content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Homophily (i.e., the tendency of individuals to interact preferentially with similar others) and social influence (i.e.,
the tendency of individuals to become more similar with whom they interact) have long been perceived as major factors that influence
social phenomena like segregation, inter-group bias and inequality, to mention only a few
\cite{Lazarsfeld_48,Castellano_09,Galam_12}. The understanding of the ways these factors impact social organization has been considerably expanded by the study of the agent-based model proposed by the political scientist Robert Axelrod in the late 1990s \cite{Axelrod_97}. Axelrod's model offered a simple quantitative approach to address the dissemination of culture among interacting agents in a society.
In Axelrod's model, the agents are represented by strings of
cultural features of length $F$, where each feature can take on a certain number $q > 1$ of distinct states
(i.e., $q$ is the common number of states that each feature can assume). Hence the parameter $F$ represents the complexity of the society, since the different features are associated to different individual characteristics that are subject to social influence such as language, education, class, politics, religion, etc.,
whereas the number of states per feature $q$ represents the (potential) cultural diversity of the society -- the larger $q$, the greater the number of options for the
cultural features \cite{Axelrod_97}.
The homophily factor is accounted for
by the assumption that the interaction between two agents takes place
with probability proportional to their cultural similarity (i.e., proportional to the number of states they have in common), whereas social
influence enters Axelrod's model by forcing the agents to become more similar when they interact. Thus, there is a positive feedback loop between homophily and social influence: similarity leads to interaction, and interaction leads to still more similarity. Somewhat surprisingly,
in spite of this homogenizing mechanism, Axelrod's model exhibits global polarization (i.e., a stable multicultural regime) for large $q$ in the case the agents are
fixed to the sites of a square lattice and interact with their nearest neighbors only \cite{Axelrod_97}. Variations of the original model have revealed that the relaxation of the homophilic interaction rules and the expansion of the interaction neighborhoods favor cultural homogenization (i.e., a stable monocultural regime) \cite{Klemm_03a,Klemm_03b,Klemm_03c,JEDC_05,Reia_16}.
In the context of social organization, an important issue is the coevolution of the cultural states of the agents and the structure of the interaction or influence network
(i.e., who interacts with whom) on the same time scale \cite{Zimmerman_04,Pacheco_06,Vazquez_07,Vazquez_08,Kimura_08,Herrera_11}. In fact, whereas in the original Axelrod model the agents are forced to interact with a predetermined group of agents (usually their nearest neighbors), we expect that in a more realistic scenario the agents would actively seek their likes and avoid their opposites. Such a scenario was considered for the nonlinear voter model \cite{Min_17}, the weighted social network model \cite{Murase_19} and the Sznajd model \cite{Benatti_19}, where the network topology is allowed to change by (probabilistically) rewiring the links between agents with a bias towards the creation of links connecting agents with similar opinions or cultures.
In this paper we take a different approach and allow the agents to move in a square box by performing steps of fixed size $\delta$ in random directions in the plane. The agents are initially located at the nodes of random geometric graphs (RGGs) \cite{Gilbert_61},
where each node is randomly assigned geometric coordinates and two nodes are connected if the Euclidean distance between them is smaller than or equal to a certain threshold $d$. The set of agents connected to a particular agent defines its influence neighborhood. The RGGs were introduced in the 1960s to model wireless communication networks \cite{Gilbert_61} and its connectivity properties were subsequently investigated for threshold phenomena \cite{Penrose_03,Dall_02}. More recently, RGGs have been used to model synchronization \cite{Guilera_09}, opinion dynamics \cite{Zhang_14}, epidemic spreading \cite{Estrada_16} and epistemic communities \cite{Reia_19} in scenarios where the agents are geographically constrained in certain regions.
The comfort-driven mobility is introduced in the model by assuming that the probability that a given agent stays put is proportional to the maximum value of its cultural similarity evaluated over all agents within its influence neighborhood. In addition, the agent moves with certainty if it is isolated, i.e., if
its influence neighborhood is empty. Hence, an agent feels more comfortable (in the sense that it is less likely to move) in a location where at least one of its neighbors has a high homophily with it. These rules of motion are akin to those used in the modeling of the dynamics of human interactions with the cultural similarity playing the role of the social appeal between the individuals \cite{Zhao_11,Starnini_13}.
We find that, for large systems, endowing the agents of Axelrod's model with the capacity to move in a plane following the comfort-driven rules of motion
fragments the initially connected RGG into a macroscopic number of components and greatly suppress the culturally isolated agents, so
most agents are comfortable in the absorbing configurations.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In section \ref{sec:model} we describe
the rules of motion in the two-dimensional physical space where the agents roam freely as well as the rules that govern their interactions and determine how their cultural states change in time.
In section \ref{sec:res} we present and analyze the results of our simulations, emphasizing the influence of the step size on the spatial and cultural organization of Axelrod's model with mobile agents. Finally, section \ref{sec:disc} is reserved to our concluding remarks.
\section{Model}\label{sec:model}
We consider a system of $N$ agents placed in a square box of linear size $L$ with periodic boundary conditions. In the initial configuration, the coordinates $x$ and $y$ of each agent are chosen randomly and uniformly over the length $L$. The density of agents
$\rho = N/L^2$, which we fix to $\rho = 1$ throughout this paper, yields the spatial scale for the interaction range $d$ and the step size $\delta$. In fact, since the effective area of an agent is $1/\rho$, the quantity $d_0 = 1/\sqrt{\rho} = 1$ will be the standard to measure all distances in our study. More pointedly, we measure the distance $d$ within which interactions between agents are allowed in units of $d_0$, i.e., $d = d_0 \alpha=\alpha$ with $\alpha > 0$. The set of agents inside a circle of radius $d$ centered at a particular agent constitutes the influence neighborhood from where that agent selects a peer to interact with. Linking any two agents at a distance smaller than $d$ produces an undirected graph that we refer to as the influence network (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:1}). Thus, as already pointed out, the initial disposition of the agents corresponds to the classic random geometric graph \cite{Gilbert_61}.
We note that the fixed value of the density $\rho$ is inconsequential, provided we use $d_0$ as the standard for measuring distances in the square box. However, the choice $\rho=1$ is consistent with the density of the regular square lattice, which was used in most studies of the Axelrod model \cite{Axelrod_97}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig1.png}
\caption{Snapshot of a small portion of an absorbing configuration with $N=2^{15}$ agents and initial cultural diversity $q = 10$. The display of the full configuration requires that the x and y axes range from 0 to $2^{15/2} \approx 181$. Agents within a distance $d = \alpha $, with $\alpha=1.75$, are connected by a link. The circle of radius $d$ centered at the central agent determines its influence neighborhood. The comfort-driven mobility with step size $\delta=9$ causes the fragmentation of the initial random geometric graph into a large number of components.
}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
In Axelrod's model, the initial states of the $F$ cultural features of the agents are drawn randomly from a uniform distribution on the integers $1, 2, \ldots, q$. Once the initial configuration (i.e., the positions of the agents in the square box and their cultural features) is set, the dynamics proceeds as follows. It begins with the selection of an agent at random, the so-called target agent,
and comprises two stages. The first stage is the motion on the square box and the second stage is the social interaction. To decide whether to move or not, the target agent evaluates its cultural similarity with all agents in its influence neighborhood and singles out the maximum value, which we denote by $a_m \in \left [0,1\right]$. (We recall that the cultural similarity between two agents is simply the fraction of features they have in common \cite{Axelrod_97}.) Here we assume that the target agent moves with probability $1- a_m$ and stays put with probability $a_m$. In the case the influence neighborhood of the target agent is empty, it moves with probability $1$. These rules of motion imply a sort of `repulsion to the different' that prompts an agent to move away more frequently from neighborhoods that lack its cultural likes.
In the case the target agent decides to move,
an angle $\theta \in \left [ 0, 2 \pi \right )$ is chosen randomly to give the direction of motion and then a fixed step of length $\delta \geq 0$ is taken on that direction, similarly to the procedure used in the modeling of the dynamics of human interactions \cite{Starnini_13} as well as in the study of the effects of random motility on cooperative problem-solving systems \cite{Freitas_19}.
Once the target agent is at the new position, a circle of radius $d = \alpha$ is drawn around it so that its (new) influence neighborhood is determined. Then the social interaction stage sets in: an agent within the influence neighborhood of the target agent is chosen at random and they interact with probability equal to their cultural similarity. An interaction consists of selecting at random one of the distinct features and making the
selected feature of the target agent equal to the corresponding feature of its randomly chosen peer \cite{Axelrod_97}.
In the case the target agent stays put, only the social interaction stage is implemented.
This procedure is repeated until the dynamics enters an absorbing configuration.
According to the social interaction rule, absorbing configurations are such that agents within the influence neighborhood of a target agent are either identical to or completely different from it with respect to their cultural features. We note that the agents are not necessarily static in the absorbing configurations: in principle, an (non-interacting) agent that shares no cultural feature with any other agent in the system will keep moving forever without affecting or being affected by the established stationary social organization.
However, we can easily identify this situation, which happens very rarely for $\delta > 0$ since by construction the comfort-driven mobility aims at preventing the appearance of uncomfortable, i.e., culturally isolated, agents.
Once the dynamics reaches an absorbing configuration, we count the number of cultural domains ($\mathcal{N}_d$) and record the size of the largest one ($\mathcal{S}_d$), as usual
\cite{Klemm_03a,Klemm_03b,Klemm_03c,JEDC_05,Reia_16}. In time, a cultural domain is defined as a connected subgraph where the agents have the same culture (i.e., they share all cultural features). Hence, cultural diasporas are considered different cultural domains. In addition and more importantly, because of the rules of motion of the agents that, in principle, could allow them to organize themselves in isolated clusters or components, we measure also the number of components ($\mathcal{N}_c$) and
the size of the largest component ($\mathcal{S}_c$) of the influence network. Since a component can sustain many cultural domains, we have $\mathcal{N}_d \geq \mathcal{N}_c$ and $\mathcal{S}_c \geq \mathcal{S}_d$. As all these quantities are bounded by the number of agents $N$, in section \ref{sec:res} we will characterize the absorbing configurations in terms of the densities $n_d = \mathcal{N}_d/N$, $s_d = \mathcal{S}_d/N$, $n_c = \mathcal{N}_c/N$ and $s_c = \mathcal{S}_c/N$.
Moreover, since our goal is to study the comfort-driven mobility, our study will focus mainly on the influence of the step size or mobility parameter $\delta$ on the statistical properties of the absorbing configurations.
Accordingly, we will fix the parameter that determines the radius of the influence neighborhoods to $\alpha = 1.75$. For large $N$ (and $\rho=1$) this choice produces initial configurations that are random geometric graphs with average degree per agent $\langle k_i \rangle \approx 9.62$, so the initial influence networks are almost surely connected graphs \cite{Penrose_03,Dall_02}. In addition, we will fix the number of cultural features to $F=3$ since this is the
minimum value of $F$ for which the ordered and disordered regimes are stable in a large range of values of $q$ in the static case. Use of larger values of $F$ makes the convergence to the absorbing configurations prohibitively slow for large $N$. In the brief study of the static limit $\delta =0$, we will consider also the case $F=2$ in order to highlight the distinct nature of the phase transitions for $F=2$ and $F=3$.
For the sake of illustration, we show in Fig.\ \ref{fig:1} a snapshot of a portion of an absorbing configuration of a system of $N=2^{15}$ agents with $q=10$ and step size $\delta =9$. The influence neighborhood of the central agent is shown as a circle in the figure. The different components of this small portion of the influence network can be easily identified due to the absence of links between them. Next we will quantify the puzzling effects of the mobility parameter $\delta$ on the connectedness of the influence networks.
\section{Results}\label{sec:res}
The measures we use to characterize the statistical properties of the absorbing configurations represent
averages over (typically) $10^3$ independent runs, which differ initially by the cultural states of the agents as well as by their positions on the square box. As mentioned before, in the study of the effects of the mobility parameter $\delta > 0$ we fix the radius of the influence neighborhood $\alpha$ and the cultural complexity $F$ of the system to $\alpha =1.75$ and $F=3$. The case $F=2$ is considered only for
the static agents scenario, $\delta =0$.
\subsection{Static agents}
Because the Axelrod model was not studied in the case the agents are fixed at the sites of RGGs, it is instructive to consider briefly the static limit, $\delta =0$. Figure \ref{fig:2} shows the dependence of the fraction of agents in the largest cultural domain $\left \langle s_d \right \rangle $ on the initial diversity of the system $q$ for $F=2$ (upper panel) and $F=3$ (lower panel). This figure exhibits the hallmark of Axelrod's model for static agents, namely, the existence of a phase transition between
ordered absorbing configurations, which are characterized by the presence of few cultural domains of macroscopic size (i.e., $\left \langle s_d \right \rangle$ is nonzero for $N \to \infty$), and disordered absorbing configurations, where all cultural domains are microscopic (i.e., $\left \langle s_d \right \rangle \to 0$ for $N \to \infty$). The phase transition is continuous for $F=2$ and discontinuous for $F =3$, similarly to the results for the square lattice \cite{Castellano_00,Peres_15}.
We note that the existence of the ordered phase implies a symmetry breaking leading to the dominance of few cultures, which does not happen for the one-dimensional model that, for $F=2$, exhibits disordered absorbing configurations for all $q$ \cite{Vilone_02,Biral_15}.
For the RGG, our results indicate that the continuous transition ($F=2$) takes place between $q=6$ and $q=7$ and the discontinuous transition ($F=3$) takes place between $q=19$ and $q=20$. We note that there is no need to use sophisticated methods (e.g., Binder cumulants \cite{Binder_81}) to determine the critical point $q_c$, since we can only state that $q^* \leq q_c \leq q^* +1$, where $q^*$ can be determined with almost certainty using the results of Fig.\ \ref{fig:2}. For instance, $q^*= 6$ for $F=2$ and
$q^*= 19$ for $F=3$. In the static scenario, $q^*$ is the largest $q$ for which $\left \langle s_d \right \rangle > 0$ in the thermodynamic limit. The order of the phase transition is determined by the presence or not of crossings of the curves of the order parameter $\left \langle s_d \right \rangle $ vs.\ $q$ for different system sizes.
Since the RGG is almost surely connected for $\alpha =1.75$, we have $\left \langle s_c \right \rangle \to 1$ and $\left \langle n_c \right \rangle \to 0 $ for $N \to \infty$, regardless of the value of $q$. We recall that the topology of the influence network is not influenced by the social dynamics for $\delta=0$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig2a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig2b.pdf}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest cultural domain $\langle s_d \rangle $ as function of the initial cultural diversity $q$ for $F=2$ (upper panel) and $F=3$ (lower panel). The agents are fixed at the sites of random geometric graphs (RGGs), i.e., the mobility parameter is $\delta =0$. The continuous phase transition for $F=2$ takes place between $q=6$ and $q=7$, whereas the discontinuous phase transition for $F=3$ takes place between $q=19$ and $q=20$. The system sizes are $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 16$, as indicated.
}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig3a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig3b.pdf}
\caption{Mean fraction of culturally isolated agents $\langle \zeta_d \rangle $ as function of the initial cultural diversity $q$ for $F=2$ (upper panel) and $F=3$ (lower panel). The agents are fixed at the sites of random geometric graphs (RGGs). i.e., $\delta =0$. The system sizes are $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 16$ as indicated.
}
\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:3} shows
the mean fraction of culturally isolated agents $\langle \zeta_d \rangle $ for $F=2$ and $F=3$. Somewhat surprisingly, a large proportion of the agents are culturally isolated (i.e., they do not share any cultural feature with the agents in their influence neighborhoods) in the disordered regime of the static limit $\delta=0$. According to our definition, those agents are uncomfortable and would move with certainty if they were allowed to. We note that $\langle \zeta_d \rangle \to 0$ for $N \to \infty$ in the ordered regime. We advance that for $N$ and $q$ such that $NF/q \gg 1$, the comfort-driven mobility is very effective to suppress culturally isolated agents in the absorbing configurations (see \ref{App_q}).
\subsection{Mobile agents for fixed system size}
Here we investigate the effects of the mobility parameter $\delta$ on the properties of the absorbing configurations for the system size $N=2^{16}$. Accordingly, Fig.\ \ref{fig:4} summarizes the influence of the initial diversity $q$ on $\langle s_d \rangle $ and
$\langle s_c \rangle $ for several representative values of the step size $\delta$. The upper panel of the figure shows that the size of the largest cultural domain decreases with increasing $\delta$ and that the disruptive effect of the mobility parameter on $\langle s_d \rangle $ is enhanced for large $q$. These findings are consistent with the expectation that the comfort-driven mobility should increase cultural diversity (i.e., decrease $\langle s_d \rangle $) since it reduces the strength of social influence by decreasing the odds of repeated interactions between the same pair of agents. We advance, however, that our analysis of the finite size effects will show that $\langle s_d \rangle \to 0$ for all $q$ and $\delta > 0$ in the thermodynamic limit, so the statistics of cultural domains is not informative in the context of mobile agents.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig4a.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig4b.pdf}}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest cultural domain $\langle s_d \rangle $ (upper panel) and in the largest component of the influence network $\langle s_c \rangle $ (lower panel) as functions of the initial cultural diversity $q$ for $N= 2^{16}$ and step sizes $\delta =0, 0.15, 0.2, 0.4, 5, 6$ and $7$, as indicated.
}
\label{fig:4}
\end{figure}
The low informative power of $\langle s_d \rangle$ contrasts with the mean size of the largest component $\langle s_c \rangle $, which is shown in the lower panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:4} and highlights the strong influence of the model parameters on the connectedness of the influence network, manifested by the non-monotonous dependence of $\langle s_c \rangle $ on both $q$ and $\delta>0$. Recalling
that $\langle s_c \rangle $ offers a picture of the fragmentation of the influence network, this panel shows that for small step sizes $\delta$ the fragmentation is more severe for low and intermediate values of the initial cultural diversity and that the network is almost connected for large $q$. For $\delta > 6$, the influence network is severely fragmented regardless of the value of $q$. Interestingly, although the fragmentation
of the influence network results necessarily in a decrease of the size of the largest cultural domain since $\langle s_c \rangle \geq \langle s_d \rangle $, the size of the largest cultural domain is actually smaller when the network is almost connected
(i.e., $\langle s_c \rangle \approx 1$) than when it is severely fragmented.
\subsection{Finite size effects} \label{FSE}
Here we argue that the comfort-driven mobility induces a fragmentation transition separating the regime where all components are microscopic (i.e., $\langle s_c \rangle \to 0 $ for $N \to \infty$) from the regime where at least one component is macroscopic (i.e., $\langle s_c \rangle > 0 $ for $N \to \infty$). Henceforth we will refer to these regimes as the severely and mildly fragmented regimes.
Figures \ref{fig:5} and \ref{fig:6} summarize our results for $\delta=0.4$. In particular, the upper panel of Fig. \ref{fig:5} shows that $\langle s_d \rangle \to 0$ as $N$ increases, regardless of the value of $q$. More pointedly, for large $N$ we find that $\langle s_d \rangle$ vanishes as $N^{-0.8}$ for all $q$ (data not shown). The lower panel of this figure shows that the density of cultural domains $\langle n_d \rangle$ tends rapidly to its smooth asymptotic limit $\langle n_d \rangle_\infty > 0$, indicating thus the presence of a macroscopic number of cultural domains for all $q$.
Hence the comfort-driven mobility eliminates altogether the ordered absorbing configurations of the static limit. We recall that those configurations are the sole attractors of the dynamics in the range $q < 20$ for $\delta=0$ (see lower panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:2}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig5a.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig5b.pdf}}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest cultural domain $\langle s_d \rangle $ (upper panel), and mean density of cultural domains $\langle n_d \rangle $ (lower panel)
as functions of the initial cultural diversity $q$ for $\delta =0.4$ and $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 18$, as indicated.
}
\label{fig:5}
\end{figure}
The left panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:6} indicates that in the thermodynamic limit $\langle s_c \rangle$ exhibits a transition between $q=5$ and $q=6$ that separates the regime where the influence network is severely fragmented (i.e., all components are microscopic) from the regime where that network exhibits a macroscopic component. For instance, for $q=4$ we find that $\langle s_c \rangle$ vanishes like the power law $N^{-0.2}$ with increasing $N$, whereas it
vanishes as $N^{-0.5}$ for $q=2$ (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:7}).
We note that since $\langle s_c \rangle < 1$ the influence network is always fragmented for $\delta > 0$. The main difference between the severely and the mildly fragmented regimes is the presence or not of a macroscopic component in the thermodynamic limit. In addition, since the ratio $\langle s_d \rangle/ \langle s_c \rangle $ tends to zero for large $N$ there is coexistence between different
cultures inside the largest component in both fragmentation regimes.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig6a.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig6b.pdf}}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest component of the influence network $\langle s_c \rangle $ (upper panel) and mean density of components $\langle n_c \rangle $ (lower panel)
as functions of the initial cultural diversity $q$ for $\delta =0.4$ and $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 18$, as indicated. The dashed curve in the
lower panel is the fitting parameter $\langle n_c \rangle_\infty$ of the extrapolation of $\langle n_c \rangle $ to $N \to \infty$. The continuous transition separating the regime where the largest component of the influence network is macroscopic from the regime where all components are microscopic
takes place between $q = 5$ and $q = 6$.
}
\label{fig:6}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig7.pdf}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest component $\langle s_c \rangle $ as function of the system size $N$ for the step size $\delta=0.4$ and $q=2,4$, as indicated. The dashed lines are the fittings $\langle s_c \rangle = 135 N ^{-0.51} $ for $q=2$ and
$\langle s_c \rangle = 5.24 N ^{-0.20} $ for $q=4$.
}
\label{fig:7}
\end{figure}
The right panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:6} shows that the mean density of components $\langle n_c \rangle $ is not affected by the fragmentation transition revealed in the study of the largest component. In addition, it shows that $\langle n_c \rangle > 0 $ in the limit $N \to \infty$, implying thus that the macroscopic component coexists with a macroscopic number of microscopic components
for $q \geq 6$. This finding supports the claim that $\langle s_c \rangle < 1$ for $\delta > 0$. From our results it is not possible to tell whether there are other macroscopic components in the mildly fragmented regime besides the largest one. Of course, since in the severely fragmented regime the largest component is microscopic (i.e., $\langle s_c \rangle \to 0$ for $N \to \infty$ ), so are all the other components.
The extrapolation of $\langle n_c \rangle > 0 $ to
$N \to \infty$ (dashed curve in the right panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:6}) was obtained through the fitting $\langle n_c \rangle = \langle n_c \rangle_\infty + a_n/N$ where $\langle n_c \rangle_\infty$ and $a_n$ are fitting parameters that depend on $q$ and $\delta$. Most interestingly, the parameter $a_n$ changes sign at about $q=6$, where the fragmentation transition takes place. Viewing $1/\langle n_c \rangle$ as an estimator of the average component size, we can infer that when $a_n$ is positive ($q \geq 6$), the components become bigger as the system size increases, which is consistent with the presence of a macroscopic component in the mildly fragmented regime. In turn, when $a_n$ is negative the components become smaller as $N$ increases, which is consistent with the existence of solely microscopic components in the severely fragmented regime.
The results for $\delta < 0.4$ are similar to those exhibited in
Figs.\ \ref{fig:5} and \ref{fig:6} but, as hinted at in Fig.\ref{fig:4}, the finite size effects are very strong, requiring the use of impracticably large system sizes to characterize the severely fragmented regime.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig8a.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig8b.pdf}}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest component $\langle s_c \rangle $ (upper panel) and mean density of components $\langle n_c \rangle $ (lower panel) as functions of the initial cultural diversity $q$ for $\delta =5$
and systems of size $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 16$, as indicated. The dashed curve in the
lower panel is the fitting parameter $\langle n_c \rangle_\infty$ of the extrapolation of $\langle n_c \rangle $ to $N \to \infty$. The discontinuous transition separating the regime where the largest component of the influence network is macroscopic from the regime where all components are microscopic
takes place between $q=7$ and $q = 8$.
}
\label{fig:8}
\end{figure}
The normalized mean size of the largest component of the influence network $\langle s_c \rangle $ is the order parameter of the fragmentation transition and its dependence on the system size $N$ may shed some light on the nature of the phase transition. In particular, it would be of interest to know whether the transition between the severely and mildly fragmented regimes is continuous or discontinuous. Although it is somewhat problematic to discuss this classification in the case the independent variable $q$ is discrete, the fact that the curves of $\langle s_c \rangle $ vs.\ $q$ for different $N$ do not cross (left panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:6}) suggests that the fragmentation transition is continuous for $\delta=0.4$. It is interesting that the curves of $\langle n_c \rangle $ for distinct system sizes do cross at about $q=6$ (right panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:6}) but since $\langle n_c \rangle $ is not an order parameter (it is nonzero in both fragmentation regimes), it offers no information on the nature of the transition.
These findings contrast starkly with the results for $\delta=5$ shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:8}, where the crossing of the curves for different system sizes happens for $\langle s_c \rangle $ but not for $\langle n_c \rangle $. This is the typical scenario of a discontinuous transition where the order parameter becomes independent of the system size at the threshold parameter $q_c$, which is thus determined by the intersection of the curves of $\langle s_c \rangle $ for large $N$. Since the relevant asymptotic behaviors, namely, $\langle n_c \rangle > 0$ in the mildly fragmented regime and $\langle s_c \rangle \to 0$ in the severely fragmented regime, are more easily observed in Fig.\ \ref{fig:8} than in Fig.\ \ref{fig:6}, we have not simulated the system sizes $N=2^{17}$ and $N=2^{18}$ for $\delta=5$.
We note that the nature of the fragmentation transition is determined by the dependence of $\langle s_c \rangle $ on $N$
in the mildly fragmented regime. For instance, in that regime $\langle s_c \rangle $ decreases with increasing $N$ for $\delta=0.4$
(see upper panel of Fig. \ref{fig:6}), whereas it increases with increasing $N$ for $\delta=5$ (see upper panel of Fig. \ref{fig:8}). In fact, in the mildly fragmented regime we can write
$\langle s_c \rangle = \langle s_c \rangle_\infty + a_s/N$, where $\langle s_c \rangle_\infty$ and $a_s$ are fitting parameters, so we can use the sign of the parameter $a_s$ to
determine whether the transition is continuous or discontinuous. Accordingly, we find that $a_s$ changes sign at $\delta \approx 4.2$, signaling thus a change on the nature of the fragmentation transition.
\begin{figure}[b!]
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig9a.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig9b.pdf}}
\caption{Fraction of components of size larger than $S$ for $\delta = 0.4$ (upper panel) and $\delta=5$ (lower panel). The system size is $N=2^{16}$ and the initial cultural diversities $q$ are as indicated. The dashed lines are the power-law fittings for $q=q^*$ and $q = q^* +1$ used to estimate the critical exponent $\tau$.
}
\label{fig:9}
\end{figure}
Now we consider an alternative method to estimate the transition points $q_c$, which relies on the analysis of the asymptotic behavior of the distribution of the component sizes \cite{Castellano_00}. In particular, in Fig.\ \ref{fig:9} we show the cumulated distribution $U \left ( S,q \right )$, which gives the fraction of components of size larger than $S \in \left [ 1,N \right ]$. In the limits of large $N$ and $S$ such that $S \ll N$, we expect that $U \left ( S,q < q_c \right ) \to 0$ and $U \left ( S,q > q_c \right ) \to \mbox{cte} > 0$, so we can identify $q_c$ simply by observing the asymptotic behavior of this cumulated distribution. This approach yields the same estimates as those based on the order parameter $\langle s_s \rangle $, viz., that for $\delta = 0.4$ the transition takes place between $q=5$ and $q=6$ (i.e., $q^* =5$) and that for $\delta = 5$ it occurs between $q=7$ and $q=8$ (i.e., $q^* =7$). More importantly, however, is the fact that $U \left ( S, q_c \right )$ decays as a power law $S^{1-\tau}$ and that the value of the exponent $\tau$ yields information on the nature of the transition at $q_c$ \cite{Castellano_00}. More pointedly, the transition is continuous if $\tau \leq 2$ and discontinuous otherwise. The difficulty here is that because $q$ is discrete we cannot determine $q_c$ in order to observe the power decay. Nevertheless, in the regions where $U \left ( S,q \right )$ at $q=q^*$ and $q=q^* + 1$ can be approximate by power laws we find $\tau \approx 1.82$ for $\delta = 0.4$ and $\tau \approx 2.05$ for $\delta = 5$, which is consistent with the conclusions based on the crossing, not crossing of the curves showing system size effects. These estimates of the exponent $\tau$ are obtained by averaging the values of the slopes of the dashed straight lines for $q=q^*$ and $q=q^* +1$ shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:9}.
As hinted at in Fig.\ \ref{fig:4}, for $\delta = 6$ and $7$, the absorbing configurations remain highly fragmented even for large $q$. In fact, Fig.\ \ref{fig:10} summarizes the effects of the system size for these step sizes and shows that the absorbing configurations are severely fragmented in the thermodynamic limit, regardless of the value of $q$. This means that the transition between the severely and mildly fragmented regimes disappears altogether at a point $\delta^*$, so that for $\delta > \delta^*$ we have
$\langle s_c \rangle \to 0 $ for $N \to \infty$ for all $q$. The weak dependence on the system size observed for $\delta =6$ suggests that $\delta^*$ is close to $6$. In fact, we can obtain a rough estimate of $\delta^*$ by considering the dependence of $\langle s_c \rangle $ on $\delta$ for different system sizes, as shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:11} for $q=10$. The critical value $\delta_c \approx 5.9$ was estimated by the intersection of the curves that fit the data of $N=2^{15}$ and $N=2^{16}$. In addition, we find that $\langle s_c \rangle \approx 0.5$ at $\delta = \delta_c$. A similar analysis for $q=20$ and $q=30$ yielded the same estimate for $\delta_c$ so we conjecture that
$\delta^* \approx 6$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig10a.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig10b.pdf}}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest component $\langle s_c \rangle $ as function of the initial cultural diversity $q$ for $\delta =6$
(upper panel), $\delta =7$ (lower panel) and systems of size $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 16$, as indicated.
}
\label{fig:10}
\end{figure}
The result that $\langle s_c \rangle \to 0 $ for $\delta > \delta^*$ regardless of the value of $q$ holds true provided that $q$ is kept fixed while the system size $N$ approaches the thermodynamic limit. However, in the case $N$ is fixed and $q$ becomes arbitrarily large then the agents are likely to be moving all the time (without interacting as the probability of finding an agent with a common feature is very low) and the topology of the influence network becomes a sequence of RGGs. This scenario is discussed in \ref{App_q}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig11.pdf}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest component $\langle s_c \rangle $ as function of the step size $\delta$ for $q=10$ and systems of size $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 16$, as indicated. The discontinuous transition separating the regime where the largest component of the influence network is macroscopic from the regime where all components are microscopic
takes place at $\delta \approx 5.9$.
}
\label{fig:11}
\end{figure}
Actually, the effect of the step size $\delta$ on the connectedness of the influence network is way more complicated than that suggested in Fig.\ \ref{fig:11}. For instance, the results of Fig.\ \ref{fig:4} have already showed that for $q \in \left [ 4,14 \right ]$ and $N = 2^{16}$ the network is more fragmented for $\delta=0.2$ than for $\delta=0.4$, which contrasts with the monotonous decrease of $\langle s_c \rangle $ with increasing $\delta$ exhibited in Fig.\ \ref{fig:11}.
This situation is seen more clearly in Fig.\ \ref{fig:12} that exhibits
the region of small $\delta$ for different system sizes and reveals the existence of a valley in the curve $\langle s_c \rangle $ vs.\ $\delta$ that becomes deeper and closer to $\delta=0$ as $N$ increases. (We recall that $\langle s_c \rangle =1$ for $\delta =0$ in the thermodynamic limit.) The fragmentation observed for small $\delta$ is reminiscent of the fragmentation observed for small $q$ in Fig.\ \ref{fig:5} and, as in that case, we can only offer a conjecture about the asymptotic behavior of $\langle s_c \rangle$. Accordingly, we speculate that $\langle s_c \rangle$ vanishes continuously at $\delta_c$ for some $\delta_c > 0$ so that in the thermodynamic limit $\langle s_c \rangle$ jumps from $1$ to $0$ as $\delta$ departs from $0$. We find it hopeless to estimate the continuous transition point $\delta_c$, which may be arbitrarily close to $0$, because $\langle s_c \rangle$ decreases very slowly with $N$ (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:12}), thus making the simulation of the model near the continuous transition point computationally impracticable.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig12.pdf}
\caption{Mean fraction of agents in the largest component $\langle s_c \rangle $ as function of the step size $\delta$ for $q=10$ and systems of size $N= 2^l$ with $ l=11, \ldots, 16$, as indicated.
}
\label{fig:12}
\end{figure}
In order to gain an insight into the nature of
the mildly fragmented regimes for small and large step sizes, we present in Fig.\ \ref{fig:13} snapshots of two absorbing configurations for $\delta =0.2$ and
$\delta = 5.6$, which exhibit largest components with approximately the same size (viz., $s_c \approx 0.8$). It is evident that what distinguishes these configurations is the presence of other large components for small $\delta$, which could also be inferred by the fact that, other things being equal, there are many more components in the configuration for $\delta =5.6$ than in the configuration for $\delta =0.2$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig13a.png}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig13b.png}}
\caption{Snapshots of two absorbing configurations showing the components of the influence network for $N=2^{16}$, initial cultural diversity $q = 10$, step sizes $\delta=0.2$ (upper panel) and
$\delta=5.6$ (lower panel). For $\delta=0.2$ we have $s_c = 0.77$ and $n_c = 0.0007$, whereas for $\delta=5.6$, $s_c = 0.78$ and $n_c = 0.003$.
}
\label{fig:13}
\end{figure}
Before concluding, a word is in order about the microscopic mechanism that leads to the severe fragmentation regime for small $\delta$. This unexpected phenomenon can be understood with aid of the pair correlation function $g_\delta \left ( r \right )$ shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:B2} of \ref{App_top} and of the absorbing configuration shown in the upper panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:13} for $\delta = 0.2$. The small step size enhances the effect of social influence since
$\delta \ll \alpha$ guarantees that many interactions between a same pair of agents will happen before one of them has the chance to leave the influence neighborhood of the other, which results in a relatively high density of pairs separated by distances smaller than $r=\alpha$. However, since for small step sizes the movement is practically continuous, the agents fine tune their motions to create exclusion regions where they would be uncomfortable, producing a dip in the pair correlation function for $r \in \left [ 2 \alpha, 3 \alpha \right ] $ which explains the extraordinary similarity between the areas and shapes of the empty and occupied regions in the upper panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:13}. Of course, exclusion regions with linear sizes greater than $\alpha$ lead to the fragmentation of the influence network.
Finally, to summarize our main results we offer in Fig.\ \ref{fig:14} a schematic portrayal of the phase diagram in the space $(\delta,q)$ showing the continuous and the discontinuous transition lines. We recall that for $\delta > \delta^* \approx 6$ the absorbing configurations are severely fragmented regardless of the value of $q$. This figure shows also a schematic depiction of the dependence of the order parameter $\langle s_c \rangle$ on $\delta$ in the thermodynamic limit, which was produced by the extrapolations of the finite size results exhibited in Figs.\ \ref{fig:11} and \ref{fig:12} for $q=10$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig14a.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig14b.pdf}}
\caption{Schematic phase diagram (upper panel) showing the continuous (solid curve) and discontinuous (dashed curve) transition lines that separate the severely ($\langle s_c \rangle =0$) and mildly ($\langle s_c \rangle > 0$) fragmented regimes. The lower panel shows a schematic representation of the order parameter in the thermodynamic limit for $q = 10$.
}
\label{fig:14}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:disc}
Axelrod's model exhibits cultural diversity, in spite of the homogenizing effect of social influence, thanks to the rule that excludes the interactions between individuals that differ from each other in all their
cultural features \cite{Axelrod_97}. Since in the original formulation of the model the agents are fixed at the nodes of a network, this rule amounts to the existence of a substantial number of uncomfortable (i.e., culturally isolated) agents that are stock-still away from their likes (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:3}). A natural way to mitigate this frustration is to allow the agents to move away from their cultural antagonists. Here we allow the agents to move a fixed distance $\delta$ (step size) in random directions in the plane with a probability that depends on the maximum value of the cultural similarity evaluated over the agents in their influence neighborhoods. In particular, the greater that cultural similarity, the more comfortable the agent is and so the lesser the probability that it moves. We recall that in this paper we define the influence neighborhood of an agent as the region limited by a circle of radius $\alpha = 1.75$ centered at the agent, and that the density of agents in the square box of linear size $L$ is set to $\rho=1$.
We hasten to note that an agent does not purposely move towards or away other agents in our model. However, the rule of motion which prescribes that the agent will stay put if it has an identical neighbor and that it will jump a distance $\delta$ in any direction if all its neighbors are antagonists results in an effective evasive behavior towards cultural antagonists, specially if $\delta > 2 \alpha$. The explicit spatial scenario we consider here allows a clearer visualization and interpretation of the self-organized network components (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:13} and Fig.\ \ref{fig:B2}) as compared with approaches based on the rewiring of links \cite{Min_17,Murase_19}. In addition, our model offers a necessary development of the static scenario introduced in the original formulation of Axelrod's model since spatial proximity and mobility are key elements of the celebrated propinquity effect of social psychology, which is the tendency for people to form social bounds with those whom they encounter often \cite{Festinger_63}.
The drawback of our approach is that the simulation times to reach the absorbing configurations are much longer than for the original model, mainly due to the additional rules of motion and the need to keep a record of the positions of the agents in order to determine their influence neighborhoods. These add-ons limited the maximum system size we could simulate in a feasible time to $N =2^{18}$, although it is clear from Fig.\ \ref{fig:12} that much larger system sizes are necessary to bypass the strong finite size effects observed for small $\delta$.
We find that the introduction of the comfort-driven mobility in Axelrod's model produces a variety of startling results. In particular, we find that the influence network is fragmented for low initial cultural diversity $q$. We argue that this fragmentation is extreme, in the sense that all components of the influence network are of microscopic size in the thermodynamic limit (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:6}).
As $q$ increases, the system transitions to
a mildly fragmented regime, which is characterized by the presence of a macroscopic component (i.e., $\langle s_c \rangle > 0 $ for $N \to \infty$). The value of the step size $\delta$ determines whether the transition between the regimes of severe and mild fragmentation is continuous or discontinuous: the fragmentation transition is continuous for $\delta < 4.2$ and discontinuous otherwise.
The discontinuous transition between the two fragmentation regimes disappears altogether for $\delta > 6$, so the absorbing configurations are severely fragmented for all values of the initial diversity $q$. This severe fragmentation is not surprising for large $\delta$, since in this case an agent can quickly survey the entire plane to find its cultural likes and then freeze close to them. However, we find that the severe fragmentation occurs for small $\delta$ as well (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:4}), thus resulting in a discontinuous jump of the relative size of the largest component at $\delta=0$ since the influence network is connected in the static limit. Regardless of the fragmentation regime, we find that the relative size of the largest cultural domain $\langle s_d \rangle$ vanishes in the thermodynamic limit, so the absorbing configurations are always multicultural.
The feedback between mobility and cultural similarity is responsible for these nonintuitive results, which make the behavior of Axelrod's model with comfort-driven mobility nonobvious logical consequences of the interaction rules, attesting thus the value and the need of the simulation model \cite{Reijula_19}. In fact, the agent-based model proposed by Axelrod in the late 1990s
has endured the test of time so far, probably because it exhibits the right balance between simplicity and realism as well as very intriguing critical phenomena \cite{Castellano_00,Vilone_02,Peres_15}. In this vein, introduction of comfort-driven mobility in Axelrod's model produced
results of interest for the social sciences, such as the prevention of the formation of large cultural domains and the spatial segregation of the agents, as well as for statistical physics, such as the continuous and discontinuous fragmentation transitions of the influence network. Thus our results reaffirm Axelrod's model as a paradigm for idealized models of collective behavior \cite{Goldstone_05}.
\bigskip
\acknowledgments
The research of JFF was supported in part
by Grant No.\ 2017/23288-0, Fun\-da\-\c{c}\~ao de Amparo \`a Pesquisa do Estado de S\~ao Paulo
(FAPESP) and by Grant No.\ 305058/2017-7, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento
Cient\'{\i}\-fi\-co e Tecnol\'ogico (CNPq).
SMR was supported by grant 15/17277-0, Fun\-da\-\c{c}\~ao de Amparo \`a Pesquisa do Estado de S\~ao Paulo
(FAPESP). Research carried out using the computational resources of the Center for Mathematical Sciences Applied to Industry (CeMEAI) funded by FAPESP (grant 2013/07375-0).
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}\label{sec:Intro}
Deep Reinforcement Learning (RL) has demonstrated great promise in recent years \cite{mnih2015human, alphago}.
However, despite being shown to be a viable approach in robotics \cite{pmlr-v87-kalashnikov18a, openai2018learning}, deep RL still suffers from significant low sample efficiency in practice---an acute issue in robot learning.
A natural approach to deal with this issue is to better exploit the actual samples generated during learning.
Indeed, this is one of the motivations behind experience replay (ER) \cite{lin1992self} and hindsight experience replay (HER) \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay}.
In ER, interactions with the environment are stored in a replay buffer and can then be reused multiple times for training.
HER extends this idea to multi-task settings in order to take advantage of failed trajectories ({\em i.e.}, sequences of interactions between the robot and its environment).
Its basic principle is to construct successful trajectories from failed ones by changing the unachieved (original) goals to artificial goals achieved by the failed sequences.
In this work, we advance in this direction by using symmetries to generate novel feasible artificial trajectories for training from observed ones.
We use \textit{symmetry} in its mathematical sense.
In our context, it is any transformation that leaves the space of feasible trajectories invariant.
If many such transformations are used, one observed trajectory, which is costly to collect, can cheaply produce many artificial samples for training, leading to much more efficient algorithms in terms of true samples, which is an important factor in robotics.
As a basic illustration of such transformation consider a robotic manipulation task (see the left of Fig.~\ref{fig:ker} for illustration) where the robot may interact with some objects.
The reflection with respect to the purple plane induces a transformation that maps any sequence of interactions recorded during learning to a new feasible trajectory, which can then also be used for training (see the right of Fig.~\ref{fig:ker} depicting the reflection applied to the path of the gripper).
This transformation is naturally also applied to the goal achieved by the considered trajectory (and any other state relevant information, {\em e.g.}, object positions).
The intuition is that if that trajectory has achieved a goal $g$, then its transformed trajectory defines a feasible sequence of controls that achieves the symmetrical reflection of $g$.
Interestingly, such a transformation preserves any contact the robot may have with its environment if the transformation is applied to all the objects and obstacles in the robot's workspace.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{pics/symmetry_plane.png}
\includegraphics[width=.5\linewidth]{pics/RAL_new_fig/KER_3D.pdf}
\caption{Left: Kaleidoscope Experience Replay leverages natural symmetry. Feasible trajectories are reflected on the plane $xoz$. The latter can itself be rotated by some $\theta_z$ along axis $\vec{z}$.
Right: A symmetrical trajectory (purple) is reflected from the observed trajectory (red) via the purple plane $xoz$. The red point denotes the robot base in the right plot. }
\label{fig:ker}
\end{figure}
The idea of using reflections and more general symmetries (see Related Work in Sec. \ref{sec:related}) to expand the original training data is the basis of many data augmentation techniques in deep learning, but has been scarcely investigated in deep RL to the best of our knowledge.
In this paper, we propose a general framework for data augmentation in deep RL, which extends ER and HER, called Invariant Transform Experience Replay (ITER) where a transformation can be applied either on trajectories entering the replay buffer or on those sampled from it.
To make ITER concrete, we present it with two different such transformations.
Each of them could potentially be used separately, leading to two independent data augmentation techniques.
The first technique, Kaleidoscope Experience Replay (KER), is based on reflectional symmetry.
It generalizes our previous example (Fig.~\ref{fig:ker}) by using multiple different reflective hyperplanes.
The second technique, Goal-augmented Experience Replay (GER), is a direct generalization of HER:
any hindsight goal $g$ generated by HER can be instead replaced by a random goal sampled from within a small ball centered around $g$ to obtain another successful goal.
This idea takes advantage of tasks where success is defined as reaching a final pose within a distance of the goal set by a threshold (such tasks are common in robotics).
The paper is organized as follows: Sec. \ref{sec:related} introduces related work on increasing data efficiency.
Sec. \ref{sec:back} presents the background (deep RL and HER) for our work.
Sec. \ref{sec:aer} details our general framework with two invariant transform data augmentation techniques.
Sec. \ref{sec:expe} describes experimental results on OpenAI Gym Fetch tasks \cite{brockman2016openai}, which demonstrate the effectiveness of our propositions and show significant improvements in learning speed and success rates; particularly for robotic manipulation tasks with and without obstacles (see Fig. \ref{fig:exp_best_multigoal} and Fig. \ref{fig:exp_obstacle}).
Sec. \ref{sec:discussion} discusses concerns of interest, and Sec. \ref{sec:conclusion} concludes.
\section{RELATED WORK} \label{sec:related}
HER \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay,Plappert2018Multi-GoalResearch} has been extended in various ways.
Prioritized replay was incorporated in HER to learn from more valuable episodes with higher priority \cite{Zhao2018Energy-BasedPrioritization}.
In \cite{Fang2019DHER:Replay}, HER was generalized to deal with dynamic goals. In \cite{Gerken2019ContinuousControllers}, a variant of HER was also investigated where completely random goals replace achieved goals and in \cite{Rauber2019HindsightGradients}, it was adapted to work with on-policy RL algorithms. All these extensions are orthogonal to our work and could easily be combined with ITER. We leave these for future work.
Symmetry has been considered in MDPs \cite{Zinkevich2001SymmetryLearning} and RL \cite{Kamal2008ReinforcementStates,Agostini2009ExploitingSpacesE,Mahajan2017SymmetryLearning,kidzinski2018learning,Amadio2019ExploitingTasks}. It can be known a priori or learned \cite{Mahajan2017SymmetryLearning}. In this work, we assume the former, which is reasonable in many robotic tasks.
A natural approach to exploit symmetry in sequential decision-making is by aggregating states that satisfy an equivalence relation induced by some symmetry \cite{Zinkevich2001SymmetryLearning,Kamal2008ReinforcementStates}.
Another related approach takes into account symmetry in the policy representation \cite{Amadio2019ExploitingTasks}. Doing so reduces representation size and generally leads to faster solution times. However, the state-aggregated representation may be difficult to recover, especially if many symmetries are considered simultaneously.
Still another approach is to use symmetry during training instead.
One simple idea is to learn the Q-function by performing an additional symmetrical update \cite{Agostini2009ExploitingSpacesE}.
Another method is to augment the training data with their reflections \cite{kidzinski2018learning}. A dihedral group with finite invariant elements has been leveraged to implement symmetry on the state representation of board position in Go \cite{alphago}.
In this paper, we generalize further this idea and extend it to propose a general and theoretically-founded framework for data augmentation where different kinds of symmetry (not only reflections) can be considered.
To the best of our knowledge, data augmentation has not been considered much to accelerate learning in RL. It has, however, been used extensively and with great success in machine learning \cite{Baird1992DocumentModels} and in deep learning \cite{KrizhevskyImagenetNetworks}.
Interestingly, symmetries can also be exploited in neural network architecture design \cite{Gens2014DeepNetworks}.
However, in our case, the integration of symmetry in deep networks will be left as future work.
\section{BACKGROUND} \label{sec:back}
In this work, we consider robotic tasks that are modeled as multi-goal Markov decision processes \cite{schaul2015universal} with continuous state and action spaces: $\langle \mathcal S, \mathcal A, \mathcal G, T, R, p, \gamma \rangle$ where $\mathcal S$ is a continuous state space, $\mathcal A$ is a continuous action space, $\mathcal G$ is a set of goals, $T: \mathcal S \times \mathcal A \times \mathcal S \to [0, 1]$ is the unknown transition function that describes the environmental dynamics, $R(s, a, s', g)$ is the immediate reward when an agent reaches state $s' \in \mathcal S$ after performing action $a \in \mathcal A$ in state $s \in \mathcal S$ if the goal were $g \in \mathcal G$.
Finally, $p(s_0,g)$ is a joint probability distribution over initial states and original goals, and $\gamma \in [0, 1]$ is a discount factor.
In this framework, the robot learning problem corresponds to an RL problem that aims at obtaining a policy $\pi : \mathcal S \times \mathcal G \to \mathcal A$ such that the expected discounted sum of rewards is maximized for any given goal.
Due to the continuity of the state-action spaces, this optimization problem is usually restricted to a class of parameterized policies.
In deep RL, the parameterization is defined by the neural network architecture.
To learn such continuous policies, actor-critic algorithms \cite{Konda1999} are efficient iterative methods since they can reduce the variance of the estimated gradient using simultaneously learned value functions.
DDPG (Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient) \cite{Lillicrap2015} is a model-free off-policy deep RL algorithm that learns a deterministic policy, which is desirable in robotic tasks.
In DDPG, the transitions are collected into a replay buffer to later update the action-value function in a semi-gradient way and the policy with the deterministic policy gradient \cite{Silver2014}.
Because the policy has to adapt to multiple goals, as in HER, we rely on universal value functions \cite{schaul2015universal}: the classic inputs of the value function and the policy of DDPG are augmented with the desired goal.
When the reward function is sparse, as assumed here, the RL problem is particularly hard to solve.
In particular, we consider here reward functions that are described as follows:
\begin{align}\label{eq:sparserewards}
R(s, a, s', g) = \bm 1[ d(s', g) \le \epsilon_R] -1
\end{align}
where $\bm 1$ is the indicator function, $d$ is a distance ({\em e.g.}, between object position in $s'$ and goal $g$), and $\epsilon_R>0$ is a fixed threshold.
To tackle this issue, HER is based on the following principle: any trajectory that failed to reach its goal still carries useful information; it has at least reached the states of its trajectory path. Using this natural and powerful idea, memory replay can be augmented with the failed trajectories by changing their goals in \textit{hindsight} and computing the new associated rewards.
In the robotic tasks solved by HER, the states are generally defined as $s = (s_{gri}, s_{obj}, s_{rel})$ with its components defined as follows: $s_{gri}$ is a 8-dimensional vector containing the absolute position of the gripper $(x_{gri},y_{gri},z_{gri})$, its linear velocity $(x'_{gri},y'_{gri},z'_{gri})$, the distance and relative velocity between the gripper's fingers $d_{fin},d'_{fin}$ respectively. Then, $s_{obj}$ is a 12-dimensional vector that consists of the pose of the object $(x_{obj}, y_{obj}, z_{obj}, \alpha_{obj}, \beta_{obj}, \gamma_{obj})$ and its twist $(x'_{obj}, y'_{obj}, z'_{obj}, \alpha'_{obj}, \beta'_{obj}, \gamma'_{obj})$. $s_{rel}$ is a 3-dimensional vector representing the position of object with respect to the target position $(x_{rel},y_{rel},z_{rel})$.
Actions are defined as $a = (x_a, y_a, z_a, d_{gri})$ where $(x_a, y_a, z_a)$ represent the new position that the gripper should reach at the next time step and $d_{grip}$ is the desired distance between the two fingers of the gripper. Finally, goals are defined as $g = (x_g, y_g, z_g)$ specifying the target positions of objects.
\section{INVARIANT TRANSFORMATIONS FOR RL}\label{sec:aer}
To reduce the number of interactions with the real environment, we propose to generate artificial training data from observed trajectories collected during the robot's learning.
Some care is needed to choose a transformation to be applied on actual data to generate artificial ones, otherwise the training would be too biased.
To that regard, we consider symmetries ({\em i.e.}, any invariant transformations) in the space of feasible trajectories.
Consider a trajectory $\tau$ of length $h$ with goal $g \in \mathcal G$ as $\langle g$, $(s_0$, $a_1$, $r_1$, $s_1$, $a_2$, $r_2$, $s_2, \ldots, s_h)\rangle$ where $s_0 \in \mathcal S$, $\forall i=1, \ldots, h$, $a_i \in \mathcal A$, $s_i \in \mathcal S$, and $r_i = R(s_{i-1}, a_i, s_i, g)$.
We assume that all trajectories have a length not larger than $H \in \mathbb N$, which is true in robotics ({\em i.e.}, the length of each manipulation task is not infinite).
The set of all trajectories is denoted $\overline \Gamma = \cup_{h=1}^H \mathcal G \times \mathcal S \times (\mathcal A \times \mathbb R \times \mathcal S)^h$.
A trajectory $\tau$ is said to be \emph{feasible} if for $i=1, \ldots, h$, $T(s_{i-1}, a_i, s_i)>0$.
The set of feasible trajectories is denoted $\Gamma \subseteq \overline\Gamma$.
A trajectory $\tau$ of length $h$ with goal $g$ is said to be \emph{successful} if $R(\tau)>R_{\min}$ where $R(\tau) = \sum_{i=1}^h \gamma^{i-1} R(s_{i-1}, a_i, s_i, g)$ and $R_{\min}$ is a fixed problem-dependent threshold.
In the context of sparse rewards with $R_{\min}=0$, a successful trajectory is one that reached the goal.
The set of successful trajectories is denoted $\Gamma^+ \subseteq \Gamma$.
We can now define the different notions of symmetries that we use in this paper.
A \textit{symmetry} of $\Gamma$ is a one-to-one mapping $\sigma : \overline\Gamma \to \overline\Gamma$ such that $\sigma(\Gamma) = \Gamma$ where $\sigma(\Gamma) = \{ \tau \in \Gamma \mid \exists \tau' \in \Gamma, \sigma(\tau') = \tau \}$.
In words, a symmetry of $\Gamma$ leaves the space invariant, {\em i.e.}, it maps feasible trajectories to feasible ones.
As we only apply symmetries to feasible trajectories, we directly consider their restrictions to $\Gamma$ and keep the same notation, {\em i.e.}, $\sigma : \Gamma \to \Gamma$.
A \emph{decomposable} symmetry is a symmetry $\sigma$ such that there exist one-to-one mappings $\sigma_{\mathcal G} : \mathcal G \to \mathcal G$, $\sigma_{\mathcal S} : \mathcal S \to \mathcal S$, and $\sigma_{\mathcal A} : \mathcal A \to \mathcal A$ that satisfy for any $\tau \in \Gamma$:
\begin{align}\label{eq:decomposable}
\sigma(\tau) = \langle g', (s_0', a_1', r_1', s_1', a_2', r_2', s_2', \ldots, s_h')\rangle
\end{align}
where
$\tau = \langle g$, $(s_0$, $a_1$, $r_1$, $s_1$, $\ldots, s_h)\rangle$,
$g' = \sigma_{\mathcal G}(g)$,
$s'_0 = \sigma_{\mathcal S}(s_0)$,
$\forall i=1, \ldots, h$,
$a'_i = \sigma_{\mathcal A}(a_i)$,
$s'_i = \sigma_{\mathcal S}(s_i)$, and
$r'_i = R(\sigma_{\mathcal S}(s_{i-1}), \sigma_{\mathcal A}(a_i), \sigma_{\mathcal S}(s_i), \sigma_{\mathcal G}(g))$.
In words, a decomposable symmetry is a simple mapping that applies transformations separately on states, actions, and rewards.
A \emph{reward-preserving} symmetry $\sigma: \Gamma \to \Gamma$ is a symmetry such that for any trajectory $\tau \in \Gamma$, the rewards appearing in $\tau$ are exactly the same as those in $\sigma(\tau)$ in the same order.
In words, the value of rewards in a trajectory is not changed by a reward-preserving symmetry.
The previous definitions of symmetries can naturally be applied to the set of successful trajectories $\Gamma^+$ as well.
Besides, note that any number of symmetries induces a group structure ({\em i.e.}, they can be composed).
Given $n$ symmetries and a trajectory, one could possibly generate up to $2^n-1$ new trajectories\footnote{Though in our implementation, we use $2n-1$ to avoid computational costs with an exponential increase.} (see Sec. \ref{subsec:ker} for specifics).
This property is useful if one only knows a fixed number of symmetries for a given problem, because a recursive application of those symmetries could lead to an exponential increase of trajectories that could be used for training.
As a general approach to increase data efficiency in deep RL, one can leverage the symmetries of $\Gamma$ or $\Gamma^+$ for data augmentation.
As an illustration, we propose ITER (Invariant Transform Experience Replay), a general architecture for data augmentation in deep RL, which we instantiate with two techniques for concreteness:
\begin{itemize}
\item Kaleidoscope experience replay (KER, Sec. \ref{subsec:ker}) is based on reward-preserving decomposable symmetries of $\Gamma$ and is applied to observed trajectories before they are stored in the replay buffer.
\item Goal-Augmented Experience Replay (GER, Sec. \ref{subsec:ger}) is based on reward-preserving decomposable symmetries of $\Gamma^+$, but can be applied to all feasible trajectories in the same fashion as HER.
It is applied to trajectories sampled from the replay buffer.
\end{itemize}
In this general framework, other symmetries ({\em e.g.}, rotation, translation) could be used instead or in conjunction of KER or GER.
Besides, these two approaches are orthogonal to each other, and could be used separately.
An overview of our architecture is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:architecture}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{pics/framework.pdf}
\caption{ITER framework overview: observed and symmetrically transformed transitions are stored in the replay buffer.
Sampled minibatches are then augmented with GER before updating the policy.}
\label{fig:architecture}
\end{figure}
Furthermore, note that our two methods preserve any contact that may occur between the robot and any object it may encounter (table included) as long as a symmetry is applied to all the objects and obstacles in the robot's workspace.
Therefore, our approach also works in any contact-rich robotic task, including
problems where some obstacles may limit the movements of objects or the robot. When the poses of obstacles are given in each state but not fixed across episodes, the agent can learn the effects of contact.
For example, the agent can avoid obstacles or leverage contact to reach a goal ({\em e.g.} in the pushing task it may learn to push an object and let the obstacle stop the moving object).
\subsection{Kaleidoscope Experience Replay (KER)}\label{subsec:ker}
KER uses reflectional symmetry.
Consider a 3D workspace with a bisecting plane $xoz$ as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ker}. If a trajectory is observed in the workspace (red in Fig. \ref{fig:ker}), the symmetry associated to $xoz$ would then yield a new feasible trajectory reflected on this plane. More generally, the $xoz$ plane may be rotated by some angle $\theta_z$ along axis $\vec{z}$ and still define an invariant symmetry for the robotic task.
We can now precisely define KER, which amounts to augmenting any observed trajectory with a certain number of random decomposable symmetries.
To generate feasible symmetrical trajectories, one must choose a maximum valid angle $\theta_\text{max}$ for generating symmetries in any specific robotic manipulation task as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:theta_max} a).
Value $\theta_\text{max}$ is a hyperparameter that one can enlarge to expand the number of symmetrical trajectories (leading to more general policy training). Note, however, that it is also possible that a limited number of reflections lead to trajectories that consists of sections where the robot manipulator is outside the workspace. In these cases, such trajectories are not included in the replay buffer to ensure that the reflection is invariant.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{pics/RAL_new_fig/2D_theta_max.pdf}
\caption{a) Grey represents the valid workspace (the table surface). Red represents the object and goal's possible initial positions. Blue represents valid areas for symmetry hyperplanes (lines in this 2-dimensional visualization) that KER applies to reflect any observed trajectory. b) 2D illustration of how KER reflects an observed trajectory when $n_\text{KER}=3$.
}
\label{fig:theta_max}
\end{figure}
State, action, and goal vectors consist of position, orientation, linear velocity, and angular velocity elements that can be reflected through symmetry. Position and linear velocity are represented through variables $(x,y,z)$, whilst variables $(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)$ are used to represent the orientation and angular velocity elements (as recalled in Sec. \ref{sec:back}). The center of the robot's base coincides with the origin. Whenever, a robot's shoulder is offset from the origin and we need to consider the parallel sagittal plane, then we translate all coordinates to this new plane. Since the distance between fingers and their corresponding relative velocity are scalar, they remain unchanged after symmetry. Thus, we only consider reflecting $(x,y,z)$ and $(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)$ to KER-augmented elements $(x_{sym},y_{sym},z_{sym})$ and $(\alpha_{sym}, \beta_{sym}, \gamma_{sym})$.
Note that each plane in the 3-dimensional Cartesian space can be leveraged to yield one symmetry. Formally, each plane $\psi$ is only associated with one symmetry $\sigma^\psi$.
The number of reflections used in KER is controlled by hyperparameter $n_\text{KER}$.
If $n_\text{KER} =1$, KER directly applies $\sigma^{xoz}$ to reflect the new trajectory in relation to states, actions, and goals in terms of $(x,y,z)$ and $(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)$ elements as shown below:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ker_1_pos}
\begin{split}
\sigma^{xoz}((x,y,z))&= (x,-y,z) \\
&=(x_{sym},y_{sym},z_{sym})\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ker_1_ori}
\begin{split}
\sigma^{xoz}((\alpha,\beta,\gamma))\\
&=(-\alpha,\beta,-\gamma)\\
&=(\alpha_{sym}, \beta_{sym}, \gamma_{sym})
\end{split}
\end{equation}
If $n_{\text{KER}} >1$, there are two stages. In the first stage,
KER generates a set of rotated symmetric planes $\Psi =\{ \psi_{\theta_j}^{z} \mid \theta_j\in \Theta \}$ which are rotated along the $\vec{z}$-axis by a set of uniformly sampled angles $\Theta = \{ \theta_j \mid \theta_j \sim (0,\theta_\text{max}], j=1,2,...,n_{\text{KER}}-1 \}$.
The set of associated decomposable symmetries for those planes is denoted as $\Sigma^{\Psi} =\{ \sigma^{\psi_{\theta_j}} : \Gamma \to \Gamma \mid \psi \in \Psi, j = 1,2,...,n_{\text{KER}}-1 \}$ (here for conciseness we use $\psi_{\theta_j}$ to represent $\psi_{\theta_j}^{z}$).
The decomposition of $\sigma^{\psi_{\theta_j}}$ is:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\sigma^{\psi_{\theta_j}}((x,y,z))&= Rot_z(\theta_j) [\sigma^{xoz}(Rot^{-1}_z(\theta_j) (x,y,z)^{T})]^{T}\\
&=(x_{sym},y_{sym},z_{sym})
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\sigma^{\psi_{\theta_j}}((\alpha,\beta,\gamma))&=
Car(Rot_z(\theta_j)Eul(\dot{\alpha},\dot{\beta},\dot{\gamma})) \\
&= (\alpha_{sym},\beta_{sym},\gamma_{sym})\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where:
\begin{align*}
(\dot{\alpha},\dot{\beta},\dot{\gamma}) &= \sigma^{xoz}(Car(Rot^{-1}_z(\theta_j) Eul(\alpha,\beta,\gamma)))
\end{align*}
with $Eul:\mathbb{R}^{3}\rightarrow SO(3)$ which maps a 3D-vector $(\alpha, \beta, \gamma)$ of Euler angles to a rotation matrix $Rot \in SO(3) \subset \mathbb{R}^{3\times 3} $ (where $SO(n)$ denotes the special orthogonal group of dimension $n$) under right-handed coordinate frame, and $Car: SO(3)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{3}$ is the inverse mapping of $Eul$ following the $x$-, $y$-, and $z$-axes rotation sequence (Cardano sequence)\cite{Corke2017Robotics}. $Rot_z(\theta)$ is a standard rotation matrix for rotation of $\theta$ about the $z$ axis.
At the end of the first stage, we obtain a set of trajectories $\overline{\Gamma}_{1}$ consisting of an observed trajectory and its symmetrical trajectories generated from $\Sigma^{\Psi}$.
From this set, infeasible trajectories ({\em e.g.}, out of workspace) are filtered out to define a set of feasible trajectories ${\Gamma_{1}}$.
Then KER applies $\sigma^{xoz}$ to ${\Gamma_{1}} $ according to Eqn. \ref{eq:ker_1_pos} and Eqn. \ref{eq:ker_1_ori}, and then yields another set of feasible symmetrical trajectories ${\Gamma_{1}'} $ (all these trajectories are feasible since our workspace is symmetrical with respect to $xoz$ plane). Finally, the trajectories in the set ${\Gamma_{2}} = {\Gamma_{1}'} \cup {\Gamma_{1}} $ are stored into the replay buffer in each episode.
In general, the maximum number of new trajectories generated is $ 2 n_{\text{KER}} - 1$. Consider Fig. \ref{fig:theta_max} b), here KER first samples two symmetry hyperplanes (the green and yellow lines) rotated about the $z$-axis with origin $o$ with uniformly sampled angles with range $(0,\theta_{max}]$. Then, we reflect the observed (red) trajectory across the two planes to generate two new trajectories (yellow and green). Finally, KER reflects both the observed and reflected trajectories about the $x$-axis to generate three new purple trajectories.
Note that instead of storing the reflected trajectories in the replay buffer, random symmetries can also be applied to sampled minibatches from the buffer. This approach was tried previously for single-symmetry scenarios \cite{kidzinski2018learning}. However, the approach is more computationally taxing (as transitions are reflected every time they are sampled) and leads to lower performance, which is due to a lower diversity in the minibatches as discussed in Sec. \ref{sec:discussion}.
\subsection{Goal-Augmented Experience Replay (GER)}\label{subsec:ger}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.\linewidth]{pics/RAL_new_fig/GER_2D.pdf}
\caption{An illustration for GER.}
\label{fig:ger_2d}
\end{figure}
GER exploits any reward function formulation (see Eqn.~\ref{eq:sparserewards}) that defines a successful trajectory as one whose end position is within a small radial threshold (a ball) centered around the goal. Thus, when the robot obtains a trajectory, we can consider it successful for any goal within a ball centered at each state of that trajectory.
Based on this observation, GER augments trajectories by replacing the original goal with a random goal sampled uniformly within that ball. Here is an example in pushing task. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ger_2d}, when HER chooses some hindsight goals (red points) to replace the original goal (green point) for experience replay, we can further sample more goals (orange points) within the circle with radius $\Delta$ that also satisfy the success condition for hindsight goal replacements, and we call those artificial goals (red and orange points) as GER-goals.
This ball can be formally described as $B(s_h, \Delta) = \{ g \in \mathcal G \mid d(s_h, g) \le \Delta \}$ where $s_h$ is the state reached in the observed trajectory and $\Delta \le \epsilon_R$ is a threshold.
Formally, GER is based on reward-preserving decomposable symmetries of $\Gamma^+$ where $\sigma_{\mathcal S}$ and $\sigma_{\mathcal A}$ are identity mappings and $\sigma_{G}$ is randomly chosen, conditional to a trajectory $\tau$ reaching some state $s_h$, in the following set:
$\{ \rho : \mathcal G \to \mathcal G \mid \forall g \in \mathcal G, \mbox{ }\rho(g) \in B(s_h, \Delta)\}$.
Interestingly, such symmetries, when viewed as mappings from $\Gamma$ to $\Gamma^+$ can be applied to the whole set of feasible trajectories to generate successful trajectories, which we do in our architecture.
In this sense, GER is a generalization of HER and can be implemented in the same fashion. $n_\text{GER}$ is a hyperparameter that controls the ratio between the numbers of original goals $g\in \mathcal G_{Ori}$ and GER goals $g \in \mathcal G_{GER}$ used in minibatch for policy training: $\frac{\left | \mathcal G_{GER} \right |}{\left | \mathcal G_{Ori} \right |}=n_\text{GER}$. Note that in order to take full advantage of realized goals, in our definition, when $n_\text{GER}=1$, HER is a spacial form of GER with $\Delta=0$, which means the GER-goals are all the hindsight goals chose right on the state of any observed trajectories.
\section{Experiments and Results} \label{sec:expe}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.\textwidth]{pics/RAL_fig_for_revise/task_ob_without_ob-crop.pdf}
\caption{Evaluation on robotic tasks without obstacles \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay} (left) and with obstacles (showed as green bricks in right) . Goals are represented by red balls.}
\label{fig:tasks}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{pics/all_new_results_graphs/best_combination-crop.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of vanilla HER and ITER with 8 KER symmetries and 4 GER applications on obstacle-free tasks.}
\label{fig:exp_best_multigoal}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pics/RAL_fig_for_revise/plot_3tasks_ker-crop.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of different $n_{\text{KER}}$ for KER with a single GER on obstacle-free tasks.}
\label{fig:exp_nker}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pics/all_new_results_graphs/GER_result-crop.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of different $n_{\text{GER}}$ for GER without KER on obstacle-free tasks.}
\label{fig:exp_nger}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pics/RAL_fig_for_revise/plot_3tasks_batch_her-crop.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of vanilla HER with different minibatch sizes from 64 to 1024.}
\label{fig:exp_her_batch_size}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pics/RAL_fig_for_revise/plot_3tasks_obstacle_best_vanilla-crop.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of vanilla HER and ITER with 4 KER symmetries and 4 GER applications on tasks with obstacles.}
\label{fig:exp_obstacle}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Environment}
To evaluate our method, a simulated 7-DOF (degrees of freedom) Fetch arm with a two-fingered parallel gripper is trained with DDPG on the pushing, sliding, and pick-and-place tasks from OpenAI Gym \cite{brockman2016openai}. The state and action are defined according to Sec. \ref{sec:back}.
The rewards are sparse and binary. If successful (the goal is achieved within an error distance) the agent gains a 0 reward, otherwise -1. With regards to goal replay, \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay} proposed four strategies for selecting the replayed goal. Their experimental results show that the \textit{future} strategy performed best. As such, we use the same goal sampling strategy in all of our experiments. In our case, this strategy will select $k$ random states $s_h$ (that will be set at the center of the ball for sampling random goals in GER experiments as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ger_2d}) that come from the same episode as the transition being replayed and were observed afterwards. In our experiment, we use the same $k$ as in \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay}, which is 8.
Our method is evaluated on three simulated manipulation
tasks described below (and introduced in \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay}) and shown in Fig. \ref{fig:tasks}. For all tasks, a movable object is initialized randomly on a table.
\subsubsection{Pushing} The robot's aim is to move the object to a desired position on the table.
\subsubsection{Sliding} The robot's aim is to slide the object to a goal position on the table (the goal position is outside the robot’s workspace). The robot must learn to contact the object with enough momentum such that it reaches its goal (considering friction).
\subsubsection{Pick-and-place} The robot's aim is to move the object to a desired position in space.
Note that for the pushing and sliding tasks, the fingers are blocked to prevent the agent from learning to grasp. All hyperparameter values are set equal to those presented in \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay}.
\textit{Learning with Obstacles}:
Our method also succeeds in more complex environments; namely, those with obstacles. In each episode, a static brick-like obstacle is randomly placed in the robot workspace (see Appendix A \cite{ITER_supplement} for details).
The state space dimensionality increases to 31 and additionally includes the obstacle pose.
In such scenarios, the robot must learn how to manipulate a movable object to achieve a goal by possible interactions with the obstacle---a much harder learning process.
\subsection{Training Setting}
The training setting
is conducted according to \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay}. Hyperparameter values are unchanged unless otherwise stated. We train policies on a single machine with 1 CPU core and generate experiences by using 2 rollouts.
An epoch is defined as a fixed-size set of successive episodes. Since a trajectory (also defined as a single episode) can be considered \textit{successful} (Sec. \ref{sec:aer}), we can compute the \textit{success rate} over an epoch by counting the number of successful episodes.
To highlight the difference in learning rate ability between ITER and HER, we use an eighth of the number of episodes (100 episodes per epoch instead of 800) in each training epoch.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{pics/RAL_fig_for_revise/real_baxter_iter_fig-crop.pdf}
\caption{A real Baxter robot running a pick-and-place policy trained via ITER (the goal is located at the orange ball).}
\label{fig:exp_real_baxter}
\end{figure}
Note that during learning, the discount factor, the structures of the policy network and the Q-value network (input, output, activation functions, and hidden layers), the policy's exploration strategy, the optimization method, the learning rates, the soft update ratio, and the replay buffer size are all equal to \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay}.
Policy performance during testing is shown in Figs. \ref{fig:exp_best_multigoal}-\ref{fig:exp_obstacle}. That is, exploration is disabled, rendering the policy fully deterministic. After each learning epoch, the testing success rate is computed over 10 episodes. We display an average over 5 random seeds for each curve.
Finally, note that a successful episode is defined as having an object reach a final position within distance $\epsilon_R$ of the goal. Namely, 5cm for pushing and pick-and-place, and 20cm for sliding.
To sample the GER goals, we used 2D-balls in the pushing and the sliding tasks, and 3D-balls in the pick-and-place task ($\Delta$ equals $\epsilon_R$).
We design experiments to demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach and to answer the following questions.
\begin{itemize}
\item How does ITER (GER+KER) perform compared to HER on obstacle-free robotic tasks?
\item How much does KER contribute to ITER's performance? How many $n_\text{KER}$ should be used?
\item What is the contribution of GER to the performance of ITER? What is the impact of $n_\text{GER}$ ?
\item Does ITER (GER+KER) improve performance even with an obstacle in the robot workspace?
\item Could we deploy a well-trained policy learned from ITER to the real robot without any finetuning?
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Does ITER improve performance with respect to HER?}
Experimental results show that when ITER uses $n_{\text{KER}}=8$ and $n_{\text{GER}}=4$ it significantly outperforms the data efficiency of HER across tasks in obstacle-free tasks (Fig. \ref{fig:exp_best_multigoal}). In this experiment, we achieve a 13$\times$, 3$\times$, and 5$\times$ speedup over HER for pushing, sliding, and pick-and-place tasks respectively. Note that the sliding task is very challenging as it is only determined by a few contacts (generally one) between the gripper and the object. The limited number of contacts limits the performance gain of ITER over HER.
\subsection{How many symmetries should we use in KER?}
In this experiment, only a single GER application with a zero threshold $\Delta$ is used ({\em i.e.}, HER).
We observe a monotonic performance increase with respect to the number of random symmetries $n_\text{KER}$ as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:exp_nker}.
We also note that there are performance drops for larger $n_\text{KER}$ and we present hypotheses in Sec. \ref{sec:discussion} to explain the phenomena (see Appendix B \cite{ITER_supplement} for experiments validating these hypotheses).
\subsection{Does GER improve performance?}
In this experiment, KER is not used and we only vary the number of GER applications.
As with KER, performance improves as more GERs are applied until a ceiling is reached. Results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:exp_nger}.
Given that GER changes the size of the minibatch, we performed a controlled experiment where we increased the size of the minibatch in vanilla HER. More specifically, the size of the minibatch is set to $256*n_\text{GER}$. Theoretically, with stochastic gradient descent, learning may speed up as the size of the minibatch increases, since the approximation of the minibatch gradient is more precise according to the Law of Large Numbers. However, we found that enlarging the minibatch size in HER did not always improve the performance in the aforementioned tasks---some times even deteriorated it (Fig. \ref{fig:exp_her_batch_size}).
We believe that with larger minibatches the network converges to sharp minimizers leading to poorer generalization performance \cite{keskar2016largebatch}.
In contrast, GER does not suffer such a degradation as it augments the data by introducing some noise. GER improves the learning performance despite a larger minibatch size. By observing Figs. \ref{fig:exp_nker} and \ref{fig:exp_nger}, we can conclude that KER and GER both contribute to ITER in similar proportions.
\subsection{How does ITER perform in tasks with obstacles?}
The experimental results shown in Fig. \ref{fig:exp_obstacle} manifest that HER cannot resolve pushing and pick-and-place tasks within 400 epochs due to the more complex dynamics introduced by obstacles. In contrast, ITER yielded highly efficient learning, converging to a satisfying performance in around 80 and 230 epochs respectively.
In the sliding task, ITER converges in around 100 epochs whilst HER converges after 400 epochs.
These experiments prove the effectiveness of our method even in contact-rich environments (videos available in \cite{ITER_supplement}).
\subsection{Real robot deployment}
Similarly to HER \cite{Andrychowicz2017HindsightReplay}, we show that a policy trained with ITER can be transferred to a real robot.
A Rethink Baxter dual-armed humanoid was used for evaluation. First, ITER trained policies in a MuJoCo simulation with Baxter. Then we directly applied a well-trained policy from simulations to the real Baxter without fine-tuning. Object poses were detected by Alvar markers (see Appendix C \cite{ITER_supplement} for learning plots and other details)
The real Baxter successfully achieved pick-and-place in 46 out of 50 trials as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:exp_real_baxter} (videos available in \cite{ITER_supplement}).
\section{DISCUSSION} \label{sec:discussion}
\subsection{Transformations to the replay buffer's input or output?}
One interesting question concerns how the new data should be used.
We could either populate the replay buffer with the artificial transitions or apply the transformations to a minibatch sampled from the replay buffer.
If the transformations are applied after, the diversity of the minibatch could be limited because all the new artificial transitions come from the same source.
On the other hand, if the transformations are applied before, then we do not fully exploit the information contained in this transformation because we only sample observed states within the same trajectory for several times.
In our experiment, we notice that applying KER before and GER after works better in practice.
\subsection{Performance drop with KER}
In the KER experiments, we noticed an unexpected performance dropped after running around certain numbers of epochs. This drop showed up earlier as the number of symmetries $n_\text{KER}$ increased. We first thought the algorithm was overfitting the new artificial goals at the expense of the real goals. However, in an experiment not shown here (see Appendix B \cite{ITER_supplement} for details), we observed that the performance drop occurs also with HER, regardless of whether ITER is used or not. DDPG seems to suffer from this instability after seeing a certain amount of data (actual or artificial).
\section{CONCLUSIONS} \label{sec:conclusion}
We proposed ITER, a general framework for data augmentation in deep RL, which we instantiated with two novel techniques KER and GER in both simple and complex dynamical environments.
KER exploited reflectional symmetry in the feasible workspace while creating invariant RL trajectories.
GER, as an extension of HER, is specific to goal-oriented tasks where success is defined with a threshold distance and generalizes hindsight goals.
These techniques greatly accelerate learning and improved success rates as demonstrated in our experiments.
As mentioned before, ITER could be formulated with other kinds of transformations ({\em e.g.}, translation, rotation) as long as they satisfy the properties ({\em e.g.}, reward-preserving symmetries on feasible trajectories) we introduced.
We leave the investigation of such other symmetries in ITER for future work.
ITER's accelerated learning enabled satisfactory learning performance in only 250k timesteps (2 hours of interaction time) for pick-and-place--a 500\% improvement compared to HER's. And we presented that policies learned under ITER can also endow the real robot with the pick-and-place ability without further finetuning. ITER also resolved environments with obstacles in a highly-efficient manner, while vanilla HER fails to solve some tasks.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGMENT}
This work is supported by GD Dept. of Science \& Tech. [2019A050510040], by the NSF of China [61950410758, 61750110521, 61872238], and the Shanghai NSF [19ZR1426700].
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an additive category, and $\mathcal{X}$ be a full additive subcategory of $\mathcal{A}$. In relative homological algebra, $\mathcal{X}$-resolutions and $\mathcal{X}$-coresolutions play the role of projective resolutions and injective resolutions in classical homological algebra.
The extension groups ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, -}^n(-, -)$ are obtained by substituting the $\mathcal{X}$-resolution in the contravariant entry of the Hom bifunctor ${\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(-, -)$ and then computing the cohomological groups. Dually, the extension groups ${\rm Ext}_{-, \mathcal{X}}^n(-, -)$ are obtained by substituting the $\mathcal{X}$-coresolution in the covariant entry. These groups might be called the \emph{upper extension groups}.
In general, these groups ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, -}^n(-, -)$ and ${\rm Ext}_{-, \mathcal{X}}^n(-, -)$ are not related to each other. We mention that under certain conditions, the upper extension groups are isomorphic to the suspended Hom groups in relative derived categories \cite{Chen11}.
The \emph{lower extension groups} ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(-, -)$ are obtained by substituting the $\mathcal{X}$-resolution in the covariant entry of ${\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(-, -)$ and then computing the cohomological groups. They enjoy the balanced property, that is, ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(-, -)$ can be obtained alternatively by substituting the $\mathcal{X}$-coresolution in the contravariant entry of ${\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(-, -)$.
The lower extension groups arise in Gorenstein homological algebra \cite{EJ} and the general stabilization theory \cite{Bel}. However, they are less well known than the upper extension groups, probably due to the unusual entries to substitute the $\mathcal{X}$-(co)resolutions.
This work studies the lower extension groups in a completely different perspective. Denote by $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$ the factor category of $\mathcal{A}$ by those morphisms factoring through $\mathcal{X}$. Denote by $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})$ and $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ the bounded homotopy categories of $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{X}$, respectively. Then we have the Verdier quotient triangulated category $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$.
The following canonical functor
$$\Phi\colon \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})\longrightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])$$
sends a complex $Z$ in $\mathcal{A}$ to $Z$, viewed as a complex in $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$. An innocent problem is when $\Phi$ is an equivalence. A special case of this problem is implicitly treated in \cite{KV}, where it is used to construct the realization functor of a bounded $t$-structure in an algebraic triangulated category.
The following result is the motivation of this work, which extends the corresponding result contained in \cite[the proof in Subsection 3.2]{KV}.
\vskip 5pt
\noindent {\bf Proposition.}\; \emph{Assume that the lower extension groups ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(-, -)$ are defined. Then the canonical functor $\Phi$ is an equivalence if and only if ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(-, -)$ vanish for all $n\geq 1$.}
\vskip 5pt
For the proof of the above result, we actually show that the lower extension groups are isomorphic to certain suspended Hom groups in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$; see Theorem \ref{thm:1}. We view the additive categories $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{X}$ as dg categories concentrated in degree zero. Then we have the dg quotient category $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$ in the sense of \cite{Kel99, Dri}. We observe that the lower extension groups are isomorphic to the negative cohomological groups of the Hom complexes in $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$; see Proposition \ref{prop:dg-qu}. Then we have another proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1} under slightly different assumptions.
To justify the title, we observe that the following three quotient categories are involved: the additive quotient $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$, the triangulated quotient $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ and the dg quotient $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$. It is well known that they are related as follows: $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$ is equivalent to the homotopy category $H^0(\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X})$ of $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$, and $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ is equivalent to the triangulated hull $(\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X})^{\rm tr}$ of $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we prove that the lower extension groups are isomorphic to the Tor groups of certain modules over $\mathcal{X}$. We prove Theorem \ref{thm:1} in Section 3. The canonical functor $\Phi$ is studied in Section 4. Moreover, a new characterization of a hereditary abelian category is given; see Corollary \ref{cor:here}. In Section 5, we study the dg quotient category $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$ and prove Proposition \ref{prop:dg-qu}. Then we interpret the Hom groups in the Verdier quotient category $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ as the Tor groups, yielding another proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1}; see Proposition \ref{prop:dg-tor}.
In the sequel, we sometimes abbreviate ${\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(-, -)$ as $\mathcal{A}(-, -)$. We use the cohomological notation for complexes.
\section{The lower extensions as Tor groups}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an additive category and $\mathcal{X}\subseteq \mathcal{A}$ a full additive subcategory. Denote by $[\mathcal{X}]$ the two-sided ideal formed by morphisms factoring through $\mathcal{X}$. Then we have the factor category $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$. For two objects $A$ and $B$, we have
$$\mathcal{A}/{[\mathcal{X}]}(A, B)=\mathcal{A}(A, B)/{[\mathcal{X}](A, B)}.$$
The corresponding coset of a morphism $f\colon A\rightarrow B$ in $\mathcal{A}$ is denoted by $[f]$.
Recall that a \emph{$\mathcal{X}$-resolution} of an object $B$ means a complex in $\mathcal{A}$
$$X_B\colon \cdots \longrightarrow X_B^{-2} \stackrel{d^{-2}}\longrightarrow X^{-1}_B\stackrel{\partial}\longrightarrow B\longrightarrow 0$$
such that $X_B^{-i}\in \mathcal{X}$ for each $i\geq 1$ and that ${\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(X, X_B)$ is acyclic for each object $X\in \mathcal{X}$. In particular, the morphism $\partial$ is a right $\mathcal{X}$-approximation of $B$, that is, any morphism $t\colon T\rightarrow B$ with $T\in \mathcal{X}$ factors through $\partial$. Dually, a \emph{$\mathcal{X}$-coresoultion} of $A$ means a complex
$$_AX\colon 0\longrightarrow A \longrightarrow {_AX}^1 \longrightarrow {_AX}^2\longrightarrow \cdots $$
such that each $_AX^i$ lies in $\mathcal{X}$ and that ${\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(_AX, X)$ is acyclic for each $X\in \mathcal{X}$.
We assume that the above $\mathcal{X}$-resolution and $\mathcal{X}$-coresolution exist. Then the \emph{upper extension groups} ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, -}^n(B, A)=H^{n+1}{\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(X_B^{\leq -1}, A)$ and ${\rm Ext}_{-, \mathcal{X}}^n(B, A)=H^{n+1}{\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(B, {_AX}^{\geq 1})$ for $n\in \mathbb{Z}$. Here, $X_B^{\leq -1}$ and ${_AX}^{\geq 1}$ denote the brutal truncations of the relevant complexes.
In general, these groups ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, -}^n(B, A)$ and ${\rm Ext}_{-, \mathcal{X}}^n(B, A)$ are not related to each other. Therefore, the following balanced property is quite different.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:bala}
We assume that the above $\mathcal{X}$-resolution $X_B$ and $\mathcal{X}$-coresolution $_AX$ exist. Then for each $n\in \mathbb{Z}$, there is an isomorphism
$$H^{-n}{\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}(A, X_B)\simeq H^{-n}{\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}({_AX}, B).$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
This follows immediately by considering the collapsing spectral sequences associated to the Hom bicomplex ${\rm Hom}_\mathcal{A}({_AX}, X_B)$.
\end{proof}
The above common cohomology groups are denoted by ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(A, B)$, called the \emph{lower extension groups}. We observe that ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, -n}(A, B)=0$ for $n\geq 1$ and that
$${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, 0}(A, B)\simeq \mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}](A, B).$$
In what follows, if either $X_B$ or $_AX$ exists, we still talk about the lower extension groups ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(A, B)$.
Assume that $\mathcal{X}$ is skeletally small. Denote by $\mathcal{X}\mbox{-Mod}$ the abelian category of left $\mathcal{X}$-modules. Here, a left $\mathcal{X}$-module is by definition an additive functor $\mathcal{X}\rightarrow \mathbb{Z}\mbox{-Mod}$. Dually, $\mbox{Mod-}\mathcal{X}$ denotes the category of right $\mathcal{X}$-modules. Then we have the well-defined tensor bifunctor
$$-\otimes_\mathcal{X}-\colon \mbox{Mod-}\mathcal{X}\times \mathcal{X}\mbox{-Mod}\longrightarrow \mathbb{Z}\mbox{-Mod}$$
and the corresponding Tor groups ${\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_n(-, -)$ for $n\geq 1$.
For example, $\mathcal{A}(-, B)$ and $\mathcal{A}(A, -)$ will be viewed as a right $\mathcal{X}$-module and a left $\mathcal{X}$-module, respectively. Then the tensor product is explicitly given by
$$\mathcal{A}(-, B)\otimes_\mathcal{X} \mathcal{A}(A, -)=(\bigoplus_{X\in \mathcal{X}} \mathcal{A}(X, B)\otimes_\mathbb{Z} \mathcal{A}(A, X))/I,$$
where $I$ is a $\mathbb{Z}$-submodule generated by $b\circ x\otimes a-b\otimes x\circ a$ for all $x\colon X\rightarrow X'$ in $\mathcal{X}$, $a\colon A\rightarrow X$ and $b\colon X'\rightarrow B$. Then there is a canonical map
\begin{align}\label{equ:can}
{\rm can}\colon \mathcal{A}(-, B)\otimes_\mathcal{X} \mathcal{A}(A, -)\longrightarrow \mathcal{A}(A, B), \quad g\otimes f\mapsto g\circ f,\end{align}
where $g\colon X\rightarrow B$ and $f\colon A\rightarrow X$ for some object $X\in \mathcal{X}$. The following sequence is exact by definition
$$\mathcal{A}(-, B)\otimes_\mathcal{X} \mathcal{A}(A, -)\stackrel{{\rm can}}\longrightarrow \mathcal{A}(A, B)\stackrel{{\rm pr}}\longrightarrow \mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}](A, B)\longrightarrow 0,$$
where ``${\rm pr}$" denotes the projection.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:ext-tor}
Assume that $\mathcal{X}$ is skeletally small and that either $X_B$ or $_AX$ exists. Then there are isomorphisms
$${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(A, B)\simeq {\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_{n-1}(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -))$$
for $n\geq 2$; moreover, ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, 1}(A, B)$ is isomorphic to the kernel of (\ref{equ:can}).
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We assume that the $\mathcal{X}$-resolution $X_B$ exists, and the case where $_AX$ exists is similar.
The $\mathcal{X}$-resolution $X_B$ gives rise to the following projective resolution of the right $\mathcal{X}$-module $\mathcal{A}(-, B)$
$$\cdots \longrightarrow \mathcal{X}(-, X_B^{-2}) \stackrel{\mathcal{X}(-, d^{-2})}\longrightarrow \mathcal{X}(-, X_B^{-1}) \longrightarrow \mathcal{A}(-, B)\longrightarrow 0.$$
Applying $-\otimes_\mathcal{X}\mathcal{A}(A, -)$ to it and using the natural isomorphisms
$$\mathcal{X}(-, X_B^{-n})\otimes_\mathcal{X} \mathcal{A}(A, -)\simeq \mathcal{A}(A, X_B^{-n}), $$
the required isomorphisms follow immediately. For the last isomorphism, we just observe that the cokernel of $\mathcal{A}(A, d^{-2})$ is isomorphic to $\mathcal{A}(-, B)\otimes_\mathcal{X} \mathcal{A}(A, -)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Since the Tor groups have the balanced property, the above isomorphisms yield another proof of the balanced property of the lower extension groups in Lemma \ref{lem:bala}.
\end{rem}
\begin{exm}\label{exm:here}
{\rm Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an abelian category with enough projectives and enough injectives. Denote by $\mathcal{P}$ (\emph{resp}. $\mathcal{I}$) the full subcategory of projective objects (\emph{resp}. injective objects). The factor category $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{P}]$ is usually denoted by $\underline{\mathcal{A}}$. Similarly, we write $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{I}]$ as $\overline{\mathcal{A}}$. These factor categories are known as the \emph{stable categories}.
We claim that ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P},n}(-, B)=0$ if and only if ${\rm proj.dim}\; B\leq n$. It suffices to show the ``only if" part. Assume that ${\rm proj.dim}\; B>n$. Then in a projective resolution of $B$
$$\cdots \longrightarrow P^{-n-1}\stackrel{d^{-n-1}} \longrightarrow P^{-n}\longrightarrow \cdots \longrightarrow P^{-1}\longrightarrow B\longrightarrow 0$$
the image $A={\rm Im}\; d^{-n-1}$ is not projective. Then the inclusion $A\rightarrow P^{-n}$ yields a nonzero element in ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P},n}(A, B)$, a contradiction.
Indeed, the above claim can be deduced from the following isomorphism
\begin{align}\label{equ:lower}
{\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P},n}(A, B)\simeq \underline{\mathcal{A}}(A, \Omega^n(B))
\end{align}
for all $n\geq 0$. Here, $\Omega^n(B)$ denotes the $n$-th syzygy of $B$ and $\Omega^0(B)=B$ by convention.
Recall that an abelian category $\mathcal{A}$ is \emph{hereditary} if its global dimension is at most one. The above claim yields the following characterization of hereditary abelian category: $\mathcal{A}$ is hereditary if and only if ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P},n}(-, -)=0$ for any $n\geq 1$. Dually, $\mathcal{A}$ is hereditary if and only if ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{I}, n}(-, -)=0$ for any $n\geq 1$.
}\end{exm}
The following example is studied in \cite[Subsection 3.2]{KV}.
\begin{exm}\label{exm:KV}
{\rm
Let $\mathcal{E}$ be a Frobenius exact category. Denote by $\mathcal{P}$ the full subcategory formed by all the projective-injective objects. The stable category $\underline{\mathcal{E}}=\mathcal{E}/[\mathcal{P}]$ is naturally triangulated, whose suspension functor is denoted by $\Sigma$.
Let $\mathcal{A}\subseteq \mathcal{E}$ be a full additive subcategory containing $\mathcal{P}$. Denote the factor category $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{P}]$ by $\underline{\mathcal{A}}$. Similar to (\ref{equ:lower}), we observe an isomorphism
$${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{P},n}(A, B)\simeq \underline{\mathcal{E}}(\Sigma^n(A), B)$$
for any $A, B\in \mathcal{A}$ and each $n\geq 0$.}\end{exm}
\section{The lower extensions as suspended Hom groups}
Denote by $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})$ be homotopy category of bounded complexes in $\mathcal{A}$. The suspension functor is denoted by $\Sigma$. We will identify an object $A\in \mathcal{A}$ with the corresponding stalk complex concentrated in degree zero. Then $\mathcal{A}$ is viewed as a full subcategory of $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})$. For each $n\in \mathbb{Z}$, the suspended stalk complex $\Sigma^{-n}(X)$ is concentrated in degree $n$.
Similarly, we have the homotopy category $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ of bounded complexes in $\mathcal{X}$. It is a triangulated subcategory of $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})$. Denote by $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ the Verdier quotient triangulated category.
We will assume that the category $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ is well defined, that is, all the Hom groups in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ are sets. For example, this happens provided that $\mathcal{X}$ is skeletally small.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:1}
Let $A, B$ be two objects in $\mathcal{A}$, which are also viewed as objects in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$. Then the following statements hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^{-n}(A), B)=0$ for $n\geq 1$.
\item The natural map ${\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]}(A, B)\rightarrow {\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(A, B)$ is an isomorphism. Consequently, the canonical functor $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]\rightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ is fully faithful.
\item Assume that either $X_B$ or $_AX$ exists. Then there are isomorphisms
$${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(A, B)\simeq {\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^n(A), B)$$
for all $n\geq 1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Recall that any morphism from $\Sigma^m(A)$ to $B$ in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ is realized as a right roof
\begin{align}\label{equ:rf}
\Sigma^m(A) \stackrel{g}\longrightarrow C \Longleftarrow B
\end{align}
where $C={\rm Cone}(f)$ is the mapping cone of a chain map $f\colon X\rightarrow B$ for some bounded complex $X\in \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$. In other words, $C$ has the following form
$$\cdots \longrightarrow X^0\stackrel{\begin{pmatrix}
{f^0}\\
{-d_X^0}
\end{pmatrix}}\longrightarrow B\oplus X^1 \longrightarrow X^2\longrightarrow \cdots $$
and $B\Longrightarrow C$ is the inclusion. Here, by the double arrow, we indicate a morphism which is localized in forming the Verdier quotient. If $m<0$, then $g \colon \Sigma^m(A)\rightarrow C$ factors through the brutal truncation $C^{\geq -m}$. Since $C^{\geq -m}$ lies in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$, $g$ becomes zero in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$. This proves (1).
For (2), we observe the following commutative diagram
\[\xymatrix{
& C \\
A\ar[dr]_-{a} \ar[ur]^-{g} \ar[r] & C^{\geq 0} \ar[d]_-{\rm pr} \ar[u]^-{\rm inc} & B \ar@{=>}[l] \ar@{=>}[ul] \ar@{=}[dl]\\
& B,
}\]
where ``${\rm inc}$" and ``${\rm pr}$" denote the obvious inclusion and projection, respectively. Here, the map $a$ is obtained by $g^0=\begin{pmatrix} a\\x \end{pmatrix}$ for some morphism $x\in A\rightarrow X^1$. It follows that the given morphism is equivalent to the trivial roof
$$A \longrightarrow B \stackrel{{\rm Id_B}}\Longleftarrow B.$$
In other words, the natural map
$${\rm Hom}_{\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]}(A, B)\longrightarrow {\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(A, B)$$
is surjective. For its injectivity, take a morphism $b\colon A\rightarrow B$ which is mapped to zero. It means that $b$ factors through some complex $Y\in \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$. Then it follows that $b$ actually factors through $Y^0$ in $\mathcal{A}$, that is, $[b]=0$ in $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$, as required.
To prove (3), we assume that the $\mathcal{X}$-resolution $X_B$ exists. The case where $_AX$ exists is similar, where we use left roofs instead of right roofs.
The required isomorphism
$$\phi\colon {\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(A, B)\longrightarrow {\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^n(A), B)$$
sends a class $\bar{c}$ in ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(A, B)$ to the right roof
\begin{align}\label{equ:rf2}
\Sigma^n(A) \stackrel{c'}\longrightarrow X^{\geq -n}_B \stackrel{\rm inc}\Longleftarrow B.
\end{align}
Here, $c\colon A\rightarrow X_B^{-n}$ represents the class $\bar{c}$, $X^{\geq -n}_B $ denotes the brutal truncation of $X_B$, and the chain map $c'$ is induced by $c$.
We assume that we are given a right roof (\ref{equ:rf}) with $m=n$. By Lemma \ref{lem:res}(2) below, we infer that the inclusion $B\rightarrow X^{\geq -l}_B$ factor through the natural map $B\rightarrow C={\rm Cone}(f)$ for sufficiently large $l$. Therefore, the right roof (\ref{equ:rf}) is equivalent to
\begin{align*}
\Sigma^n(A) \longrightarrow X^{\geq -l}_B \stackrel{\rm inc}\Longleftarrow B.
\end{align*}
It is clear that the above roof is equivalent to a right roof of the form (\ref{equ:rf2}). This proves the surjectivity of $\phi$.
For the injectivity of $\phi$, we take a morphism $c\colon A\rightarrow X_B^{-n}$ such that the right roof (\ref{equ:rf2}) is equivalent to zero. It follows that $c'\colon \Sigma^n(A)\rightarrow X_B$ factors through some complex $Y\in \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$. The factorization is assumed to be $\Sigma^n(A)\stackrel{u} \rightarrow Y\stackrel{v}\rightarrow X_B$. However, by Lemma \ref{lem:res}(1) $v$ is homotopic to zero, and so is $c'$. In other words, the map $c$ factors through $d^{-n-1}$. Then the corresponding class $\bar{c}$ in ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(A, B)$ is zero, as required.
\end{proof}
Denote by $\mathbf{K}^{-}(\mathcal{A})$ the homotopy category of bounded-above complexes in $\mathcal{A}$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:res}
Let $X_B$ be the $\mathcal{X}$-resolution of $B$ and $X$ be a bounded complex in $\mathcal{X}$. Then the following statements hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^-(\mathcal{A})}(Y, X_B)=0$ for any complex $Y\in \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$.
\item Given any chain map $f\colon X\rightarrow B$, the inclusion $B\rightarrow X^{\geq -m}_B$ factors through the natural map $B\rightarrow {\rm Cone}(f)$ for sufficiently large $m$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By definition, ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^{-}(\mathcal{A})}(\Sigma^n(Z), X_B)=0$ for any $Z\in \mathcal{X}$ and $n\in \mathbb{Z}$. Then (1) follows immediately.
We apply the cohomological functor ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^{-}(\mathcal{A})}(-, X_B)$ to the canonical exact triangle
$$X\stackrel{f} \longrightarrow B \stackrel{\iota}\longrightarrow {\rm Cone}(f) \longrightarrow \Sigma X. $$
By (1) the inclusion $B\rightarrow X_B$ factors through $\iota$. Since ${\rm Cone}(f)$ is a bounded complex, the required factorization follows immediately.
\end{proof}
\section{The canonical functor}
The following canonical functor
$$\Phi\colon \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})\longrightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])$$
sends a complex $Z$ in $\mathcal{A}$ to $Z$, where the latter is viewed as a complex in $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:can}
Keep the notation as above. Then the following statements hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\Phi$ is full, then it is dense.
\item The functor $\Phi$ is faithful if and only if it is an equivalence.
\item Assume that the category $\mathcal{A}$ is Krull-Schmidt. Then $\Phi$ is full if and only if it is an equivalence.
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
(1) Recall that the essential image of a full triangle functor is necessarily a triangulated subcategory. The only triangulated subcategory of $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])$ containing $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$ is itself. Then the result follows immediately.
(2) Assume that $\Phi$ is faithful. Let $A, B \in \mathcal{A}$. Recall that ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])}(\Sigma^n(A), B)=0$ for $n\neq 0$ and ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])}(A, B)\simeq {\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]}(A, B)$. The faithfulness of $\Phi$ forces that ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^n(A), B)=0$ for $n\neq 0$. In view of Theorem \ref{thm:1}(2), we have an isomorphism
$${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^n(A), B)\simeq {\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])}(\Sigma^n(A), B)$$
for each $n\in \mathbb{Z}$. It follows from \cite[Lemma 1]{Bei} that $\Phi$ is fully faithful. By (1), we infer that $\Phi$ is an equivalence.
(3) Recall a well-known fact: a full triangle functor is faithful if and only if it is faithful on object; see \cite[p.446]{Ric}. Therefore, it suffices to prove that $\Phi$ is faithful on objects, that is, for any complex $Y\in \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})$, $\Phi(Y)\simeq 0$ implies that $Y$ is isomorphic to a direct summand of some object in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$.
We observe that $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$ is also Krull-Schmidt. We may assume that $Y$ is a \emph{minimal} complex in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})$, that is, each differential $Y^i\rightarrow Y^{i+1}$ is a radical morphism in $\mathcal{A}$. Then $\Phi(Y)$ is also a minimal complex in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])$. Since a null-homotopic minimal complex is necessarily isomorphic to the zero complex in the category of complexes, we infer that each component $Y^i$ is zero in $\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}]$. In other words, each $Y^i$ is isomorphic to a direct summand of some object in $\mathcal{X}$. It follows that $Y$ is isomorphic to a direct summand of some object in $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$, as required.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
In general, the denseness of $\Phi$ will not imply its fully-faithfulness; see Example \ref{exm:non-faith}.
\end{rem}
\begin{exm}
{\rm Let $k$ be a field and $\Lambda=k[t]/(t^3)$ be the truncated polynomial algebra. Denote by $\Lambda\mbox{-mod}$ the abelian category of finite dimensional $\Lambda$-modules and by $\Lambda\mbox{-proj}$ the full subcategory formed by projective modules. The stable module category $\Lambda\mbox{-\underline{mod}}$ is by definition $\Lambda\mbox{-mod}/[\Lambda\mbox{-proj}]$. We claim that the canonical functor
$$\Phi\colon \mathbf{K}^b(\Lambda\mbox{-mod})/\mathbf{K}^b(\Lambda\mbox{-proj}) \longrightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\Lambda\mbox{-\underline{mod}})$$
is not dense. Then it is non-faithful and non-full by Proposition \ref{prop:can}.
Consider the simple $\Lambda$-module $k$ and the $2$-dimensional $\Lambda$-module $M=k[t]/(t^2)$. We have the following complex in $\Lambda\mbox{-\underline{mod}}$
$$0\longrightarrow M \stackrel{[\pi]}\longrightarrow k \stackrel{[\iota]}\longrightarrow M\stackrel{[\pi]} \longrightarrow k \longrightarrow 0,$$
where $\pi$ denotes the projection and $\iota$ is the natural embedding. We observe that this complex does not lie in the essential image of $\Phi$.
}\end{exm}
As pointed out in the introduction, the following result is our main motivation to study the lower extension groups.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:KV}
Assume that $\mathcal{X}\subseteq \mathcal{A}$ satisfies the following condition: $X_B$ exists for each $B\in \mathcal{A}$, or $_AX$ exists for each $A\in \mathcal{A}$. Then the canonical functor $\Phi$ is an equivalence if and only if ${\rm Ext}_{\mathcal{X}, n}(-, -)=0$ for $n\geq 1$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
As we saw in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:can}(2), the functor $\Phi$ is an equivalence if and only if
$${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^n(A), B)=0$$
for any objects $A, B\in \mathcal{A}$ and $n\neq 0$. Then we are done by Theorem \ref{thm:1}.
\end{proof}
The ``if" part of the following immediate consequence is implicitly contained in the proof of \cite[Subsection 3.2]{KV}.
\begin{cor}
Keep the notation as in Example \ref{exm:KV}. Then the canonical functor $ \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{P})\longrightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\underline{\mathcal{A}})$ is an equivalence if and only if $\underline{\mathcal{E}}(\Sigma^n(A), B)=0$ for all $A, B\in \mathcal{A}$ and $n\geq 1$. \hfill $\square$
\end{cor}
The following result is a seemingly new characterization of hereditary abelian categories. It follows directly from Example \ref{exm:here} and Proposition \ref{prop:KV}.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:here}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be an abelian category with enough projectives and enough injectives. Then the following statements are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the canonical functor $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{P})\longrightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\underline{\mathcal{A}})$ is an equivalence;
\item the abelian category $\mathcal{A}$ is hereditary;
\item the canonical functor $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{I})\longrightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\overline{\mathcal{A}})$ is an equivalence. \hfill $\square$
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{rem}
Assume that the abelian category $\mathcal{A}$ has finite global dimension. Denote by $\mathbf{D}^b(\mathcal{A})$ the bounded derived category of $\mathcal{A}$, and by $\mathbf{K}_{\rm ac}^b(\mathcal{A})$ the homotopy category of bounded acyclic complexes. Then we have a well-known recollement \cite{BBD}
\[\xymatrix{
\mathbf{K}_{\rm ac}^b(\mathcal{A}) \ar[rr]|{{\rm inc}} && \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}) \ar[rr]|{\rm can} \ar@/_1pc/[ll] \ar@/^1pc/[ll] && \mathbf{D}^b(\mathcal{A}). \ar@/_1pc/[ll]|{\bf p} \ar@/^1pc/[ll]|{\bf i}
}\]
Here, ${\bf p}$ sends a complex to its projective resolution; in particular, its essential image is $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{P})$. So, we obtain a triangle equivalence
$$\mathbf{K}_{\rm ac}^b(\mathcal{A})\simeq \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{P}).$$
Dually, we have the triangle equivalence
$$\mathbf{K}_{\rm ac}^b(\mathcal{A})\simeq \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{I}).$$
Assume now that $\mathcal{A}$ is hereditary. Combining the above equivalences with Corollary \ref{cor:here}, we have a triangle equivalence
$$ \mathbf{K}^b(\underline{\mathcal{A}})\simeq \mathbf{K}^b(\overline{\mathcal{A}}).$$
We mention that if $\mathcal{A}$ is the category of finitely generated modules over an artin algebra, then the stable categories $\underline{\mathcal{A}}$ and $\overline{\mathcal{A}}$ are already equivalent via the Auslander-Reiten translations.
\end{rem}
\begin{exm}\label{exm:non-faith}
{\rm
Let $k$ be a field and $\Lambda=k[t]/(t^2)$ be the algebra of dual numbers. Then the stable module category $\Lambda\mbox{-\underline{mod}}$ is equivalent to the category of finite dimensional $k$-modules. It follows that any complex in $\mathbf{K}^b(\Lambda\mbox{-\underline{mod}})$ is isomorphic to a finite direct sum of stalk complexes. Then the canonical functor
$$\Phi\colon \mathbf{K}^b(\Lambda\mbox{-mod})/\mathbf{K}^b(\Lambda\mbox{-proj}) \longrightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\Lambda\mbox{-\underline{mod}})$$
is dense. However, since $\Lambda\mbox{-mod}$ is not hereditary, by Corollary \ref{cor:here} the functor $\Phi$ is not an equivalence.
}\end{exm}
\section{The Tor groups and dg quotients}
Let $k$ be a commutative ring, and let $\mathcal{A}$ be a $k$-linear additive category. Assume that $\mathcal{A}$ is skeletally small. By choosing a skeleton, we might assume further that $\mathcal{A}$ is small.
We view $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{X}$ as dg categories concentrated in degree zero. The following treatment is similar to \cite[Subsection 7.2]{KY} and \cite[Subsection 5.2]{CC}. For dg quotient categories, we refer to \cite{Kel99, Dri}.
We recall the construction of the dg quotient category. Take a semi-free resolution $\pi\colon \tilde{\mathcal{A}}\rightarrow \mathcal{A}$ as in \cite[Lemma B.5]{Dri}. We identify the objects of $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ with those of $\mathcal{A}$. Denote by $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$ the full dg subcategory of $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ formed by objects in $\mathcal{X}$. Then we have a new dg category $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}/{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}}$ as follows: the objects are the same as in $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$; for each object $X\in \tilde{\mathcal{X}}$, we freely add a new endomorphism $\varepsilon_X$ of degree $-1$ and set $d(\varepsilon_X)={\rm Id}_X$. For details, we refer to \cite[Subsection 3.1]{Dri}.
By abuse of notation, the resulting dg category $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}/{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}}$ will be denoted by $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$, called the \emph{dg quotient category} of $\mathcal{A}$ by $\mathcal{X}$. This notation is justified by the fact that $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}/{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}}$ is uniquely determined up to quasi-equivalence; see \cite[1.6.2 Main Theorem]{Dri}.
Thanks to the isomorphisms in Proposition \ref{prop:ext-tor}, the following observation interprets
the lower extension groups as the negative cohomological groups of the Hom complexes in $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:dg-qu}
Keep the assumptions and notation as above. Then for any objects $A, B\in \mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$, the Hom complex $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}(A, B)$ is non-positively graded such that the following statements hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $H^0(\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}(A, B))\simeq \mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}](A, B)$.
\item $H^{-1}(\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}(A, B))$ is isomorphic to the kernel of (\ref{equ:can}).
\item For each $n\geq 2$, $H^{-n}(\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}(A, B))\simeq {\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_{n-1}(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -)).$
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Recall that the Hom complexes in $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ are non-positively graded. By the very construction, the same holds for $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}/{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}}=\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$.
The quasi-equivalence $\pi\colon \tilde{\mathcal{X}}\rightarrow \mathcal{X}$ implies that $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$ and $\mathcal{X}$ are derived equivalent. The relevant derived equivalences identify the right dg $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$-module $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, B)$ with the right $\mathcal{X}$-module $\mathcal{A}(-, B)$, and the left dg $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$-module $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}(A, -)$ with the left $\mathcal{X}$-module $\mathcal{A}(A, -)$. Moreover, the natural map
$$\tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, B)\otimes^\mathbb{L}_{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, A)\longrightarrow {\mathcal{A}}(-, B)\otimes^\mathbb{L}_{{\mathcal{X}}} {\mathcal{A}}(-, A)$$
is a quasi-isomorphism. Then we have natural isomorphisms
\begin{align}\label{equ:2-tor}
H^{n}(\tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, B)\otimes^\mathbb{L}_{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, A))\simeq {\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_{-n}(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -))
\end{align}
for all $n\in \mathbb{Z}$. Here, ${\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_0(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -))=\mathcal{A}(-, B)\otimes_\mathcal{X} \mathcal{A}(A, -)$ and by convention ${\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_n(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -))=0$ for $n<0$.
Recall from \cite[Subsection 3.1]{Dri} that there is an exact sequence of complexes
\begin{align}\label{equ:longex}
0\longrightarrow \tilde{\mathcal{A}}(A, B) \longrightarrow \tilde{\mathcal{A}}/{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}}(A, B) \longrightarrow \Sigma ({\bf B}\otimes_{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, A))\longrightarrow 0,
\end{align}
where ${\bf B}$ denotes the total module of the bar resolution \cite[Subsection 6.6]{Kel94} for the right dg $\tilde{\mathcal{X}}$-module $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, B)$, and $\Sigma$ denotes the suspension functor. In particular, by (\ref{equ:2-tor}) we have
$$H^n(\Sigma ({\bf B}\otimes_{\tilde{\mathcal{X}}} \tilde{\mathcal{A}}(-, A)))\simeq {\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_{-n-1}(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -)).$$
Since $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}(A, B)$ is quasi-isomorphic to the stalk complex $\mathcal{A}(A, B)$ concentrated in degree zero, the long exact sequence associated to (\ref{equ:longex}) yields the required statements.
\end{proof}
For a dg category $\mathcal{C}$, the \emph{homotopy category} $H^0(\mathcal{C})$ is defined such that its objects are the same as $\mathcal{C}$ and its Hom $k$-modules are the zeroth cohomologies $H^0(\mathcal{C}(A, B))$ of the Hom complexes $\mathcal{C}(A, B)$. Therefore, Proposition \ref{prop:dg-qu}(1) implies that $H^0(\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X})$ is isomorphic to the factor category $\mathcal{A}/{[\mathcal{X}]}$.
Denote by $\mathcal{C}^{\rm tr}$ the \emph{triangulated hull} of $\mathcal{C}$; for details, see \cite[Subsection 2.4]{Dri}. We mention that $H^0(\mathcal{C})$ naturally becomes a full subcategory of $\mathcal{C}^{\rm tr}$. Furthermore, for any objects $A, B$, we have natural isomorphisms
\begin{align}\label{equ:tr}
\mathcal{C}^{\rm tr}(\Sigma^n(A), B) \simeq H^{-n}(\mathcal{C}(A, B))
\end{align}
for all $n\in \mathbb{Z}$. Here, $\Sigma$ denotes the suspension functor on $\mathcal{C}^{\rm tr}$.
In view of Proposition \ref{prop:ext-tor}, we now actually give another proof of Theorem \ref{thm:1} via the dg method.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:dg-tor}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a skeletally small $k$-linear additive category and $\mathcal{X}\subseteq \mathcal{A}$ be a full additive subcategory. Then there is a triangle equivalence
$$\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})\simeq (\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X})^{\rm tr}.$$
Consequently, for any $A, B\in \mathcal{A}$, the following isomorphisms hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^n(A), B)=0$ for $n<0$;
\item ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(A, B)\simeq \mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}](A, B)$;
\item ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma^n(A), B)\simeq {\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_{n-1}(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -))$ for $n\geq 2$; moreover, ${\rm Hom}_{\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})}(\Sigma(A), B)$ is isomorphic to the kernel of (\ref{equ:can}).
\end{enumerate}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We identify $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})$ with $\mathcal{A}^{\rm tr}$, and $\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})$ with $\mathcal{X}^{\rm tr}$. Then the triangle equivalence follows from a general result \cite[Theorem 3.4 and Subsection 3.5]{Dri}. In view of the isomorphisms (\ref{equ:tr}) for the dg quotient category $\mathcal{A}/\mathcal{X}$, the remaining statements follow from the triangle equivalence and Proposition \ref{prop:dg-qu}.
\end{proof}
The following consequence is analogous to Proposition \ref{prop:KV}. We omit the same reasoning.
\begin{cor}
Keep the same assumptions as above. Then the canonical functor $\Phi\colon \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A})/\mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{X})\rightarrow \mathbf{K}^b(\mathcal{A}/[\mathcal{X}])$ is an equivalence if and only if the canonical map (\ref{equ:can}) is injective and ${\rm Tor}^\mathcal{X}_{n}(\mathcal{A}(-, B), \mathcal{A}(A, -))=0$ for all $n\geq 1$. \hfill $\square$
\end{cor}
\vskip 5pt
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgements}.\quad The authors are grateful to Zhenxing Di and Yu Ye for helpful comments. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.s 11671245 and 11971449), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, and Anhui Initiative in Quantum Information Technologies (AHY150200).
|
\section{Synthesizing Non-members}
\label{synthesizenonmembers}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/revise/location_explore/compare_with_generate_figure.pdf}\\
\caption{Inference accuracy of the NN attack as the confidence score distortion budget increases on the Location dataset when synthesizing non-members for training the defense classifier (MemGuard-S).}
\label{fig:synthesize-app}
\end{figure}
When training the defense classifier, we can use $D_1$ as members and synthesize non-members based on $D_1$. For instance, for each data sample in $D_1$ and each of its feature, we keep the feature value with a probability 0.9 and randomly sample a value from the corresponding data domain for the feature with a probability 0.1, which synthesizes a non-member data sample. Then, we train the defense classifier using $D_1$ as members and the synthesized data samples as non-members.
\autoref{fig:synthesize-app}
shows the comparison results on the Location dataset (binary features), where MemGuard-S is the scenario where we synthesize the non-members for training the defense classifier. We observe that MemGuard and MemGuard-S achieve similar performance. Our results show that MemGuard does not necessarily need to split the training dataset in order to train the defense classifier.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
In this work, we propose MemGuard to defend against black-box membership inference attacks. MemGuard is the first defense that has formal utility-loss guarantees on the confidence score vectors predicted by the target classifier. MemGuard works in two phases. In Phase I, MemGuard leverages a new algorithm to find a carefully crafted noise vector to turn a confidence score vector into an adversarial example. The new algorithm considers the unique utility-loss constraints on the noise vector. In Phase II, MemGuard adds the noise vector to the confidence score vector with a certain probability, for which we derive an analytical solution. Our empirical evaluation results show that MemGuard can effectively defend against black-box membership inference attacks and outperforms existing defenses.
An interesting future work is to extend MemGuard to defend against other types of machine learning based inference attacks such as white-box membership inference attacks, website fingerprinting attacks, and side-channel attacks.
\section{Discussion and Limitations}
\label{discussion}
On one hand, machine learning can be used by attackers to perform automated inference attacks. On the other hand, machine learning has various vulnerabilities, e.g., \emph{adversarial examples}~\cite{CW17,PMJFCS16,PMGJCS17,SZSBEGF13,PMSW18,PMG16,KGB16,GSS15}. Therefore, attackers who rely on machine learning also share its vulnerabilities and we can exploit such vulnerabilities to defend against them. For instance, we can leverage adversarial examples to mislead attackers who use machine learning classifiers to perform automated inference attacks~\cite{JG19}. One key challenge in this research direction is how to extend existing adversarial example methods to address the unique challenges of privacy protection. For instance, how to achieve formal utility-loss guarantees.
In this work, we focus on membership inference attacks under the black-box setting, in which an attacker uses a binary classifier to predict a data sample to be a member or non-member of a target classifier's training dataset. In particular, the attacker's classifier takes a data sample's confidence score vector predicted by the target classifier as an input and predicts member or non-member. Our defense adds carefully crafted noise to a confidence score vector to turn it into an adversarial example, such that the attacker's classifier is likely to predict member or non-member incorrectly. To address the challenges of achieving formal utility-loss guarantees, e.g., 0 label loss and bounded confidence score distortion, we design new methods to find adversarial examples.
Other than membership inference attacks, many other attacks rely on machine learning classifiers, e.g., \emph{attribute inference attacks}~\cite{CAK12,GL162,JWZG17}, \emph{website fingerprinting attacks}~\cite{CZJJ12,JAADG14,WCNJG14,PNZE11,HWF09}, \emph{side-channel attacks}~\cite{ZJRR12}, \emph{location attacks}~\cite{BHPZ17,OTP17,PTC18,ZHRLPB18}, and \emph{author identification attacks}~\cite{NPGBSSS12,CYDHRGN18}. For instance, online social network users are vulnerable to {attribute inference attacks}, in which an attacker leverages a machine learning classifier to infer users' private attributes (e.g., gender, political view, and sexual orientation) using their public data (e.g., page likes) on social networks. The Facebook data privacy scandal in 2018\footnote{\url{https://bit.ly/2IDchsx}} is a notable example of attribute inference attack. In particular, Cambridge Analytica leveraged a machine learning classifier to automatically infer a large amount of Facebook users' various private attributes using their public page likes. Jia and Gong proposed AttriGuard~\cite{JG18}, which leverages adversarial examples to defend against attribute inference attacks. In particular, AttriGuard extends an existing adversarial example method to incorporate the unique challenges of privacy protection. The key difference between MemGuard and AttriGuard is that finding adversarial examples for confidence score vectors is subject to unique constraints, e.g., an adversarial confidence score vector should still be a probability distribution and the predicted label should not change. Such unique constraints require substantially different methods to find adversarial confidence score vectors.
Other studies have leveraged adversarial examples to defend against traffic analysis~\cite{ZHRZ19} and author identification~\cite{QMR19,MMJ18}. However, these studies did not consider formal utility-loss guarantees.
We believe it is valuable future work to extend MemGuard to defend against other machine learning based inference attacks such as website fingerprinting attacks, side-channel attacks, and membership inference attacks in the white-box setting. Again, a key challenge is how to achieve formal utility-loss guarantees with respect to certain reasonable utility-loss metrics.
Our MemGuard has a parameter $\epsilon$, which controls a tradeoff between membership privacy and confidence score vector distortion. The setting of $\epsilon$ may be dataset-dependent. One way to set $\epsilon$ is to leverage an inference accuracy vs. $\epsilon$ curve as shown in Figure~\ref{fix_k_query_infer_acc}. Specifically, given a dataset, we draw the inference accuracy vs. $\epsilon$ curves for various attack classifiers. Suppose we desire the inference accuracy to be less than a threshold. Then, we select the smallest $\epsilon$ such that the inference accuracies of all the evaluated attack classifiers are no larger than the threshold.
\section{Evaluation}
\label{evaluation_section}
\subsection{Experimental Setup}
\subsubsection{Datasets} We use three datasets that represent different application scenarios.
\myparatight{Location} This dataset was preprocessed from the Foursquare dataset\footnote{https://sites.google.com/site/yangdingqi/home/foursquare-dataset} and we obtained it from~\cite{SSSS17}.
The dataset has 5,010 data samples with 446 binary features, each of which represents whether a user visited a particular region or location type.
The data samples are grouped into $30$ clusters. This dataset represents a 30-class classification problem, where each cluster is a class.
\myparatight{Texas100} This dataset is based on the Discharge Data public use files published by the Texas
Department of State Health Services.\footnote{https://www.dshs.texas.gov/THCIC/Hospitals/Download.shtm} We obtained the preprocessed dataset from~\cite{SSSS17}.
The dataset has $67,330$ data samples with $6,170$ binary features.
These features represent the external causes of injury (e.g., suicide, drug misuse), the diagnosis, the procedures the patient underwent, and some generic information (e.g., gender, age, and race).
Similar to~\cite{SSSS17}, we focus on the $100$ most frequent procedures and the classification task is to predict a procedure for a patient using the patient's data. This dataset represents a 100-class classification problem.
\myparatight{CH-MNIST} This dataset is used for classification of different tissue types on histology tile from patients with colorectal cancer. The dataset contains $5,000$ images from $8$ tissues. The classification task is to predict tissue for an image, i.e., the dataset is a 8-class classification problem. The size of each image is $64\times 64$.
We obtained a preprocessed version from Kaggle.~\footnote{\url{https://www.kaggle.com/kmader/colorectal-histology-mnist}}.
\myparatight{Dataset splits}
For each dataset, we will train a target classifier, an attack classifier, and a defense classifier. Therefore, we split each dataset into multiple folds. Specifically, for the Location (or CH-MNIST) dataset, we randomly sample 4 disjoint sets, each of which includes 1,000 data samples. We denote them as ${D_1}$, ${D_2}$, ${D_3}$, and ${D_4}$, respectively. For the Texas100 dataset, we also randomly sample such 4 disjoint sets, but each set includes 10,000 data samples as the Texas100 dataset is around one order of magnitude larger. Roughly speaking, for each dataset, we use ${D_1}$, ${D_2}$, and ${D_3}$ to learn the target classifier, the attack classifier, and the defense classifier, respectively; and we use $D_1\cup{D_4}$ to evaluate the accuracy of the attack classifier. We will describe more details on how the sets are used when we use them.
\begin{table}[t]\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}
\centering
\caption{Neural network architecture of the target classifier for CH-MNIST.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|} \hline
Layer Type & Layer Parameters \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Input $64\times 64$} \\ \hline
Convolution& $32\times 3 \times 3$, strides=$(1, 1)$, padding=same \\
Activation& ReLU \\ \hline
Convolution& $32\times 3 \times 3$, strides=$(1, 1)$ \\
Activation& ReLU \\
Pooling& MaxPooling$(2\times 2)$ \\ \hline
Convolution& $32\times 3 \times 3$, strides=$(1, 1)$, padding=same \\
Activation& ReLU \\ \hline
Convolution& $32\times 3 \times 3$, strides=$(1, 1)$ \\
Activation& ReLU \\ \hline
Pooling& MaxPooling$(2\times 2)$ \\ \hline
Flatten& \\ \hline
Fully Connected& 512 \\ \hline
Fully Connected& 8 \\ \hline
Activation& softmax \\ \hline
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Output} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{architecture_ch_mnist}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Target Classifiers} For the Location and Texas100 datasets, we use a fully-connected neural network with $4$ hidden layers as the target classifier. The number of neurons for the four layers are 1024, 512, 256, and 128, respectively. We use the popular activation function ReLU for the neurons in the hidden layers. The activation function in the output layer is softmax. We adopt the cross-entropy loss function and use Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) to learn the model parameters. We train $200$ epochs with a learning rate $0.01$, and we decay the learning rate by $0.1$ in the $150$th epoch for better convergence. For the CH-MNIST dataset, the neural network architecture of the target classifier is shown in~\autoref{architecture_ch_mnist}. Similarly, we also adopt the cross-entropy loss function and use SGD to learn the model parameters. We train $400$ epochs with a learning rate $0.01$ and decay the learning rate by $0.1$ in the $350$th epoch.
For each dataset, we use $D_1$ to train the target classifier.~\autoref{accuracy_of_target_classifier} shows the training and testing accuracies of the target classifiers on the three datasets, where the testing accuracy is calculated by using the target classifier to make predictions for the data samples that are not in $D_1$.
\subsubsection{Membership Inference Attacks}
\label{membershipattack}
In a membership inference attack, an attacker trains an attack classifier, which predicts \emph{member} or \emph{non-member} for a query data sample. The effectiveness of an attack is measured by the \emph{inference accuracy} of the attack classifier, where the inference accuracy is the fraction of data samples in $D_1\cup{D_4}$ that the attack classifier can correctly predict as member or non-member. In particular, data samples in $D_1$ are members of the target classifier's training dataset, while data samples in $D_4$ are non-members. We call the dataset $D_1\cup{D_4}$ \emph{evaluation dataset}. We consider two categories of state-of-the-art black-box membership inference attacks, i.e., \emph{non-adaptive attacks} and \emph{adaptive attacks}. In non-adaptive attacks, the attacker does not adapt its attack classifier based on our defense, while the attacker adapts its attack classifier based on our defense in adaptive attacks.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Location]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/evaluate_attack/location_median_figure.pdf}}
\subfloat[Texas100]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/evaluate_attack/texas100_median_figure.pdf}}
\subfloat[CH-MNIST]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/evaluate_attack/ch_mnist_median_figure.pdf}}
\caption{Inference accuracies of different attacks as the confidence score distortion budget (i.e., $\epsilon$) increases.}
\label{fix_k_query_infer_acc}
\end{figure*}
\myparatight{Non-adaptive attacks} We consider the \emph{random guessing} attack and state-of-the-art attacks as follows.
{\bf Random guessing (RG) attack}. For any query data sample, this attack predicts it to be a member of the target classifier's training dataset with probability 0.5. The inference accuracy of the RG attack is 0.5.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Training and testing accuracies of the target classifier on the three datasets.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& Location & Texas100 & CH-MNIST \\
\hline
Training Accuracy & 100.0\% & 99.98\% & 99.0\% \\
\hline
Testing Accuracy & 60.32\% & 51.59\% & 72.0\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{accuracy_of_target_classifier}
\end{table}
{\bf Neural Network (NN) attack~\cite{SSSS17,SZHBFB19}}. This attack assumes that the attacker knows the distribution of the target classifier's training dataset and the architecture of the target classifier. We further split the dataset $D_2$ into two halves denoted as $D_2'$ and $D_2''$, respectively. The attacker uses $D_2'$ to train a shadow classifier that has the same neural network architecture as the target classifier. After training the shadow classifier, the attacker calculates the confidence score vectors for the data samples in $D_2'$ and $D_2''$, which are members and non-members of the shadow classifier. Then, the attacker ranks each confidence score vector and treats the ranked confidence score vectors of members and non-members as a ``training dataset'' to train an attack classifier. The attack classifier takes a data sample's ranked confidence score vector as an input and predicts member or non-member. For all three datasets, we consider the attack classifier is a fully-connected neural network with three hidden layers, which have 512, 256, and 128 neurons, respectively. The output layer just has one neuron. The neurons in the hidden layers use the ReLU activation function, while the neuron in the output layer uses the sigmoid activation function. The attack classifier predicts member if and only if the neuron in the output layer outputs a value that is larger than 0.5. We train the attack classifier for 400 epochs with a learning rate 0.01 using SGD and decay the learning rate by 0.1 at the 300th epoch.
{\bf Random Forest (RF) attack}. This attack is the same as the NN attack except that RF attack uses random forest as the attack classifier, while NN uses a neural network as the attack classifier. We use scikit-learn with the default setting to learn random forest classifiers. We consider this RF attack to demonstrate that our defense mechanism is still effective even if the attack classifier and the defense classifier (a neural network) use different types of algorithms, i.e., the noise vector that evades the defense classifier can also evade the attack classifier even if the two classifiers use different types of algorithms.
{\bf NSH attack~\cite{NSH18}}. Nasr, Shokri, and Houmansadr~\cite{NSH18} proposed this attack, which we abbreviate as NSH. This attack uses multiple neural networks. One network operates on the confidence score vector. Another one operates on the label which is one hot encoded. Both networks are fully-connected and have the same number of input dimension, i.e., the number of classes of the target classifier. Specifically, NSH assumes the attacker knows some members and non-members of the target classifier's training dataset. In our experiments, we assume the attacker knows $30\%$ of data samples in $D_1$ (i.e., members) and 30\% of data samples in $D_4$ (i.e., non-members). The attacker uses these data samples to train the attack classifier. We adopt the neural network architecture in~\cite{NSH18} as the attack classifier. The remaining 70\% of data samples in $D_1$ and $D_4$ are used to calculate the inference accuracy of the attack classifier. We train the attack classifier for $400$ epochs with an initial learning rate $0.01$ and decay the learning rate by $0.1$ after $300$ epochs.
\myparatight{Adaptive attacks} We consider two attacks that are customized to our defense.
{\bf Adversarial training (NN-AT)}. One adaptive attack is to train the attack classifier via adversarial training, which was considered to be the most empirically robust method against adversarial examples so far~\cite{ACW18}. We adapt the NN attack using adversarial training and denote the adapted attack as NN-AT. Specifically, for each data sample in $D_2'$ and $D_2''$, the attacker calculates its confidence score vector using the shadow classifier. Then, the attacker uses the Phase I of our defense to find the representative noise vector and adds it to the confidence score vector to obtain a noisy confidence score vector. Finally, the attacker trains the attack classifier via treating the true confidence score vectors and their corresponding noisy versions of data samples in $D_2'$ and $D_2''$ as a training dataset.
{\bf Rounding (NN-R)}. Since our defense adds carefully crafted small noise to the confidence score vector, an adaptive attack is to \emph{round} each confidence score before using the attack classifier to predict member/non-member. Specifically, we consider the attacker rounds each confidence score to be one decimal and uses the NN attack. Note that rounding is also applied when training the NN attack classifier. We denote this attack NN-R.
\autoref{accuracy_without_defense} shows the inference accuracies of different attacks when our defense is not used. All attacks except RG have inference accuracies that are larger or substantially larger than 0.5.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Inference accuracies of different attacks on the three datasets when our defense is not used.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& Location & Texas100 & CH-MNIST \\
\hline
RG & 50.0\% & 50.0\% & 50.0\% \\
\hline
NN & 73.0\% & 68.9\% & 62.9\% \\
\hline
RF & 73.7\% & 67.3\% & 58.7\% \\
\hline
NSH & 81.1\% & 74.0\% & 58.4\% \\
\hline
NN-AT & 64.6\% & 68.3\% & 63.3\% \\
\hline
NN-R & 72.9\% & 69.2\% & 63.0\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{accuracy_without_defense}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Defense Setting} \label{defensesetting}
In our defense, we need to specify a defense classifier and the parameters in Algorithm~\autoref{algorithml1}.
\myparatight{Defense classifier} The defender itself trains a classifier to perform membership inference. We consider the defense classifier is a neural network. However, since the defender does not know the attacker's attack classifier, we
assume the defense classifier and the attack classifier use different neural network architectures. Specifically, we consider three different defense classifiers in order to study the impact of defense classifier on MemGuard. The three defense classifiers are fully-connected neural networks with 2, 3, and 4 hidden layers, respectively. The hidden layers of the three defense classifiers have (256, 128), (256, 128, 64), and (512, 256, 128, 64) neurons, respectively.
The output layer has just one neuron. The activation function for the neurons in the hidden layers is $ReLU$, while the neuron in the output layer uses the sigmoid activation function.
Unless otherwise mentioned, we use the defense classifier with 3 hidden layers.
The defender calculates the confidence score vector for each data sample in $D_1$ and $D_3$ using the target classifier. The confidence score vectors for data samples in $D_1$ and $D_3$ have labels ``member'' and ``non-member'', respectively. The defender treats these confidence score vectors as a training dataset to learn a defense classifier, which takes a confidence score vector as an input and predicts member or non-member. We train a defense classifier for $400$ epochs with a learning rate $0.001$. We note that we can also synthesize data samples based on $D_1$ as non-members (Appendix~\ref{synthesizenonmembers} shows details).
\myparatight{Parameter setting} We set $max\_iter=300$ and $\beta=0.1$ in Algorithm~\autoref{algorithml1}. We found that once $max\_iter$ is larger than some threshold, MemGuard's effectiveness does not change. Since we aim to find representative noise vector that does not change the predicted label, we assign a relatively large value to $c_2$, which means that the objective function has a large value if the predicted label changes (i.e., the loss function $L_2$ is non-zero). In particular, we set $c_2=10$. Our Algorithm~\autoref{algorithml1} searches for a large $c_3$ and we set the initial value of $c_3$ to be 0.1. We also compare searching $c_2$ with searching $c_3$.
\subsection{Experimental Results}
\label{experimentalresults}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Location, without defense]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/entropy/location_origin_distribution.pdf}}
\subfloat[Texas100, without defense]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/entropy/texas100_origin_distribution.pdf}}
\subfloat[CH-MNIST, without defense]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/entropy/ch_mnist_origin_distribution.pdf}}
\subfloat[Location, with defense]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/entropy/location_defense_distribution.pdf}}
\subfloat[Texas100, with defense]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/entropy/texas100_defense_distribution.pdf}}
\subfloat[CH-MNIST, with defense]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/entropy/ch_mnist_defense_distribution.pdf}}
\caption{Distribution of the normalized entropy of the confidence score vectors for members and non-members of the target classifier. Figures on the upper side are results without our defense, and figures on the lower side are results with our defense.}
\label{entropy_distribution}
\end{figure*}
\myparatight{MemGuard is effective} ~\autoref{fix_k_query_infer_acc} shows the inference accuracies of different attacks as the confidence score distortion budget increases on the three datasets. Since we adopt the expected $L_1$-norm of the noise vector to measure the confidence score distortion, the confidence score distortion is in the range [0, 2]. Note that our defense is guaranteed to achieve 0 label loss as our Algorithm~\ref{algorithml1} guarantees that the predicted label does not change when searching for the representative noise vector. We observe that our MemGuard can effectively defend against membership inference attacks, i.e., the inference accuracies of all the evaluated attacks decrease as our defense is allowed to add larger noise to the confidence score vectors. For instance, on Location, when our defense is allowed to add noise whose expected $L_1$-norm is around 0.8, our defense can reduce all the evaluated attacks to the random guessing (RG) attack; on CH-MNIST,
our defense can reduce the NSH attack (or the remaining attacks) to random guessing when allowed to add noise whose expected $L_1$-norm is around 0.3 (or 0.7).
\myparatight{Indistinguishability between the confidence score vectors of members and non-members} We follow previous work~\cite{NSH18} to study the distribution of confidence score vectors of members vs. non-members of the target classifier. Specifically, given a confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}$, we compute its \emph{normalized entropy} as follows:
\begin{align}
\text{\bf Normalized entropy: } -\frac{1}{\log k}\sum_{j}s_j\log(s_j),
\end{align}
where $k$ is the number of classes in the target classifier.
Figure~\ref{entropy_distribution} shows the distributions of the normalized entropy of the confidence score vectors for members (i.e., data samples in $D_1$) and non-members (i.e., data samples in $D_4$) of the target classifier, where we set the confidence score distortion budget $\epsilon$ to be 1 when our defense is used. The gap between the two curves in a graph corresponds to the information leakage of the target classifier's training dataset. Our defense substantially reduces such gaps. Specifically, the \emph{maximum gap} between the two curves (without defense vs. with defense) is (0.27 vs. 0.11), (0.41 vs. 0.05), and (0.30 vs. 0.06) on the Location, Texas100, and CH-MNIST datasets, respectively. Moreover, the \emph{average gap} between the two curves (without defense vs. with defense) is (0.062 vs. 0.011), (0.041 vs. 0.005), and (0.030 vs. 0.006) on the three datasets, respectively.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Searching $c_3$]{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{figs/revise/location_explore/compare_with_c2_figure.pdf}\label{searchc3-main}}
\subfloat[Searching $c_2$]{\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{figs/revise/location_explore/compare_with_search_compare_figure.pdf}\label{searchc2-main}}
\caption{Inference accuracy of the NN attack as the confidence score distortion budget increases on the Location dataset when searching $c_3$ or $c_2$.}
\end{figure}
\myparatight{Searching $c_2$ vs. searching $c_3$} Figure~\ref{searchc3-main} shows the inference accuracy of the NN attack as the confidence score distortion budget increases when fixing $c_2$ to different values and searching $c_3$. Figure~\ref{searchc2-main} shows the results when fixing $c_3$ and searching $c_2$. We observe that MemGuard is insensitive to the setting of $c_2$ when searching $c_3$. Specifically, MemGuard has almost the same effectiveness when fixing $c_2$ to different values, i.e., the different curves overlap in Figure~\ref{searchc3-main}. This is because when our Phase I stops searching the noise vector, the predicted label is preserved, which means that the loss function $L_2$ is 0. However, MemGuard is sensitive to the setting of $c_3$ when searching $c_2$. Specifically, when fixing $c_3$ to be 0.1, searching $c_2$ achieves the same effectiveness as searching $c_3$. However, when fixing $c_3$ to be 1.0, searching $c_2$ is less effective. Therefore, we decided to search $c_3$ while fixing $c_2$.
\myparatight{Impact of defense classifiers} Figure~\ref{defenseclassifier} shows the inference accuracy of the NN attack as the confidence score distortion budget increases on the Location dataset when using different defense classifiers. We observe that MemGuard has similar effectiveness for different defense classifiers, which means that our carefully crafted noise vectors can transfer between classifiers.
\myparatight{MemGuard outperforms existing defenses} We compare with state-of-the-art defenses including $L_2$-Regularizer~\cite{SSSS17}, Min-Max Game~\cite{NSH18}, Dropout~\cite{SZHBFB19}, Model Stacking~\cite{SZHBFB19}, and DP-SGD~\cite{ACGMMTZ16}. Each compared defense (except Model Stacking) has a hyperparameter to control the privacy-utility tradeoff. For instance, the hyperparameter that balances between the loss function and the $L_2$ regularizer in $L_2$-Regularizer, the hyperparameter that balances between the loss function and the adversarial regularizer in Min-Max Game, the dropout rate in Dropout, the privacy budget in DP-SGD, and $\epsilon$ in MemGuard.
We also compare with MemGuard-Random in which we use the \emph{Random} method (refer to Section~\ref{sec:phaseI}) to generate the noise vector in Phase I.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{figs/revise/location_explore/compare_with_defense_model_figure.pdf}}
\caption{Inference accuracy of the NN attack as the confidence score distortion budget increases on the Location dataset when using different defense classifiers.}
\label{defenseclassifier}
\end{figure}
Before deploying any defense, we use the undefended target classifier to compute the confidence score vector for each data sample in the evaluation dataset $D_1\cup D_4$. For each defense and a given hyperparameter, we apply the defense to the target classifier and use the defended target classifier to compute the confidence score vector for each data sample in $D_1\cup D_4$. Then, we compute the confidence score distortion for each data sample and obtain the \emph{average confidence score distortion} on the evaluation dataset $D_1\cup D_4$. Moreover, we compute the inference accuracy of the attack classifier (we consider NN in these experiments) on the evaluation dataset after the defense is used. Therefore, for each defense and a given hyperparameter, we can obtain a pair (inference accuracy, average confidence score distortion). Via exploring different hyperparameters, we can obtain a set of such pairs for each defense. Then, we plot these pairs on a graph, which is shown in~\autoref{fix_infer_acc}.
Specifically, we tried the hyperparameter of $L_2$-Regularizer in the range $[0,0.05]$ with a step size $0.005$, $0.001$, and $0.005$ for Location, Texas100, and CH\_MNIST datasets, respectively.
We tried the hyperparameter of Min-Max Game in the range $[0,3]$ with a step size $0.5$.
We tried the dropout rate of Dropout in the range $[0,0.9]$ with a step size $0.1$.
We use a publicly available implementation\footnote{https://github.com/tensorflow/privacy} of DP-SGD. We tried the parameter $noise\_multiplier$ that controls the privacy budget in the range $[0,0.2]$ with a step size $0.05$.
We tried $[0,0.1,0.3,0.5,0.7,1.0]$ as the $\epsilon$ in MemGuard and MemGuard-Random.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Results of Model Stacking.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& Location & Texas100 & CH-MNIST \\
\hline
Inference Acc. & 50.0\% & 50.8\% & 50.0\% \\
\hline
Average Distortion & 1.63 & 1.28 & 0.81 \\
\hline
Label Loss & 56.3\% & 37.9\% & 18.3\% \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{accuracy_of_target_model}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\vspace{-2mm}
\centering
\subfloat[Location]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/comparison_050819/distortion/location_epsilon_acc_figure_sgd.pdf}}
\subfloat[Texas100]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/comparison_050819/distortion/texas100_epsilon_acc_figure_sgd.pdf}}
\subfloat[CH-MNIST]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/comparison_050819/distortion/ch_mnist_epsilon_acc_figure_sgd.pdf}}
\caption{Inference accuracy vs. average confidence score distortion of the compared defenses. Our MemGuard achieves the best privacy-utility tradeoff.}
\label{fix_infer_acc}
\vspace{-1mm}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\subfloat[Location]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/comparison_050819/label/location_label_loss_figure.pdf}}
\subfloat[Texas100]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/comparison_050819/label/texas100_label_loss_figure.pdf}}
\subfloat[CH-MNIST]{\includegraphics[width=0.330\textwidth]{figs/revise/comparison_050819/label/ch_mnist_label_loss_figure.pdf}}
\caption{Inference accuracy vs. label loss of the compared defenses. Both MemGuard-Random and MemGuard achieve 0 label loss, while the other defenses incur large label losses in order to substantially reduce the attacker's inference accuracy.}
\label{labellossinfer}
\vspace{-1mm}
\end{figure*}
Our results show that MemGuard achieves the best privacy-utility tradeoff. In particular, given the same average confidence score distortion, MemGuard achieves the smallest inference accuracy. According to the authors of Model Stacking, it does not have a hyperparameter to easily control the privacy-utility tradeoff. Therefore, we just obtain one pair of (inference accuracy, average confidence score distortion) and~\autoref{accuracy_of_target_model} shows the results. Model Stacking reduces the inference accuracy to be close to 0.5, but the utility loss is intolerable.
Similarly, we can obtain a set of pairs (inference accuracy, label loss) for the compared defenses and~\autoref{labellossinfer} shows inference accuracy vs. label loss on the three datasets. Label loss is the fraction of data samples in the evaluation dataset whose predicted labels are changed by a defense. MemGuard-Random and MemGuard achieve 0 label loss. However, other defenses incur large label losses in order to substantially reduce the attacker's inference accuracy.
\section{Introduction}
\label{section:introduction}
Machine learning (ML) is transforming many aspects of our society. We consider a model provider deploys an ML classifier (called \emph{target classifier}) as a black-box software or service, which returns a \emph{confidence score vector} for a query data sample from a user. The confidence score vector is a probability distribution over the possible labels and the label of the query data sample is predicted as the one that has the largest confidence score. Multiple studies have shown that such black-box ML classifier is vulnerable to \emph{membership inference attacks}~\cite{SSSS17,NSH19,SZHBFB19,SSM19}.
Specifically, an attacker trains a binary classifier, which takes a data sample's confidence score vector predicted by the target classifier as an input and predicts whether the data sample is a \emph{member} or \emph{non-member} of the target classifier's training dataset. Membership inference attacks pose severe privacy and security threats to ML. In particular, in application scenarios where the training dataset is sensitive (e.g., biomedical records and location traces), successful membership inference leads to severe privacy violations. For instance, if an attacker knows her victim's data is used to train a medical diagnosis classifier,
then the attacker can directly infer the victim's health status. Beyond privacy, membership inference also damages the model provider's intellectual property of the training dataset as collecting and labeling the training dataset may require lots of resources.
Therefore, defending against membership inference attacks is an urgent research problem and multiple defenses~\cite{SSSS17,NSH18,SZHBFB19} have been explored. A major reason why membership inference attacks succeed is that the target classifier is overfitted. As a result, the confidence score vectors predicted by the target classifier are distinguishable for members and non-members of the training dataset. Therefore, state-of-the-art defenses~\cite{SSSS17,NSH18,SZHBFB19} essentially regularize the training process of the target classifier to reduce overfitting and the gaps of the confidence score vectors between members and non-members of the training dataset. For instance, $L_2$ regularization~\cite{SSSS17}, min-max game based adversarial regularization~\cite{NSH18}, and dropout~\cite{SZHBFB19} have been explored to regularize the target classifier. Another line of defenses~\cite{CMS11,KST12,INSTTW19,SCS13,BST14,WYX17,ACGMMTZ16,YLPGT19} leverage differential privacy~\cite{DMNS06} when training the target classifier.
Since tampering the training process has no guarantees on the confidence score vectors, these defenses have no formal utility-loss guarantees on the confidence score vectors. Moreover, these defenses achieve suboptimal tradeoffs between the membership privacy of the training dataset and utility loss of the confidence score vectors. For instance, Jayaraman and Evans~\cite{JE14} found that existing differentially private machine learning methods rarely offer acceptable privacy-utility tradeoffs for complex models.
\myparatight{Our work} In this work, we propose \emph{MemGuard}, the first defense with formal utility-loss guarantees against membership inference attacks under the black-box setting. Instead of tampering the training process of the target classifier, MemGuard randomly adds noise to the confidence score vector predicted by the target classifier for any query data sample.
MemGuard can be applied to an existing target classifier without retraining it. Given a query data sample's confidence score vector, MemGuard aims to achieve two goals: 1) the attacker's classifier is inaccurate at inferring member or non-member for the query data sample after adding noise to the confidence score vector, and 2) the utility loss of the confidence score vector is bounded. Specifically, the noise should not change the predicted label of the query data sample, since even 1\% loss of the label accuracy may be intolerable in some critical applications such as finance and healthcare. Moreover, the confidence score distortion introduced by the noise should be bounded by a budget since a confidence score vector intends to tell a user more information beyond the predicted label. We formulate achieving the two goals as solving an optimization problem. However, it is computationally challenging to solve the optimization problem as the noise space is large. To address the challenge, we propose a two-phase framework to approximately solve the problem.
We observe that an attacker uses an ML classifier to predict member or non-member and classifier can be misled by \emph{adversarial examples}~\cite{CW17,PMJFCS16,PMGJCS17,SZSBEGF13,PMSW18,PMG16,KGB16,GSS15}. Therefore, in Phase I, MemGuard finds a carefully crafted noise vector that can turn the confidence score vector into an adversarial example. Specifically, MemGuard aims to find a noise vector such that the attacker's classifier is likely to make a random guessing at inferring member or non-member based on the noisy confidence score vector. Since the defender does not know the attacker's classifier as there are many choices, the defender itself trains a classifier for membership inference and crafts the noise vector based on its own classifier. Due to \emph{transferability}~\cite{SZSBEGF13,KGB16,LCLS16,PMG16} of adversarial examples, the noise vector that misleads the defender's classifier is likely to also mislead the attacker's classifier. The adversarial machine learning community has developed many algorithms (e.g.,~\cite{CW17,PMJFCS16,GSS15,MMSTV18,KGB16,MFF16,TKPGBM17,MFFF17}) to find adversarial noise/examples. However, these algorithms are insufficient for our problem because they did not consider the unique constraints on utility loss of the confidence score vector. Specifically, the noisy confidence score vector should not change the predicted label of the query data sample and should still be a probability distribution. To address this challenge, we design a new algorithm to find a small noise vector that satisfies the utility-loss constraints.
In Phase II, MemGuard adds the noise vector found in Phase I to the true confidence score vector with a certain probability. The probability is selected such that the expected confidence score distortion is bounded by the budget and the defender's classifier is most likely to make random guessing at inferring member or non-member. Formally, we formulate finding this probability as solving an optimization problem and derive an analytical solution for the optimization problem.
We evaluate MemGuard and compare it with state-of-the-art defenses~\cite{SSSS17,NSH18,SZHBFB19,ACGMMTZ16} on three real-world datasets. Our empirical results show that MemGuard can effectively defend against state-of-the-art black-box membership inference attacks~\cite{NSH19,SZHBFB19}. In particular, as MemGuard is allowed to add larger noise (we measure the magnitude of the noise using its $L_1$-norm), the inference accuracies of all evaluated membership inference attacks become smaller. Moreover, MemGuard achieves better privacy-utility tradeoffs than state-of-the-art defenses. Specifically, given the same average confidence score distortion, MemGuard reduces the attacker's inference accuracy at inferring member/non-members by the most.
In summary, our key contributions are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose MemGuard, the first defense with formal utility-loss guarantees against membership inference attacks under the black-box setting.
\item We propose a new algorithm to find a noise vector that satisfies the unique utility-loss constraints in Phase I of MemGuard. Moreover, in Phase II, we derive an analytical solution of the probability with which MemGuard adds the noise vector to the confidence score vector.
\item We evaluate MemGuard on three real-world datasets. Our results show that MemGuard is effective and outperforms existing defenses.
\end{itemize}
\section{Our M\lowercase{em}G\lowercase{uard}}
\subsection{Overview}
Finding the randomized noise addition mechanism is to solve the optimization problem in~\autoref{originalproblem}. We consider two scenarios depending on whether $g(\mathbf{s})$ is 0.5 or not.
\myparatight{Scenario I} In this scenario, $g(\mathbf{s})=0.5$. For such scenario, it is easy to solve the optimization problem in~\autoref{originalproblem}. Specifically, the mechanism that adds the noise vector $\mathbf{0}$ with probability 1 is the optimal randomized noise addition mechanism, with which the objective function has a value of 0.
\myparatight{Scenario II}
In this scenario, $g(\mathbf{s})$ is not 0.5.
The major challenge to solve the optimization problem in this scenario is that the randomized noise addition mechanism is a probability distribution over the continuous noise space for a given true confidence score vector. The noise space consists of the noise vectors that satisfy the four constraints of the optimization problem. As a result, it is challenging to represent the probability distribution and solve the optimization problem. To address the challenge, we observe that the noise space can be divided into two groups depending on the output of the defense classifier's decision function $g$.
Specifically, for noise vectors in one group, if we add any of them to the true confidence score vector, then the decision function $g$ outputs 0.5 as the probability of being member. For noise vectors in the other group, if we add any of them to the true confidence score vector, then the decision function $g$ outputs a probability of being member that is not 0.5.
Based on this observation, we propose a \emph{two-phase framework} to approximately solve the optimization problem. Specifically, in Phase I, for each noise group, we find the noise vector with minimum confidence score distortion (i.e., $d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n})$ is minimized) as a \emph{representative} noise vector for the noise group. We select the noise vector with minimum confidence score distortion in order to minimize the confidence score distortion. Since $g(\mathbf{s})\neq 0.5$, the selected representative noise vector for the second noise group is $\mathbf{0}$. We denote by $\mathbf{r}$ the selected representative noise vector for the first noise group. In Phase II, we assume the randomized noise addition mechanism is a probability distribution over the two representative noise vectors instead of the overall noise space. Specifically, the defender adds the representative noise vector $\mathbf{r}$ to the true confidence score vector with a certain probability and does not add any noise with the remaining probability.
Next, we introduce our Phase I and Phase II.
\subsection{Phase I: Finding $\mathbf{r}$}
\label{sec:phaseI}
\myparatight{Finding $\mathbf{r}$ as solving an optimization problem} Our goal essentially is to find a noise vector $\mathbf{r}$ such that 1) the utility loss of the confidence score vector is minimized and 2) the decision function $g$ outputs 0.5 as the probability of being member when taking the noisy confidence score vector as an input. Formally, we find such noise vector via solving the following optimization problem:
\begin{align}
\label{optimization_p_1}
\min_{\mathbf{r}}&\ d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r}) \\
\label{prediction_label}
\text{subject to: } & \argmax_j \{s_j+r_j\} =\argmax_j \{s_j\} \\
\label{noise_goal_constraint}
& g(\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r})=0.5 \\
\label{probability_constraint_1}
&s_j+r_j \geq 0,\forall j \\
\label{probability_constraint_2}
&\sum_j r_j=0,
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{s}$ is the true confidence score vector, the objective function means that the confidence score distortion is minimized, the first constraint means that the noise does not change the predicted label of the query data sample, the second constraint means that the defense classifier's decision function outputs 0.5 (i.e., the defense classifier's prediction is random guessing), and the last two constraints mean that the noisy confidence score vector is still a probability distribution.
Solving the optimization problem in~\autoref{optimization_p_1} can be viewed as finding an \emph{adversarial example} to evade the defense classifier. In particular, $\mathbf{s}$ is a normal example and $\mathbf{s+r}$ is an adversarial example. The adversarial machine learning community has developed many algorithms (e.g.,~\cite{CW17,PMJFCS16,GSS15,MMSTV18,KGB16,MFF16,TKPGBM17,MFFF17}) to find adversarial examples. However, these algorithms are insufficient to our problem because they did not consider the unique challenges of privacy protection. In particular, they did not consider the utility-loss constraints, i.e., the constraints in~\autoref{prediction_label},~\autoref{probability_constraint_1}, and~\autoref{probability_constraint_2}.
One naive method (we call it \emph{Random}) to address the challenges is to generate a {random} noise vector that satisfies the utility-loss constraints. In particular, we can generate a random vector $\mathbf{r}^{\prime}$ whose entries are non-negative and sum to 1. For instance, we first sample a number ${r'_1}$ from the interval [0,1] uniformly at random as the first entry. Then, we sample a number ${r'_2}$ from the interval [0, 1-${r'_1}$] uniformly at random as the second entry. We repeat this process until the last entry is 1 minus the sum of the previous entries. Then, we exchange the largest entry of $\mathbf{r}^{\prime}$ to the position $j$ to satisfy the constraint~\ref{prediction_label}. Finally, we treat $\mathbf{r}=\mathbf{r}^{\prime}-\mathbf{s}$ as the noise vector, which is a solution to the optimization problem in~\autoref{optimization_p_1}. However, as we will show in experiments, this Random method achieves suboptimal privacy-utility tradeoffs because the noise vector is not optimized and it is challenging to satisfy the constraint~\autoref{probability_constraint_1}.
We propose to solve the optimization problem via change of variables and adding the constraints to the objective function.
\myparatight{Eliminating the constraints on probability distribution via change of variables} Since we consider the target classifier to be a neural network, whose output layer is a softmax layer, the true confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}$ is a {softmax function} of some vector $\mathbf{z}$. The vector $\mathbf{z}$ is the output of the neurons in the second-to-last layer of the neural network and is often called \emph{logits} of the neural network. Formally, we have:
\begin{align}
\mathbf{s}&=softmax(\mathbf{z}).
\end{align}
Moreover, we model the noisy confidence score vector as follows:
\begin{align}
\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r}&=softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}),
\end{align}
where $\mathbf{e}$ is a new vector variable. For any value of $\mathbf{e}$, the noisy confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r}$ is a probability distribution, i.e., the constraints in~\autoref{probability_constraint_1} and~\autoref{probability_constraint_2} are satisfied. Therefore, in the optimization problem in~\autoref{optimization_p_1}, we change the true confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}$ as $softmax(\mathbf{z})$ and change the variable $\mathbf{r}$ as $softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}) - softmax(\mathbf{z})$. Then, we obtain the following optimization problem:
\begin{align}
\label{l_1_loss_constraints}
\min_{\mathbf{e}}&\ d(softmax(\mathbf{z}),softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e})) \\
\label{constraints_1}
\text{subject to: } & \argmax_j \{z_j+e_j\} =\argmax_j \{z_j\} \\
\label{constraints_2}
&g(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))= 0.5.
\end{align}
After solving $\mathbf{e}$ in the above optimization problem,
we can obtain the noise vector $\mathbf{r}$ as follows:
\begin{align}
\label{noise_equation}
\mathbf{r}=softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e})-softmax(\mathbf{z}).
\end{align}
The optimization problem without the constraints on probability distribution is still challenging to solve because the remaining two constraints are highly nonlinear. To address the challenge, we turn the constraints into the objective function.
\myparatight{Turning the constraint in~\autoref{constraints_2} into the objective function} We consider the defender's binary defense classifier is a neural network whose output layer has a single neuron with sigmoid activation function. Therefore, we have:
\begin{align}
g(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))=\frac{1}{1+\exp(-h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e})))},
\end{align}
where $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))$ is the output of the neuron in the second-to-last layer of the defense classifier when the defense classifier takes the noisy confidence score vector $softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e})$ as an input. In other words, $h$ is the logit of the defense classifier.
$g(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))=0.5$ implies $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))=0$. Therefore, we transform the constraint in~\autoref{constraints_2} to the following loss function:
\begin{align}
L_1=|h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))|,
\end{align}
where $L_1$ is small when $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))$ is close to 0.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Phase I of MemGuard}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE $\mathbf{z}$, $max\_iter$, $c_2$, $c_3$, and $\beta$ (learning rate). \\
\ENSURE $\mathbf{e}$ \\
\STATE //Predicted label \;
\STATE $l=\argmax_{j}\{z_j\}$
\WHILE {$True$} \;
\STATE //A new iteration to search $c_3$ \;
\STATE $\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{0}$
\STATE $\mathbf{e}'=\mathbf{e}$
\STATE $i=1$
\WHILE {$i<max\_iter$ and ($\argmax_{j}\{z_j+e_j\}\neq l$ or $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}))\cdot h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e})) > 0$)} \;
\label{conditioncheck}
\STATE //Gradient descent with normalized gradient \;
\STATE $\mathbf{u}=\frac{\partial L}{\partial \mathbf{e}}$
\STATE $\mathbf{u}=\mathbf{u}/||\mathbf{u}||_2$
\STATE $\mathbf{e}=\mathbf{e}-\beta \cdot \mathbf{u}$
\STATE $i=i+1$
\ENDWHILE \;
\STATE //Return the vector in the previous iteration if the predicted label changes or the sign of $h$ does not change in the current iteration
\IF{$\argmax_{j}\{z_j+e_j\}\neq l$ or $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}))\cdot h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e})) > 0$} \;
\RETURN $\mathbf{e}'$
\ENDIF \;
\STATE $c_3=10\cdot c_3$
\ENDWHILE \;
\end{algorithmic}
\label{algorithml1}
\end{algorithm}
\myparatight{Turning the constraint in~\autoref{constraints_1} into the objective function}
We denote by $l$ the predicted label for the query data sample, i.e., $l=argmax_{j}\{s_j\}=\argmax_{j}\{z_j\}$.
The constraint in~\autoref{constraints_1} means that $z_l + e_l$ is the largest entry in the vector $\mathbf{z+e}$. Therefore, we enforce the inequality constraint
$z_l + e_l \geq max_{j|j\neq l}\{z_j+e_j\}$. Moreover, we further transform the inequality constraint to the following loss function:
\begin{equation}
L_2=\text{ReLU}(-z_l-e_l+max_{j|j\neq l}\{z_j+e_j\}),
\end{equation}
where the function ReLU is defined as ReLU$(v)$=$\max\{0, v\}$.
The loss function $L_2$ is 0 if the inequality $z_l + e_l \geq max_{j|j\neq l}\{z_j+e_j\}$ holds.
\myparatight{Unconstrained optimization problem} After transforming the constraints into the objective function, we have the following unconstrained optimization problem:
\begin{align}
\min_{\mathbf{e}}\ L=L_1+c_2\cdot L_2 + c_3\cdot L_3,
\end{align}
where $L_3=d(softmax(\mathbf{z}),softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))$, while $c_2$ and $c_3$ balance between the three terms.
\myparatight{Solving the unconstrained optimization problem} We design an algorithm based on gradient descent to solve the unconstrained optimization problem. Algorithm~\autoref{algorithml1} shows our algorithm. Since we aim to find a noise vector that has a small confidence score distortion, we iteratively search a large $c_3$. For each given $c_3$, we use gradient descent to find $\mathbf{e}$ that satisfies the constraints in \autoref{constraints_1} and~\autoref{constraints_2}. The process of searching $c_3$ stops when we cannot find a vector $\mathbf{e}$ that satisfies the two constraints. Specifically, given $c_2$, $c_3$, and a learning rate $\beta$, we iteratively update the vector variable $\mathbf{e}$ (i.e., the inner while loop in Algorithm~\autoref{algorithml1}). Since we transform the constraints in \autoref{constraints_1} and~\autoref{constraints_2} into the objective function, there is no guarantee that they are satisfied during the iterative gradient descent process. Therefore, in each iteration of gradient descent, we check whether the two constraints are satisfied (i.e., Line~\autoref{conditioncheck} in Algorithm~\autoref{algorithml1}). Specifically, we continue the gradient descent process when the predicted label changes or the sign of the logit $h$ does not change. In other words, we stop the gradient descent process when both constraints are satisfied. We use $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}))\cdot h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e})) \leq 0$ to approximate the constraint in~\autoref{constraints_2}. In particular, the constraint in~\autoref{constraints_2} is equivalent to $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))=0$. Once we find a vector $\mathbf{e}$ such that $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}))$ and $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))$ have different signs (e.g., $h(softmax(\mathbf{z})) >0$ and $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))<0$), $h(softmax(\mathbf{z}+\mathbf{e}))$ just crosses 0 and should be close to 0 since we use a small learning rate. Note that we could also iteratively search $c_2$, but it is computationally inefficient to search both $c_2$ and $c_3$.
\subsection{Phase II}
After Phase I, we have two representative noise vectors. One is $\mathbf{0}$ and the other is $\mathbf{r}$. In Phase II, we assume the randomized noise addition mechanism is a probability distribution over the two representative noise vectors instead of the entire noise space. Specifically, we assume that the defender picks the representative noise vectors $\mathbf{r}$ and $\mathbf{0}$ with probabilities $p$ and $1-p$, respectively; and the defender adds the picked representative noise vector to the true confidence score vector. With such simplification, we can simplify the optimization problem in~\autoref{originalproblem} to the following optimization problem:
\begin{align}
p=\argmin_{p}& |p\cdot g(\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r}) + (1-p)\cdot g(\mathbf{s+0})-0.5| \\
\text{subject to: }&p\cdot d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r}) + (1-p)\cdot d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{0}) \leq \epsilon,
\end{align}
where the constraint means that the expected confidence score distortion is bounded by the budget. Note that we omit the other three constraints in~\autoref{originalproblem-c1},~\autoref{originalproblem-c3}, and~\autoref{originalproblem-c4}. This is because both of our representative noise vectors already satisfy those constraints. Moreover, we can derive an analytical solution to the simplified optimization problem. The analytical solution is as follows:
\begin{align}
\label{computep}
p=\begin{cases}
0, &\text{ if }|g(\mathbf{s})-0.5|\leq |g(\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r})-0.5|\\
\min(\frac{\epsilon}{d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r})},1.0), &\text{ otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
\myparatight{One-time randomness} If the defender randomly samples one of the two representative noise vectors every time for the same query data sample, then an attacker could infer the true confidence score vector via querying the same data sample multiple times. We consider the attacker knows our defense mechanism including the confidence score distortion metric $d$, the budget $\epsilon$, and that the noise vector is sampled from two representative noise vectors, one of which is $\mathbf{0}$.
Suppose the attacker queries the same data sample $n$ times from the target classifier. The attacker receives a confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}_1$ for $m$ times and a confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}_2$ for $n-m$ times. One confidence score vector is $\mathbf{s+r}$ and the other is the true confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}$. Since the attacker receives two different confidence score vectors, the attacker knows $0<p<1$. Moreover, given the two confidence score vectors, the attacker can compute $p$ according to~\autoref{computep} since the distance $d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r})$ does not depend on the ordering of $\mathbf{s}$ and $\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r}$, i.e., $d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{r})=d(\mathbf{s}_1,\mathbf{s}_2)$. The attacker can also estimate the probabilities that the defender returns the confidence score vectors $\mathbf{s}_1$ and $\mathbf{s}_2$ as $\frac{m}{n}$ and $\frac{n-m}{n}$, respectively. If $\frac{m}{n}$ is closer to $p$, then the attacker predicts that $\mathbf{s}_2$ is the true confidence score vector, otherwise the attacker predicts $\mathbf{s}_1$ to be the true confidence score vector.
To address this challenge, we propose to use one-time randomness when the defender samples the representative noise, with which the defender always returns the same confidence score vector for the same query data sample. Specifically,
for a query data sample, the defender quantizes each dimension of the query data sample and computes the hash value of the quantized data sample. Then, the defender generates a random number $p^{\prime}$ in the range $[0,1]$ via a pseudo random number generator with the hash value as the seed. If $p^{\prime}<p$, the defender adds the representative noise vector $\mathbf{r}$ to the true confidence score vector, otherwise the defender does not add noise. The random number $p^{\prime}$ is the same for the same query data sample, so the defender always returns the same confidence score vector for the same query data sample. We compute the hash value of the quantized query data sample as the seed such that the attacker cannot just slightly modify the query data sample to generate a different $p^{\prime}$.
The attacker can compute the random number $p^{\prime}$ as we assume the attacker knows the defense mechanism including the hash function and pseudo random number generator. However, the attacker does not know $p$ any more because the defender always returns the same confidence score vector for the same query data sample. Therefore, the attacker does not know whether the returned confidence score vector is the true one or not.
\section{Problem Formulation}
\label{section:problem}
In our problem formulation, we have three parties, i.e., \emph{model provider}, \emph{attacker}, and \emph{defender}. \autoref{table:notations} shows some important notations used in this paper.
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Notations}
\label{table:notations}
\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{-2pt}
\begin{tabular}{c|l}
\toprule
Notation & Description\\
\midrule
$\mathbf{x}$ & A data sample\\
$\mathbf{s}$ & A true confidence score vector\\
$\mathbf{s}^{\prime}$ & A noisy confidence score vector\\
$\mathbf{n}$ & A noise vector\\
$f$ & Decision function of the target classifier\\
$\mathbf{z}$ & Logits of the target classifier\\
$C$ & Attacker's attack classifier for membership inference\\
$g$ & Decision function of defender's defense classifier\\
$h$& Logits of the defender's defense classifier\\
$\mathcal{M}$ & Randomized noise addition mechanism\\
$\epsilon$ & Confidence score distortion budget\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Model Provider}
We assume a model provider has a proprietary training dataset (e.g., healthcare dataset, location dataset). The model provider trains a machine learning classifier using the proprietary training dataset. Then, the model provider deploys the classifier as a cloud service or a client-side AI software product (e.g., a mobile or IoT app), so other users can leverage the classifier to make predictions for their own data samples. In particular, we consider the deployed classifier returns a {confidence score vector} for a query data sample.
Formally, we have:
\[
f: \mathbf{x} \mapsto \mathbf{s},
\]
where $f$, $\mathbf{x}$, and $\mathbf{s}$ represent the classifier's decision function, the query data sample, and the confidence score vector, respectively. The confidence score vector essentially is the predicted posterior probability distribution of the label of the query data sample, i.e., $s_j$ is the predicted posterior probability that the query data sample has label $j$. The label of the query data sample is predicted to be the one that has the largest confidence score, i.e., the label is predicted as $\argmax_j \{s_j\}$. For convenience, we call the model provider's classifier \emph{target classifier}. Moreover, we consider the target classifier is neural network in this work.
\subsection{Attacker}
An attacker aims to infer the proprietary training dataset of the model provider. Specifically, we consider the attacker only has \emph{black-box} access to the target classifier, i.e., the attacker can send query data samples to the target classifier and obtain their confidence score vectors predicted by the target classifier. The attacker leverages black-box \emph{membership inference attacks}~\cite{LBWBWTGC18,NSH18,SSSS17,SZHBFB19} to infer the members of the target classifier's training dataset. Roughly speaking, in membership inference attacks, the attacker trains a binary classifier, which takes a query data sample's confidence score vector as input and predicts whether the query data sample is in the target classifier's training dataset or not. Formally, we have:
\[
C: \mathbf{s} \mapsto \{0, 1\},
\]
where $C$ is the attacker's binary classifier, $\mathbf{s}$ is the confidence score vector predicted by the target classifier for the query data sample $\mathbf{x}$, 0 indicates that the query data sample $\mathbf{x}$ is not a member of the target classifier's training dataset, and 1 indicates that the query data sample $\mathbf{x}$ is a member of the target classifier's training dataset. For convenience, we call the attacker's binary classifier $C$ \emph{attack classifier}. We will discuss more details about how the attacker could train its attack classifier in Section~\ref{evaluation_section}. Note that, to consider strong attacks, we assume the attacker knows our defense mechanism, but the defender does not know the attack classifier since the attacker has many choices for the attack classifier.
\subsection{Defender}
The defender aims to defend against black-box membership inference attacks. The defender could be the model provider itself or a trusted third party. For any query data sample from any user, the target classifier predicts its confidence score vector and the defender adds a \emph{noise vector} to the confidence score vector before returning it to the user. Formally, we have:
\[
\mathbf{s}'=\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n},
\]
where $\mathbf{s}$ is the true confidence score vector predicted by the target classifier for a query data sample, $\mathbf{n}$ is the noise vector added by the defender, and $\mathbf{s}'$ is the noisy confidence score vector that is returned to a user. Therefore, an attacker only has access to the noisy confidence score vectors.
The defender aims to add noise to achieve the following two goals:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Goal I.} The attacker's attack classifier is inaccurate at inferring the members/non-members of the target classifier's training dataset, i.e., protecting the privacy of the training dataset.
\item {\bf Goal II.} The utility loss of the confidence score vector is bounded.
\end{itemize}
However, achieving these two goals faces several challenges which we discuss next.
\myparatight{Achieving Goal I} The first challenge to achieve Goal I is that the defender does not know the attacker's attack classifier.
To address the challenge, the defender itself trains a binary classifier to perform membership inference and adds noise vectors to the confidence score vectors such that its own classifier is inaccurate at inferring members/non-members. In particular, the defender's classifier takes a confidence score vector as input and predicts member or non-member for the corresponding data sample. We call the defender's binary classifier \emph{defense classifier} and denote its decision function as $g$. Moreover, we consider the decision function $g(\mathbf{s})$ represents the probability that the corresponding data sample, whose confidence score vector predicted by the target classifier is $\mathbf{s}$, is a member of the target classifier's training dataset. In particular, we consider the defender trains a neural network classifier, whose output layer has one neuron with sigmoid activation function. For such classifier, the decision function's output (i.e., the output of the neuron in the output layer) represents probability of being a member. Formally, we have:
\[
g: \mathbf{s} \mapsto [0, 1].
\]
The defense classifier predicts a data sample to be member of the target classifier's training dataset if and only if $g(\mathbf{s})>0.5$.
To make the defense classifier inaccurate, one method is to add a noise vector to a true confidence score vector such that the defense classifier makes an incorrect prediction. Specifically, if the defense classifier predicts member (or non-member) for the true confidence score vector, then the defender adds a noise vector such that the defense classifier predicts non-member (or member) for the noisy confidence score vector. However, when an attacker knows the defense mechanism, the attacker can easily adapt its attack to achieve a high accuracy. In particular, the attacker predicts member (or non-member) when its attack classifier predicts non-member (or member) for a data sample. Another method is to add noise vectors such that the defense classifier always predicts member (or non-member) for the noisy confidence score vectors. However, for some true confidence score vectors, such method may need noise that violates the utility-loss constraints of the confidence score vectors (we will discuss utility-loss constraints later in this section).
{\bf Randomized noise addition mechanism.} Therefore, we consider the defender adopts a \emph{randomized noise addition mechanism} denoted as $\mathcal{M}$. Specifically, given a true confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}$, the defender samples a noise vector $\mathbf{n}$ from the space of possible noise vectors with a probability $\mathcal{M}(\mathbf{n}|\mathbf{s})$ and adds it to the true confidence score vector.
Since random noise is added to a true confidence score vector, the decision function $g$ outputs a random probability of being member. We consider the defender's goal is to make the expectation of the probability of being member predicted by $g$ close to 0.5. In other words, the defender's goal is to add random noise such that the defense classifier randomly guesses member or non-member for a data sample on average. Formally, the defender aims to find a randomized noise addition mechanism $\mathcal{M}$ such that $|E_{\mathcal{M}}(g(\mathbf{s} + \mathbf{n}))-0.5|$ is minimized.
\myparatight{Achieving Goal II} The key challenge to achieve Goal II is how to quantify the utility loss of the confidence score vector. To address the challenge, we introduce two utility-loss metrics.
{\bf Label loss.}
Our first metric concentrates on the query data sample's label predicted by the target classifier. Recall that the label of a query data sample is predicted as the one that has the largest confidence score. If the true confidence score vector and the noisy confidence score vector predict the same label for a query data sample, then the \emph{label loss} is 0 for the query data sample, otherwise the label loss is 1 for the query data sample. The overall label loss of a defense mechanism is the label loss averaged over all query data samples. In some critical applications such as finance and healthcare, even 1\% of label loss may be intolerable. In this work, we aim to achieve 0 label loss, i.e., our noise does not change the predicted label for any query data sample. Formally, we aim to achieve $\argmax_j \{s_j\} = \argmax_j \{s_j + n_j\}$, where $\argmax_j \{s_j\}$ and $\argmax_j \{s_j + n_j\}$ are the labels predicted based on the true and noisy confidence score vectors, respectively.
{\bf Confidence score distortion.} The confidence score vector for a query data sample tells the user more information about the data sample's label beyond the predicted label. Therefore, the added noise should not substantially distort the confidence score vector. First, the noisy confidence score vector should still be a probability distribution. Formally, we have $s_j+n_j\geq 0$ for $\forall j$ and $\sum_j (s_j+n_j)=1$. Second, the distance $d(\mathbf{s}, \mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n})$ between the true confidence score vector and the noisy confidence score vector should be small. In particular, we consider the model provider specifies a confidence score distortion budget called $\epsilon$, which indicates the upper bound of the expected confidence score distortion that the model provider can tolerate. Formally, we aim to achieve $E_{\mathcal{M}}(d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n}))\leq \epsilon$. While any distance metric can be used to measure the distortion, we consider $L_1$-norm of the noise vector as the distance metric, i.e., $d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n})=||\mathbf{n}||_1$. We adopt $L_1$-norm of the noise vector because it is easy to interpret. Specifically, the $L_1$-norm of the noise vector is simply the sum of the absolute value of its entries.
\myparatight{Membership inference attack defense problem} After quantifying Goal I and Goal II, we can formally define our problem of defending against membership inference attacks.
\begin{definition}[Membership-Inference-Attack Defense Problem]
Given the decision function $g$ of the defense classifier, a confidence score distortion budget $\epsilon$, a true confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}$, the defender aims to find a randomized noise addition mechanism $\mathcal{M}^{\ast}$ via solving the following optimization problem:
\begin{align}
\label{originalproblem}
\mathcal{M}^{\ast}&=\argmin_{\mathcal{M}} |E_{\mathcal{M}}(g(\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n}))-0.5| \\
\label{originalproblem-c1}
\text{subject to: } & \argmax_j \{s_j+{n}_j\} =\argmax_j \{s_j\} \\
\label{originalproblem-c2}
&E_{\mathcal{M}}(d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n}))\leq \epsilon \\
\label{originalproblem-c3}
&s_j+{n}_j \geq 0,\forall j \\
\label{originalproblem-c4}
&\sum_j s_j + {n}_j=1,
\end{align}
where the objective function of the optimization problem is to achieve Goal I and the constraints are to achieve Goal II. Specifically, the first constraint means that the added noise does not change the predicted label of the query data sample; the second constraint means that the confidence score distortion is bounded by the budget $\epsilon$; and the last two constraints mean that the noisy confidence score vector is still a probability distribution. Note that the last constraint is equivalent to $\sum_j {n}_j=0$ since $\sum_j {s}_j=1$. Moreover, we adopt $L_1$-norm of the noise vector to measure the confidence score distortion, i.e., $d(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n})=||\mathbf{n}||_1$.
\label{optimization_original}
\end{definition}
\section{Related Work}
\label{related}
\subsection{Membership Inference}
\myparatight{Membership inference attacks}
The goal of membership inference is to determine whether a certain data sample is inside a dataset.
Homer et al.~\cite{HSRDTMPSNC08} proposed the first membership inference attack in the biomedical setting,
in particular on genomic data. Specifically, they showed that an attacker can compare a user's genomic data with the summary statistics
of the target database, such as mean and standard deviation,
to determine the presence of the user in the database.
The comparison can be done by using statistical testing methods such as log-likelihood ratio test.
Later, several works performed similar membership inference attacks against other types of biomedical data such as MicroRNA~\cite{BBHM16}
and DNA methylation~\cite{HZHBTWB19}.
Recently, Pyrgelis et al.~\cite{PTC18,PTC19} further showed that
membership inference can also be performed effectively against location databases. In particular, they showed that an attacker can infer whether a user's location dataset was used for computing a given aggregate location dataset.
\myparatight{Membership inference attacks against ML models}
Shokri et al.~\cite{SSSS17} introduced membership inference in the ML setting.
The goal here is to determine whether a data sample is in the training dataset of a target black-box ML classifier.
To achieve the goal, the attacker trains binary ML classifiers, which take a data sample's {confidence score vector} predicted by the target classifier as input and infer the data sample to be a member or non-member of the target classifier's training dataset. We call these classifiers \emph{attack classifiers} and they are trained using \emph{shadow classifiers}. Specifically, the attacker is assumed to have a dataset coming from the same distribution as the target classifier's training dataset and the attacker uses the dataset to train {shadow classifiers}, each of which aims to replicate the target classifier. Then, the attacker trains the attack classifiers by using the confidence score vectors predicted by the shadow classifiers for some members and non-members of the shadow classifiers' training datasets.
Salem et al.~\cite{SZHBFB19} recently proposed new membership inference attacks for black-box target classifiers, which relax the assumptions of the attacks proposed by Shokri et al.
from both model and data angles. For instance, they showed that the attacker can rank the entries in a confidence score vector before feeding it into an attack classifier, which improves the attack effectiveness. Moreover, they showed that it is sufficient for the attacker to train just one shadow classifier. These results
indicate that membership inference threat is even larger than previously thought.
More recently, Nasr et al.~\cite{NSH19} proposed membership inference attacks against white-box ML models.
For a data sample,
they calculate the corresponding gradients over the white-box target classifier's parameters
and use these gradients as the data sample's feature for membership inference. Moreover, both Nasr et al.~\cite{NSH19} and Melis et al.~\cite{MSCS19} proposed membership inference attacks against federated learning.
While most of the previous works concentrated on classification models~\cite{SSSS17,LBG17,LBWBWTGC18,NSH18,YGFJ18,SZHBFB19,NSH19},
Hayes et al.~\cite{HMDC19} studied membership inference against generative models,
in particular generative adversarial networks (GANs)~\cite{GPMXWOCB14}.
They designed attacks for both white- and black-box settings.
Their results showed that generative models are also vulnerable to membership inference.
\myparatight{Defense mechanisms against membership inference}
Multiple defense mechanisms have been proposed to mitigate the threat of membership inference in the ML setting.
We summarize them as the following.
{\bf $L_2$-Regularizer~\cite{SSSS17}.} Overfitting, i.e., ML classifiers are more confident when facing data samples they are trained on (members)
than others, is one major reason why membership inference is effective. Therefore, to defend against membership inference, people have explored to reduce overfitting using regularization.
For instance, Shokri et al.~\cite{SSSS17} explored using conventional $L_2$ regularizer when training the target classifier.
{\bf Min-Max Game~\cite{NSH18}.} Nasr et al.~\cite{NSH18} proposed a min-max game-theoretic method to train a target classifier. Specifically, the method formulates a min-max optimization problem that aims to minimize the target classifier's prediction loss while maximizing the membership privacy. This formulation is equivalent to adding a new regularization term called \emph{adversarial regularization} to the loss function of the target classifier.
{\bf Dropout~\cite{SZHBFB19}.} Dropout is a recently proposed technique to regularize neural networks~\cite{SHKSS14}. Salem et al.~\cite{SZHBFB19} explored using dropout to mitigate membership inference attacks. Roughly speaking, dropout drops a neuron with a certain probability in each iteration of training a neural network.
{\bf Model Stacking~\cite{SZHBFB19}.}
Model stacking is a classical ensemble method which combines multiple weak classifiers' results as a strong one. Salem et al.~\cite{SZHBFB19} explored using model stacking to mitigate membership inference attacks.
Specifically, the target classifier consists of three classifiers organized into a two-level tree structure.
The first two classifiers on the bottom of the tree take
the original data samples as input, while the third one's input is the outputs of the first two classifiers.
The three classifiers are trained using disjoint sets of data samples,
which reduces the chance for the target classifier to remember any specific data sample, thus preventing overfitting.
{\bf Differential privacy.} Differential privacy~\cite{DMNS06} is a classical method for privacy-preserving machine learning.
Most differential privacy based defenses add noise to the objective function that is used to learn a model~\cite{CMS11,KST12,INSTTW19}, or the gradient in each iteration of gradient descent or stochastic gradient descent that is used to minimize the objective function~\cite{SCS13,BST14,WYX17,ACGMMTZ16,YLPGT19}. Shokri and Shmatikov~\cite{SS15} designed a differential privacy method for collaborative learning of deep neural networks.
{\bf Limitations.} Existing defenses suffer from two key limitations: 1) they do not have formal utility loss guarantee of the confidence score vector; and 2) they achieve suboptimal privacy-utility tradeoffs. Our defense addresses these two limitations. For instance, as we will show in experiments, with the same utility loss of the confidence score vector (e.g., the same $L_1$-norm distortion of the confidence score vector), our defense reduces the attack classifier's
accuracy at inferring members/non-members to a larger extent than existing defenses.
\myparatight{Other privacy/confidentiality attacks against ML}
There exist multiple other types of privacy/confidentiality attacks against ML models~\cite{FLJLPR14,FJR15,AFMSVV13,GWYGB18,MSCS19,TZJRR16,WG18,OASF18,SBBFZ19}.
Fredrikson et al.~\cite{FLJLPR14,FJR15} proposed \emph{model inversion attacks}. For instance,
they can infer the missing values of an input feature vector
by leveraging a classifier's prediction on the input feature vector. Several works~\cite{AFMSVV13,GWYGB18,MSCS19} studied \emph{property inference attacks}, which aim to infer a certain property (e.g., the fraction of male and female users) of a target classifier's training dataset.
Tram{\`{e}}r et al.~\cite{TZJRR16}
proposed \emph{model stealing attacks}.
They designed different techniques tailored to different ML models
aiming at stealing the parameters of the target models.
Another line of works studied \emph{hyperparameter stealing attacks}~\cite{WG18,OASF18}, which aim to steal the hyperparameters such as the neural network architecture and the hyperparameter that balances between the loss function and the regularization term.
\subsection{Adversarial Examples}
\label{adversarialexample}
Given a classifier and an example, we can add carefully crafted noise to the example such that the classifier predicts its label as we desire. The example with carefully crafted noise is called an \emph{adversarial example}. Our MemGuard adds carefully crafted noise to a confidence score vector to turn it into an adversarial example, which is likely to mislead the attack classifier to make a random guessing at member or non-member. The adversarial machine learning community has developed many algorithms (e.g.,~\cite{CW17,PMJFCS16,GSS15,MMSTV18,KGB16,MFF16,TKPGBM17,MFFF17}) to find adversarial examples. However, these algorithms are insufficient to our problem because they did not consider the utility-loss constraints on the confidence score vectors. We address these challenges via designing a new algorithm to find adversarial examples.
Since our defense leverages adversarial examples to mislead the attacker's attack classifier, an adaptive attacker can leverage a classifier that is more robust against adversarial examples as the attack classifier. Although different methods (e.g., adversarial training~\cite{GSS15,TKPGBM17,MMSTV18}, defensive distillation~\cite{PMWJS16}, Region-based Classification~\cite{CG17}, MagNet~\cite{MC17}, and Feature Squeezing~\cite{XEQ18}) have been explored to make classifiers robust against adversarial examples, it is still considered an open challenge to design such robust classifiers. Nevertheless, in our experiments, we will consider the attacker uses adversarial training to train its attack classifier, as adversarial training was considered to be the most empirically robust method against adversarial examples so far~\cite{ACW18}.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{section:model}
In this section, we first define machine learning classification.
Then, we present the threat model.
In the end, we discuss our system model.
\subsection{Machine Learning}
In this work, we focus on machine learning classification,
one of the most common ML applications~\cite{SSSS17,SZHBFB19,SBBFZ19}.
A machine learning classifier, denoted by $\mathcal{C}$, is essentially a function
which maps a data sample $\mathbf{x}$ to
a vector of confidence scores $\mathbf{s}$.
Formally, we have:
\[
\mathcal{C}: \mathbf{x} \mapsto \mathbf{s}
\]
A confidence score vector $\mathbf{s}$ is also referred to as posterior probability:
Each entry of $\mathbf{s}$ indicates the probability of the corresponding data sample
being classified into a certain class or affiliated with a certain label.
The class with the highest probability is the final predicted class $\hat{\mathbf{y}}$
for the sample.
Meanwhile, we denote the real class label of the sample by $\mathbf{y}$.
For presentation purposes, we summarize the notations introduced here and later in this paper
in~\autoref{table:notations}.
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Notations, \YZ{we need add more notations}}
\label{table:notations}
\begin{tabular}{r|l}
\toprule
Notation & Description\\
\midrule
$\mathbf{x}$ & A data sample\\
$\mathbf{s}$ & A confidence score vector\\
$\mathbf{y}$ & Class label of a sample\\
$\mathcal{C}$ & Target machine learning model\\
$\mathcal{A}$ & Membership inference attack classifier\\
$f$ & Defender's membership inference classifier\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Threat Model}
Membership inference attack in the setting of machine learning
aims to determine whether a target data sample $\mathbf{x}$
is in the training set of the target ML model $\mathcal{C}$.
In this work, we concentrate on the black-box ML setting,
i.e., the adversary can only query the target model with the sample
and obtain the corresponding confidence score vector.
The adversary can only decide the membership of her target sample
based on the confidence score.
As pointed out by previous works~\cite{SSSS17,SBBFZ19},
this is the most difficult setting for the adversary.
A membership inference attack model, denoted by $\mathcal{A}$,
can be formalized as the following map.
\[
\mathcal{A}: \mathbf{s} \mapsto \{0, 1\}
\]
Here, $\mathbf{s}$ denotes the confidence score vector of the target data sample $\mathbf{x}$, i.e., $\mathbf{s}=\mathcal{C}(\mathbf{x})$,
$1$ indicates $\mathbf{x}$
is a member of the target model $\mathcal{C}$'s training set and vice versa.
The attack model $\mathcal{A}$ is also realized by an ML classifier.
An adversary can train $\mathcal{A}$ in multiple ways depending on her knowledge
which is summarized as the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item As previous works~\cite{SSSS17,SZHBFB19},
we can assume that the adversary has some data samples coming from the same distribution as the training data of the target model.
Then, she can establish a shadow model~\cite{SZHBFB19} or multiple shadow models~\cite{SSSS17}
to mimic the behavior of the target model.
As the adversary controls the whole training process of her shadow models,
she can derive the labeled data with respect to members and non-members,
and utilize the data to train her attack model.
One further assumption made by previous works is that the attacker knows the architecture of the target model.
This can be realized by either using the same MLaaS API as the target model to establish shadow models~\cite{SSSS17}
or performing model hyperparameter stealing attacks~\cite{WG18,OASF18}.
%
\item A different but stronger assumption in this direction is recently proposed by Nasr et al.~\cite{NSH18}.
Specifically, they assume the attacker knows part of member and non-member data samples of target model.
This indicates the attacker can directly train her attack model without building any shadow model.
This attack is referred to as the sub-network attack.
%
\item The adversary can also know the underlying defense mechanism enforced by the target model.
In this case, the adversary can establish her shadow model
with the defense in place, and derive the adversarial training data for her attack model.
We hypothesize that this attack, termed as the adaptive attack,
results in a more robust membership inference against defense mechanisms.
\end{itemize}
Following these assumptions, we focus on 7 different membership inference attacks in this paper
such that our proposed defense mechanism can be evaluated comprehensively.
\subsection{System Model}
There are two parties in our system including user and defender.
\medskip
\myparatight{User}
We assume an user $u$ has a training set and
denote it by $D_{\text{train}}^{u}=\{\mathbf{X}_{\text{train}},\mathbf{Y}_{\text{train}}\}$.
Here, $\mathbf{X}_{\text{train}}=\{\mathbf{x}_1,\cdots,\mathbf{x}_{|\mathbf{X}_{\text{train}}|}\}$
contains all the data samples and $\mathbf{Y}_{\text{train}}$ contains labels for each sample.
The user can use the training set to train a target model $\mathcal{C}_{u}$
and uses a testing set $D_{\text{test}}^{u}=\{\mathbf{X}_{\text{test}}, \mathbf{Y}_{\text{test}}\}$
to evaluate the performance of the model.
The goal of the user is to deploy $\mathcal{C}_{u}$ as a service
for others to query.
Specifically, the service will return a confidence score vector given a data sample.
The user may suffer from recently proposed membership inference attack~\cite{SSSS17,SZHBFB19}
by providing the original confidence score vector.
Instead, she relies on a defender to sanitize the confidence score vector.
\medskip
\myparatight{Defender}
The defender is on the user side,
it can be an extra component of the user's deployed MLaaS,
or it can be an independent service provided by a trusted party.
The defender defends membership inference attack by adding a noise vector $\mathbf{n}$ to the output of $\mathcal{C}_{u}$
given a data sample $\mathbf{x}$.
This indicates the output of $\mathcal{C}_{u}$ on $\mathbf{x}$ will be:
\[
\mathbf{s}'=\mathbf{s}+\mathbf{n}
\]
To calculate the noise,
the defender first builds a local membership inference classifier denoted by $f$
to assess the membership threat.
As the defender is on the user side,
we assume it can access the user's training and testing sets as well as the target model.
This allows the defender to build the strongest membership inference classifier,
as it is trained on the ground truth data.
In detail, the defender first uses
$\mathbf{X}_{\text{train}}$ and $\mathbf{X}_{\text{test}}$
to query $\mathcal{C}_{u}$,
and obtains the corresponding confidence scores
denoted by $\mathbf{S}_{\text{train}}$ and $\mathbf{S}_{\text{test}}$, respectively.
All confidence score vectors in $\mathbf{S}_{\text{train}}$ are labeled as $1$, i.e., member samples,
and $\mathbf{S}_{\text{test}}$ as $0$, non-member samples.
Then, $f$ is trained on this dataset.
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the main challenges in constructing successful particle physics and cosmology models of string theory origin, is the requirement for a stable vacuum with a positive -albeit tiny today- cosmological constant. Despite the theoretical advances in this topic, there is no conclusive argument that this goal has been unequivocally achieved. A generic feature of the effective field theories resulting after compactification, is the appearance of a large number of moduli fields in the
massless spectrum. A primary purpose is thus to obtain a (meta)-stable vacuum where all moduli are fixed and acquire masses in order to avoid long range forces and other undesirable phenomenological features.
It has been realised, however, that after moduli stabilisation de Sitter (dS) vacua are scarce, if at all. Focusing on type IIB string in particular, the scalar potential of the corresponding effective supergravity constructed from the K\"ahler potential and superpotential exhibits a no scale structure at the classical level~\cite{Cremmer:1983bf}. Thus, while the complex structure moduli and the dilaton field are fixed in the presence of $3$-form fluxes from supersymmetry conditions imposed via the superpotential~\cite{Frey:2002hf}, K\"ahler moduli fields are not stabilised unless quantum corrections are taken into account~\cite{Becker:2002nn, Kachru:2003aw, Balasubramanian:2005zx, Conlon:2005ki}. Moreover, in general the scalar potential displays often an anti-de Sitter (AdS) minimum, and therefore, a suitable mechanism is required to provide an appropriate uplifting term which ensures a vacuum with positive energy~\cite{Kachru:2003aw, Balasubramanian:2005zx}.
Motivated by these facts, in a previous work~\cite{Antoniadis:2018hqy}, we studied the quantum corrections arising from
a geometric configuration of three intersecting $7$-branes in the framework of type IIB/F-theory. The corrections
break the no-scale structure of the K\"ahler potential and generate a non-zero F-term potential for the K\"ahler moduli.
In addition, Fayet-Iliopoulos D-terms associated with anomalous $U(1)$ symmetries of the intersecting $D7$ branes, are generated.
These are sufficient to uplift the potential, and generate a dS minimum with all the K\"ahler moduli stabilised to their minima.
This result is obtained thanks to the fact
that the aforementioned quantum corrections have a logarithmic dependence on the moduli associated with
the co-dimension two volume~\cite{Antoniadis:1998ax} transverse to the $D7$ brane.
Although this type of dependence can be deduced from a simple
dimensional analysis, yet the strength and sign of these contributions plays a decisive role and should be derived from a direct string calculation.
Therefore, the main objective of the present work is the precise estimate of these corrections leading to the most dominant modifications of the K\"ahler potential in the large volume limit. Actually, in type II (and type I) string compactifications, these contributions are induced by the corrections to the Einstein gravity kinetic terms renormalising the effective four-dimensional (4d) Planck mass~\cite{Antoniadis:1996vw, Antoniadis:1997eg}.
In a compactified theory, the large volume limit is expected to give back the higher dimensional theory. In the presence of branes though (or in general localised defects) the limit is more subtle and one has to break up the total volume into pieces along and transverse to the various world-volumes. Still, in the large transverse volume limit, one would expect brane decoupling. However, this is not true in the case of co-dimension two (or one) if the theory has local tadpoles of (effectively) massless bulk states. Indeed, their emission to the bulk from the localised defect leads to infrared divergences due to the effective propagation in two (or one) dimensions. They behave logarithmically with the size of the bulk in the two-dimensional case and linearly in one dimension. Examples of this property are the threshold corrections to gauge couplings of $D7$ brane gauge kinetic terms~\cite{Antoniadis:1998ax} and the linear dilaton dependence on the size of the eleventh dimension in heterotic M-theory~\cite{Witten:1996mz}. This is not the case for graviton kinetic terms, which are in principle higher dimensional, associated with closed strings that live in ten dimensions. It was found however that type II strings compactified on a non-trivial 6d Calabi-Yau (CY) manifold lead to a 4d Einstein action localised at points where the Euler number is concentrated when taking the large volume limit~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr}. This correction arises at the string tree-level for smooth manifolds~\cite{Becker:2002nn} (corresponding to a perturbative correction in $\alpha'$~\cite{Grisaru:1986kw}) and at one-loop level in orbifolds~\cite{Antoniadis:1997eg, Antoniadis:2002tr}.
It is now clear that these localised graviton kinetic terms can receive to the next order logarithmic corrections on the size of the volume transverse to $7$-brane (or orientifold) sources localised at distant points from the graviton kinetic terms, due to the emission of closed strings on non-vanishing local tadpoles. Note that consistency of the theory implies only global tadpole cancellation while local tadpoles are generally present except in special configurations of $D7$ branes on top of orientifold planes~\cite{Antoniadis:1998ax}. In this work, we compute these corrections and we show that they are adequate to stabilise the K\"ahler moduli and in particular the total internal volume, obtaining a de Sitter minimum when suitable D-terms from the $D7$-branes are also taken into account.
The layout of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we present a short description of the runaway problem for stabilising the string moduli at weak coupling, related to the generic behaviour of the scalar potential for the volume modulus (or for the string dilaton) in string theory and discuss possible solutions through quantum corrections.
In Section 3, we discuss the appearance of the induced Einstein-Hilbert (EH) term in four dimensions and the derivation of the one-loop corrections through graviton scattering. The logarithmic contributions associated with the exchange of Kaluza-Klein (KK) excitations between the induced graviton vertices and $7$-brane sources are computed in Section 3.2 and are translated in corrections to the K\"ahler potential. In Section 4, we include D-term contributions and describe the minimisation of the scalar potential and the conditions for a dS vacuum. Section 5 contains a summary of our results and some concluding remarks.
\section{Corrections to the K\"ahler potential and runaway moduli behaviour}
The Dine-Seiberg problem \cite{Dine:1985he} is a long-standing question in moduli stabilisation. It concerns the modulus that controls the perturbative expansion, either in $\alpha'$ (the internal volume), or in string loops (the dilaton). In both cases, the assumption is that in the weak coupled limit, the potential at a certain order of the expansion has a monotonic behaviour towards a vanishing value at inifinity corresponding to the free theory. Thus in order to generate a minimum, there should be at least two terms compensating each other, which in general requires the expansion parameter to be of order 1 and the theory is no longer weakly coupled. This argument points out that the vacuum is either strongly coupled or it needs two sectors compensating each other, somehow at weak coupling. For example, in the KKLT model~\cite{Kachru:2003aw}, non-perturbative effects in the superpotential \cite{Derendinger:1985kk} fix all the K\"ahler moduli. In the large volume scenario \cite{Balasubramanian:2005zx, Conlon:2005ki} on the other hand, one only uses non-perturbative effects for small volumes which behave like the holes in Swiss cheese. The back-reaction of the small volume together with $\alpha'$-corrections \cite{Kiritsis:1997em, Antoniadis:1997eg, Becker:2002nn} fix the whole volume at exponentially large size.
Here, we want to check this assumption from the bottom-up point of view. One starts with a general form of the K\"ahler potential for a single K\"ahler modulus with perturbative corrections (in supergravity units):
\begin{equation}
{\cal K} = -2 \log\, (\tau^{\frac{3}{2}} + \eta{f[\tau]}),\label{Kaehler}
\end{equation}
where $\eta$ is the expansion parameter and $f [\tau]$ is a general function of the K\"ahler modulus $\tau$ which breaks the no-scale structure. The term $\eta{f[\tau]}$ is assumed to be much smaller than the volume $\tau^{\frac{3}{2}}$. The corresponding F-term potential for constant superpotential ${\cal W}_0$ is
\begin{equation}
V_F (\tau) = \frac{\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2}{2\tau^{9/2}} (3 {f[\tau]} - 4 \tau {f'[\tau]} + 4 \tau^2 {f''[\tau]}) + O(\eta^2)\label{Ftermgeneral},
\end{equation}
where we omit the higher order terms in the $\eta$-expansion. We see from eq. (\ref{Ftermgeneral}) that the F-term potential naturally splits into three parts. However, if the correction is a power-like function $f[\tau] = \tau^k$, the three terms above acquire the same form $V_F \propto \eta \tau^{k-9/2} + O(\eta^2)$, thus always being monotonic in the leading order. In the past, all radiative corrections calculated in terms of either the string coupling $g_s$ (at one-loop level) or $\alpha'$ had this form, such as in \cite{Antoniadis:1996vw, Kiritsis:1997em, Antoniadis:1997eg, Becker:2002nn, Antoniadis:2002tr, vonGersdorff:2005bf, Berg:2005ja, Berg:2005yu, Parameswaran:2006jh, Cicoli:2007xp, Berg:2014ama, Haack:2015pbv, Kobayashi:2017zfd, Haack:2018ufg}.
The observation in \cite{Antoniadis:1998ax} suggests however that in addition to power behaving functions, one could also have corrections with logarithmic dependence on the moduli
\begin{equation} f [\tau] = \log (\tau). \end{equation}
The interesting fact now is that the F-term potential has two distinct parts, both with the same power dependence but one of the two proportional to $\log (\tau)$~\cite{Antoniadis:2018hqy, Antoniadis:2018ngr}:
\begin{equation}
V_F = \frac{\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2}{2\tau^{9/2}} (3 \log (\tau) - 8) + O(\eta^2)~.
\label{VF}
\end{equation}
The two terms could compensate each other and lead to a minimum provided that the coefficient $\eta$ is negative.
This mechanism is reminiscent of the one with a Coleman-Weinberg potential~\cite{Coleman:1973jx}, offering an alternative solution to the runaway moduli problem, consistent with perturbation theory in the large volume expansion.
The next step is to study whether we could get an exponentially large volume. One trivial solution is to insert an extremely small compactification scale parameter $\mu$ inside the correction $f [\tau] = \log (\mu^4 \tau)$. This is equivalent to adding a constant $\xi$ inside the logarithm of the K\"ahler potential. Indeed, assuming that the volume upon stabilisation is exponentially large, one can expand the K\"ahler potential in terms of the total volume $\mathcal{V} = \tau^{\frac{3}{2}}$ of the six-dimensional compactification manifold ${{\cal X}_6}$ in the large volume limit:
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal{K}} = -2\log\left({\cal V} +\xi + \eta \log({\cal V}) + O(\frac{1}{\mathcal{V}})\right) = -2\log\left({\cal V} + \eta \log({\mu^6 \cal V}) + O(\frac{1}{\mathcal{V}})\right),\label{KahlerpotentialVexpansion}
\end{equation}
where $\mu \equiv e^{{\xi}/{6\eta}}$. In the case of $\eta < 0$, one can show that there is a minimum of the effective potential (\ref{VF}) in terms of $\mathcal{V}$, which in the large volume limit is:
\begin{equation}
{\cal V}_{min}=e^{{13}/3}/\mu^6 \quad;\quad V_F^{min}=\frac{\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2}{3{\cal V}_{min}^{3}}~.
\label{Vmineta}
\end{equation}
It follows that in order to make this solution large enough, as required in the large volume expansion, we assumed a priori that $\mu$ has to be exponentially small, which corresponds to the condition
\begin{equation}
\xi \gg -\eta > 0\,.
\label{signsxieta}
\end{equation}
This is again similar to the situation in the Coleman-Weinberg potential, where $\eta$ and $\xi$ correspond to two different parameters/couplings, such as a quartic scalar interaction and a gauge coupling~\cite{Coleman:1973jx}. In the following sections, we shall present an explicit string theory example, realising the above proposal.
\section{Quantum corrections from graviton scattering}
In the type II superstring action, in addition to the Einstein-Hilbert (EH) term, there are fourth order corrections in Riemann
curvature, generated by multi-graviton scattering. Those which are relevant to our discussion, that generate a localised EH action in four dimensions, are of the form~\cite{Green:1997di, Kiritsis:1997em, Antoniadis:1997eg, Russo:1997mk, Becker:2002nn}:
\begin{equation}
\int\limits_{M_{10}} \epsilon^{\mu_1\mu_2\dots \mu_8}\epsilon_{\nu_1\nu_2\dots \nu_8}R_{\mu_1\mu_2}^{\nu_1\nu_2} R_{\mu_3\mu_4}^{\nu_3\nu_4} R_{\mu_5\mu_6}^{\nu_5\nu_6} R_{\mu_7\mu_8}^{\nu_7\nu_8}
\equiv \int\limits_{M_{10}}\epsilon_8\epsilon_8 R^4 = \int\limits_{M_{10}} R\wedge R\wedge R\wedge R\wedge e\wedge e \,,
\label{t8R4}
\end{equation}
where
the last expression is in differential forms notation,
$\int_{M_{10}} R^4\wedge e^2$ in short.
The reduction of this term in four dimensions has implications in the effective field theory. Among others, there is an induced localised EH term in four dimensions\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr} which generates the universal correction to the Planck mass appearing in eq.~(\ref{KahlerpotentialVexpansion}). In the following subsections, we first review the result of \cite{Antoniadis:2002tr} which shows that the constant $\xi$ is proportional to the Euler characteristic $\chi$ of the CY manifold ${\cal X}_6$. Then, we calculate the exchange of closed strings between these localised EH terms and extended object sources ($7$-branes) located at distant points in the bulk. Such local tadpoles lead to logarithmic corrections in the size of the two-dimensional space transverse to the $7$-branes.
\subsection{Localised Einstein-Hilbert terms}
The implications of $R^4$ terms in the effective theory obtained after
compactifying on a CY manifold, have been studied by several authors
\cite{Antoniadis:1997eg, Kiritsis:1997em, Antoniadis:2002tr, Becker:2002nn}. The term of interest to us
arising from (\ref{t8R4}) after integration on CY, is proportional
to the Euler characteristic of the manifold $\chi$~\cite{Antoniadis:1997eg}.
Hence, including the tree-level and the one-loop generated Einstein-Hilbert terms,
after compactification on ${\cal M}_4\times {\cal X}_6$ with ${\cal M}_4$ the 4d Minkowski spacetime, the ten-dimensional action reduces to~\cite{Antoniadis:1997eg, Kiritsis:1997em, Antoniadis:2002tr, Becker:2002nn}
\begin{eqnarray}
S &\supset &\frac{1}{(2\pi)^7 \alpha'^4} \int\limits_{M_{10}} e^{-2\phi} {\cal R}_{(10)} - \frac{6}{(2\pi)^7 \alpha'} \int\limits_{M_{10}} \left(-2\zeta(3) e^{-2\phi} \pm 4\zeta(2) \right) R^4 \wedge e^2\label{IIB10DactionA}\\
&\equiv&S_{\rm grav}= \frac{1}{(2\pi)^7 \alpha'^4} \int\limits_{M_{4} \times {{\cal X}_6}} e^{-2\phi} {\cal R}_{(10)} - \frac{\chi}{(2\pi)^4 \alpha'} \int\limits_{M_{4}} \left(-2\zeta(3) e^{-2\phi} \pm\frac{2\pi^2}{3}\right) {\cal R}_{(4)}\,,
\label{IIB10Daction}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\phi$ is the string dilaton whose vacuum expectation value (VEV) defines the string coupling $g_s=\langle e^\phi\rangle$, ${\cal R}_{(d)}$ is the $d$-dimensional Ricci scalar, the $\pm$ sign corresponds to the type IIA/B theory,
and in the second line, $\zeta(2)={\pi^2}/6$ has been substituted. We also used~\cite{Antoniadis:1997eg}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{(2\pi)^6}\int\limits_{{\cal X}_6} R\wedge R\wedge R=\frac{\chi}{3!(2\pi)^3}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that the action~(\ref{IIB10Daction}) is universal for smooth manifolds (for orbifolds the tree-level contribution proportional to $\zeta(3)$ vanishes - see below) and the 4d term proportional to $\chi$ corresponds to the large volume limit of the internal compactification space, associated with the localised contributions that remain finite in the non-compact limit. In general, there are extra model dependent terms that vanish at large volume, either perturbatively (power suppressed), or non-perturbatively (exponentially suppressed). The localisation points are arbitrary, corresponding to the singularities supporting the Euler number of the CY manifold in the non-compact limit; thus, in general $\chi=\sum_i\chi_i$, where the summation index $i$ runs over all different points of localised gravity. In the following, we consider for simplicity that there is just one singularity at the origin supporting the total Euler number. In the orbifold limit, the first term in the bracket involving $\zeta(3)$ vanishes and the localised ${\cal R}_{(4)}$ term arises at one loop, proportional to $\zeta(2)$.
From the above reduction it is readily inferred that an induced term linear in the Ricci scalar is only possible in four
dimensions~\footnote{Actually, in M-theory gravity localisation arises in five dimensions which is the strongly coupled limit of type IIA.}.
In supersymmetric type II string compactifications, the Euler characteristic counts the difference between the number of $\mathcal{N} = 2$
hypermultiplets and vector multiplets,
\begin{equation}\chi =\pm 4 (n_V - n_H)\label{chiforII}\,,\end{equation}
for type IIA/B, respectively. It is remarkable that
the emergence of a lower dimensional Einstein-Hilbert term ${\cal R}_{(d)}$, with the whole internal space in the non-compact limit,
is only possible in four dimensions (in the weakly coupled regime) and leads to interesting cosmological consequences that we shall discuss at the end.
\noindent
To simplify the expression of the action, we choose the mass conventions $2\pi \alpha' = 1$~\cite{Becker:2002nn},
leading to:
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{\rm grav}&=&\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} \int\limits_{M_{4} \times {{\cal X}_6}} e^{-2\phi} {\cal R}_{(10)} - \frac{\chi}{(2\pi)^3} \int\limits_{M_{4}} \left(-2\zeta(3) e^{-2\phi} \pm\frac{2\pi^2}{3}\right) {\cal R}_{(4)}\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} \int\limits_{M_{4}}
\left[{\cal V} e^{-2\phi} + \chi\left(2\zeta(3) e^{-2\phi} \mp\frac{2\pi^2}{3}\right)\right] {\cal R}_{(4)}\,.
\label{IIB10DactionF}
\end{eqnarray}
In order to deduce the physical corrections to the moduli metric, one has to take into account also the corrections to the moduli kinetic terms and perform an appropriate Weyl rescaling of the spacetime metric from the string to the Einstein frame where gravity kinetic terms are correctly normalised. It turns out that the corrections to the moduli metric read~\cite{Antoniadis:1997eg}:
\begin{equation}
{\cal V} e^{-2\phi} \left[(\partial V)^2+(\partial H)^2\right]
\mp \chi\left(2\zeta(3) e^{-2\phi} + \frac{2\pi^2}{3}\right)\left[(\partial V)^2-(\partial H)^2\right]\,,
\end{equation}
where $V$ and $H$ denote collectively the $\mathcal{N}=2$ vector and hypermultiplet moduli, respectively (orthogonal to the volume and dilaton directions)\footnote{For the volume and universal dilaton hypermultiplet, special care is needed to take care of the mixing~\cite{Antoniadis:2003sw}.}. As a result in type IIA, upon a Weyl rescaling to the Einstein frame, the correction proportional to $\zeta(3)$ renormalises the metric of vector moduli and the dilaton dependence drops, whilst the correction proportional to $\pi^2/3=2\zeta(2)$ renormalises the metric of the hypermultiplet moduli and acquires a dilaton dependence. Thus, the vector and hyper metrics decouple, in agreement with the $\mathcal{N}=2$ supergravity.
In type IIB on the other hand, which is our case of interest, it is easy to see
that in the Einstein frame the vector moduli space is not corrected while the
hypermultiplet moduli obtain tree-level as well as one-loop corrections. The latter
can be read off from the corrections to ${\cal R}$ up to a factor of $(-2)$ due to the Weyl rescaling. Note that now the internal volume, as well as all K\"ahler class moduli, are in $\mathcal{N}=2$ hypermultiplets, together with the dilaton. After the orientifold projection and turning on $3$-form fluxes, supersymmetry is broken to $\mathcal{N}=1$ keeping only the K\"ahler class and complex structure moduli (and the dilaton) in chiral multiplets. The latter together with the dilaton are stabilised in a supersymmetric way via the $3$-form flux generated superpotential, leaving the K\"ahler moduli unfixed as flat directions when the corrections proportional to $\chi$ are ignored. These corrections modify the tree-level K\"ahler potential by shifting the volume according to eq.~(\ref{KahlerpotentialVexpansion}) by a constant $\xi$ that can be read off from eq.~(\ref{IIB10DactionF}) and taking care of the dilaton fixing following for instance the procedure of~\cite{Becker:2002nn}: $\xi=-\frac{\chi}{4}[\zeta(3)+\pi^3/3]$.\footnote{Note that our $\xi$ differs from the one of~\cite{Becker:2002nn} by a factor of 2.}
Next, we turn to the localisation width of the wavefunction of ${\cal R}_{(4)}$ in the internal manifold ${{\cal X}_6}$ when $\chi \neq 0$.
In order to render the computations tractable, we work in the context of type IIB string theory compactified on the $T^6/{Z_N}$ orbifold limit of CY space ~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr}. Note that, in the non-compact limit, $N$ can be an arbitrary integer. The non-vanishing contribution to the localised EH action comes from one-loop, since the tree-level correction (proportional to $\zeta(3)$) vanishes in the orbifold limit~\cite{Antoniadis:1997eg}. Moreover, the one-loop correction receives non-vanishing contributions only from the odd-odd spin structure and from the $\mathcal{N} = 1+1$ supersymmetric sectors with all internal coordinates twisted by the orbifold. In the odd-odd spin structure, one has to take one vertex in the $(-1, -1)$-ghost picture, the two others in $(0, 0)$-ghost picture, and add a world-sheet supercurrent insertion in both left- and right-moving sectors.
In order to compute the localisation width, the corresponding graviton scattering amplitude involves two massless gravitons and one Kaluza-Klein (KK) excited state with zero winding in the $Z_N$ orbifold background (see Fig.\ref{xx0}). Their 4d momenta satisfy momentum conservation and mass-shell conditions
$$\sum_i k_i=0,\; k_1^2=k_2^2=0,\;k_3^2=-q^2~,$$
with $q$ being the KK momentum.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\columnwidth]{Torus3Gk123}\;\;
\caption{
\footnotesize
{Three graviton scattering with two massless gravitons with momentum $k1, k2$ and a KK state carrying momentum $k_3$.}
}
\label{xx0}
\end{figure}
We take the zero modes of the fermions along the non-compact directions from $V_{(0, 0)} (z_1)$ and $V_{(-1, -1)} (z_2)$ and the zero mode parts from the contractions between the supercurrents and the vertex operator $V_{(0, 0)} (z_3)$. After some manipulations the amplitude takes the form~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr}
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle V^2_{(0,0)}V_{(-1,-1)}\rangle = {\cal C_R} \frac{1}{N^2}
\sum_{\substack{f=0,\dots, n_f\\
k=0,\dots, N-1}}e^{i \gamma^kq \cdot {x}_f} \int_{\cal F}\frac{d^2\tau}{\tau_2^2}
\int \prod_{i=1,2,3}\frac{d^2z_i}{\tau_2} {\sum_{(h,g)}}' e^{\alpha' q^2 F_{(h,g)}(\tau, z_i)}\,,\label{Amp1}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\cal C_R}$ contains the linearised tensorial structure of the three gravitons which comes from the expansion of the scalar curvature ${\cal R}_{(4)}$, whilst $x_f$ are the fixed points of the orbifold and $\gamma^k$ is the representation of the action of the orbifold group. The pairs $(h,g)$ label the orbifold sectors corresponding to the boundary conditions $h$ and $g$ around the two cycles of the world-sheet torus, while the prime in the sum excludes the untwisted sector $(0,0)$ which does not contribute to the amplitude because of the fermion zero-modes integration. For simplicity, we consider $N$ prime, so that there are no $\mathcal{N} = 2+2$ supersymmetric sectors that give also vanishing contribution. The factor $1/N^2$ takes into account the two orbifold projections around the 2 cycles. As usually, the integration over the 2d torus modulus $\tau$ is restricted in the fundamental domain ${\cal F}$ of the $SL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ modular group. The function $F_{(h,g)}(\tau, z_i)$ is computed in~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr} in terms of the twisted 2-point function and the coupling between two twisted and one untwisted states on the torus.
Obviously, the localisation occurs at the orbifold fixed points. Focusing on one of them, say the origin $x_f = 0$, all the others go to infinity in the non-compact limit, while the summation over $k$ gives a factor of $N$.
We now take the Fourier transform with respect to the KK momentum $q$ in all six internal dimensions, in the non-compact limit, using Euclidean signature $q^2<0$. This gives the coefficient of ${\cal R}_{(4)}$ as an integral over the 6d internal position space $y$ of a localisation function $\delta(y)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta(y) =&& \frac{1}{N} \int_{\cal F}\frac{d^2\tau}{\tau_2^2}
\int \prod_{i=1,2,3}\frac{d^2z_i}{\tau_2} {\sum_{(h,g)}}' \frac{1}{8\alpha'^3 F_{(h,g)}(\tau, z_i)^3} e^{-\frac{y^2}{4\alpha' F_{(h,g)}(\tau, z_i)}}\nonumber\\
\sim&& N \frac{1}{w^6} e^{-\frac{y^2}{2w^2}}\,,
\label{6Dcoordinatelocal}
\end{eqnarray}
where we restored $\alpha'\equiv l_s^2$, with $l_s$ the string length.
It is now clear that $\delta(y)$ exhibits a Gaussian profile with respect to the ratio $\frac{y}{w}$ where the origin of the coordinate $y$
is identified with the fixed point and $w$ is an effective width associated with it. The width can be computed in the large $N$ limit by a saddle point analysis, extremising $F_{(h,g)}$. Evaluating the stationary point of $F_{(h,g)}(\tau, z_i)$ the effective width is found to be~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr}
\begin{equation}
w^2 \simeq \alpha' F_{(h,g)}(\tau, z_i) |_{min} \sim \frac{l_s^2}{N}\,.
\label{width}
\end{equation}
The summation over $(h, g)$
in eq. (\ref{6Dcoordinatelocal}) leads then to a factor of $N^2$, taken into account in the second line. Notice that the effective width corresponds to the 4d Planck mass in accordance with the field theory arguments of localised gravity~\cite{Dvali:2000hr}.
Looking back at eq. (\ref{IIB10Daction}), we conclude that the one-loop correction can be written as
\begin{equation}
\frac{4\zeta(2)\chi}{(2\pi)^4 \alpha'} \int\limits_{M_{4}\times {{\cal X}_6}} \frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} \frac{e^{-y^2/(2 w^2)}}{w^6} {\cal R}_{(4)},
\label{localisedtermorbifold}
\end{equation}
where $|\chi| \sim N$ (see eq.~$\ref{chiforII}$) and the effective width $w$ provides the effective ultraviolet cutoff for the graviton KK modes propagating in the bulk.
\subsection{$7$-branes and logarithmic corrections}
We have seen above that one loop corrections in $\mathcal{N} = 1+1$ orbifold compactifications of type II strings generate localised gravity kinetic terms associated with a 4d EH action proportional to the Euler characteristic of the manifold. We are now ready to show that next order corrections in general display a logarithmic dependence on the size of two dimensional bulk subspaces transverse to distant $7$-brane sources.
Indeed, localised graviton vertices can emit gravitons and other closed string states in the bulk towards these sources, generating local tadpoles whose existence can be consistent with global tadpole cancellation.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\columnwidth]{TorusCur_A19}\;\;
\caption{
\footnotesize
{Genus-3/2 amplitude leading to logarithmic correction to the induced 4d Planck mass.}
}
\label{xxx}
\end{figure}
The relevant string diagram is genus-3/2, as shown in Fig.~\ref{xxx}, where the disk corresponds to a boundary (brane) or a crosscap (orientifold) and we considered the insertion of two 4d graviton zero-mode vertices.\footnote{As usually, we assume an appropriate off-shell regularisation to prevent on-shell vanishing of the 2-point function. Alternatively, one should consider the $3$-pont function by adding an extra 4d graviton vertex insertion.} The presence of the handle is needed to produce the localised correction in orbifolds, described in the previous subsection, while the presence of the boundary/crosscap is necessary to produce the desired logarithmic correction in the codimension-two case.
The exact computation of this diagram is quite involved. However, the contribution of the local closed string tadpole that gives rise to the logarithmic correction can be done easily in the degeneration limit where the diagram factorises into a $3$-point function on a torus (one loop) of two 4d gravitons and a massless ten-dimensional closed string, and a one-point function on a disk describing the propagation of the closed string in the tube ending on the boundary/crosscap. The massless 10d closed string state can be decomposed in four dimensions into a 4d massless mode and a series of KK excitations for the graviton, dilaton, volume modulus and possibly other (model dependent) untwisted moduli (the 2-index antisymmetric tensor cannot go into the vacuum by Lorentz invariance).
Here, for simplicity, we will use the same one-loop $3$-point function given in eq. (\ref{Amp1}), with a KK mode of the graviton-dilaton (corresponding to the same vertex operator with a different polarisation factor) propagating towards a tadpole ending on a $7$-brane source, see Fig.\ref{VinfN=60old}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\columnwidth]{T2G3D7}
\caption{
\footnotesize
{Degeneration limit genus-3/2 amplitude with two massless gravitons and a KK excitation transmitted towards a $D7$ brane.} }
\label{VinfN=60old}
\end{figure}
Obviously, the KK-state must be off-shell with mass $q_\perp$; its 4d momentum is zero by momentum conservation. Similarly, all internal momenta vanish along the $7$-brane world-volume directions. Thus, $q_\perp$ corresponds to the KK-momentum along the two directions transverse to the $7$-brane.
Going back to the momentum space, the $3$-point function~(\ref{6Dcoordinatelocal}) becomes:
\begin{equation}
{\tilde\delta}(q_\perp)\sim {\cal C_R} N e^{-w^2 q_\perp^2/2}\,,
\end{equation}
where ${\cal C_R}$ contains the linearised tensorial structure as in eq. (\ref{Amp1}).
The amplitude can now be written as the product of the above vertex, the two-dimensional propagator, and the contribution from a $D7$-brane/$O7$-plane. In the string frame, the result is:
\begin{eqnarray}
A_S=-{\cal C_R}\sum\limits_{q_\perp\neq 0} g_s^2 T N e^{-w^2 q_\perp^2/2}\frac{1}{q_\perp^2 R_\perp^2 }~
\label{AS}
\end{eqnarray}
where $T$ is the brane tension, $R_\perp$ is the size of the two-dimensional space transverse to the $7$-brane, and the zero mode is omitted from the summation over the KK modes due to the global tadpole cancellation condition.
In the large $R_\perp$
limit, we can go to the continuum by replacing the sum with the appropriate integral.
Thus, including also the Jacobian determinant, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
A_S &=&- {\cal C_R} \int_{1/R_\perp}^\infty g_s^2 T N e^{-w^2 p^2/2}\frac{1}{p^2}\frac{2\pi p}{N\sin{\frac{2\pi}{N}}} dp\nonumber\\
&=&- {\cal C_R} g_s^2 T \frac{2\pi}{\sin{\frac{2\pi}{N}}} \frac{1}{2}\Gamma \left(0, \frac{w^2}{2R^2_\perp}\right)\nonumber\\
&=&- {\cal C_R} g_s^2 T\frac{2\pi}{\sin{\frac{2\pi}{N}}} \left\{-\gamma/2 + \log{\left(\frac{R_\perp \sqrt{2}}{w}\right)} + {\cal O}\left(\frac{w^2}{R^2_\perp}\right) \right\}\,,
\label{ASint}
\end{eqnarray}
where $2\pi/(N\sin{\frac{2\pi}{N}})$ is the result of the angular integration corresponding to the volume of $Z_N$ fundamental cell (valid for $N>2$)~\cite{Antoniadis:1993jp}.
Focusing on the $R_\perp$ dependent part, we observe that in the large transverse volume limit, the dominant
contribution comes from the logarithmic factor,
\begin{equation}
\sim -N g_s^2 T \log\frac{R_\perp}{w}\,,
\end{equation}
where we considered also the large $N$ (or $\chi$) limit.
The above computation can also be done in the position space in a
straightforward way, using the localised form factor (\ref{6Dcoordinatelocal}). The result is $\sim N g_s^2 T\log (y_B/w)$, with $y_B$ the distance of the $7$-brane probe from the origin.
Remarkably, the logarithmic contributions found above, have the opposite sign compared to the one of the constant correction~(\ref{6Dcoordinatelocal}) or (\ref{localisedtermorbifold}). This relative negative sign arises due to the fact that, using for instance Euclidean signature, the propagator ${1}/{q_\perp^2}$ changes sign. Furthermore, the tension $T$ is positive for a $D7$-brane probe and negative for an $O7$-plane. Thus, the negative value of the parameter $\eta$ (relative to $\xi$) introduced in eq.~(\ref{KahlerpotentialVexpansion}), required to ensure large volume expansion (see eq. (\ref{Vmineta})), is associated with the existence of local tadpoles through $D7$-branes. This implies that the configuration should involve a surplus of branes relative to orientifold planes. For instance, in the absence of any fluxes, this condition can be satisfied if one places all branes away from the origin (where 4d gravity is localised), at the boundary of the internal space. In the presence of fluxes, this condition can also be satisfied in several ways.
Actually, the whole six-dimensional internal space allows at most three different directions of local tadpoles associated with the three possible orthogonal sets of $7$-branes, through the exchange of KK excitations along the corresponding codimension-two transverse dimensions.
In general, consistent string models should satisfy global tadpole cancellation conditions. Supersymmetric constructions have $3$- and $7$-brane sources (orientifold $O$-planes and $D$-branes) that are subject to global cancellation requirement, where $3$-form fluxes contribute to $3$-form charges. Magnetised $D7$-branes generate also in principle $3$-form charges that should be taken into account~\cite{Antoniadis:2006eu}. Note, however, that $3$-brane sources do not lead to logarithmic corrections, since the corresponding local closed string tadpoles are in a six-dimensional bulk. Thus, only $7$-brane sources give rise to logarithmic corrections with closed strings propagating towards local tadpoles in two dimensions. As an example, their contribution in the $\mathbb{Z}_2$-case reads~\cite{Antoniadis:1998ax}:
\begin{equation}
F(q_\perp)\sim -16\prod_{I=1,2}\frac{1+(-)^{n_I}}{2}+\sum_{a=1}^{16}\cos(q_\perp\cdot y_a)\,,
\label{Ftotal}
\end{equation}
where the first term corresponds to the contribution of the $O7$-planes located at the four corners of a square of size $R_\perp$, describing the compactification of the two bulk dimensions, and $y_a$ denote the positions of the $D7$-branes. The function $F(q_\perp)$ normally
should multiply the terms in the sum of eq.~\eqref{AS} which was done for one $7$-brane source in the bulk at a position of distance $\sim\cal{O}(R_\perp)$ from the origin. The parameter $T$ in \eqref{AS} stands for the total tension of coincident $D7$-branes at this location, as well as of an orientifold if the position is chosen to be at one of the corners of the square away from the origin. The complete computation should include instead the function $F(q_\perp)$. Global tadpole cancellation implies that there are 16 $D7$-branes, cancelling the divergence at $q_\perp=0$ when summing over transverse momenta $q_\perp$. It is then easy to see that for generic positions of the branes away from the origin $y_a= c_a \pi R_\perp$ with $c_a<1$ but fixed as $R_\perp\to\infty$, the sum in eq.~\eqref{AS} approximated by the integral in eq.~\eqref{ASint} behaves logarithmically in $R_\perp$ with a coefficient $T$ given by the tension of a single $D7$-brane corresponding to the sum of the positive tensions of 16 $D7$-banes and the negative tensions of 15 $O7$-planes (since one of them is located at the origin). The only possibility to cancel the coefficient of the logarithm is to place one $D7$-brane at the origin, where 4d gravity is localised. When more $7$-branes are at the origin the coefficient of the logarithm changes sign. It is then clear that the logarithmic corrections we consider are generic to any globally consistent type IIB compactification with $D7$-branes.
We can now substitute both the one-loop correction $\xi$ and the three genus-3/2 corrections proportional to $\eta \log{R_\perp}$ in the induced action to obtain
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{(2\pi)^3} \int\limits_{M_{4} \times {{\cal X}_6}} e^{-2\phi} {\cal R}_{(10)} + \frac{4\zeta(2) \chi }{(2\pi)^3} \int\limits_{M_{4}} \left( 1 - \sum_{i = 1, 2, 3} e^{2\phi} T_i \log\frac{R_\perp^i}{w} \right) {\cal R}_{(4)}~,
\label{kinterms}
\end{equation}
where $i$ labels the three transverse directions for each one of the three $D7$-branes, and we restored the Euler number $\chi$ from $N$. We also fixed the normalisation factor ${\cal C_R}$ in the previous equations by the correct coefficient of the one-loop correction to the localised gravity kinetic term ${\cal R}_{(4)}$. From eqs.~(\ref{kinterms}) and~(\ref{IIB10Daction}) (for the smooth CY case), by comparing the 10d and 4d gravity kinetic terms, one obtains in the weak coupling limit:
\begin{equation}
\xi=-\frac{1}{4}\chi f(g_s)\quad;\quad f(g_s)=
\begin{cases}
\zeta(3)\simeq 1.2\quad {\rm for\ smooth\ CY}\\[3pt]
\frac{\pi^2}{3}g_s^2\quad\hskip 0.9cm {\rm for\ orbifolds}
\end{cases}
\label{cases}
\end{equation}
implying a negative Euler number $\chi<0$, in order to satisfy the condition~(\ref{signsxieta}).
We can now estimate the compactification scale $1/\mu$ introduced in eq.~(\ref{KahlerpotentialVexpansion}). Assuming for simplicity a universal $D7$ brane tension $T=e^{-\phi}T_0$, we get
\begin{equation}
\eta=-\frac{1}{2} g_sT_0\xi \quad;\quad \mu = \frac{1}{w} e^{\frac{\xi}{6 \eta}} = \sqrt{|\chi|} e^{-\frac{1}{3 g_sT_0}}\,,
\label{xiovereta}
\end{equation}
where the factor $|\chi| \sim N$ comes from the width $w$ in eq.~\eqref{width} entering as an effective ultraviolet cutoff in the argument of the logarithm (see eq.~\eqref{kinterms}).
Thus, by lowering the string coupling (or the brane tension $T_0$), the volume would go exponentially large as desired. As seen above, we also need $\xi>0$ which implies positive induced Planck mass, requiring a surplus of vectors from the twisted orbifold sectors~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr}.
Note that $T_0$ is an effective tension depending on the complex structure moduli (in principle fixed by $3$-form fluxes) and internal magnetic fields along the four compactified dimensions of the $D7$-brane world-volume.
We also notice that our result of the logarithmic correction is in principle valid for the case of a general CY compactification, where localised gravity kinetic terms arise at string tree-level due to $\alpha'$-corrections. Indeed, the computation in the degeneration limit we described above is expected to go through. The logarithmic correction has an extra factor of the string coupling $g_s$ relative to $\xi$, since it arises at the next order in the presence of a boundary/crosscap, and has the opposite sign for the same reason explained above. Thus, Equation~(\ref{xiovereta}) should hold in the general case, in the limit of large size of the volume transverse to the $7$-brane source.
One might also worry whether large back-reaction effects are induced from $7$-branes that are in principle taken into account within F-theory. However such effects are expected to be important at strong coupling or in the presence of scalar VEVs that take the theory away from the orientifold description. Since we do not consider such VEVs and our stabilisation mechanism works at weak coupling, we do not expect that back-reaction effects would be important. Moreover, the emergence of logarithmic corrections is based on infrared effects due to local tadpoles of (effectively) massless states that propagate in two dimensions emitted from localised vertices towards $7$-brane sources. The latter exist also in F-theory. One may wonder whether 4d localised gravity kinetic terms arise in F-theory, as well. Actually, these corrections are present in $N=2$ type IIB compactifications already in the absence of fluxes, orientifolds and $7$-branes, where arguments based on S-duality can be used to establish their presence also in strong coupling~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr}. It is therefore plausible that they are also present in F-theory, although we don't discuss them here since this work focuses on perturbative corrections.
\section{D-terms and de Sitter vacua}
In the previous section we established that the F-term potential~(\ref{VF}) has an AdS minimum~(\ref{Vmineta}) with respect to the total volume at a value which becomes exponentially large in the weak coupling limit. This vacuum breaks supersymmetry since for constant superpotential
the F-auxiliary component of the volume modulus superfield does not vanish, unlike KKLT~\cite{Kachru:2003aw} but similar to the large volume scenario (although for a different reason)~\cite{Balasubramanian:2005zx, Conlon:2005ki}.
In~\cite{Antoniadis:2018hqy}, we have shown that this minimum can be uplifted to positive energy when appropriate D-term contributions from the $D7$-branes are taken into account. Here, we will analyse again these contributions and make a quantitative argument for the existence of perturbative dS vacua at large volume and weak string coupling.
One way to obtain D-term contributions is by introducing magnetic fluxes of $U(1)$ gauge group factors along the world-volume directions of the $D7$-branes. The corresponding Fayet-Iliopoulos (FI) contribution is:
\begin{eqnarray}
V_{D_i} = \frac{d_i}{\tau_i} \left(\frac{\partial K}{\partial_{\tau_i}}\right)^2 \,=\,
\frac{d_i}{\tau_i^3} + {\cal O}(\eta_j)\,,
\label{VD-termlimit}
\end{eqnarray}
where $i$ denotes a $D7$-brane stack, $\tau_i$ is the corresponding world-volume modulus and
the constant $d_i$ is positive and proportional to the magnetic flux.
The lowest order approximation on the right hand side of the equation above is valid in the large volume expansion of the K\"ahler potential (\ref{KahlerpotentialVexpansion}), i.e., when ${\cal V} \gg \sum_j|\eta_j|\ln ({\tau_j^{3/2}}\mu^6)$.
Considering now three such orthogonal sets of magnetised $D7$-branes, one obtains the total scalar potential as a sum of the F-term~(\ref{VF})
and all the D-term contributions~(\ref{VD-termlimit}):
\begin{equation}
\label{Vtotal}
V_{tot} = \frac{3\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2}{\mathcal{V}^3} \left(\textrm{ln} (\mathcal{V}\mu^6) - 4\right) + \frac{d_1}{\tau_1^3} + \frac{d_2}{\tau_2^3} + \frac{d_3 \tau_1^3 \tau_2^3}{\mathcal{V}^6}\,,
\end{equation}
where we used ${\cal V}=(\tau_1\tau_2\tau_3)^{1/2}$ and we considered for simplicity the case of equal $\eta_i\equiv\eta$, which is not a necessary condition for a global minimum once D-terms are included for all three mutually orthogonal $D7$-brane stacks~\cite{Antoniadis:2018hqy}.
In deriving the F-term contribution to the scalar potential, special care is needed for the dilaton dependence of the K\"ahler potential that enters non-trivially together with the volume and the other K\"ahler moduli which, in type IIB, all descend from ${\cal N}=2$ hypermultiplets. This leads to a mixing in the K\"ahler metric between K\"ahler moduli and the dilaton, bringing an ambiguity in the expression of the scalar potential depending on whether one treats the dilaton as constant before or after applying the supergravity formula~\cite{Becker:2002nn}. However, since the mixing term is either proportional to $\xi$ or $\eta$, the leading order in the large volume expansion used in eq.~\eqref{Vtotal} is not affected from this ambiguity.
Minimising the scalar potential \eqref{Vtotal} with respect to $\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$, one fixes the ratios:
\begin{equation}
\frac{\tau_i}{\tau_j}=\left(\frac{d_i}{d_j}\right)^{1/3}~,
\end{equation}
and the scalar potential becomes:
\begin{equation}
V_{tot} = \frac{3\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2}{\mathcal{V}^3} \left(\textrm{ln} (\mathcal{V}\mu^6) - 4\right) + 3\frac{d}{{\cal V}^2}\quad;\quad
d=(d_1d_2d_3)^{1/3}\,.
\end{equation}
Minimising now with respect to the volume, one gets:
\begin{equation}
\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2 (13 - 3 \textrm{ln} (\mathcal{V}\mu^6)) = 2d\, \mathcal{V}\,.
\label{minimizationofV}
\end{equation}
Following the steps of the analysis of Ref.~\cite{Antoniadis:2018hqy}, one finds that the potential $V_{tot}$ has a dS minimum provided the following inequality is satisfied:
\begin{equation}
-0.007242 < \frac{d}{\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2\mu^6}\equiv\varrho < -0.006738\,.
\label{inequalitiesDS}
\end{equation}
The inequality on the left implies that eq.~(\ref{minimizationofV}) has two solutions with the smaller one being a minimum and the larger one a maximum, so that the potential vanishes asymptotically from positive values. The inequality on the right implies that the minimum has positive energy, see Fig.\ref{VeffdS}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{VeffdS_AdS}
\caption{
\footnotesize
{Plot of $V_{\rm eff}$ vs ${\cal V}$ (in arbitrary units) for three values of the parameter $\varrho=\frac{d}{\eta \mu^6 {\cal W}_0^2}$.
The lower curve corresponds to AdS vacuum.
At large ${\cal V}$, $V_{\rm eff}$ vanishes asymptotically after passing from a maximum.} }
\label{VeffdS}
\end{figure}
Within this range, the value of the volume at the minimum
is approximately given by:
\begin{equation}
\textrm{ln} (\mu^6\mathcal{V}_{min}) \simeq 5~,
\label{V0min}
\end{equation}
and the potential at the minimum reads
\begin{equation}
V_{tot}^{min} = \frac{3 \eta \mathcal{W}_0^2}{\mathcal{V}_{min}^3} + \frac{3 d}{\mathcal{V}_{min}^2} > 0\,.
\end{equation}
Let us now examine what conditions must be imposed on the parameter space in order to satisfy the inequality (\ref{inequalitiesDS}) at weak string coupling and large volume. We have seen already from eq.~(\ref{xiovereta}) that in the limit $g_s\to 0$, $\mu$ becomes exponentially suppressed and $\mathcal{V}_{min}$ becomes exponentially large. This makes the condition (\ref{inequalitiesDS}) difficult to satisfy, unless $d/(\eta\mathcal{W}_0^2\mu^6)$ also vanishes, compensating the vanishing of $\mu$.
Note that $d$ is proportional to the square of the $U(1)$ gauge coupling, and thus to $g_s$, as well as to the magnetic flux. On the other hand, the brane tension $T_0$ is also proportional to the magnetic flux. It follows from the expression~(\ref{xiovereta}) of $\eta$, that the ratio $\varrho$ defined in
(\ref{inequalitiesDS}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\varrho=\frac{d}{\eta \mathcal{W}_0^2\mu^6}\propto -\frac{1}{\xi\mathcal{W}_0^2\mu^6}\, .
\end{equation}
Note that ${\cal W}_0$ has been redefined appropriately to be invariant under K\"ahler transformations, taking into account various dilaton dependent and constant factors. In particular, ${\cal W}_0^2$ contains an implicit proportionality factor of $g_s^{-1/2}$~\cite{Becker:2002nn}.
The parameter $\xi$ is given in eq.~(\ref{cases}) and is of order $g_s^2$ for orbifolds and $g_s$-independent for smooth CY manifolds, but in both cases is proportional to the Euler number $\chi$. Thus, in order to satisfy (\ref{inequalitiesDS}) at weak coupling, one has to consider either large $\chi$ or large $\mathcal{W}_0$:
\begin{equation}
|\chi| \mathcal{W}_0^2\mu^6 \simeq 100\, .
\label{cond}
\end{equation}
Large $\chi$ enhances the strength of the localised 4d gravity kinetic term, while large $\mathcal{W}_0$ implies in general large quantised flux.
Both are in principle easy to satisfy.
As an illustration, in Fig.\ref{VeffdS}, the potential is plotted for $\eta \approx -0.4$, $\varrho\mu^6 \approx 7.5\times 10^{-5}$ and three different values of $\varrho$ larger than the lower bound of eq.~(\ref{inequalitiesDS}), showing how the minimum passes from negative to positive energy values.
One can also check the validity of the approximation (\ref{VD-termlimit}), using (\ref{V0min}) and (\ref{cond}):
\begin{equation}
{\cal V} \gg |\eta|\ln ({\cal V}\mu^6)\,\, \Leftrightarrow\,\, \frac{e^5}{\mu^6} \gg 5|\eta| \, ,
\end{equation}
implying $e^5 \gg 50 g_sT_0/\mathcal{W}_0^2$ that can be easily satisfied for weak coupling and large $\mathcal{W}_0$.
\section{Conclusions}
Constructing de Sitter vacua within the framework of the effective supergravity of string compactifications is one of the most challenging tasks.
As it is well known since long time ago, quantum corrections play a pivotal role in accomplishing this goal. In the
present work we have taken a step forward, by computing higher loop corrections to the Planck mass (and thus to the K\"ahler potential) in a type IIB
background, assuming a geometric configuration consisting of three intersecting $D7$-branes. Our computations rely
on previous studies where the implications of $R^4$ terms of the ten-dimensional action play an important role.
As shown in ~\cite{Antoniadis:2002tr}, in particular, compactifying on a CY manifold, a localised Einstein-Hilbert term
is generated in four dimensions (in the non-compact limit) which induces a universal correction to the Planck mass multiplied by
a constant factor proportional to the Euler characteristic $\chi$.
Furthermore, by studying loop corrections, we find that new non-vanishing contributions are induced by the emission of local tadpoles of closed strings from
the localised gravity vertices, which exhibit a
logarithmic dependence on the large co-dimension two volume transverse to each distant $7$-brane probe.
Our computation shows that these corrections, together with the usual D-term contributions from the $D7$-branes world-volume, suffice to consolidate a de Sitter vacuum in type IIB constructions
based on geometric configurations of the aforementioned type.
Recently, there have been several arguments casting doubts on the validity of constructing de Sitter vacua using 4d effective supergravity description starting from the no-scale structure, for example in \cite{Sethi:2017phn, Danielsson:2018ztv}, which led to the swampland dS conjecture~\cite{Obied:2018sgi}. Most arguments are related to the validity of the non-perturbative effects, the addition of the anti-$D3$ branes and the
accuracy of quantum corrections. In this work, only perturbative corrections are invoked based on the structure of the localised 4d Einstein Hilbert term, which is universal and dependent only on the internal topology. The logarithmic correction is also
a generic consequence of
infrared divergences due to local tadpoles of effectively massless closed strings emitted by the localised vertices and propagating in a two-dimensional bulk. Its effect in the minimisation of the scalar potential is very important for invalidating the assumptions of the previous arguments, allowing for the presence of locally stable dS vacua in accordance with large volume and weak string coupling, thus providing an explicit counter example to the dS swampland conjecture.
It is important to emphasise that these corrections exist only in four dimensions thanks to the presence of the induced localised Einstein-Hilbert term. Thus, based on this observation, one can also argue that this mechanism could be used to explain why the Universe is four-dimensional from a new emergent point of view which differs from previous arguments, see for instance~\cite{Brandenberger:1988aj}. More precisely, one starts from the ten-dimensional non-compact limit while each $D7$ brane can compactify the two dimensions transverse to it. However, the stabilisation mechanism requires a localised source for the graviton kinetic terms which only exists in four dimensions.
This generates local tadpoles of massless closed strings emitted to at most three mutually orthogonal sets of $D7$ branes, which then compactify all six-dimensions. The three intersecting $D7$ branes configuration is also the basic ingredient of type IIB and F-theory models providing an interesting framework for realising the Standard Model of particle physics, see for instance~\cite{Vafa:1996xn, Beasley:2008dc}.
\section*{Acknowledgements} Y.C. would like to thank Karim Benakli, Peng Cheng, Michele Cicoli, Joseph Conlon, Laura Covi, Jean-Pierre Derendinger, Xin Gao, Mark Goodsell,
Mariana Gra\~na, Michael Haack, Tailin Li, Ruben Minasian, Fernando Quevedo, Pramod Shukla and Alexander Westphal for useful discussions. G.K.L. would like to thank the Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics of the University of Bern, and the LPTHE of Sorbonne University for hospitality during various stages of this work. This work was supported in part by the Labex ``Institut Lagrange de Paris'', in part by the Swiss National Science Foundation, in part by a CNRS PICS grant, and in part by the Erasmus exchange program.
|
\section{Introduction and methodology}
\label{sec:1}
Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) \citep{goodfellow2014generative} are gaining popularity in the deep learning industry, particularly in computer vision by generating photo-realistic images (\cite{johnson2016super}; \cite{zhu2018cyclegan}; \cite{karras2018progressivegan}). GAN is a generative model composed of a generator and a discriminator, each parametrized by a separate neural network. The generator is trained to map a latent vector into an image, while the discriminator is trained to distinguish the real (training) images from those that have been generated by the generator. The goal of GANs is to train both the generator and the discriminator such that the generator can create images that the discriminator cannot tell the difference. Both the generator and the discriminator are considered as two players that play a minimax game in an adversarial fashion with the following loss function:
\begin{equation}
L =\min_{G} \max_{D}V(D, G)=\mathbb{E}_{\mathbf{x} \sim p_{data}} [\log D(\mathbf{x})] + \mathbb{E}_{\mathbf{z} \sim p_{noise}} [\log (1 - D(G(\mathbf{z})))]
\label{eq:1}
\end{equation}
where $V(D, G)$ represents the reward (a.k.a., loss) for the discriminator that aims to maximize its value by forcing $D(\mathbf{x})$ to approach 1 and $D(G(\mathbf{z}))$ being as close as 0 while the generator tends to minimize its loss by boosting $D(G(\mathbf{z}))$ to be 1. See Figure~\ref{fig:gandiagram} for a schematic illustration of the GANs.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-gandiagram.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Schematic diagram showing the structure of GANs that consists of two networks: one generator and another for discriminator. The generator generates fake images to fool the discriminator while the discriminator aims to distinguish the real images from the training data from the fake ones by the generator.}
\label{fig:gandiagram}
\end{figure}
A more efficient and practical structure of GANs was proposed by Radford et al \citep{radford2015unsupervised}, which introduced deep convolutional generative adversarial networks (DCGAN) to learn a hierarchy of representations from object parts to scenes in both the generator and discriminator. This DCGAN structure has become a standard implementation of GANs in general image representations and image generations.
The emerging application areas of GANs include physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology, health care, geology, arts and others. Despite these promising applications, training GANs is notoriously difficult because of a well-known phenomenon called “mode collapse” that the generator produces very limited varieties of samples, causing either non-converged or vanishing gradients in the process of GAN training. The biggest disadvantage resulted from the mode collapse is the biased sampling in GANs that tends to compromise the use of GAN generated samples to make predictions when the uncertainty needs to be considered and addressed in an objective manner. This is particularly true when applying GANs to model geology.
Another disadvantage of GAN is that the latent vector used for image generation is highly entangled, i.e., one cannot know if each separate element in the latent vector could have any semantic meaning. Therefore, the latent vector lacks the ability to interpret the salient attributes of the data, like fluvial, deltaic, etc., in our application of geological facies modeling.
The pathological mode collapse phenomenon in the original GAN approach was later discussed in a publication by Chen et al. \citep{chen2016infogan} and was explained because of the entangled information embedded in the latent space. They proposed an extension to the original GANs such that it can learn disentangled representation in a completely unsupervised or semi-supervised manner. The authors introduced additional latent codes $\mathbf{c}$ on top of a simple continuous input noise vector $\mathbf{z}$ as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:gandiagram} to impose selective representations in a disentangled manner to overcome the limitation in the generator since it creates samples in a highly entangled way due to the lack of the correspondence between the individual dimensions of $\mathbf{z}$ and the semantic features of the data.
This approach was named as InfoGAN \citep{chen2016infogan} and it can generate samples with the variety in the training data by maximizing the discerning capability of each code, or label to its associated images using the mutual information concept in information theory. The demonstrative examples include the disentangling of the writing styles from digit shapes on the MNIST dataset, pose from lighting of 3D rendered images and background digits from the central digit on the SVHN dataset.
Figure~\ref{fig:infogandiagram} illustrates the InfoGAN structure that is like GAN structure in Figure~\ref{fig:gandiagram} except for the added latent codes $\mathbf{c}$ in the input layer and an extra classifier in the output layer of the network that provides the categorical probability $p(\mathbf{c}|\mathbf{x})$ given the input $\mathbf{x}$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-infogandiagram.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Schematic diagram of InfoGAN structure.}
\label{fig:infogandiagram}
\end{figure}
The InfoGAN loss is defined as the following:
\begin{equation}
V_{InfoGAN}(D, G)=\mathbb{E}_{\mathbf{x} \sim p_{data}} [\log D(\mathbf{x})] + \mathbb{E}_{\mathbf{z} \sim p_{G}} [\log (1 - D(G(\mathbf{z})))] - \lambda I(\mathbf{c}; G(\mathbf{z}, \mathbf{c}))
\label{eq:2}
\end{equation}
In addition to InfoGAN, another improvement on the training stability and eliminating the mode collapse of the original GAN was presented by Arjovsky et al. \citep{arjovsky2017wgan}. This paper introduced a new approach, named Wasserstein GAN (WGAN) with gradient penalty, to stabilize the GAN training. WGAN uses an earth-mover (Wasserstein) distance to achieve a much smoother loss function that reduces the possibility of GANs getting stuck in local minimums, which is highly likely in the original GAN and easily causes vanishing gradients for training. The Wasserstein distance is defined as:
\begin{equation}
W(P_{data}, P_{G})=\inf_{\gamma \sim \Pi (P_{data}, P_{G})}\mathbb{E}_{(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{y}) \sim \gamma} [\| \mathbf{x}-\mathbf{y} \|]=\sup_{{\| f \|}_{L}} \mathbb{E}_{\mathbf{x} \sim p_{data}}[f_{\mathbf{w}}(\mathbf{x})] - \mathbb{E}_{\mathbf{x} \sim p_{G}}[f(\mathbf{x})]
\label{eq:3}
\end{equation}
where the function $W(P_{data}, P_{G})$ is the earth-mover distance that is formally defined as the minimum cost of transporting mass in order to transform the real data distribution $P_{data}$ to the generated data distribution $P_{G}$, and $f$ is an arbitrary function defined in the real field. In our context, $f_{\mathbf{w}}$ is the discriminator neural network with weights $\mathbf{w}$.
On top of Wasserstein distance, gradient penalty is applied to further boost the training stability of GANs, which penalizes the gradient whose norm is away from one by the following updated loss function (\cite{gulrajani2017gp}; \cite{wei2018gp}):
\begin{equation}
L_{(WGAN-GP)}W(P_{data}, P_{G})=-W(p_{data}, p_{G}) + \lambda \mathbb{E}_{x \sim P_{data}}(\| {\nabla}{f_{w}(\mathbf{x})} \| - 1)^2
\label{eq:4}
\end{equation}
The finalized approach that combines InfoGAN and WGAN with gradient penalty is denoted as Info-WGAN-GP and is referred as Info-WGAN for brevity in this paper.
Recently, researchers started applying the original GANs to geology and reservoir engineering. Specifically, Chan and Elsheikh \citep{chan2017parameterizing} proposed parameterizing a geological model using GANs. GANs have also been proposed to reconstruct porous medium from CT-scan rock samples \citep{mosser2017ctscan}. The use of GANs in geostatistical inversion was discussed by Laloy et al. \citep{laloy2017ganinversion}.
The paper by Dupont et al. \citep{dupont2018gangeomodeling} was the first publication using GANs to generate geological models at the reservoir scale constrained to well data. A library of reservoir-scale 2D models was generated by object-based modeling (abbreviated as OBM) (\cite{holden1998obm}; \cite{skorstad1999obm}) as training images that exhibit and represent a wide variation of depositional facies patterns. A semantic inpainting scheme (\cite{li2017inpainting}, \cite{pathak2016inpainting}, \cite{yeh2016inpainting}) was used to generate conditional models by GANs that fully honor well data.
Later, an extension of the work by Dupont et al. to 3D was presented by Zhang et al. \citep{zhang2019gan3dmodeling}. It has been demonstrated that the 3D GANs outperforms the advanced geostatistical reservoir modeling approaches such as multi-point statistics (MPS) in generating more geologically realistic facies models constrained by well data, particularly when the subsurface geology contains non-stationary and heterogeneous geological sedimentary patterns such as progradational and aggradational trend, which is a ubiquitous phenomenon in most reservoirs.
Despite the promising applications of GANs in geological modeling, we have observed several key issues that would prevent its successful use in building faithful reservoir facies models that are necessary for the objective uncertainty evaluation and optimal decision-making in exploration and field developments in the oil industry. The root cause of these issues is the frequent mode collapse in the training of the original GAN method, leading to severely biased samples by the generator and the lack of diversity in the resulting models, which further compromise the usefulness of the facies models by GANs.
This paper aims to apply the Info-WGAN as a novel tool in modeling geology by eliminating pathological mode collapse phenomenon in the original GAN method to provide efficient solutions in building geological facies models. The resulting facies models by Info-WGAN have the exact diversity and equal probability inherited from the training dataset and provide interpretable attributes as a few disentangled elements in the latent variable space, to allow generating desireble geological facies models specified by the user. We believe that our novel workflow is beneficial not only in geology but also in other domains when applying GANs for modeling the respective phenomena.
\section{Generating equal probable realizations of the geology using Info-WGAN}
Even though GANs can generate different geological facies models by learning the representation of the sedimentary facies associations from the training images, the samples that are created by GAN generator could be highly biased. This section will demonstrate how we resolve this major limitation in GANs using Info-WGAN.
\label{sec:2}
\subsection{Case 1: binary fluvial facies}
Figure~\ref{fig:ganbias} shows some training examples from 15000 binary fluvial training images (left-most on the top of the figure with channel sand: black, and shale background: white).
The main flow direction of the channels is from north to south with varying channel width, sinuosity and amplitudes. The channels are distributed evenly in space, i.e. they can happen anywhere in the 2D area that confines the channels in the training images. This can be verified by an e-type map (estimation type) of the training images. The e-type map is computed as an estimation of the channel sand probability in space by performing pixel-wise averaging of all channel images with channel sand being assigned to a value 1 and 0 for the background.
The e-type map in the middle of the top of Figure~\ref{fig:ganbias} is almost a flat (constant) map, which indicates the channels from the training dataset are evenly spaced and pixels in all the training images are considered as equal probable, meaning that the channels can be at any position with equal probability. This is also a basic assumption required by traditional geostatistical simulations using Monte Carlo sampling \citep{deutsch1998gslib}. The approximately constant e-type value is around the mean value of the channel sand proportion from 15000 training images, which can be manifested by a tight histogram of all the e-type pixel values with the mean value being equal to the sand proportion in each of the training images (=0.25 in this case study).
However, if the original GAN method is used, the trained generator becomes highly biased due to the mode collapse even though the samples reproduce the geometry of the channels from the training dataset reasonably (most-left at the bottom of Figure~\ref{fig:ganbias}). In contrast to the e-type of the channel training images that is constant and flat, the e-type of the generated samples by GANs (middle at the bottom of Figure~\ref{fig:ganbias}) shows that channel sand happens more likely in some area than others, indicating a highly biased learning of GANs. This also suggests that GANs fails to capture the true data distribution during the training, which is manifested in the histogram of e-type with a wide spread of pixel values from 0 to 0.6 (most-right at the bottom of Figure~\ref{fig:ganbias}).
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{Fig-ganbias.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Diversity and equal probability of sand distribution in the training data vs. the biased sampling from the conventional GANs}
\label{fig:ganbias}
\end{figure}
This biased sampling is one big limitation when using GANs for geological modeling because all samples cannot be claimed as truly realistic realizations since they are not equally probable like we normally use in geostatistical simulation. Consequently, all the samples (static facies models) cannot be used for further uncertainty evaluation and propagation when the static models are fed into flow simulations. Moreover, the e-type of such samples becomes less meaningful since their distribution is different from that of the training dataset, and therefore the e-type cannot be treated to be sand probability map anymore.
To overcome this limitation, we applied Info-WGAN to generate facies samples. The same set of 15000 fluvial training dataset were used to train the model. We used one dummy categorical latent code that indicates all the channels to be the same type such that the infomation maximization component is temporarily disabled and only the Wasserstein distance and gradient penalty are utilized. Figure~\ref{fig:infogan100samplesbinaryfluvial} shows 100 samples by Info-WGAN that suggests reasonable reproduction of the geometry of fluvial deposits.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-infogan100samplesbinaryfluvial.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Binary facies samples by Info-WGAN reproduces the channel geometry reasonably}
\label{fig:infogan100samplesbinaryfluvial}
\end{figure}
Thanks to the Wasserstein distance and the gradient penalty used in the model, further verification on the e-type of 15000 samples suggests that Info-WGAN can generate diverse and equal probable realizations of channels by learning the true distribution of the training dataset, a striking contrast to the original GANs. This is manifested in the e-type map (most-left at the bottom of Figure~\ref{fig:etypeinfoganbinaryfluvial}) with the corresponding tight histogram of the pixel values, which are close to the statistics from the training dataset (the top of Figure~\ref{fig:etypeinfoganbinaryfluvial}). The e-type map by the InfoGAN is very close to that from the training images except for a small artifact area (bright spot) at the lower-left corner.
That Info-WGAN is much more superior than the original GANs in creating diverse as well as equal probable samples can be explained by its use of Wasserstein distance and gradient penalty to stabilize the GAN training to avoid mode collapse.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-etypeinfoganbinaryfluvial.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Diversity and equal probable sand distribution in the training dataset (top) and they are reasonably reproduced by Info-WGAN (bottom)}
\label{fig:etypeinfoganbinaryfluvial}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case 2: mixed 2 types of fluvial and deltaic systems}
In this case study, we move further to test the disentangling capability of Info-WGAN by mixing fluvial and deltaic channel training images to see whether Info-WGAN is capable to reproduce both types with equal probable realizations by reproducing the correct sand statistics from the training dataset.
Figure~\ref{fig:training100samplesfluvialplusdeltaic} shows 100 of the total 15000 training images that are generated by OBM, which is a mix of two types depositional environments: fluvial (type-I) and deltaic (type-II). The fluvial channels mainly follow the north-south direction while the deltaic system starts form a point source at the middle of the upper border of the region and then spreads out to the south direction. This dataset creates challenges for the original GANs to learn the diversity and generate two types of systems due to the mode collapse limitation.
We used the Info-WGAN in a novel way by introducing two bits of categorical codes $\mathbf{c}$: $\mathbf{c}$ = [0, 1] for the fluvial deposits and $\mathbf{c}$ = [1, 0] for the deltaic deposits. This can be considered as the use of Info-WGAN in supervised fashion; however, the labels assigned to images by sedimentary types are easy to provide. After training Info-WGAN, the generator can create both systems with the correct labels. Figure~\ref{fig:infogan100samplesfluvialplusdeltaic} shows 100 samples by Info-WGAN that gives a satisfactory mix of the fluvial and deltaic deposits, a striking contrast with the original GANs that can generate either only the fluvial or deltaic deposits but not both due to the use of a single noisy vector in the latent space. Because of maximizing the mutual information carried out by the two additional categorical codes, Info-WGAN can generate a mix of the two different types of environments through disentangling capability without encountering the mode collapse issue that normally happens in the original GANs. Meanwhile, it is worth noting that the use of both Wasserstein distance and gradient penalty also contribute to the training stability of Info-WGAN.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-training100samplesfluvialplusdeltaic.png}
\end{center}
\caption{100 of the total 15000 training images that contains mixed two types of deposits: one is fluvial (10000) and another
for deltaic (5000) that is enclosed by dashed red squares}
\label{fig:training100samplesfluvialplusdeltaic}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-infogan100samplesfluvialplusdeltaic.png}
\end{center}
\caption{100 samples by the Info-WGAN that reproduce the mix of two types of deposits reasonable with correct labels}
\label{fig:infogan100samplesfluvialplusdeltaic}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-etypeinfoganbinaryfluvialplusdeltaic.png}
\end{center}
\caption{E-type of the samples (bottom) demonstrates the reasonable production of the two types of deposits by Info-WGAN in terms of the diversity and statistics}
\label{fig:etypeinfoganbinaryfluvialplusdeltaic}
\end{figure}
The e-type map of the sand facies and its statistics by pixels from 15000 samples by Info-WGAN are similar to those from the training images, which show a slightly darker regions at the top of the area because of the more concentrated channel sand in the deltaic system (see Figure~\ref{fig:etypeinfoganbinaryfluvialplusdeltaic}). This test case suggests that Info-WGAN can generate the mix of two types of sedimentary systems with equal probable realizations by reproducing the correct sand statistics from the training dataset.
\subsection{Case 3: deltaic system with 4 facies}
This case study demonstrates that the Info-WGAN can generate equal probable realizations by reproducing the correct statistics for each facies when there are multiple ($>2$) facies in the sedimentary system.
Figure~\ref{fig:infogan25trainingdeltic4facies} shows 25 of total 10000 deltaic training images with 4 facies: channel, levee, splay and shale background. The facies association can be clearly observed by the following relationships: the channel sand (yellow) is bounded by the levee (red) that attaches the splay (blue), which is embedded in the shale background (transparent).
Info-WGAN is used with one constant categorical code to train the both generator and discriminator networks and then the trained generator is used to produce samples. Figure~\ref{fig:infogan25samplesdeltic4facies} shows 25 samples generated by the Info-WGAN that demonstrate reasonable reproduction of the facies geometric relationships, connectivity and their association.
Further testing of the e-type maps foe each individual facies is displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:etypeinfogandeltaic4facies}. When computing the e-type for one specified sedimentary facies, an indicator transformation is applied, i.e. , the corresponding studied facies is indicated as 1 and others as 0. The e-type map of a specified facies is then created by pixel-wise averaging of indicator maps. In Figure~\ref{fig:etypeinfogandeltaic4facies}, we can observe that the e-type maps and their statistics for all the facies from the training images are reproduced quite well by the generator of the Info-WGAN.
\newpage
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Fig-infogan25trainingdeltic4facies.png}
\end{center}
\caption{25 of 10000 deltaic training images with 4 facies (channel: yellow, levee: red, splay: blue, shale: transparent)}
\label{fig:infogan25trainingdeltic4facies}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Fig-infogan25samplesdeltic4facies.png}
\end{center}
\caption{25 deltaic samples by Info-WGAN with 4 facies that show reasonable reproduction of facies associations}
\label{fig:infogan25samplesdeltic4facies}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-etypeinfogandeltaic4facies.png}
\end{center}
\caption{The e-type maps and their histogram statistics for each of the 4 facies in the training images (top) are well reproduced by the samples generated by Info-WGAN (bottom). In each histogram, the x-axis has the rane [0, 1] and the y-axis is the freqency.}
\label{fig:etypeinfogandeltaic4facies}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case 4: mixed 3 types of systems with different number of facies}
This case study pushes the envelope to test the boundaries of the applicability of Info-WGAN. We merged all three types of sedimentary systems discussed above into one rich training dataset that contains 5000 binary fluvial images, 5000 binary deltaic images (called deltaic-I) and 5000 additional deltaic images with 4 facies (called deltaic-II). The facies coding is consistent in the mixed training images as 1 for channel, 2 for levee, 4 for splay and 0 for the background shale.
Info-WGAN with 3 latent categorical codes (labels) are used in this case study, i.e., $\mathbf{c}$=[1, 0, 0], [0, 1, 0] and [0, 0, 1]. Figure~\ref{fig:infogan100mixsamplesof3types} shows 100 samples by the generator of the Info-WAN. It demonstrates that Info-WGAN can satisfactorily generate the mixed types of sedimentary systems with the correctly predicted labels and the ratio of each type from the training dataset (1/3 each in this case study) even though the training images have different number of facies.
Figure~\ref{fig:codedFaciesbyInfoGAN} in grayscale image shows that InfoGAN correctly generates 3 types of sedimentary systems by disentangling of the facies patterns in the latent space using maximizing infomation of 3 latent categorical codes.
This confirms the advantages of Info-WGAN as a useful tool in generating diverse samples from the training dataset by producing equal probable realizations of facies models with the correct statistics.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.925\textwidth]{Fig-infogan100mixsamplesof3types.png}
\end{center}
\caption{100 samples by Info-WGAN show that Info-WGAN can generate a mix of depositional systems (fluvial, deltaic-I, deltaic-II) even though they have different number of facies}
\label{fig:infogan100mixsamplesof3types}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.925\textwidth]{Fig-codedFaciesbyInfoGAN.png}
\end{center}
\caption{The 3 types of sedimentary facies are generated by InfoGAN through disentanglement in the latent space with specified codes: binary channel system (top), binary deltic system (middle), deltic with 4 facies (bottom)}
\label{fig:codedFaciesbyInfoGAN}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Validation on the accuracy of the predicted labels}
Another advantage of Info-WGAN over the original GANs lies in its prediction capability on the new images (facies models) since there is also a classifier $p(\mathbf{c}|\mathbf{x})$ as another output of the Info-WGAN in addition to the discriminator that tells only the probability of the generated images being real or fake. This has been illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:infogandiagram} for the InfoGAN strcuture.
After the training of info-WGAN for the test dataset as discussed in the above section using 15000 mixed types of sedimentary systems with each type containing 5000 training images, we used additional 7000 testing images (fluvial: 2000, deltaic-I: 2000, deltaic-II: 3000), which were generated by OBM using the same statistics as those used for the training image creation, to test how good the generator of the info-WGAN can predict the labels.
Table~\ref{tbl:validationpredictionaccuracy} shows the classification accuracy matrix that tells the info-WGAN predicts the labels of the 7000 testing images with the accuracy of 99.93\% and only two fluvial images and two deltaic-I images were misclassified and all the 3000 deltaic-II images with 4 facies are correctly classified. If the training images with partial labels are used such as in the semi-supervised training, the classification accuracy will decrease.
\begin{table}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Tab-validationpredictionaccuracy.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Test the prediction accuracy of the labels on 7000 images that contain 2000 images for fluvial and celtaic-I repsectively and 3000 deltaic-II}
\label{tbl:validationpredictionaccuracy}
\end{table}
\section{Conditioning the samples generated by Info-WGAN to well measurements}
\label{sec:3}
Generating geological facies models using GANs and constraining them by the well interpretations have been introduced in the paper by Dupont et al. \citep{dupont2018gangeomodeling}. The well data conditioning is done using semantic inpainting (\cite{yeh2016inpainting}; \cite{li2017inpainting}) after the training of GANs through the optimization of noisy $\mathbf{z}$-vector in the latent space by gradient descent with Adam optimization scheme.
However, because of the mode collapse and the resulting biased sampling in the original GANs, performing data conditioning tends to be very challenging once well data locations become denser. In contrast, the Info-WGAN makes it much easier to honor dense well locations thanks to the diversity and equal probability of the samples that the Info-WGAN generated. Moreover, we have developed a novel scheme to perform the optimization of $\mathbf{z}$-vector using stochastic gradient descent by normalizing the gradient vector into a unit vector, which is a practical and useful extension of the method by Zhang et al. \citep{zhang2018hgd} about normalized direction-preserving Adam algorithm.
Our new stochastic gradient descent scheme with normalized gradient descent is written as the following:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{v}_{t}=\beta\mathbf{v}_{(t-1)} + r\mathbf{g}_{t}
\label{eq:5}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{z}_{t} = \mathbf{z}_{(t-1)} - \mathbf{v}_{t}
\label{eq:6}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{v}$ is an updated variable, $\mathbf{z}$ is the noise vector in the latent space, $r$ is the learning rate with a default value 0.006, $\mathbf{g}_{t}$ is the normalized gradient, $\beta$ is the moment factor with default value 0.999, and $t$ is the time step in the iteration process of the optimization.
To perform well data conditioning, the loss function in the optimization through error propagation over the latent noise $\mathbf{z}$-vector is designed to have two components: perceptual loss and contextual loss. While the perceptual loss penalizes unrealistic images, the contextual loss penalizes the mismatch between the generated samples and the interpreted facies at well locations \citep{dupont2018gangeomodeling} .
The followings will show tested cases for the well data conditioning by Info-WGAN with the new optimization scheme. It is worth noting that the data conditioning only uses the generator part of the trained Info-WGAN networks. That means, once the Info-WGAN has been trained for a training dataset, the data conditioning process can be done afterwards separately without the need to retraining the networks and this makes the generation of conditional samples by GANs very efficient, which is normally completed in seconds for one realization.
Furthermore, because of the Wasserstein distance along with the GP technique that mitigates the problem of mode collapse, it is much easier to train Info-WGANs than the original GANs. The conditioning iteration ceases once the contextual loss is below an error threshold.
\subsection{Case 1: well data conditioning for binary fluvial facies}
Figures~\ref{fig:infoganconditional30wellsbinary} and~\ref{fig:infoganconditional300wellsbinary} display conditional samples using the pre-trained Info-WGAN that honor 30 wells, 100 wells and 300 wells respectively. See Figure~\ref{fig:ganbias} for some of the 15000 binary fluvial training images (top-left). All the samples are constrained by the same set of well data and their differences indicate the uncertainty among the facies models at areas that are away from the known well locations.
In Figure~\ref{fig:infoganconditional30wellsbinary}, the top-right map is the conditional e-type map constrained by the 30 well locations (top-left), which is computed by averaging 100 conditional samples generated by the Info-WGAN. This map provides the sand probability after knowing the well interpretation at 30 locations and it also suggests that there is less uncertainty in the area closer to well locations and channel patterns can be oberved to some extent between wells that was learnt by the generator of GANs.
This case study demonstrates the flexibilty and capability of Info-WGAN in generating geological facies models constrained by dense well data.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-infoganconditional30wellsbinary.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Three conditional samples honoring 30 wells (left-most) by Info-WGAN and the e-type map (right-most) of 100 conditional samples; green dots are channel sand and red for shale background.}
\label{fig:infoganconditional30wellsbinary}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{Fig-infoganconditional100wellsbinary.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Three conditional samples honoring 100 wells (left-most) by Info-WGAN}
\label{fig:infoganconditional100wellsbinary}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{Fig-infoganconditional300wellsbinary.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Three conditional samples honoring 300 wells (left-most) by Info-WGAN}
\label{fig:infoganconditional300wellsbinary}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case 2: data conditioning for a mix of binary fluvial and deltaic systems}
Figure~\ref{fig:infoganconditional30fluvialplusdeltaicbinary} demonstrates the capability of Info-WGAN in generating conditional samples when the training dataset contains mixed depositional environments such as a mix of binary fluvial and deltaic systems. The samples honor 30 wells and contain both the fluvial and deltaic deposits with the correctly predicted labels and the correct mixing ratio of the fluvial and deltaic deposits.
This is useful, in particular for geological modeling, when the geologic senarios are uncertain and the users would like to evaluate the uncerntainty involved the variation of sedimentary facies types under the given well data constraints.
\begin{figure} [H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{Fig-infoganconditional30fluvialplusdeltaicbinary.png}
\end{center}
\caption{30 well data locations (top-left) and 8 conditional samples by Info-WGAN. 6 of the 8 samples are fluvial deposits and the rest of 2 samples are deltaic systems and all of them honor the same set of well data}
\label{fig:infoganconditional30fluvialplusdeltaicbinary}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case 3: well data conditioning for multiple facies}
Figures~\ref{fig:infoganconditional30wells4facies} and~\ref{fig:infoganconditional100wells4facies} demonstrates the capability of Info-WGAN in generating conditional samples when the training images have multiple facies. There are 4 facies in this case study and the results show that Info-WGAN can generate realistic geology with multiple facies and condition them to various well locations.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{Fig-infoganconditional30wells4facies.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Three conditional samples honoring 30 wells (left-most) by Info-WGAN using 10000 fluvial training images with
4 facies (color legend at wells: yellow for channel, red for levee, blue for splay, magenta for shale)}
\label{fig:infoganconditional30wells4facies}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig-infoganconditional100wells4facies.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Four conditional samples honoring 100 wells (left-most) by Info-WGAN using 10000 fluvial training images with 4 facies (channel, levee, splay, shale background)}
\label{fig:infoganconditional100wells4facies}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:4}
This paper applies a novel variant of the original GANs called Info-WGAN for generating subsurface geological models constrained by well data. Compared with the original GANs, Info-WGAN can generate more diverse samples with equal probable realizations, which the original GANs often fails to provide due to the mode collapse that causes notorious difficulty in stabilizing the training of GANs. This superiority is ascribed to the disentanglement of latent variables by info-component, or infomation maximization of the method, and further boosted by Wasserstein distance and gradient descent.
By eliminating the hurdles on the diversity and ensuring a true representation of training data distribution, we believe that modeling geology using Info-WGAN is a practical and useful tool in addressing objective uncertainty and creating meaningful realizations with representative and equal probable statistics. Otherwise, the generated models by the conventional GANs would be very biased and cannot be utilized for further accurate prediction of the subsurface geology.
The demonstrated advantages of using Info-WGAN with the aid of Wasserstein distance and gradient penalty in generating equal probable and diverse geological models would be beneficial to other deep machine learning based applications using GANs, in which more general representation and exact reproduction of the true data distribution from the training dataset become critical. The workflow and the scheme for checking the statistics can be used to determine whether the deep learning networks in image generation and modeling are representative with legitimate results.
The following is a list of the advantages of Info-WGAN propoesed in this paper:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Applying Info-WGAN to modeling geology that combines InfoGAN with labeled geologic sedimentary types and uses Wasserstein distance and gradient penalty to overcome mode collapse of GAN training.
\item The samples generated by Info-WGAN are unbiased and as diverse as in the training images, and therefore, they can be treated as equal probable realizations.
\item Equal probable samples by Info-WGAN allow objective uncertainty evaluation, and one of them is the e-type map that is computed by averaging many generated equal probable samples to access the facies probability. These e-type maps are useful in assisting optimal decision making such as infill well drilling, reserve estimation, and the estimation of hydrocarbon flow pathways in reservoirs.
\item The latent variable used as the input to the generator network to generate new geological models can be disentangled into two parts, in which one part can have interpretable physical meaning, like $\mathbf{c}$=[0, 1] for fluvial and $\mathbf{c}$=[1, 0] for deltaic, when the mutual information maximization regularization term is included in the loss function of the Info-WGAN.
\item By adding sedimentary types as categorical codes to the latent space in addition to the noise vector $\mathbf{z}$, Info-WGAN can generate the mixed types of sedimentary environments with the correct statistics without encountering mode collapse even though the training dataset contain images with different number of facies.
\item Comparing the e-type maps between the training dataset and the samples by GANs allows to determine whether the networks are generating unbiased models, and this can be confirmed and verified by the comparison of the histograms of the e-type maps in pixels.
\item The diversity and equal probability by Info-WGAN makes the process of the well data conditioning converges faster even for much denser well locations. This fast convergence is further boosted by a novel stochastic gradient descent scheme with momentum that uses normalization of gradient vectors.
\end{enumerate}
\section*{Appendix}
|
\section{Introduction}
Topological quantum computation is predicated on the idea that information stored non-locally in pairs of non-Abelian anyons or topological defects is robust to local noise sources~\cite{Nayak08, DasSarma2015}. Braiding the anyons or defects implements a non-trivial operation on the quantum state, while preserving the topological protection of the encoded information. Topological protection is generally defined as exponentially suppressed scaling of error rates in parameter ratios of the system that can be made large.
At present, the most promising approach towards realizing topological quantum computing utilizes Majorana zero modes (MZMs), non-Abelian topological defects of a superconductor~\cite{Kitaev01,Kitaev03,Alicea12a,Lutchyn17}. Each MZM is described by a Majorana operator, $\gamma_j=\gamma_j^\dagger$, satisfying anticommutation relations
\begin{align}\label{eq:Maj-com}
\{\gamma_j,\gamma_k\} &= 2\delta_{j,k}.
\end{align}
Majorana-based qubits encode quantum information in the fermion parity of pairs of MZMs, corresponding to the operator $i\gamma_j\gamma_k$. Braiding MZMs $j$ and $k$ corresponds to the operator~\cite{Read2000, Ivanov01}
\begin{align}\label{eq:braid}
R^{(jk)} &= \frac{1+\gamma_j\gamma_k}{\sqrt{2}}.
\end{align}
Braiding, combined with a two-qubit entangling measurement, is sufficient to implement all Clifford operations. Supplementing braiding and measurement with a non-Clifford gate ({\it e.g.}, using magic state distillation, which also benefits from protected Clifford gates) enables universal quantum computation~\cite{Nayak08, DasSarma2015}. The attractiveness of Majorana-based quantum computing is equally dependent on achieving long coherence times for the idle qubit, and on achieving topologically protected Clifford operations.
There has been impressive experimental progress in tuning semiconductor-superconductor nanowires into a topological superconducting phase hosting MZMs at either endpoint~\cite{Lutchyn10,Oreg10,Mourik12,Deng12,Das12,Churchill13,Finck12,Deng16,Albrecht16,Nichele17,Zhang17,Vaitiekenas18}. The continued experimental improvement of these systems has led to theoretical interest in designing Majorana-based qubits out of such heterostructures~\cite{Sau2010a, Hassler11,vanHeck11,Hyart13,Aasen16}. In particular, several works in the last few years have proposed charge-protected Majorana-based qubits~\cite{Karzig17,Plugge17,Vijay16}. These qubits have a large charging energy to suppress extrinsic quasiparticle poisoning ({\it i.e.,} stochastic electron tunneling into a Majorana island that changes the topological state of the system). Additionally, these qubits are operated according to a measurement-based braiding protocol~\cite{Bonderson08b,Bonderson08c,Zhang16,Karzig17,Vijay16, Plugge17,Tran19,Bomantara19} to circumvent the difficulty of physically moving MZMs in 1D wire networks~\cite{Alicea11,Bauer18} and the susceptibility of anyon braiding to problematic diabatic errors~\cite{Knapp16}.
Charge-protected Majorana-based qubits are operated in the Coulomb-blockaded regime, for which quantum phase fluctuations of the superconducting order parameter are important. The majority of previous studies of Majorana systems have used mean-field BCS models, which do not take into account such fluctuations. A natural question to consider is the extent to which mean-field results apply to a physical system with particle-number conservation~\cite{Ortiz14,Ortiz16,Wang17,Wang18,Lin17,Lin18}. Field-theoretic bosonization has emerged as a useful tool for comparing mean field and number-conserving predictions for 1D topological superconductors~\cite{Sau11,Fidkowski11,Cheng15,Knapp17}.
Previous works have demonstrated that Majorana nanowires have a topologically protected ground state degeneracy even in the absence of long-range superconducting order~\cite{Fidkowski11}, examined the fractional Josephson effect in Coulomb-blockaded Majorana-based devices~\cite{Cheng15}, calculated the charge distribution associated with the topological state and thus the susceptibility of Majorana-based qubits to noise~\cite{Knapp17}. These studies have reaffirmed the topological protection of an idle charge-protected Majorana-based qubit.
Majorana-based quantum computation additionally relies on MZM braiding to implement topologically protected Clifford gates. Recent studies have questioned whether number conservation introduces non-universal corrections to the Majorana braiding transformations. References~\onlinecite{Lin17,Lin18} used number projected Bogoliubov-de-Gennes theory for 2D p+ip superconductors to argue that Cooper pair coupling to local observables may affect MZM braiding in 2D p+ip superconductors. The potential braiding phase errors raised by Refs.~\onlinecite{Lin17,Lin18} would be detrimental to the field of Majorana-based quantum computing and thus warrant serious investigation.
In this work, we extend the bosonized formalism of Refs.~\onlinecite{Fidkowski11, Cheng15,Knapp17} to study measurement-based braiding for charge-protected Majorana-based qubits. In particular, we examine whether the MZM parity measurements proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17} are susceptible to non-universal corrections from quantum fluctuations of the superconducting phase, and the implications for measurement-based braiding. We find:
\begin{comment}
There has been impressive experimental progress in tuning semiconductor-superconductor nanowires into a topological superconducting phase hosting MZMs at either endpoint~\cite{Lutchyn10,Oreg10,Mourik12,Deng12,Das12,Churchill13,Finck12,Deng16,Albrecht16,Nichele17,Zhang17,Vaitiekenas18}. The continued experimental improvement of these systems has led to theoretical interest in designing Majorana-based qubits out of such heterostructures~\cite{Sau2010a, Hassler11,vanHeck11,Hyart13,Aasen16}. In particular, several works in the last few years have proposed charge-protected Majorana-based qubits~\cite{Karzig17,Plugge17,Vijay16}. These qubits have a large charging energy to suppress extrinsic quasiparticle poisoning ({\it i.e.,} stochastic electron tunneling into a Majorana island that changes the topological state of the system). Charge-protected Majorana-based qubits are operated in the Coulomb-blockaded regime, for which quantum phase fluctuations of the superconducting order parameter are important.
The majority of previous studies of Majorana systems have used mean-field BCS models, which do not take into account quantum fluctuations of the superconducting phase. To account for these fluctuations, several studies have emerged employing a number-conserving analysis~\cite{Fidkowski11,Cheng15,Knapp17,Wang17,Wang18}. These works include demonstrating a topologically protected ground state degeneracy without long-range superconducting order~\cite{Fidkowski11}, the fractional Josephson effect in Coulomb-blockaded Majorana-based devices~\cite{Cheng15}, and the dependence of the charge distribution on the topological state and thus the susceptibility of Majorana-based qubits to noise~\cite{Knapp17}. Recent studies have argued that number conservation, {\it i.e.}, superconducting phase fluctuations, may have non-universal corrections to the Majorana braiding transformations~\cite{Lin17,Lin18} contrary to the mean-field BCS analysis predicting topological protection of MZM braiding. Such corrections would be detrimental for Majorana-based topological quantum computing proposals, and therefore warrant serious investigation.
References~\onlinecite{Lin17,Lin18} consider adiabatic MZM braiding in a 2D p+ip superconductor. Given the relative experimental accessibility of 1D topological superconductivity compared to its 2D counterpart, our focus will instead be on MZM braiding in 1D wire networks. The combined difficulty of physically moving MZMs in such networks~\cite{Alicea11,Bauer18}, and the susceptibility of anyon braiding to problematic diabatic errors~\cite{Knapp16}, suggests that utilizing a measurement-based braiding protocol for such systems might be a better approach~\cite{Bonderson08b,Bonderson08c,Zhang16,Karzig17,Vijay16, Plugge17,Tran19,Bomantara19}. Specifically, we investigate whether the measurement and braiding proposals in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17} are susceptible to non-universal corrections from quantum phase fluctuations.
In this work, we use the formalism of field theoretic bosonization to study MZM parity measurements of charge-protected Majorana-based qubits. We find:
\end{comment}
\begin{enumerate}
\item In the absence of charging energy, the left/right end of the proximitized wire segment $j$ hosts a charged fermionic zero mode $\Gamma_{j,L/R}$. The neutral product of two such operators $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger\Gamma_{k,K}$, ${J,K\in\{L/R\}}$, is closely related to the MZM parity.
\item The quantum dot-based tunneling measurement proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17} couples to the MZM parity. Corrections to this measurement from number conservation occur outside of the ground state subspace and are therefore exponentially suppressed in the charge gap over the temperature. Spatial quantum phase fluctuations in the superconductor reduce the measurement visibility, but do not otherwise affect projective parity measurements.
\item The quantum dot-based tunneling measurement can be used in a measurement-based braiding protocol. As quantum fluctuations in the superconductor do not preclude projective measurements, the operation implemented by this protocol simulates a topologically protected braiding transformation.
\end{enumerate}
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:setup}, we describe our model of the charge-protected qubit displayed in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup}. We then derive the zero modes at each end of the proximitized segments and demonstrate their anticommutation as well as other key properties, see Sec.~\ref{sec:zm}. We identify the MZM parity and demonstrate that it is insensitive to all local operators, up to exponentially suppressed terms. In Sec.~\ref{sec:mst}, we then consider the quantum dot-based tunneling measurement depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup}. We show that such a measurement couples to the MZM parity. Finally, in Sec.~\ref{sec:braiding} we argue that the measurement-based braiding protocol outlined in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17} is topologically protected. We conclude by identifying the role number conservation plays throughout our analysis and discussing the connection to previous works in Secs.~\ref{sec:comparison} and \ref{sec:conclusions}. We relegate technical details of the calculations to the appendices.
\section{Setup}\label{sec:setup}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=2\columnwidth]{NewFig.pdf}
\caption{
Basic qubit layout proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17}. A semiconductor (orange) is proximitized by a superconductor (blue) in three spatial regions, $x_{j,L}<x<x_{j,R}$ for $j\in\{1,2,3\}$ and $L/R$ indicating left/right. At the end of each proximitized segment, there is a bare semiconductor region of length $\ell$, terminated by a tunnel barrier. Each bare semiconductor region hosts a charged fermionic zero mode $\Gamma_{j,J}$, where the neutral product $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger \Gamma_{k,K}$ corresponds to the MZM parity $i\gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K}$. The regions between two proximitized wires hosts a quantum dot. To perform a measurement, the barriers are lowered to permit tunneling between the quantum dot and the bare semiconducting regions. Reference~\onlinecite{Karzig17} discusses how the same physics can be used to measure any pair of MZMs using coherent links (floating topological superconductors in a fixed fermion parity state). Our analysis generalizes straightforwardly to the non-linear qubit structures proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17}.
}
\label{fig:setup}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
We consider the charge-protected Majorana-based qubit depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup}. The full structure of the qubit will only be important in Sec.~\ref{sec:braiding} when we consider measurement-based braiding (which requires a minimum of six MZMs). We highlight the relevant physics below.
A spinless semiconducting nanowire (orange) is proximitized by an s-wave superconductor (dark blue) in three segments. Each segment is connected to a superconducting backbone, which is assumed to have many channels so that there is no relative charging energy between different regions. A tunnel barrier separates the end of each proximitized region from a quantum dot or lead that can be used for a tunneling measurement, see Section~\ref{sec:mst}. The device in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup} hosts six MZMs (red dots), one at each end of the proximitized nanowires. We label the proximitized wires by $j\in\{1,2,3\}$ and left/right end of the wires by $J\in\{L/R\}$. Below, we refer to the MZM at the $J$th end of the $j$th wire as $\gamma_{j,J}$. The qubit forms a floating (non-grounded) superconducting island with four degenerate (up to exponentially suppressed corrections that we neglect here) ground states. Two of these states constitute the computational basis, while the remaining two are ancilla degrees of freedom used to facilitate measurement-based braiding, see Section~\ref{sec:braiding}. Our analysis of the device shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup} generalizes straightforwardly to the non-linear geometries proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17}.
We study this device using a number-conserving bosonized formalism, previously used in Refs.~\onlinecite{Fidkowski11,Cheng15,Knapp17, Snizhko18}. We model the semiconductor with spinless electrons defined by
\begin{align}
\psi_\text{sm}(x) &\sim e^{ik_F x} e^{i\theta(x) + i\phi(x)} + e^{-ik_F x} e^{i\theta(x)-i\phi(x)}.
\end{align}
In the above notation, $\theta$ and $\phi$ are bosonic operators whose commutator
\begin{align}\label{eq:commutator}
[\phi(x),\theta(y)] &= i\pi \Theta(x-y),
\end{align}
ensures that electron operators at distinct points anticommute. The charge density is related to $\phi$ by $\rho(x)=\partial_x\phi(x)/\pi$, while the operator $e^{i\theta(x)}$ adds a charge to the semiconductor at position $x$. In the above, $k_F$ is the semiconductor Fermi momentum and $\Theta(x)$ is the Heaviside function.
The superconductor carries both charge ($\rho$) and spin ($\sigma$) fields
\begin{align}
\psi_{\text{sc},\uparrow/\downarrow}(x) \sim& e^{ik_F^{(\rho)}x} e^{\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\left( \theta_\rho(x) + \phi_\rho(x)\pm \left[\theta_\sigma(x) + \phi_\sigma(x)\right]\right)} \notag
\\ &+ e^{-ik_F^{(\rho)}x} e^{\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}} \left(\theta_\rho(x) -\phi_\rho(x)\pm\left[\theta_\sigma(x)-\phi_\sigma(x)\right]\right)},
\end{align}
where $\uparrow$ ($\downarrow$) corresponds to $+$ ($-$) in the exponent. Similarly, the commutation relations are
\begin{align}\label{eq:canonical-comm}
[\phi_\lambda(x),\theta_{\lambda'}(y)]&= i \pi \delta_{\lambda,\lambda'}\Theta(x-y)
\end{align}
where $\lambda,\lambda'\in\{\rho,\sigma\}$.
The charge density in the superconductor is defined by ${\rho_\text{sc}(x) = \sqrt{2}\partial_x \phi_\rho(x)/\pi}$ and the current is $\sqrt{2}\partial_x\theta_\rho/\pi$. Thus the operator $e^{i\theta_\rho(x)/\sqrt{2}}$ adds a charge to the superconductor at position $x$. We denote the Fermi momentum in the superconductor by $k_F^{(\rho)}$. The number operator for the combined semiconductor and superconductor is
\begin{align} \label{eq:N}
N &= N_\text{sm}+ N_\text{sc}
\\ N_\text{sm} &= \frac{1}{\pi} \sum_{j=1}^3 \left(\phi(x_{j,R}+\ell) -\phi(x_{j,L}-\ell)\right)
\\ N_\text{sc} &= \frac{\sqrt{2}}{\pi} \left( \phi_\rho(x_{3,R})-\phi_\rho(x_{1,L}) \right).
\end{align}
We model the semiconductor as a Luttinger liquid and the superconductor as a Luther-Emery liquid~\cite{Seidel05}. Due to the spin gap in the superconductor, one can integrate out spin degrees of freedom in the superconductor and obtain an effective pair tunneling Hamiltonian across the semiconductor/superconductor interface~\cite{Fidkowski11}. Thus, the effective low-energy Hamiltonian has only charge degrees of freedom, and can be written as
\begin{align}
H_\text{sm} &= \frac{v}{2\pi}\sum_{j=1}^{3} \int_{x_{j,L}-\ell}^{x_{j,R}+\ell} dx \left\{ K \left(\partial_x \theta\right)^2 + K^{-1} \left(\partial_x \phi \right)^2 \right\}
\\ H_\text{sc} &= \frac{v_\rho}{2\pi} \int_{x_{1,L}}^{x_{3,R}} dx \left\{ K_\rho \left( \partial_x \theta_\rho\right)^2 + K_\rho^{-1}\left( \partial_x \phi_\rho \right)^2 \right\}
\\ H_\text{P} &= \frac{\Delta_P}{2\pi a} \sum_{j=1}^3 \int_{x_{j,L}}^{x_{j,R}} dx \cos\left( \sqrt{2}\theta_\rho -2\theta \right)\label{eq:HP}
\end{align}
In the above, $v$ and $K$ are the Fermi velocity and Luttinger liquid parameter for the semiconductor, while $v_\rho$ and $K_\rho$ are for the superconductor. The term $H_\text{P}$ describes pair-tunneling between the semiconductor and superconductor. This term is a relevant perturbation that flows to strong coupling in the infrared limit and opens up a topological superconducting gap $\Delta_P.$~\cite{Fidkowski11} As $H_\text{sm},$ $H_\text{sc}$, and $H_\text{P}$ all commute with the number operator $N$, our model is explicitly number-conserving.
When the semiconductor and superconductor are decoupled from each other, for instance in the region ${x_{j,R}<x<x_{j+1,L}}$, the semiconductor and superconductor fields introduced above are the natural degrees of freedom to describe the system. In the $j$th proximitized wire, the pairing term in Eq.~\eqref{eq:HP} strongly couples the semiconductor and superconductor. In this case, the convenient fields to use are
\begin{align}\label{eq:theta-}
\theta_-(x)&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\theta_\rho(x)-\theta(x)
\\ \theta_+(x)&=\frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\theta_\rho(x) +\theta(x)\right),
\end{align}
and their respective dual fields
\begin{align}
\phi_-(x) &= \frac{1}{2} \left(\sqrt{2}\phi_\rho(x) - \phi(x) \right)
\\ \phi_+(x) &= \sqrt{2}\phi_\rho(x) +\phi(x).
\end{align}
Note that the total charge of a proximitized wire can be written in terms of $\phi_+$
\begin{align}
N^j_+ &= \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{x_{j,L}}^{x_{j,R}} dx \, \partial_x \left(\sqrt{2}\phi_\rho +\phi\right)
\\ &= \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{x_{j,L}}^{x_{j,R}} dx \, \partial_x \phi_+
\end{align}
and commutes with $\theta_-$. Henceforth, we will derive an effective low-energy theory for the system. At energies $\varepsilon \ll \Delta_P$, the field $\theta_-(x)$ for each proximitized wire is pinned and takes values $\theta_-=0$ or $\pi.$ The even and odd superpositions of these minima,
\begin{align}\label{eq:parity-eigenstates}
\ket{\pm}_j &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\ket{\theta_-=0}_j\pm \ket{\theta_-=\pi}_j\right)
\end{align}
are eigenstates of the relative fermion parity $(-1)^{N^j_-},$ where
\begin{align}
N^j_- &= \frac{1}{\pi}\int_{x_{j,L}}^{x_{j,R}} dx \, \partial_x \phi_-.
\end{align}
When the total charge of the qubit is fixed, say, to be even, there are four such states: $\ket{\pm}_1\ket{\pm}_2\ket{+}_3$, and $\ket{\pm}_1\ket{\mp}_2\ket{-}_3$ where the subscript here refers to a particular proximitized segment in Fig.\ref{fig:setup}.
References~\onlinecite{Fidkowski11,Knapp17} argued that these states are indistinguishable by all local operators, have an exponentially suppressed degeneracy splitting, and are predicted to have exceptionally long coherence times. Thus, the topological information is completely encoded in $\theta_-$. We now extend this analysis to consider qubit measurement, with the aim of understanding whether topological protection extends to Clifford gates implemented by measurement-based braiding of MZMs.
We introduce two new elements: (1) bare semiconducting regions at the end of each proximitized wire, terminated by a tunneling barrier of potential $V_B$
\begin{align}\label{eq:HB}
H_\text{B} &= V_B \sum_{j=1}^3 \left\{ \cos\left(2\phi\left(x_{j,L}-\ell\right) \right) + \cos\left(2\phi\left(x_{j,R}+\ell \right) \right) \right\};
\end{align}
and (2) a Hamiltonian $H_C$ describing the charging of the island
\begin{align}\label{eq:HC}
H_C &= E_C \left( N-N_g\right)^2,
\end{align}
where $N$ is defined by Eq.~\eqref{eq:N} and $N_g$ is a dimensionless gate voltage. When operated at a Coulomb valley, {\it i.e.}, $N_g\in \mathbb{Z}$, adding or removing an electron from the island costs an energy $E_C$. In the limit $E_C$ is much larger than the temperature $T$, single electron processes are exponentially suppressed. This is the sense in which the qubit is ``charge-protected." Henceforth, we assume that the level spacings for the superconductor $\delta_\text{sc}$ and the semiconductor $\delta_\text{sm}$ are negligibly small. The latter applies to a sufficiently long wire, $v/L_\text{wire}\ll T$, as well as when there is a strong coupling between the superconductor and semiconductor which further suppresses $\delta_\text{sm}$ due to small $\delta_\text{sc}$~\cite{Stanescu2011}
In the remainder of the paper, we study the weak tunneling limit for the qubit-dot coupling and assume that the barrier potential $V_B$ is sufficiently large that $\phi(x_{j,L/R})$ are pinned to $m_{j,L/R}\pi$ ($m_{j,L/R}\in \mathbb{Z}$). At low energies, the pairing amplitude $\Delta_P$ pins the difference field $\theta_-$ to $n_j \pi$ for $x_{j,L}<x<x_{j,R}$ ($n_j \in \mathbb{Z}$). Finally, we assume that the superconducting field $\theta_\rho$ is spatially homogeneous throughout the superconductor due to a large number of transverse channels ({\it i.e.}, $K_\rho\to \infty$). This constraint will be relaxed in Section~\ref{sec:comparison}.
Given the above assumptions and ${T\ll\text{min}\left(V_B,\Delta_P\right)}$, one can derive the low-energy theory by imposing mixed boundary conditions for the bare semiconducting regions at the ends of each proximitized segment. We show below that this results in a fermionic zero mode localized in each of these regions.
\section{Zero mode solution}\label{sec:zm}
In this section, we show that the bare semiconductor region at the end of a proximitized wire localizes a fermionic zero mode. This zero mode arises from the mixed boundary conditions in the segment - normal boundary conditions at one end ($\psi_{\text{sm}, R}=\psi_{\text{sm}, L}$ corresponding to $\phi$-field being pinned by the barrier Hamiltonian in Eq.~\eqref{eq:HB}), and Andreev boundary conditions at the opposite end ($\psi_{\text{sm}, R}=\psi_{\text{sm}, L}^\dag$ corresponding to $\theta_-$ being pinned by the pairing term in Eq.~\eqref{eq:HP})~\cite{Fidkowski12}.
The fields in the bare semiconductor region to the $J$th side of the $j$th proximitized segment admit normal mode expansions
\begin{align}\label{eq:phi}
\phi_{j,J}(y)& \!= \phi_{j,J}^0\! + \!i\sqrt{2K}\sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{\cos\! \left( [2k+ 1] \frac{\pi y}{2\ell}\right)} {\sqrt{2k+ 1}} \! \left( b_k^\dagger - b_k \right)
\\ \theta_{j,J}(y) & \! = \theta_{j,J}^0 \!+\! \sqrt{\frac{2}{K}} \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{\sin\! \left( [2k+1]\frac{\pi y}{2\ell} \right)}{\sqrt{2k+1}} \! \!\left( b_k^\dagger + b_k \right) \!.\label{eq:theta}
\end{align}
The bosonic operators $b_k$ have canonical commutation relations $[b_k,b_{k'}^\dagger]=\delta_{k,k'}$, while the zero modes satisfy
\begin{align}\label{eq:zm-commutator}
[\phi_{j,J}^0,\theta_{k,K}^0] &= i \pi \Theta(j-k+J/2),
\end{align}
where $J=L=-1$ and $J=R=+1.$
For simplicity, we have used the shifted coordinates $y=x-x_{j,J}$, which range between $[-\ell,0]$ for $J=L$ and $[0,\ell]$ for $J=R$. One can show that the expansions in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:phi}-\ref{eq:theta}) satisfy the commutator of Eq.~\eqref{eq:commutator}, see Appendix~\ref{app:zero-mode} for details.
Equations~(\ref{eq:phi}-\ref{eq:theta}) diagonalize $H_\text{bare}$:
\begin{align}
H_\text{bare}&= J\frac{v}{2\pi}\int_0^{J\ell} dy \left\{ K \left( \partial_{y} \theta_{j,J}\right)^2 + K^{-1} \left(\partial_{y}\phi_{j,J} \right)^2 \right\}
\\ &= \frac{\pi v}{\ell} \sum_{k=0}^\infty \left(k+\frac{1}{2}\right) \left( b_k^\dagger b_k + \frac{1}{2} \right).
\end{align}
The quasiparticle excitations in this segment have an energy gap of $\pi v/\ell$.
The bosonic zero modes
\begin{align}
\phi_{j,J}^0&=\pi m_{j,J}, & \theta_{j,J}^0 &= \frac{\theta_\rho(x_{j,J})}{\sqrt{2}} - \pi n_j \,, \label{eq:theta0}
\end{align}
ensure that $\phi_{j,J}(y)$ and $\theta_{j,J}(y)$ satisfy the boundary conditions imposed $H_B$ and $H_P$. Note that $\pi n_j$ is exactly the difference field $\theta_-$ for wire $j$ defined in Eq.~\eqref{eq:theta-}, which encodes the topological state of the $j$th wire.
The bare semiconductor regions localize a zero mode of the full many body spectrum of $H_\text{bare}$ $\Gamma_{j,J}$, which when projected into the ground state subspace with no excited bosons ($\langle b_k^\dagger b_k\rangle=0$), $\Gamma_{j,J}$ takes the simple form
\begin{align}\label{eq:gs-projection}
\Gamma_{j,J}&= e^{i\theta_{j,J}^0-i\phi_{j,J}^0}.
\end{align}
Equation~\eqref{eq:gs-projection} satisfies fermionic anticommutation relations, $\{\Gamma_{j,J},\Gamma_{k,K}\}=2\delta_{j,k}\delta_{J,K}.$
The derivation and ground state projection of $\Gamma_{j,J}$ closely follows that in Ref.~\onlinecite{Clarke13}, which considered a similar problem of a quantum Hall edge subject to mixed boundary conditions. Their result was further extended to the number-conserving case by Ref.~\onlinecite{Snizhko18}. For this reason, we relegate further details to Appendix~\ref{app:zero-mode}.
In addition to being a zero mode of $H_\text{bare}$, $\Gamma_{j,J}$ also commutes with $H_\text{sm}+H_\text{sc}+H_\text{P}$. However, $\Gamma_{j,J}$ has a non-trivial commutator with the number operator $N$. Working from Eq.~\eqref{eq:gs-projection},
\begin{align}
[N,\Gamma_{j,J}] &= \frac{1}{\pi} [\phi(x_{j,R})-\phi(x_{j,L}),\theta_{j,J}^0] i \Gamma_{j,J}
= -\Gamma_{j,J}.
\end{align}
In the above, we used the relation $[A,f(B)]=[A,B]f'(B)$ when $A$ and $B$ both commute with their commutator. It follows that $\Gamma_{j,J}$ acquires non-trivial time-dependence from $H_C$:
\begin{align}
\frac{d \Gamma_{j,J}(t)}{dt} &= i [H_C, \Gamma_{j,J}(t)]
\\ &= i E_C [(N-N_g)^2,\Gamma_{j,J}(t)]
\\ &= -i E_C \left( 2N -2N_g +1 \right) \Gamma_{j,J}(t).
\end{align}
In imaginary time, the evolution of $\Gamma_{j,J}(\tau)$ is
\begin{align}\label{eq:Gamma-time}
\Gamma_{j,J}(\tau) &= e^{- E_C \left( 2N -2N_g +1\right) \tau} \Gamma_{j,J}(0).
\end{align}
Similar logic shows
\begin{align}\label{eq:Gamma-time-dagger}
\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger(\tau) &= e^{E_C \left( 2N-2N_g -1\right)\tau}\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger(0).
\end{align}
When the qubit is tuned to a Coulomb valley, {\it e.g.}, $N_g=0$ and $\langle N\rangle=0$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:corr-function}
\langle T_\tau \Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger(\tau_1)\Gamma_{k,K}(\tau_2)\rangle_C &= e^{-E_C|\tau_1-\tau_2|} \langle \Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger(0)\Gamma_{k,K}(0)\rangle,
\end{align}
where the averaging is taken over charging Hamiltonian, see Appendix~\ref{app:corr-function}.
To evaluate the equal time correlator, we first note that the zero mode operators satisfy fermionic anticommutation relations
\begin{align}
\{\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger,\Gamma_{k,K}\} &= 2\delta_{j,k}\delta_{J,K}.
\end{align}
The neutral product $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger \Gamma_{k,K}$ is Hermitian for ${(j,J)\neq (k,K)}$ and can be written as
\begin{align}\label{eq:neutral-product}
i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger \Gamma_{k,K} &= i e^{i \pi \left( n_j + m_{j,J} \right)}e^{-i\pi \left(n_k + m_{k,K} \right)}.
\end{align}
There is no $\theta_\rho$ dependence in Eq.~\eqref{eq:neutral-product} because we have taken the limit ${K_\rho \to \infty}$. We will return to this point at the end of Section~\ref{sec:comparison}.
We note several important features of Eq.~\eqref{eq:neutral-product}, all of which are discussed in more detail in Appendix~\ref{app:zero-mode}. (1) The operators $n_{j/k}$, $m_{j/k,J/K}$ are integer-valued, thus the eigenvalues of $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger\Gamma_{k,K}$ are $\pm 1$.
(2) $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger\Gamma_{k,K}$ acts on the topologically protected parity eigenstates $\ket{\pm}$ of Eq.~\eqref{eq:parity-eigenstates} exactly as expected for bilinears of the Majorana operators $\gamma$ reviewed in the introduction. (3) $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger \Gamma_{k,K}$ commutes with all local operators. Points (1-3) imply that in the limit $K_\rho\to \infty$, $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger\Gamma_{k,K}$ can be identified with the MZM parity. To emphasize this point, throughout the remainder of the paper we will write
\begin{align}\label{eq:neutral-product1}
i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger\Gamma_{k,K} &= i\gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K},
\end{align}
where $i\gamma_{j,L}\gamma_{j,R} \ket{\pm}_j = \pm \ket{\pm}_j.$ The correlation function Eq.~\eqref{eq:corr-function} thus reduces to
\begin{align}\label{eq:neutral-product1}
\langle T_\tau \Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger(\tau_1)\Gamma_{k,K}(\tau_2)\rangle &= e^{-E_C|\tau_1-\tau_2|} \gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K}.
\end{align}
Equations~\eqref{eq:neutral-product}-\eqref{eq:neutral-product1} establish a correspondence between MZM parity operators in number-conserving and mean-field approaches (see also Section~\ref{sec:comparison}). While fermion operators couple to both $\phi$ and $\theta_-$ degrees of freedom, the parity operator $i\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger\Gamma_{k,K}$ is neutral and commutes with all local operators. Thus, degenerate ground states of the system (encoded in terms of MZM parity operators) cannot be distinguished by any local operator.
\section{Tunneling Measurement}\label{sec:mst}
We now review the tunneling measurement of MZM parity. The basic idea is depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:setup}. Two bare semiconductor regions are separated by tunnel barriers from an intermediate quantum dot, {\it e.g.}, between $x_{2,R}$ and $x_{3,L}$. The measurement protocol involves lowering tunneling barriers and increasing the amplitude for virtual tunneling of an electron between the quantum dot and Majorana island (we assume that the charging energy is large so that there is still a charge gap in the system suppressing real single-electron tunneling processes). The relevant charge fluctuation processes involve an electron tunneling in and out of the Majorana island either through the same MZM, or in through one and out through the other. As a result, one finds a MZM parity-dependent energy shift of the combined qubit-quantum dot system, which can be used to infer the parity of the participating MZM pair. For simplicity, we focus on a parity measurement of two adjacent MZMs; the measurement can be generalized to other MZM pairs with the use of coherent links (floating topological superconducting islands in a fixed parity state) or by modifying the geometry of the qubit, as discussed at length in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17}.
Following the above outlined idea, we now derive the measurement-induced energy shift using our particle-number-conserving formalism. The dot-Majorana island tunneling Hamiltonian can be written as
\begin{align}
H_t &= \sqrt{\ell}c_d^\dagger \left(t_{j,J} \psi(x_{j,J}+J\ell) + t_{k,K} \psi(x_{k,K}+K\ell)\right) + h.c.
\end{align}
where $c_d$ is the annihilation operator for the quantum dot and $t_{j,J}$ is the tunneling amplitude for an electron to tunnel into the semiconductor at $\psi(x_{j,J}+J\ell).$
The semiconductor electrons at the boundaries can be expanded as ${\psi(x_{j,J}+J\ell)= \Gamma_{j,J}/\sqrt{\ell}+ \dots}$, so that for sufficiently low temperatures (where the energy scale is set by the level spacing of the bare semiconductor region) $H_t$ becomes
\begin{align}\label{eq:Ht}
H_t &=t_{j,J}c_d^\dagger \Gamma_{j,J} + t_{k,K} c_d^\dagger \Gamma_{k,K} + h.c.
\end{align}
Note that unlike the previous works~\onlinecite{Fu10,vanHeck16,Karzig17}, Eq.~\eqref{eq:Ht} uses the number-conserving expression for the fermionic zero mode $\Gamma_{k,K}$, rather than writing $H_t$ in terms of Majorana operators $\gamma_{k,K}$.
Odd orders in $H_t$ necessarily change the charge of the island and thus are exponentially suppressed by a large charge gap $~E_C \gg T$ (for $N_g=0$). Using imaginary-time path-integral formalism, one can derive the second order tunneling action to find
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
S_t^{(2)} &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\beta d\tau_1 d\tau_2 \left(t_{j,J} c_d^\dagger(\tau_1) \Gamma_{j,J}(\tau_1) + t_{k,K} c_d^\dagger(\tau_1) \Gamma_{k,K}(\tau_1) + h.c. \right) \left( t_{j,J} c_d^\dagger(\tau_2) \Gamma_{j,J}(\tau_2) + t_{k,K} c_d^\dagger (\tau_2)\Gamma_{k,K}(\tau_2) + h.c.\right) .
\end{align}
Averaging over the charging energy, we have
\begin{align}
\left\langle S_t^{(2)}\right\rangle_C= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\beta d\tau_1 & \int_0^{\beta} d\tau_2 \Big\{ \Big( |t_{j,J}|^2 \langle T_\tau \Gamma_{j,J}(\tau_1)\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger(\tau_2) \rangle_C + |t_{k,K}|^2 \langle T_\tau \Gamma_{k,K}(\tau_1)\Gamma_{k,K}^\dagger(\tau_2)\rangle_C \notag
\\ &+ t_{j,J} t_{k,K}^* \langle T_\tau \Gamma_{j,J}(\tau_1)\Gamma_{k,K}^\dagger(\tau_2)\rangle_C + t_{j,J}^* t_{k,K} \langle T_\tau \Gamma_{k,K}(\tau_1)\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger(\tau_2)\rangle_C \Big) c_d^\dagger(\tau_1)c_d(\tau_2)
+ (\tau_1\leftrightarrow \tau_2) \Big\}
\\ =- \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\beta d\tau_1 d\tau_2 \Big\{ ~&e^{-E_C |\tau_1-\tau_2|}\Big( |t_{j,J}|^2 + |t_{k,K}|^2+2 \text{Im}[t_{j,J}^* t_{k,K}] i\gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K}\Big) c_d^\dagger(\tau_1)c_d(\tau_2)+ (\tau_1\leftrightarrow \tau_2)
\Big\},
\end{align}
where in the last equality we have used Eq.~\eqref{eq:corr-function}. In the limit $T\ll E_C$, we can take $\beta=1/T \to \infty$ so that
\begin{align}\label{eq:action-2}
\left\langle S_t^{(2)}\right\rangle_C &= -2 \frac{|t_{j,J}|^2 + |t_{k,K}|^2+2 \text{Im}[t_{j,J}^* t_{k,K}] i\gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K}}{E_C} \int_0^\beta d\tau\, c_d^\dagger (\tau)c_d (\tau) +\mathcal{O}\left(E_C^{-2}\right),
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
see Appendix~\ref{app:mst} for details. The effective tunneling Hamiltonian is thus
\begin{align} \label{eq:Heff}
H_\text{eff} &= - 2\frac{|t_{j,J}|^2 + |t_{k,K}|^2+2 \text{Im}[t_{j,J}^* t_{k,K}] i\gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K}}{E_C} c_d^\dagger c_d .
\end{align}
Higher orders in perturbation theory modify the parity-dependent energy splitting, but do not change the structure of Eq.~\eqref{eq:Heff}. Thus, our number-conserving formalism has recovered the essential result from Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17} that tunneling results in a parity-dependent energy shift of the joint state of the quantum dot and the qubit.
The MZM parity can then be readout by probing the quantum dot ground state, {\it e.g.}, through spectroscopy, charge sensing, or differential capacitance~\cite{Karzig17}.
It is worth noting that noisy measurement or insufficient integration time could result in a partial projection of the MZM parity state. Errors in the braiding phase implemented with a measurement-based protocol, reviewed below, will be bounded from below by measurement errors. Therefore, topological protection is only achievable provided measurement errors are sufficiently suppressed. Measurement errors warrant further consideration, but are independent of number-conserving effects and are thus beyond the scope of the current analysis.
\section{Implications for braiding}\label{sec:braiding}
The motivating question for this paper is whether number conservation in a topological superconductor introduces non-universal corrections to the MZM braiding phase. We argue this is not the case in the context of measurement-based braiding.
Measurement-based braiding replaces physically moving MZMs with a sequence of projective parity measurements~\cite{Bonderson08b, Bonderson08c}. This protocol utilizes the ancilla Hilbert space provided by encoding a qubit in six, rather than four, MZMs. Mathematically, a measurement projects the MZM pair $i\gamma_j\gamma_k$ into a definite parity state. The even and odd parity projectors are given by
\begin{align}
\Pi_\pm^{(jk)} &= \frac{1\pm i\gamma_j\gamma_k}{2}.
\end{align}
Recall that braiding MZMs $j$ and $k$ corresponds to the operator $R^{(jk)}$ given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:braid}. Let us encode the qubit state in MZMs $h$, $i$, $j$, and $k$, while $a$ and $b$ correspond to the ancilla MZM pair. Then, $R^{(jk)}$ can be related to a sequence of even parity projections:
\begin{align}
\Pi_+^{(ab)} \Pi_+^{(aj)} \Pi_+^{(ak)} \Pi_+^{(ab)} &\propto R^{(jk)}\Pi_+^{(ab)}.
\end{align}
The above follows straightforwardly from Eq.~\eqref{eq:Maj-com}. Note that each projector changes which four MZMs encode the qubit state, but does not collapse the encoded information.
While it is not in general possible to guarantee the outcome of a measurement ({\it e.g.}, whether $\Pi_+$ or $\Pi_-$ is applied), this complication can be circumvented by employing ``forced measurement"~\cite{Bonderson08b}. If the wrong measurement outcome is obtained, simply repeat the previous parity measurement in the sequence, then re-attempt the desired measurement. This repeat-until-success protocol does not change the relative phase implemented by the sequence, and on average requires two repeated measurements. Reference~\onlinecite{Zhang16} considered how forced measurement may be circumvented by appropriately modifying the software tracking the measurement outcomes, while Ref.~\onlinecite{Knapp16} investigated the tradeoff between forced measurement and adiabatically tuning MZM couplings. Reference~\onlinecite{Tran19} further investigated how to minimize the number of necessary MZM measurements for Clifford gates.
The previous section demonstrated that number conservation only affects the tunneling measurement of MZM parity at energies on the order of $\mathcal{O}\left(E_C\right)$, and thus at low temperatures $T\ll E_C$ results in exponentially suppressed corrections $\mathcal{O}\left(e^{-E_C/T}\right)$. Therefore, the underlying arguments of measurement-based braiding are unaltered by the number-conserving analysis of this paper.
Essentially, measurement-based braiding relies on the ability to project a pair of MZMs to the desired parity eigenstate. Errors in this protocol arise from residual hybridization of MZMs. Generally, MZM hybridization is exponentially suppressed in the energy gap over the temperature, and in the distance separating the MZMs over the correlation length of the topological superconductor. When this is the case, the resulting braiding phase errors in a measurement-only protocol are similarly small and the protocol is topologically protected.
\section{Comparison to previous results}\label{sec:comparison}
We now discuss and compare our results with the previous works on this subject~\cite{Fu10,Gangadharaiah11, Lobos12,vanHeck16,Karzig17,Kim,Snizhko18}.
The mean field equivalent of our bosonized analysis is to suppress superconducting phase fluctuations by replacing the field $\sqrt{2}\theta_\rho$ with a scalar quantity $\Phi$. In this case, the pairing Hamiltonian becomes
\begin{align}
H_P^\text{MF} &= \sum_j \frac{\Delta_P}{2\pi a} \int_{x_{j,L}}^{x_{j,R}} dx \cos(2\theta-\Phi),
\end{align}
and no longer commutes with the number operator $N$. Equation~\eqref{eq:gs-projection} is modified to
\begin{align}
\Gamma_{j,J}^\text{MF}\to e^{i \frac{\Phi}{2}}e^{-i \pi \left(n_j + m_{j,J} \right)},
\end{align}
where $n_j$, $m_{j,J}$ are both integer-valued operators. When ${\Phi=0}$, $\Gamma_{j,J}^\text{MF}$ is Hermitian and commutes with all bulk operators, therefore it can be identified with the Majorana operator $\gamma_{j,J}$ as established in Refs.~\onlinecite{Fidkowski11, Lobos12, Clarke13}.
For Coulomb-blockaded Majorana islands,
previous works~\cite{Fu10,vanHeck16,Karzig17} have used a phenomenological form of the Majorana tunneling Hamiltonian,
\begin{align}
\tilde{H}_t &= t c_d^\dagger \gamma e^{-i\hat{\Phi}/2} + h.c.
\end{align}
where $\hat{\Phi}$ is fluctuating superconducting phase that satisfies the commutation relation $[\hat{\Phi}, N]=2i$ with $N$ being the total charge of the island.
By comparing with Eqs.~\eqref{eq:theta0} and \eqref{eq:Ht}, one may notice that $e^{i\hat{\Phi}/2}$ is similar to the dependence on $e^{i\theta_\rho/\sqrt{2}}$ in $\Gamma$. However, $\theta_\rho$ is dual to $N_\text{sc}$ rather than $N=N_\text{sc}+N_\text{sm}$, i.e. this operator adds a charge to the superconductor in contrast to a total charge between the superconductor and semiconductor. Thus, Majorana tunneling processes in general act on both topological and non-topological degrees of freedom. However, as we show above parities $\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger \Gamma_{k,K}$ couple only to topological degrees of freedom (up to exponentially small corrections $O(e^{-E_C/T})$).
The differences between $\Gamma_{j,J}$ and $\Gamma_{j,J}^\text{MF}$ connect naturally to the concerns raised by Refs.~\onlinecite{Lin17,Lin18}. In their case, the number-conserving version of the Majorana operator included a Cooper pair in its definition, and thus seems reminiscent of the dependence on $e^{i\theta_\rho(x_{j,J})/\sqrt{2}}$ in $\Gamma_{j,J}$. However, their concern that the Cooper pair would introduce non-universal corrections to the braiding phase does not occur in our scenario. Indeed, by neglecting spatial fluctuations in $\theta_\rho$ (and taking the limit $K_\rho\to \infty$), one can show that the $\theta_\rho$ dependence drops out of the neutral product $\Gamma_{j,J}^\dagger \Gamma_{k,K}$. Temporal fluctuations in $\theta_\rho$ do not modify the tunneling measurement, as the charging energy effectively sets the times equal in $S_t^{(2)}$, so that the measurement only couples to the MZM parity. Thus, for temperatures $T\ll E_C$, the tunneling-based parity measurement is not affected by imposing number conservation.
One might worry that our conclusions would change if we keep $K_\rho$ finite so that there are spatial fluctuations in $\theta_\rho.$ In Appendix~\ref{app:fluctuations}, we argue that for $K_\rho$ finite, the correlation function in Eq.~\eqref{eq:corr-function} becomes
\begin{align}
&\langle T_\tau \Gamma^\dagger_{k,K}(\tau_1)\Gamma_{j,J}(\tau_2)\rangle \notag
\\ &= e^{-E_C|\tau_1-\tau_2|}e^{ -\frac{1}{4}\langle\left[\theta_\rho(x_{j,J})-\theta_\rho(x_{k,K}) \right]^2 \rangle} \gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K},
\end{align}
which in turn modifies the effective tunneling Hamiltonian to be
\begin{align} \label{eq:modified}
H_\text{eff}& = - \frac{|t_{j,J}|^2 + |t_{k,K}|^2}{E_C} c_d^\dagger c_d\notag
\\ +&e^{ -\frac{1}{4}\langle\left[\theta_\rho(x_{j,J})-\theta_\rho(x_{k,K}) \right]^2 \rangle} \frac{2\text{Im}[t_{j,J}^* t_{k,K}] i\gamma_{j,J}\gamma_{k,K}}{E_C} c_d^\dagger c_d .
\end{align}
The factor $e^{ -\frac{1}{4}\langle\left[\theta_\rho(x_{j,J})-\theta_\rho(x_{k,K}) \right]^2 \rangle}\leq 1$ saturates the bound when $K_\rho\to \infty,$ and otherwise reduces the measurement visibility (decays algebraically) when $K_\rho$ remains finite (the exact $K_\rho$ dependence is sensitive to which measurement is being performed), see Eq.~\eqref{eq:modified-connect}. Thus, our results indicate that spatial quantum phase fluctuations in the superconductor reduce the measurement visibility, in addition to affecting the degeneracy splitting of the qubit states as reported earlier in Ref.~\onlinecite{Fidkowski11}. This reduction in the measurement visibility may be particularly important for two-qubit measurements, for which the gap separating the ground state and first excited state in a fixed parity sector is reduced from $\mathcal{O}\left(E_C\right)$ for a single-qubit measurement to $\mathcal{O}\left(t^2/E_C\right)$.~\cite{Karzig17} For the measurements proposed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Karzig17}, reduced visibility requires a longer integration time to achieve the same measurement accuracy, and can become problematic if the integration time becomes comparable to the qubit coherence times.
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusions}
In this paper, we employed a number-conserving bosonized formalism to study 1D topological superconductors formed from semiconductor-superconductor heterostructures. We demonstrated the presence of fermionic zero modes localized to the ends of a proximitized nanowire, and related these zero modes to the MZM parity operator. We carefully considered the effect of tunnel coupling between the proximitized nanowire and an adjacent quantum dot, and showed that the combined system exhibits a parity-dependent energy shift independent of the topological state of the rest of the qubit, up to exponentially suppressed corrections from higher energy processes. Finally, we showed that number-conserving corrections do not affect projective parity measurements and, as a result, measurement-based braiding operations are topologically protected.
Our findings contrast the conjecture by Refs.~\onlinecite{Lin17,Lin18} that number conservation could introduce non-universal corrections to the MZM braiding phase in a topological superconductor. The critical step in our argument is that while the form of the fermionic zero mode $\Gamma_{j,L/R}$ localized to the left/right end of proximitized wire $j$ is modified in our number-conserving formalism as compared to a mean-field analysis, the relevant quantity $i\Gamma^\dagger_{j,J}\Gamma_{k,K}$ can still be identified with the mean-field MZM parity. Thus we affirm the potential of Majorana-based qubits to achieve topologically protected Clifford gates through braiding.
Previous studies have investigated the effect of quantum fluctuations in the superconductor on the MZM hybridization energy~\cite{Fidkowski11}. Here, we have extended this analysis to the tunneling-based MZM parity measurement and have shown that spatial fluctuations can reduce the measurement visibility, in addition to the previously identified effects.
Understanding how different noise sources affect MZM parity measurements is an interesting open question. The bosonized particle-number formalism utilized here provides a well-developed framework for investigating these effects. Perturbation theory, for instance in gate voltage fluctuations coupling to density, can be straightforwardly applied to understand how this noise further reduces measurement visibility. Additionally, the analysis could be extended to translate reduced visibility into fidelity estimates for measurement-based braiding by specifying the readout method ({\it e.g.}, charge sensing or differential capacitance). As experimental progress in tuning semiconductor-superconductor nanowires into the topological phase continues to improve~\cite{Lutchyn_review}, such questions become of increasing practical importance.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We are grateful to Torsten Karzig, Chetan Nayak, and Dmitry Pikulin for stimulating discussions. C.K. acknowledges support from the NSF GRFP under Grant No. DGE $114085$ and from the Walter Burke Institute for Theoretical Physics at Caltech. Part of this work was performed at the Aspen Center for Physics, which is supported by National Science Foundation grant PHY-1607611.
|
\section{Introduction}
Callan \cite[Thm.~2]{Binomial} originally extended the classical
binomial identity
\[
(X+Y)^{n}=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k}X^{k}Y^{n-k},
\]
to
\begin{equation}
(X+Y)^{S_{2}(n)}=\sum_{0\leq k\lesssim_{2}n}X^{S_{2}(k)}Y^{S_{2}(n-k)},\label{eq:S2n}
\end{equation}
involving the binary expansions of $n$ and $k$. Here, given any
positive integer $n$, we denote its $b$-ary expansion as
\[
n=\sum_{l=0}^{N-1}n_{l}b^{l}=\left(n_{N-1}\cdots n_{0}\right)_{b}.
\]
Then, $S_{b}(n):=n_{N-1}+\cdots+n_{0}$ is the sum of all the digits
of $n$, in base $b$. In addition, $0\leq k\lesssim_{b}n$ means
the sum index $k$ runs over all integers from $0$ to $n$ such that
the $b$-ary addition $k+(n-k)=n$ is carry-free.
An extension of (\ref{eq:S2n}), to any base $b$, is obtained as
\cite[Eq.~10]{bAry}
\begin{equation}
(X+Y)^{S_{b}(n)}=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k}_{b}X^{S_{b}(k)}Y^{S_{b}(n-k)},\label{eq:Sbn}
\end{equation}
where, the $b$-ary binomial coefficients is defined by \cite[Eq.~11]{bAry}
\begin{equation}
\binom{n}{k}_{b}=\overset{N-1}{\underset{l=0}{\prod}}{n_{l} \choose k_{l}},\label{eq:BinomialCoefficientsBaseb}
\end{equation}
for nonnegative integers $n$ and $k$. Here, we assume $k=(k_{N-1}\cdots k_{0})_{b}$
and $N=\min\left\{ m\in\mathbb{N}:n_{s}=k_{s}=0\text{ for all }s\geq m\right\} $.
Namely, if $n$ has $N_{1}$ digits and $k$ has $N_{2}$ digits,
in base $b$, then $N=\max\left\{ N_{1},N_{2}\right\} $. This setup
for $N$ shall be applied throughout this paper. It can be observed
that the carry-free condition, appeared in (\ref{eq:S2n}), is eliminated
in (\ref{eq:Sbn}), due to the definition (\ref{eq:BinomialCoefficientsBaseb}).
Moreover, the generating function of the $b$-ary binomial coefficients
is obtained as \cite[Eq.~13]{bAry}
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k}_{b}x^{k}=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{n_{l}}.\label{eq:bAryGF}
\end{equation}
In an early paper, Loeb \cite[Thm.~4.1]{NegativeBinomial} defined
in general the binomial coefficients with negative integer entries:
for $n,k\in\mathbb{Z}$,
\[
\binom{n}{k}:=\lim_{\varepsilon\rightarrow0}\frac{\Gamma\left(n+1+\varepsilon\right)}{\Gamma\left(k+1+\varepsilon\right)\Gamma\left(n-k+1+\varepsilon\right)},
\]
which also admit a combinatorial interpretation, counting the number
of elements in a hybrid set. Alternatively, it can be defined as the
coefficient of $x^{k}$ in the power series of $\left(1+x\right)^{n}$
\cite[Prop.~4.5]{NegativeBinomial}:
\begin{equation}
\binom{n}{k}:=\left[x^{k}\right]\left(1+x\right)^{n},\label{eq:NegativeBinomialDEF}
\end{equation}
where if $k$ is negative, the inverse power series is applied. More
precisely, for positive $n$, the following two series expansions
will be considered
\begin{equation}
(1+x)^{-n}=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\binom{-n}{j}x^{j}=\sum_{j=n}^{\infty}\binom{-n}{-j}x^{-j}.\label{eq:ExpansionBinomialNegative}
\end{equation}
The first three cases, $n=1$, $2$, and $3$, are listed here. Calculations
in later examples will consult these expressions:
\begin{eqnarray*}
(1+x)^{-1}= & {\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^{\infty}}(-1)^{j}x^{j} & ={\displaystyle \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}}(-1)^{j+1}x^{-j},\\
(1+x)^{-2}= & {\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^{\infty}}(-1)^{j}(j+1)x^{j} & ={\displaystyle \sum_{j=2}^{\infty}}(-1)^{j}(j-1)x^{-j},\\
(1+x)^{-3}= & {\displaystyle \sum_{j=0}^{\infty}}(-1)^{j}\frac{(j+1)(j+2)}{2}x^{j} & ={\displaystyle \sum_{j=3}^{\infty}}\frac{(-1)^{j+1}(j-1)(j-2)}{2}x^{-j}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The main purpose of this work is to generalize the $b$-ary binomial
coefficients with negative entries, similarly as (\ref{eq:NegativeBinomialDEF}).
Definition, examples and an explicit expression are introduced in
Section \ref{sec:DEF}. In Section \ref{sec:Properties}, we shall
study some properties, such as symmetry, congruence, the Chu-Vandermonde
identity and the Pascal-like recurrence. In Section \ref{sec:Alternatives},
we briefly discuss two other natural but different generalizations,
partially satisfying Pascal-like recurrences.
\section{\label{sec:DEF}Definition and explicit expression}
First of all, we adopt the convention that a negative integer has
all its digits nonpositive, in any base $b$. Namely, if $n=(n_{N-1}n_{N-2}\cdots n_{1}n_{0})_{b}>0$,
then
\[
-n=\left((-n_{N-1})(-n_{N-2})\cdots(-n_{1})(-n_{0})\right)_{b},
\]
which is compatible with the $b$-ary expansion that
\[
-n=(-n_{N-1})b^{N-1}+(-n_{N-2})b^{N-2}+\cdots+(-n_{1})b+(-n_{0}).
\]
It also indicates
\[
S_{b}(-n)=-n_{N-1}-n_{N-2}-\cdots-n_{0}=-S_{b}(n).
\]
We now extend the $b$-ary binomial coefficients with negative entries
as follows.
\begin{defn}
Let $n,k\in\mathbb{Z}$ with $n=\left(n_{N-1}\cdots n_{0}\right)_{b}$
and $k=\left(k_{N-1}\cdots k_{0}\right)_{b}$.
\begin{equation}
\binom{n}{k}_{b}:=\left[x^{k}\right]\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{n_{l}},\label{eq:DEFnkb}
\end{equation}
where, when both $n$ and $k$ are negative, it is the coefficient
of $x^{k}$ of the inverse power series of the right-hand side.
\end{defn}
\begin{rem*}
For simplicity, we shall denote the generating function by
\[
f_{n,b}(x):=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{n_{l}}.
\]
Also, for the negative case, we assume $n$ is positive and consider
the expansions
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\binom{-n}{k}_{b}x^{k}=f_{-n,b}(x)=\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\binom{-n}{-k}_{b}\frac{1}{x^{k}}.\label{eq:GFnegativen}
\end{equation}
\end{rem*}
\begin{example}
\label{exa:Example}Let $b=4$ and $n=6$, so that $-n=-6=\left((-1)(-2)\right)_{4}$
and
\[
f_{-6,4}(x)=\frac{1}{\left(1+x^{4}\right)\left(1+x\right)^{2}}.
\]
(1) For $k=7$, since as $x\rightarrow0$,
\[
f_{-6,4}(x)=1-2x+3x^{2}-4x^{3}+4x^{4}-4x^{5}+4x^{6}-4x^{7}+O\left(x^{8}\right),
\]
we see
\[
\binom{-6}{7}_{4}=-4.
\]
(2) For $k=-8$, as $x\rightarrow\infty$,
\[
f_{-6,4}(x)=x^{-6}-2x^{-7}+3x^{-8}+O\left(x^{-9}\right)\Longrightarrow\binom{-6}{-8}_{4}=3.
\]
\end{example}
The next proposition gives an explicit expression of the $b$-ary
binomial coefficients with negative entries.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:ExplicitExpression} Let $n=\left(n_{N-1}\cdots n_{0}\right)_{b}$
be positive. Then,
\begin{equation}
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}=\begin{cases}
{\displaystyle \sum_{\left(j_{N-1},\ldots,j_{0}\right)\in\mathcal{P}_{n}(k,\mathbf{b}_{N})}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}},} & \text{if }k\geq0;\\
{\displaystyle \sum_{\left(j_{N-1},\ldots,j_{0}\right)\in\mathcal{P}_{n}^{*}(-k,\mathbf{b}_{N})}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{-j_{l}},} & \text{if }k<0,
\end{cases}\label{eq:nbnegativek2}
\end{equation}
where $\bullet$ $\mathbf{b}_{N}:=\{1,b,\ldots,b^{N-1}\}$;
\hspace{16.5bp}$\bullet$ $\mathcal{P}_{n}(k,\mathbf{b}_{N})$ is
the set of \emph{restricted partitions} of $k$ into parts in $\mathbf{b}_{N}$,
i.e.,
\hspace{24bp}$N$-tuples of nonnegative integers $\left(j_{N-1},\ldots,j_{0}\right)$
such that
\begin{equation}
j_{N-1}b^{N-1}+\cdots+j_{1}b^{1}+j_{0}=k;\label{eq:Expansionkbary}
\end{equation}
\hspace{16.5bp}$\bullet$ and $\mathcal{P}_{n}^{*}(-k,\mathbf{b}_{N})$
is the subset of $\mathcal{P}_{n}(-k,\mathbf{b}_{N})$, containing
all the $N$-tuples
\hspace{24bp}with extra restrictions: $j_{l}\geq n_{l}$, for $l=0,\ldots,N-1$.
\end{prop}
\begin{rem*}
If $b>\max\left\{ n,\left|k\right|\right\} $, then both $n$ and
$k$ have one digit, i.e., $N=1$. In this case, (\ref{eq:nbnegativek2})
reduces to (\ref{eq:NegativeBinomialDEF}).
\end{rem*}
\begin{example}
Reconsider, in Example \ref{exa:Example}, that $b=4$ and $-n=-6=\left((-1)(-2)\right)_{4}$.
Then, $N=2\Rightarrow\mathbf{4}_{2}=\left\{ 1,4\right\} $.
\smallskip{}
\noindent(1) For $k=7=1\cdot4+3\cdot1=0\cdot4+7\cdot1$, we see $\mathcal{P}_{6}(7,\mathbf{4}_{2})=\left\{ (1,3),(0,7)\right\} $.
By (\ref{eq:nbnegativek2}),
\[
\binom{-6}{7}_{4}=\binom{-1}{1}\binom{-2}{3}+\binom{-1}{0}\binom{-2}{7}=(-1)\cdot(-4)+1\cdot(-8)=-4.
\]
(2) For $k=-8$, it is not hard to see that $\mathcal{P}_{6}^{*}\left(8,\mathbf{4}_{2}\right)=\left\{ (1,4)\right\} $.
Therefore,
\[
\binom{-6}{-8}_{4}=\binom{-1}{-1}\binom{-2}{-4}=1\cdot3=3.
\]
\end{example}
\begin{proof}
[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:ExplicitExpression}](1) If $k>0$,
we apply (\ref{eq:ExpansionBinomialNegative}) to each factor of $f_{-n,b}(x)$:
\[
f_{-n,b}(x)=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(\sum_{j_{l}=0}^{\infty}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}x^{j_{l}b^{l}}\right)=\sum_{j_{0},\ldots,j_{N-1}=0}^{\infty}\left(\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}\right)x^{\overset{N-1}{\underset{l=0}{\sum}}j_{l}b^{l}}.
\]
By comparing coefficients, the first case in (\ref{eq:nbnegativek2})
is confirmed. \smallskip{}
\\
(2) Similarly if $k<0$, by the inverse power series in (\ref{eq:ExpansionBinomialNegative}),
\[
f_{-n,b}(x)=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(\sum_{j_{l}=n_{l}}^{\infty}\binom{-n_{l}}{-j_{l}}x^{-j_{l}}\right)=\sum_{j_{l}=n_{l}}^{\infty}\left(\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{-j_{l}}\right)x^{-\overset{N-1}{\underset{l=0}{\sum}}j_{l}b^{l}}.
\]
Note that all the $j_{l}'s$, $l=0,\ldots,N-1$ start from $n_{l}$
(, rather than $0$ in the case of $k\geq0$). We need to additionally
restrict the $N$-tuples $\left(j_{N-1},\ldots,j_{0}\right)\in\mathcal{P}_{n}^{*}(-k,\mathbf{b}_{N})$,
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem*}
When both $n$ and $k$ are positive, $f_{n,b}(x)$ is a polynomial
\[
f_{n,b}(x)={\displaystyle \prod_{l=0}^{N-1}}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{n_{l}}=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(\sum_{j_{l}=0}^{n_{l}}\binom{n_{l}}{j_{l}}x^{j_{l}b^{l}}\right).
\]
Then, it requires $0\leq j_{l}\leq n_{l}$, for $l=0,\ldots,N-1$,
which restricts (\ref{eq:Expansionkbary}) to have only one solution:
the unique expression of $k$ in base $b$: $j_{l}=k_{l}$. This explains
the reason that (\ref{eq:BinomialCoefficientsBaseb}) and (\ref{eq:bAryGF})
define the same coefficients, when $n\geq0$. In the last section,
we shall see that a natural generalization of (\ref{eq:BinomialCoefficientsBaseb})
for $n<0$ is different from (\ref{eq:DEFnkb}).
\end{rem*}
\section{\label{sec:Properties}Properties}
\subsection{Symmetry}
\begin{prop*}
For any $n,k\in\mathbb{Z}$, ${\displaystyle \binom{n}{k}_{b}=\binom{n}{n-k}_{b}}$.
\end{prop*}
\begin{proof}
Since the non-negative case is already proven in \cite[Thm.~10]{bAry},
we let $n,k\in\mathbb{N}$ and it suffices to show that
\[
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}=\binom{-n}{-n-k}_{b}\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \binom{-n}{-k}_{b}=\binom{-n}{-n+k}_{b}.
\]
(1) By the left expansion in (\ref{eq:GFnegativen}),
\[
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}=\frac{f_{-n,b}^{(k)}(0)}{k!}.
\]
On the other hand, note that
\[
f_{-n,b}\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(1+x^{-b^{l}}\right)^{-n_{l}}=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}x^{n_{l}b^{l}}\left(x^{b^{l}}+1\right)^{-n_{l}}=x^{n}f_{-n,b}(x).
\]
From the higher-order product rule that
\[
f_{-n,b}^{(n+k)}\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)=\sum_{l=0}^{n+k}\binom{n+k}{l}\frac{\mathrm{d}^{l}(x^{n})}{\mathrm{d}x^{l}}f_{-n,b}^{(n+k-l)}(x),
\]
we see, when letting $x\rightarrow0$, the only non-zero term on the
right-hand side is that $l=n$. Thus,
\[
\binom{-n}{-n-k}_{b}=\frac{1}{(n+k)!}\lim_{x\rightarrow0}f_{-n,b}^{(n+k)}\left(\frac{1}{x}\right)=\frac{1}{(n+k)!}\binom{n+k}{n}n!f_{-n,b}^{(k)}(0)=\binom{-n}{k}_{b},
\]
which proves the first symmetric identity.\smallskip{}
\\
(2) For the second identity, if $k\geq n\Leftrightarrow-n+k\geq0$,
by interchanging the two sides and by noting $-n-(-n+k)=-k$, it is
equivalent to the first identity.
Now, The remaining case is that $k<n$, so that both $-k$ and $-n+k$
are negative. In fact, we have
\[
\binom{-n}{-k}_{b}=\binom{-n}{-n+k}_{b}=0,
\]
which can be seen either from (\ref{eq:nbnegativek2}), where in this
case $\mathcal{P}_{n}(-k,\mathbf{b}_{N})=\emptyset$; or from the
following direct calculation:
\[
\sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\binom{-n}{-k}_{b}\frac{1}{x^{k}}=f_{-n,b}(x)=\frac{1}{x^{n}}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{1}{x^{b^{l}}}\right)^{n_{l}}}=\frac{1}{x^{n}}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(\sum_{j_{l}=1}^{\infty}\frac{(-1)^{j_{l}}}{x^{j_{l}b^{l}}}\right)^{n_{l}}.\qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{rem*}
The proof above suggests a slight modification of (\ref{eq:GFnegativen}):
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\binom{-n}{k}_{b}x^{k}=f_{-n,b}(x)=\sum_{k={\color{red}n}}^{\infty}\binom{-n}{-k}_{b}x^{-k}.\label{eq:GF-nkb}
\end{equation}
\end{rem*}
\subsection{Recurrence}
As proven in \cite[Thm.~10]{bAry}, for nonnegative integers $n$
and $k$,
\[
\binom{n}{k}_{b}+\binom{n}{k-1}_{b}=\binom{n+1}{k}_{b}
\]
holds when $\binom{n+1}{k}_{b}\neq0$. The next proposition shows
that for negative $n$, the recurrence holds similarly, with some
(in-)divisibility restriction.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:Pascal} Let $n=\left(n_{N-1}\cdots n_{0}\right)>0$ and
$k\in\mathbb{Z}$. If $b\nmid n$, then
\begin{equation}
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}+\binom{-n}{k-1}_{b}=\binom{-n+1}{k}_{b}.\label{eq:Pascal}
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Since $b\nmid n\Leftrightarrow n_{0}\neq0$, we have $-n+1=\left((-n_{N-1})\cdots(-(n_{0}-1)\right)_{b}$.
Then,
\[
f_{-n+1,b}(x)=\left(1+x\right)^{-n_{0}+1}\prod_{l=1}^{N-1}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{-n_{l}}=(1+x)f_{-n,b}(x).
\]
This recurrence gives (\ref{eq:Pascal}) by expanding both sides and
comparing coefficients of the two expansions in (\ref{eq:GF-nkb}).
\end{proof}
\begin{rem*}
By a similar calculation, we can see that, if for some $s\in\left\{ 0,\ldots,N-1\right\} $,
$n_{s}\neq0$, then
\begin{equation}
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}+\binom{-n}{k-b^{s}}_{b}=\binom{-n+b^{s}}{k}_{b}.\label{eq:bAryPascal}
\end{equation}
\end{rem*}
Next, we consider the case $b\mid n$, in the next proposition.
\begin{prop}
Let $n=\left(n_{N-1}\cdots n_{s}0\cdots0\right)>0$, i.e., $n_{0}=\cdots=n_{s-1}=0$
and $n_{s}\neq0$. Then, for any $m\in\left\{ 0,\ldots,s-1\right\} $
and $k\geq b^{s}$ or $k\leq-n+b^{m}$,
\begin{equation}
\binom{-n+b^{s}}{k}_{b}=\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{b^{m}\leq j\leq b^{s}}{b^{m}\mid j}}\binom{b^{s}-b^{m}}{j}_{b}\binom{-n+b^{m}}{k-j}_{b}.\label{eq:PartialChuVandermonde}
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Since $n-b^{m}=\left(n_{N-1}\cdots(n_{s}-1)(b-1)\cdots(b-1)0\cdots0\right)_{b}$,
we see
\[
f_{-n+b^{m},b}(x)=\frac{{\displaystyle \prod_{l=m}^{s-1}}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{1-b}}{\left(1+x^{b^{s}}\right)^{n_{s}-1}{\displaystyle \prod_{l=s+1}^{N-1}}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{n_{l}}}=\frac{1+x^{b^{s}}}{{\displaystyle \prod_{l=m}^{s-1}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{b-1}}}f_{-n,b}(x),
\]
namely,
\begin{align*}
\left(1+x^{b^{s}}\right)f_{-n,b}(x) & =\left(\prod_{l=m}^{s-1}\left(1+x^{b^{l}}\right)^{b-1}\right)f_{-n+b^{m},b}(x)\\
& =\prod_{l=m}^{s-1}\left(\sum_{j_{l}=0}^{b-1}\binom{b-1}{j_{l}}x^{j_{l}b^{l}}\right)f_{-n+b^{m},b}(x)\\
& =\left(\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{b^{m}\leq j\leq b^{s}}{b^{m}\mid j}}\binom{b^{s}-b^{m}}{j}_{b}x^{j}\right)f_{-n+b^{m},b}(x),
\end{align*}
where in the last step, we see that $j=\left(j_{N-1}\cdots j_{0}\right)_{b}$
runs over all integers between $b^{m}$ and $b^{s}$ with $j_{l}=0$,
$l=0,\ldots,m-1$, which is equivalent to $b^{m}\mid j$. Comparing
coefficients and applying (\ref{eq:bAryPascal}) to the left-hand
side complete the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Chu-Vandermonde identity}
Suppose both $n=\left(n_{N-1}\cdots n_{0}\right)_{b}$ and $m=\left(m_{N-1}\cdots m_{0}\right)_{b}$
are positive, and $n+m$ in base $b$ is carry-free. Then,
\begin{equation}
f_{-(n+m),b}(x)=f_{-n,b}(x)f_{-m,b}(x),\label{eq:ChuVandermondeGF}
\end{equation}
which, by the series expansions, is
\[
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\binom{-n-m}{k}_{b}x^{k}=\sum_{k=0}^{\infty}\sum_{j=0}^{k}\binom{-n}{k-j}_{b}\binom{-m}{j}_{b}x^{k}.
\]
This leads to the following Chu-Vandermonde identities.
\begin{prop}
For positive integers $n$ and $m$, such that $n+m$ in base $b$
is carry-free. Then, for $k\geq m$, we have
\[
\binom{-n-m}{k}_{b}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}\binom{-n}{k-j}_{b}\binom{-m}{j}_{b}.
\]
and for $k\geq n+m$,
\[
\binom{-n-m}{-k}_{b}=\sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\binom{-n}{-k+j}_{b}\binom{-m}{-j}_{b}.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{rem*}
The second identity is obtained by the inverse power series of (\ref{eq:ChuVandermondeGF}),
which requires both $-k+j$ and $-j$ are negative.
\end{rem*}
Next, we consider the mixed of positive and negative cases. Let both
$n,m$ be positive such that $n>m$ and $m+(n-m)$ is carry-free in
base $b$. Then,
\[
f_{n-m,b}(x)=f_{n,b}(x)f_{-m,b}(x)\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ f_{-n+m,b}(x)=f_{-n,b}(x)f_{m,b}(x).
\]
From the first identity, we have
\[
\sum_{k=0}^{n-m}\binom{n-m}{k}_{b}x^{k}=\left(\sum_{s=0}^{n}\binom{n}{s}_{b}x^{s}\right)\left(\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}\binom{-m}{j}_{b}x^{j}\right),
\]
which leads to
\[
\binom{n-m}{k}_{b}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}\binom{n}{k-j}_{b}\binom{-m}{j}_{b}.
\]
Meanwhile, if we alternatively use
\[
\sum_{k=0}^{n-m}\binom{n-m}{k}_{b}x^{k}=\left(\sum_{s=0}^{n}\binom{n}{s}_{b}x^{s}\right)\left(\sum_{j=m}^{\infty}\binom{-m}{-j}_{b}x^{-j}\right),
\]
we see
\[
\binom{n-m}{k}_{b}=\sum_{s=k+1}^{n}\binom{n}{s}_{b}\binom{-m}{k-s}_{b}.
\]
Similar discussion applies to the second identity. Therefore, we obtain
the following identities, whose proofs are omitted.
\begin{prop}
Given positive integers $n$ and $m$, such that $n>m$ and $m+(n-m)$
is carry-free in base $b$, we have\medskip{}
\\
(1) for $0\leq k\leq n-m$,
\[
\binom{n-m}{k}_{b}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}\binom{n}{k-j}_{b}\binom{-m}{j}_{b}=\sum_{s=k+1}^{n}\binom{n}{s}_{b}\binom{-m}{k-s}_{b};
\]
(2) for $k\geq0$,
\[
\binom{-n+m}{k}_{b}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}\binom{-n}{k-j}_{b}\binom{m}{j}_{b};
\]
(3) and for $k\geq n-m$,
\[
\binom{-n+m}{-k}_{b}=\sum_{j=0}^{k}\binom{-n}{-k-j}_{b}\binom{m}{j}_{b}.
\]
\end{prop}
\subsection{Congruence}
As the authors \cite[Thm.~12]{bAry} pointed out, Lucas' congruence
theorem, for prime $p$,
\[
\binom{n}{k}\equiv\binom{n}{k}_{p}=\overset{N-1}{\underset{l=0}{\prod}}{n_{l} \choose k_{l}}\pmod p
\]
becomes obvious, by letting $b=p$ in the generating function (\ref{eq:bAryGF})
and by using an elementary congruence
\[
(1+x)^{n}\equiv\overset{N-1}{\underset{l=0}{\prod}}\left(1+x^{p^{l}}\right)^{n_{l}}\pmod p.
\]
The reciprocal of the congruence above indicates that Lucas' congruence
theorem also holds for negative entries.
\begin{prop}
For $n,k\in\mathbb{Z}$ and a prime $p$, ${\displaystyle \binom{n}{k}\equiv\binom{n}{k}_{p}}$
$\left(\bmod p\right)$.
\end{prop}
\section{\label{sec:Alternatives}other possible generalizations}
Naturally, we could generalized the $b$-ary binomial coefficients
as, for positive integer $n$
\begin{equation}
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{*}:=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{k_{l}},\label{eq:nkbStar}
\end{equation}
However, this definition is different from (\ref{eq:DEFnkb}). For
instance, (see also Example \ref{exa:Example}),
\[
\binom{-6}{7}_{4}^{*}=\binom{-1}{1}\binom{-2}{3}=4\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \binom{-6}{-8}_{4}^{*}=\binom{-1}{-2}\binom{-2}{0}=-1.
\]
Meanwhile, we tried to extend (\ref{eq:Sbn}), by expanding both sides
as
\[
\left(X+Y\right)^{S_{b}(n)}=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(X+Y\right)^{n_{l}}=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(\sum_{j_{l}=0}^{n_{l}}\binom{n_{l}}{j_{l}}X^{-n_{l}-j_{l}}Y^{j_{l}}\right),
\]
while in the negative case
\[
\left(X+Y\right)^{-S_{b}(n)}=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}X^{-n_{l}}\left(1+\frac{Y}{X}\right)^{-n_{l}}=\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\left(\sum_{j_{l}=0}^{\infty}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}X^{-n_{l}-j_{l}}Y^{j_{l}}\right).
\]
When $Y$ has power $j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)$, $X$ has the
power $-S_{b}(n)-S_{b}(k)$. The inverse power series leads to similar
results. It seem that we could consider
\[
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{**}:=\left[\frac{Y^{S_{b}(k)}}{X^{S_{b}(n)+S_{b}(k)}}\right]\left(X+Y\right)^{-S_{b}(n)}=\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=0,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\left(\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}\right),
\]
and
\[
\binom{-n}{-k}_{b}^{**}:=\left[\frac{X^{S_{b}(k)}}{X^{S_{b}(n)}Y^{S_{b}(k)}}\right]\left(X+Y\right)^{-S_{b}(n)}=\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{l}\geq n_{l}\text{ for }l=0,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\left(\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{-j_{l}}\right).
\]
Not only do they have different values, e.g., by considering the two
series of $(1+x)^{-3}$,
\[
\binom{-6}{7}_{4}^{**}=15\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \binom{-6}{-8}_{4}^{**}=0,
\]
but also they do not extend (\ref{eq:Sbn}), since when $S_{b}(k')=S_{b}(k)$,
the definition above implies $\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{**}=\binom{-n}{k'}_{b}^{**}$.
In the positive case, from the two expansions
\[
\sum_{j=0}^{S_{b}(n)}\binom{S_{b}(n)}{j}X^{j}Y^{S_{b}(n)-j}=(X+Y)^{S_{b}(n)}=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\binom{n}{k}_{b}X^{S_{b}(k)}Y^{S_{b}(n-k)},
\]
we should have
\[
\binom{S_{b}(n)}{j}=\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0\leq k\leq n}{S_{b}(k)=j}}\binom{n}{k}_{b}.
\]
Note that the finite sum on the left-hand side becomes an infinite
series in the negative case, which makes the extension of (\ref{eq:Sbn})
tricky.
Although the two different extends do not satisfy basic properties
such as symmetry and congruence, they satisfy similar Pascal-like
recurrence, for positive $k$.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop:PascalStars} For positive integers $n$ and $k$, if
$b\nmid k$ and $b\nmid n$, then
\[
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{*}+\binom{-n}{k-1}_{b}^{*}=\binom{-n+1}{k}_{b}^{*}\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{**}+\binom{-n}{k-1}_{b}^{**}=\binom{-n+1}{k}_{b}^{**}.
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We shall make use of the result \cite[Prop.~4.4]{NegativeBinomial}
that the generalized binomial coefficients also satisfy the Pascal-like
recurrence:
\[
\binom{-n}{k}+\binom{-n}{k-1}=\binom{-n+1}{k}.
\]
Note that $b\nmid k$ and $b\nmid n$ are equivalent to $k_{0}\neq0\neq n_{0}$,
so that
\[
k-1=(k_{N-1}\cdots k_{1}(k_{0}-1))_{b}\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ -n+1=\left((-n_{N-1})\cdots(-n_{1})(-n_{0}+1)\right)_{b}.
\]
(1) Directly, we have
\begin{align*}
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{*}+\binom{-n}{k-1}_{b}^{*} & =\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{k_{l}}+\binom{-n_{0}}{k_{0}-1}\prod_{l=1}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{k_{l}}\\
& =\left(\binom{-n_{0}}{k_{0}}+\binom{-n_{0}}{k_{0}-1}\right)\prod_{l=1}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{k_{l}}\\
& =\binom{-n_{0}+1}{k_{0}}\prod_{l=1}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{k_{l}}=\binom{-n+1}{k}_{b}^{*}.
\end{align*}
(2) By definition,
\[
\binom{-n}{k-1}_{b}^{**}=\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{l}'\geq0\text{ for }l=0,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}'+\cdots+j_{0}'=S_{b}(k-1)}}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}},
\]
and
\begin{align*}
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{**} & =\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=0,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}\allowdisplaybreaks\\
& =\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{0}>0,j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=1,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}+\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{0}=0,j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=0,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}.
\end{align*}
Note that $S_{b}(k-1)=S_{b}(k)-1$ and if $j_{0}>0$, there is a one-to-one
correspondence
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\{ \left(j_{N-1},\ldots,j_{0}\right):\sum_{l=0}^{N-1}j_{l}=S_{b}(k)\right\} & \longleftrightarrow & \left\{ \left(j_{N-1}',\ldots,j_{0}'\right):\sum_{l=0}^{N-1}j_{l}'=S_{b}(k-1)\right\} \\
\left(j_{N-1},\ldots,j_{0}\right) & \rightleftharpoons & \left(j_{N-1},\ldots,j_{0}-1\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, we can rewrite that
\[
\binom{-n}{k-1}_{b}^{**}=\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{0}>0,j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=1,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\binom{-n_{0}}{j_{0}-1}\prod_{l=1}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}.
\]
In addition, when $j_{0}=0$,
\[
\binom{-n_{0}}{j_{0}}=1=\binom{-n_{0}+1}{j_{0}}.
\]
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{**}+\binom{-n}{k-1}_{b}^{**}= & \sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{0}=0,j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=1,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\binom{-n_{0}+1}{j_{0}}\prod_{l=0}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}\\
& +\sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{0}>0,j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=1,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\left(\binom{-n_{0}}{j_{0}}+\binom{-n_{0}}{j_{0}-1}\right)\prod_{l=1}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}\\
= & \sum_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j_{l}\geq0\text{ for }l=0,\ldots,N-1}{j_{N-1}+\cdots+j_{0}=S_{b}(k)}}\binom{-n_{0}+1}{j_{0}}\prod_{l=1}^{N-1}\binom{-n_{l}}{j_{l}}=\binom{-n+1}{k}_{b}^{**}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{rem*}
(1) Note that by definition, if $k-1$ has more digits than $n$,
the recurrence for $\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{*}$ holds vacuously, since
all the three terms vanish. \smallskip{}
\\
(2) When $k<0$, for ``most'' values of $k$, similar recurrences
hold for $\binom{-n}{k}_{b}^{*}$. It can be observed that if $b\nmid n$
and $k\equiv1$ $\left(\bmod p\right)$, Prop.~\ref{prop:PascalStars}
tend to fail. However, there are not all the exceptions. Please see
the following Table \ref{tab:2}, which lists the result of
\[
\binom{-n}{-k}_{4}^{*}+\binom{-n}{-k-1}_{4}^{*}-\binom{-n+1}{-k-1}_{4}^{*},
\]
for $1\leq n\leq10$ and $1\leq k\leq20$. Non-zero values locate
where the Pascal-like recurrence fails.
We shall leave it as part of our future work. \vspace{-10bp}
\begin{table}[H]
\[
\left(\begin{array}{rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & -3 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 3 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & -1 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 2 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & -2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -4 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 4 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -3 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 4 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 3 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & -1 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 2 & 0 & 0 & -1 & -3 & 0 & 0 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 & -1 & -2 & 0 & 0 & -2 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & -3 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & -5 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 6 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{array}\right)
\]
\vspace{-5bp}
\caption{\label{tab:2}${\displaystyle \binom{-n}{-k}_{4}^{*}+\binom{-n}{-k-1}_{4}^{*}-\binom{-n+1}{-k-1}_{4}^{*}}$
for $\protect\begin{aligned}1\protect\leq n\protect\leq10\protect\\
1\protect\leq k\protect\leq20
\protect\end{aligned}
$}
\end{table}
\end{rem*}
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The corresponding author is supported by the National Science Foundation
of China (No.~1140149). And the first author is supported by the
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (No.~145628481).
|
\section{Acknowledgment}\label{sec:acknowledgment}
This work was partially supported by US NSF-CAREER-CNS-1453647, and Florida Center for Cybersecurity Capacity Building Program. The views expressed are those of the authors only.
\section{Background}\label{background}
In this section, we briefly describe a SHS and different design assumptions and features that we have considered in solution.
\subsection{Connected Smart Healthcare System}
SHS refers to a medical device or a group of medical devices which are equipped with different physical sensors to collect data from a patient's body and surroundings and take autonomous decisions to provide improved treatments. Also the inclusion of information and data sharing between patients and health service providers using wired or wireless technology (Bluetooth, ZigBee, etc.) improve access to care, quality of care, and increase the overall efficiency of the healthcare system. As mentioned earlier, the smart healthcare system may consist of a single or multiple smart medical devices (e.g., wearables, wireless devices, implantable devices, etc.). Here, for this work, we consider multi-device SHS. In addition to these devices, SHS also considers different non-medical parameters (e.g., the location of the patient, physical status, etc.). to provide a correct diagnosis of an event (disease, body condition, etc.). Here, different vital signs of the patient are collected by the devices to understand the overall condition of the patient. These vital signs are represented as analog signals along with their nominal values in Figure~\ref{fig:background} where vital signs are obtained, sampled and digitized for transmission as network packets to a Central Data Processing Unit (CDPU)~\cite{varshney2007pervasive}. The CDPU observes the overall condition of the patients based on the vital signs forwarded by the smart medical devices and alerts the physician in case of an emergency situation. In some instances, CDPU also takes autonomous decisions such as suggest new medicine, change the dose of the medicine, etc. For example, in Figure~\ref{fig:background}, the EEG and ECG signal monitor observe the neural activities of the patient and the heart condition, respectively. If any body function or state of the patient change, it will change ECG and EEG signal patterns. A healthcare professional can observe the change in the ECG and EEG signal and interpret this change as a cardiovascular problem. Additionally, SHS can be programmed to determine different pre-defined states (e.g., atrial problem, myocardial infraction, etc.) and provide autonomous treatment to the patient.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Interconnected Body Function}
The functions of different organs in a human body are interconnected, and if any organ behaves abnormally, it affects the overall condition of the human body \cite{gray1878anatomy}. For example, if the heart rate suddenly increases in the body, it may end up causing heart palpitations, shortness of breath, etc. causing abrupt functions in other body organs. As SHS can observe different body functions at once, this interconnection can be detected and used as a feature to identify the cause of the problem. We consider this interconnection of body function as a feature of detecting anomalous behavior in SHS.
For example, if we find a patient has high blood pressure, then the patient has cardiovascular risk factors where major risk factors are hypertension, cigarette smoking, physical inactivity, etc. Targeted organ damage are the heart, brain, chronic kidney disease, etc. Identifiable causes of hypertension are sleep apnea, drug-related problem, chronic kidney disease, etc.~\cite{chobanian2003seventh}. So in this scenario, high blood pressure of a patient can be confirmed by observing the vital signs collected from ECG, blood pressure, glucose monitoring, oxygen monitoring, sweating, EEG, and sleep monitoring device.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.50\textwidth]{backgr.png}
\caption{An example of a smart healthcare system.}
\label{fig:background}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Analysis of Anomalous Behavior}
Anomalous behavior analysis refers to a model which defines all the normal behavior in a system to differentiate abnormal behavior. The capability of detecting unknown attacks makes the anomaly behavior analysis suitable for smart healthcare security framework. However, the major challenge to implementing such an analysis method in a SHS is to establish the ground truth from normal behavior with a low false positive rate. To overcome this problem, we propose an anomaly behavior analysis of the devices based on patients health condition and activities. For instance, if a person is working out in the gym, his heart-rate will rise, the oxygen level will decrease, breathing will increase, and certain brain waves will change in a pattern. To detect anomalous behavior in a SHS, a security framework should understand the ongoing activity in the human body and determine whether the activity is benign or malicious based on the vital signs collected from connected smart health devices. We consider different day-to-day user activities as well as vital signs of the body for specific diseases to understand the benign activities and identify malicious states in a SHS. For example, a person takes high cholesterol food who does not have high blood pressure suddenly gets an alarm in a blood pressure monitoring device because it crosses the minimum threshold for systolic$\ge120$. We consider both regular and disease affected scenario of the devices by observing user activities and usage patterns to build the ground truth of HealthGuard.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
Smart Healthcare Systems offer better diagnostic tools and treatment for patients, but they also raise
many security concerns, as discussed in this work.
To address these security concerns, in this paper, we presented HealthGuard, a novel machine-learning-based security framework that can assess the overall status of a SHS and can determine if there is any malicious activity has occured in the system. We evaluated HealthGuard in multiple medical settings
considering healthy and disease-infected people in a SHS. Moreover,
HealthGuard is highly effective and efficient in detecting several threats. Specifically, HealthGuard can achieve 91\% accuracy in detecting different attacks.
\section{Discussion and Limitations} \label{sec:discussion}
In this section, we discuss the benefits and the limitations of HealthGuard in detecting malicious activities in SHSs. We also highlight some future research directions that can help to understand the threats and build secure SHSs.
\begin{itemize}
\item Real-life patient monitoring data: We have collected our dataset for different healthcare devices considering all the devices are connected to a patient for health monitoring. However, the collected data are not from the same patient which may introduce some false positive and false negative cases in the framework. It is also very challenging and expensive to create a real-life testbed to collect data and train HealthGuard. In the future, we would like to implement HealthGuard in a real-life smart healthcare system and test with real devices.
\item Continuous healthcare monitoring: In a SHS, a patient is monitored 24/7. In healthcare, some of the devices are used for continuous monitoring and give continuous data for the patient where some of the devices are used in a certain time interval to check the health status. So, it's a 24/7 health monitoring system and in our framework timestamp is a big challenge to implement our solution. We did consider our data is coming at different time frame and it's a continuous monitoring process.
\item Diverse configuration: In a SHS, number of connected devices may vary with the need of the patient/user. To evaluate HealthGuard, we consider a set of eight smart medical devices in the SHS. In reality, the number and the combination of the devices may vary which can affect the performance of HealthGuard. In addition, new smart medical devices can measure more than one vital signs at once~\cite{fit}. In future, we wi
l implement and test HealthGuard in real-life SHS with different configuration to understand the effectiveness thoroughly. l
\item Performance Overhead: As we used MATLAB and Scikit-Learn toolbox for Python to build our framework, HealthGuard runs in the local machine which does not demonstrate any overhead. Moreover, we collected real-life data for eight different devices from publicly available dataset which does not illustrate any overhead of collecting data. In future, we would like to evaluate HealthGuard in a real-life settings to calculate the overhead and perform a detailed evaluation.
\end{itemize}
Although our proposed security framework (HealthGuard) can detect threats in a smart healthcare system, we will expand this solution in a real-life environment with a real-life health monitoring system.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
A rapidly growing aging population and a massive rise in the cost of healthcare have escalated the dire need of an efficient healthcare system. Indeed, according to recent figures, the global healthcare market is expected to reach \$ 53.65 billion by 2025~\cite{healthcare6}.
In this fast-growing landscape, recent advancements in medical technology have led the way to
better diagnostic tools, better treatment for patients, and devices that improve the quality of life. Specifically, with the introduction of high precision medical sensors and Internet-of-Things devices and applications, healthcare systems have become both smart and ubiquitous. Nowadays, the use of Smart Healthcare Systems (SHSs) is not limited to the medical facilities only. Besides the clinical usage, SHS also includes
implantable and wearable medical devices to gather, store, and process various types of physiological data during daily activities of a patient~\cite{yin2018smart}. Moreover, SHS can connect with the nearby devices or cloud (e.g., smartwatch, fitness tracker, glucose monitoring devices, etc.) and offer a proactive approach to early detection and even prevention of medical conditions \cite{sikder2019context}. SHS also enhances the clinical and administrative workflow of healthcare organizations, and help in
the massive demand for more efficient and error-free healthcare industry.
While SHS enables many benefits with improved technology, they unfortunately also face myriads of cybersecurity threats. Moreover, cybersecurity maturity in healthcare is still in its early stage and healthcare data tends to be richer than financial services or retail data.
A popular example of security concern was disabling the wireless connectivity of the pacemaker of individuals
to protect it from hacking~\cite{intro3}. In the academic community, researchers demonstrated several cyber attacks against a commercial Implantable Cardiac Defibrillator (ICD) and Implantable Medical Devices (IMD), where an attacker could disable or reprogram the therapies performed by an ICD/IMD \cite{li2011hijacking}. However, balancing security, privacy, and usability is a challenge in the healthcare domain. Any issue concerning trustworthiness should be addressed aggressively and proactively because of the catastrophic health consequences. Thus, this area requires the immediate attention of information security research communities, medical device manufacturer and regulatory bodies. Although there are some device-specific solutions provided by the researchers, no comprehensive and centralized solution has been proposed to protect SHS from malicious threats \cite{greaves2017access}.
To address these emerging threats and shortcomings of the SHS, in this paper, we present a novel security framework, HealthGuard, to detect malicious activities in a smart healthcare system (SHS). Our framework is built upon the observation that for any change in the physiological functions of a patient, the vital signs of a specific set of medical devices changes. HealthGuard observes each device in a SHS separately and correlates the vital signs from different devices to understand the overall status of the patient. HealthGuard also uses the correlation of different body functions to differentiate normal user activities and disease-affected activities. In HealthGuard, the framework utilizes different Machine Learning (ML)-based detection algorithm (Artificial Neural Network, Decision Tree, Random Forest, k-Nearest Neighbor) to detect malicious activities in the SHS. We collected data for eight different smart medical devices and twelve benign activities (7 normal user activities and 5 disease-affected scenarios) to train HealthGuard. We also evaluated HealthGuard against three
different threats. Our evaluation shows that HealthGuard can detect malicious activities in SHS with an accuracy of 91\% and F1-score of 90\%.
\vspace{6pt}
\noindent\textit{Contributions:} To summarize, our contributions are three-fold:
\begin{itemize}[nosep, wide=0pt, leftmargin=*]
\item We present HealthGuard, a ML-based, data-driven security framework to detect threats in SHS. HealthGuard can capture the correlation between different body functions of the patient and observe the vital signs of different smart medical devices to detect malicious activities in a SHS.
\item We trained HealthGuard with data collected from nine databases for eight different devices and twelve benign activities including seven normal user activities and five disease-affected cases.
\item We evaluated HealthGuard against three different threats. Our extensive evaluation illustrates that HealthGuard can detect different threats to smart healthcare system with high accuracy and F1-score.
\end{itemize}
\noindent\textit{Organization:} The rest of the paper is organized as follows: We provide an overview of security vulnerabilities in healthcare systems and existing solutions in Section~\ref{sec:related_work}. The detailed overview of the smart healthcare system is provided in Section \ref{background}. In Section~\ref{scope}, we discuss the problem scope of the current solution while focusing on this work and our considered threat models. In Section~\ref{sec:system_overview}, the detailed overview of HealthGuard is provided. We illustrate the efficiency of HealthGuard in detecting several malicious activities by analyzing several performance metrics in Section~\ref{sec:performance_evaluation}. Finally, we conclude the paper in Section~\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Performance Evaluation}\label{sec:performance_evaluation}
In this section, we evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of HealthGuard in detecting malicious activities in a SHS. We consider several research questions to evaluate HealthGuard in detecting malicious attacks.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textbf{RQ1}] What is the performance of HealthGuard in differentiating an incident occurring on disease-affected user and normal user? (Sec~\ref{normal})
\item[\textbf{RQ2}] What is the performance of HealthGuard in detecting different malicious attacks in SHSs? (Sec~\ref{attack})
\item[\textbf{RQ3}] What is the impact of the number of devices in SHS on the performance of HealthGuard? (Sec.~\ref{device})
\item[\textbf{RQ4}] What is the impact of the number of attacks occurring in the SHS on the performance of the HealthGuard? (Sec.~\ref{noattack})
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\fontsize{12}{14}\selectfont
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|lllllllllll|l|}
\hline
\textbf{Disease Type} & \textbf{ECG} & \textbf{SW} & \textbf{BP} & \textbf{GL} & \textbf{BR} & \textbf{OX} & \textbf{SL} & \textbf{HG} & \textbf{AL} & \textbf{NA} & \textbf{HM} & \textbf{Ref.} \\ \hline
High blood Pressure & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \cite{94d682fe28184e60a9822abdddf0a2f8} \\
High Cholesterol & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \cite{urala2003reasons} \\
Excessive sweating & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \cite{heckmann2001botulinum} \\
Abnormal oxygen level & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \cite{bakker1991blood} \\
High or low blood sugar & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \cite{bordia1998effect} \\\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Device status in disease affected scenarios.}
\label{table:disease}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{table}
\subsection{Training Environment and Methodology}
To test the efficacy of HealthGuard, we collected data from eight different smart medical devices available on the Internet for different normal user activities and disease-affected users. We have selected eight smart medical devices that gave us the heart rate (ECG), blood pressure (BP), blood glucose (GL), oxygen (OX) saturation, blood hemoglobin (HG), respiratory or breathing (BR) rate, blood alcohol (AL), neural activity (NA), human motion (HM) and sleep (SL) monitoring of a person.
We considered the threshold values of different vital signs of humans (e.g., heart rate, blood pressure, etc.) as a normal state. For example, the oxygen saturation level for a healthy person is 94-99\%, and blood hemoglobin is 12.3 - 17.5 g/dl and HealthGuard considers this range as a normal range for a user. The list of devices and a list of
selected features and sources are given in Table~\ref{table:devices}. In addition to these, we considered five different disease scenarios to understand the normal operation in disease affected scenarios of SHS thoroughly. We collected data from the selected smart medical devices for high blood pressure, high cholesterol, excessive sweating (SW), abnormal oxygen level, abnormal blood sugar. For a specific disease, a group of different but specific devices gives vital signs that are beyond the range of normal threshold. HealthGuard considers these data as disease-affected data and labels as normal operation of the SHS. The list of disease and the corresponding devices are given in Table~\ref{table:disease}.
In the training environment, we also considered seven regular user activities (sleeping, walking, exercise, stress, drunk, heart-attack, and stroke situation) and observed how the vitals from different smart medical changes with the activities. For a specific activity, a group of devices exhibits changes in the vital signs. For example, when a person does exercise his heart-rate rises, glucose, oxygen, hemoglobin level decreases, sweating increases and certain brain waves exhibit in the monitoring device~\cite{klachko1972blood}. Similarly, when a person is in stress condition, his heart-rate might rise, blood pressure increases, sweating, breathing increases and a certain part of the brain is affected~\cite{sharma2012objective}. We considered these as benign user activities and labeled as normal operation of a SHS. A detailed list of normal user activities considered in HealthGuard is given in Table~\ref{table:normal}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\fontsize{12}{14}\selectfont
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|llllllllll|l|}
\hline
\textbf{Activity Type} & \textbf{ECG} & \textbf{BP} & \textbf{GL} & \textbf{BR} & \textbf{OX} & \textbf{SW} & \textbf{HM} & \textbf{HG} & \textbf{AL} & \textbf{NA} & \textbf{Ref.} \\ \hline
Sleeping & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & - & - & - & - & \cite{block1979sleep} \\
Walking & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & \cite{klachko1972blood} \\
Stress & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & - & - & \checkmark & \cite{sharma2012objective} \\
Exercise & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & - & \checkmark & \cite{crabbe2004brain} \\
Drunk & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & - & - & - & \checkmark & & \cite{dhindsa2004differential} \\
Heart-Attack & \checkmark & - & - & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & - & - & - & \checkmark & \cite{chen2017brain} \\
Stroke & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & - & - & - & \checkmark & \checkmark & - & \checkmark & \cite{mackay2004atlas} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Device affected for normal activity pattern.}
\label{table:normal}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{table}
For making the malicious dataset, we simulated three different attack scenarios for a SHS based on the adversary model described in Section~\ref{scope}. To perform the attack for Threat 1, we considered an attacker injected false data to medical devices to perform malicious activities. For Threat 2, we considered a malicious app installed in any of the devices which disables the sleep mode in the device (tampered device attack). For threat 3, we simulated a scenario to impede the normal operation of a smart medical device which illustrates the DoS attack in the system. We built a simulation environment in MATLAB using digital signal processing toolbox and Poisson distribution to randomize the attack scenario. We used Poisson distribution to describe the attack scenarios as rare events in a large dataset.
To test HealthGuard, we collected 20,000 data instances in total where 17,000 were for healthy and disease infected people, and 3,000 were simulated attack data in dataset. Next, we divided our data into two sections, where 70\% of the collected dataset was used to train the framework, and 30\% of the collected data along with malicious dataset were used for testing purpose \cite{amazon}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\fontsize{12}{14}\selectfont
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|llll|llll|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{Benign}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{Malicious}} \\ \cline{2-9}
& \textbf{KNN} & \textbf{DT} & \textbf{RF} & \textbf{ANN} & \textbf{KNN} & \textbf{DT} & \textbf{RF} & \textbf{ANN} \\ \hline
\textbf{Accuracy} & 0.903 & 0.931 & 0.898 & 0.927 & 0.878 & 0.909 & 0.865 & 0.910 \\
\textbf{Precision} & 0.90 & 0.92 & 0.90 & 0.92 & 0.88 & 0.91 & 0.86 & 0.90 \\
\textbf{Recall} & 0.90 & 0.93 & 0.90 & 0.93 & 0.88 & 0.91 & 0.86 & 0.91 \\
\textbf{F1-score} & 0.90 & 0.93 & 0.90 & 0.93 & 0.87 & 0.90 & 0.86 & 0.89 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Performance of HealthGuard in detecting benign and malicious events in SHS.}
\label{table:benign and malicious}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\end{table}
\subsection{Performance Metric}
In the evaluation of HealthGuard, we used four different performance metrics: Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1-score. Accuracy refers to the degree of closeness of a measured quality to that quality's true value, and Precision calculates the fraction of correct positive identifications. Recall identifies the portion of correctly identified positives. $F_1$-score measures a test's accuracy considering both precision and recall.
\subsection{Evaluation with only disease-affected and normal activities} \label{normal}
In a SHS, different benign but rare events can occur as an effect of a disease in the patient's body and user activities (e.g., sleeping, working out, etc.). A security framework should be able to detect these diverse types of events correctly. To evaluate the performance of HealthGuard in detecting benign activities, we chose twelve different scenarios in total including vitals collected for seven user activities and five disease-affected scenarios. Table~\ref{table:benign and malicious} presents the evaluation results associated with different benign activities. We can observe that accuracy, and $F_1$score varies from 90-93\% for different algorithms. We achieved the highest accuracy and $F_1$score of 93\% using the DT algorithm. We can also observe that HealthGuard achieved the lowest accuracy of 89\% using the RF algorithm. The accuracy of KNN and ANN are 90.3\% and 92.7\% respectively. In summary, HealthGuard can achieve the highest accuracy and $F_1$score using a decision tree algorithm for correctly identifying benign activities.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
\fontsize{12}{15}\selectfont
\resizebox{1\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|llll|llll|llll|llll|llll|}
\hline
\textbf{Device Count} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{4}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{5}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{6}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{7}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{8}} \\ \hline
\textbf{Algorithm} & \textbf{Accuracy} & \textbf{Precision} & \textbf{Recall} & \textbf{F1-score} & \textbf{Accuracy} & \textbf{Precision} & \textbf{Recall} & \textbf{F1-score} & \textbf{Accuracy} & \textbf{Precision} & \textbf{Recall} & \textbf{F1-score} & \textbf{Accuracy} & \textbf{Precision} & \textbf{Recall} & \textbf{F1-score} & \textbf{Accuracy} & \textbf{Precision} & \textbf{Recall} & \textbf{F1-score} \\ \hline
\textbf{KNN} & 0.812 & 0.82 & 0.81 & 0.78 & 0.823 & 0.81 & 0.82 & 0.79 & 0.845 & 0.84 & 0.84 & 0.83 & 0.878 & 0.88 & 0.88 & 0.87 & 0.878 & 0.88 & 0.88 & 0.87 \\
\textbf{DT} & 0.839 & 0.83 & 0.84 & 0.81 & 0.850 & 0.85 & 0.85 & 0.82 & 0.866 & 0.86 & 0.87 & 0.85 & 0.909 & 0.91 & 0.91 & 0.90 & 0.909 & 0.91 & 0.91 & 0.90 \\
\textbf{RF} & 0.772 & 0.75 & 0.77 & 0.76 & 0.778 & 0.75 & 0.78 & 0.76 & 0.804 & 0.79 & 0.80 & 0.79 & 0.865 & 0.86 & 0.86 & 0.86 & 0.865 & 0.86 & 0.86 & 0.86 \\
\textbf{ANN} & 0.811 & 0.78 & 0.81 & 0.77 & 0.828 & 0.82 & 0.83 & 0.79 & 0.861 & 0.82 & 0.86 & 0.82 & 0.9111 & 0.89 & 0.91 & 0.89 & 0.910 & 0.90 & 0.91 & 0.89 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Performance evaluation of HealthGuard considering different number of devices.}
\label{table:three}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Evaluation with Different Attack Scenarios} \label{attack}
To evaluate HealthGuard against different malicious attacks, We considered three different threats (tampered device, DoS, and false data injection attack) in a SHS. We collected 3000 different instances for these attack scenarios and tested HealthGuard.
From Table~\ref{table:benign and malicious}, we can observe the ANN algorithm performs with the highest accuracy and $F_1$score of 91\% and 89\% respectively. For the DT algorithm, one can notice that the accuracy decreases to 90\% while
$F_1$score increases slightly (90\%). For KNN and RF, accuracy and $F_1$score vary from 86-87\%. In short, the ANN algorithm performs better in detecting different malicious activities in SHS.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\vspace{-0.1in}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{knn.eps}\label{fig:f8}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{dt.eps}\label{fig:f9}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{rf.eps}\label{FP}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{ann.eps}\label{acc}}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\caption{Accuracy of HealthGuard for different ML algorithm (a) KNN, (b) DT, (c) RF, (d) ANN.}
\label{fig:accuracy}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Evaluation with Different Number of Devices}\label{device}
In a SHS, a different number of smart medical devices can be connected to monitor the overall status of a patient or user. To test the effect of the number of connected devices in HealthGuard, we change the configuration of SHS and performed the detailed evaluation (Table~\ref{table:three}). We can observe that the accuracy and
$F_1$score decreases with the number of connected devices in SHS. HealthGuard performs better if the SHS has more devices connected in the system as it is easier to detect an event correctly with more vital signs giving information about the patient/user. We can observe that ANN performs the best with the accuracy and $F_1$score range of 81-91\% and 77-89\% for 4 and 8 connected devices respectively. We can also notice that DT is less affected for decreasing the number of devices as the accuracy and $F_1$score change only 7\% and 9\% respectively. In summary, HealthGuard achieves the highest accuracy and $F_1$score using ANN, however, the performance is less affected in DT with a decreasing number of devices in SHS
\subsection{Evaluation with Simultaneous Attack Scenarios} \label{noattack}
A SHS can be vulnerable to multiple malicious attacks at the same time. To understand the effect of multiple simultaneous attacks on HealthGuard, we simulated different simultaneous attacks using Poisson distribution. Figure~\ref{fig:accuracy} illustrates the impact of simultaneous attacks on HealthGuard. We can notice that all the detection mechanism performs with the highest accuracy if only one attack is active in the system. The accuracy decreases with the number of attacks in the system. We can also observe that ANN performs with the highest accuracy in all three scenarios (one attack, two attacks, and three attacks). HealthGuard can achieve 93\% accuracy for one and two simultaneous attacks and 91\% accuracy for three simultaneous attacks using ANN.
\section{Problem Scope} \label{scope}
In this section, we describe the problem scope of HealthGuard using a use case scenario. Moreover, we explain different threats considered in HealthGuard that can lead to malicious activities in SHSs.
\subsection{Problem Scope}
To understand the problem scope of our work, we assume a patient (P) admits to a hospital having chest pain for the past several weeks. For emergency monitoring, a SHS is being setup with several smart medical devices observing different vital signs of the patient. For example, a cardiac monitoring ECG device,
a pulse oximeter and an EEG is placed on P to monitor the level of oxygen on blood and neurological activity on brain respectively. We also assume that all the device is working perfectly and there is no compromised device installed in the system. Finally, the system is programmed to alert the physician and push medicine to the patient if any sudden change in the heart of the patient. At some point, the ECG started to alert the physician for the sudden drop of heart rate. However, the vital signs from EEG and pulse oximeter are normal, and the patient shows no sign of the change of heart rate.
We introduce HealthGuard as a novel security framework that can asses the overall status of the SHS and determines whether a malicious event has occurred in the system. By using HealthGuard, several security-related questions can be answered in SHS: (1) Is the alert from one smart medical device benign or malicious? (2) The alert generated by the device is due to the influence of a disease or not? (3) Is there any outside influence (human-made or device malfunction) on the vital signs of the patient? (4) Whether an automatic decision (e.g., pushing a new dose of medicine) taken by the system is benign or not? Our proposed framework observes each smart medical device and determines the overall status of the system by connecting different vital signs of the patient. Instead of making a decision based on one device, our framework verifies the status of the patient by checking other related vitals signs. Furthermore, HealthGuard can identify a decision made by the system under the outside influence and alert the physician to prevent any erroneous treatment.
\subsection{Threat model}
HealthGuard considers malicious device behavior (e.g., an unauthorized user changing the device states) that may result in abnormal functionality of the SHS. We describe the possible attack scenarios for our work~\cite{teixeira2012attack}. It considers the attackers' system model knowledge, its disruption resources, and disclosure resources. Disruption resources enable an attacker to affect system operation and availability while disclosure resources enable the attacker to obtain sensitive information about the system during the attack by violating the data confidentiality. System model knowledge often provides an attacker with intimate details on the system to perform more complex attack
We chose three different types of attacks that cover all three properties of attack space.
Our threat model includes (1) tampered medical devices, (2) Denial of Service (DoS) attack, and (3) false data injection. If an attacker has prior system knowledge, his disclosure resources can make false data injection attack. DoS attack makes disruption of the resource while tampered device attack can cause disruption and disclosure resources both. To better capture the threat model, we classify the threats in the following three categories:
\begin{itemize}[nosep, wide=0pt, leftmargin=*]
\item Threat 1 - Malicious Behavior 1. A malicious attacker can exist in the environment and inject forged data to perform malicious activities to change the physical condition of a patient. This threat represents false data injection in a medical device \cite{radcliffe2011hacking}.
\item Threat 2 - Malicious Behavior 2. A malicious app can be installed in any medical devices so that the device will never go into the sleep mode. This threat represents a tampered device attack \cite{williams2015cybersecurity}.
\item Threat 3 - Malicious Behavior 3. An attacker can physically be present in the environment to tamper any of the medical devices to make it temporally unavailable. This threat represents a Denial of Service (DoS) attack \cite{halperin2008pacemakers}.
\end{itemize}
Note that, any passive attack such as eavesdropping or information leakage via packet capture is considered out of the scope of HealthGuard. We also assume that the data collected from the SHS are not compromised.
\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related_work}
In this section, we discuss different threats to SHSs and explain the shortcomings of existing security solutions available on different platforms.
\subsection{Security Vulnerabilities}
SHS provides real-time monitoring and treatment to check the patient's health status but the functional complexity is also increasing day by day, and it makes the reliability more challenging than ever. Different works have outlined several security threats and these security threats to SHS can be categorized into four topics: hardware, software, side-channel and radio attacks. Hardware Trojan attacks have emerged as a major security concern for integrated circuits (ICs) as most ICs are manufactured in outsourced fabrication facilities. Besides for Hardware Trojan attack, there is EM radiation which can be exploited to recover internal information from the medical devices.
EMI injection is pushed into an implantable cardiac defibrillator's sensing leads to stop it from delivering the pacing signal\cite{kune2013ghost}. Additionally, it has been shown that electromagnetic interference might be the reason for temporary or permanent malfunction in pacemakers and ICDs \cite{jilek2010safety}.
In 2016 a ransomware attack on the Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center shut down its network for ten days, preventing staff from accessing medical records or using medical equipment until the hospital paid the ransom about \$17,000 \cite{mansfield2016ransomware}. Security researcher of MedSec studied St. Jude Medical Maerline’s Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) and reported a "crash attack" which described a loss of radio connectivity with the CIED because of sending undisclosed radio traffic causing the CIED to stop working \cite{ransford2017cybersecurity}.
\subsection{Existing solutions}
A high-precision, low-overhead embedded test structure (ETS) called REBEL was proposed to detect delay anomalies in Hardware Trojans (HTs) \cite{lamech2012trojan}.
To prevent unauthorized access, limiting the communication range is an intuitive way to prevent radio attacks.
In that scenario, near-field communication (NFC) and RFID-based channel can be utilized since they are designed for short-range communication.
A better approach is a near-field communication (NFID) that is an extension of RFID which is gaining popularity due to its integration on mobile phones \cite{freudenthal2007suitability}.
Alkeem et al. proposed a security framework depending on sensors located on the wearable devices \cite{al2015security}. Sangpetch et al. proposed a security context framework to design the system and to evaluate security in existing systems of interest \cite{sangpetch2016security}. Abie et al. proposed a risk-based adaptive security framework using game theory and context-awareness techniques \cite{abie2012risk}.
\subsection{Difference existing solutions}
Our framework implements an entirely new approach to detect malicious activities in SHS. There is no direct comparable solution to our work. The differences between existing solutions and HealthGuard can be noted as follows: (1) While existing solution focuses on the sensors located on the wearable devices \cite{al2015security}, HealthGuard detects malicious behaviors by considering interconnected body function. (2) HealthGuard builds a machine learning-based data-driven security framework where user identification unit for the medical devices is not required \cite{sangpetch2016security}. (3) HealthGuard does not include any overhead cost of processing complexity on the sensor node to collect data from different devices \cite{abie2012risk}. (4) Unlike threat-specific existing solutions \cite{lamech2012trojan, al2015security}, HealthGuard can detect three different types of threat in a SHS which makes it a more robust solution.
\section{System Overview}
\label{sec:system_overview}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{system.pdf}
\caption{HealthGuard framework.}
\label{fig:system}
\end{figure}
In this section, we present a detailed overview of HealthGuard. HealthGuard consists of four main modules: (1) data collector, (2) data preprocessing, (3) anomaly detector and (4) action management (illustrated in figure~\ref{fig:system}). The data collector module collects data from different smart medical devices. Here, each device provides a specific vital sign of the patient. These data are merged into an array in the data preprocessing module which represents the overall status of a patient at a specific time. The array generated in the data preprocessing module is fed into the anomaly detector module which decides whether or not any malicious activity is running in the SHS. Finally, the action management module notifies healthcare professionals whenever a malicious activity is detected in the SHS. The following sub-sections give details about these modules.
\subsection{Data Collector Module}
Data collector module collects data from different medical devices of a SHS. In a SHS, there can be multiple devices connected to a network and operating in a co-dependent manner. Data collector module collects the vital signs and status of the patients from these devices and saves it into a database. Based on the data collected from different devices, the collected data from each device can be represented by the following equation:
\begin{equation}
\small
Device\ Data,\ E = \{D_1, D_2, D_3, ... , D_n\}\\
\end{equation}
where $D_1$ is the set of features extracted from the device at time $t_1$, $D_2$ is the set of features extracted from the device at time $t_2$ and so on. Each device data is represented by specific data array and these data are forwarded to data preprocessing module for sampling and data merging.
\begin{table*}[]
\centering
\fontsize{12}{14}\selectfont
\resizebox{1\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\textbf{Device Monitoring Type}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Model}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Feature Parameter Value}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Database}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Ref.}} \\ \hline
Heart Rate and Blood Pressure & QuadioArm & 60-100 beats per minute, Systolic (120 mm Hg) and Diastolic (80 mm Hg) & Fetal ECG Synthetic Database, Data.Gov & \cite{diabetes} \\ \hline
Blood Glucose & MiniMed™ 670G Insulin Pump System & 70-130 mg/dl & UCI machine learning database of diabetes & \cite{martin2012higher} \\ \hline
Blood Oxygen & iHealth Air Wireless Pulse Oximeter & Oxygen Saturation level $\ge$ 94\% & Pattern Analysis of Oxygen Saturation Variability & \cite{bhogal2017pattern} \\ \hline
Respiratory and Sweating Rate & QuardioCore & 12-20 Breaths per minute, $0.5\mu$/min/$cm^2$ & BIDMC PPG and Respiration Dataset & \cite{pimentel2017toward} \\ \hline
Blood Alcohol & Scram Continuous Alcohol Monitoring (Cam) & 0.08 g/dl & StatCrunch dataset & \cite{fell2014effectiveness} \\ \hline
Blood Hemoglobin & Germaine AimStrip Hb Hemoglobin Meter & 12.3-17.5 g/dl & Hemoglobin Data in DHS Survey & \cite{shah2011threshold} \\ \hline
Neural Activity & Emotiv Insight & Delta (0.5-4 Hz), Theta (4-8 Hz), Alpha (8-12 Hz), Beta (16-24 Hz) \& EEG / ERP data & EEG / ERP data & \cite{delorme2002single} \\ \hline
Sleep and Human Motion & Fitbit Versa Smart Watch & REM and NREM sleep cycle & The CAP Sleep Database & \cite{terzano2002atlas} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Devices and parameters considered for monitoring health condition. }
\label{table:devices}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Data Preprocessing}
The data collector module forwards the collected data to the data preprocessing module to build the dataset of different features and aggregate them to a single array. Data collected from different devices in the data collector module consists of different patient's vital signs and status. Data merging process takes these vital signs and status to feature consideration. As different medical device has a different sampling rate, data preprocessing module sample the data according to the corresponding sampling frequency. For example, a heartbeat monitoring device measures the heartbeat of a patient in a minute (beat per minute). On the contrary, ECG monitoring device monitors the cardio-vascular state of a patient in every 10 seconds. These collected data from different devices are sampled and represented as per minute data, and data preprocessing module merges these sampled data in a single array. The data array represents the overall state of a SHS at a given time. This array can be represented as follow:
\begingroup
\small
\begin{equation}
Data\ Array,\ S = \{S_1, S_2, S_3, ... , S_n\}\\
\end{equation}
\endgroup
where $S_1, S_2, ... ..., S_n$ is the set of features extracted from $Device_1, Device_2, ... ..., Device_n$ in every minute respectively. Data preprocessing module forwards the data array to anomaly detector module for training the analytical model and detecting malicious state in the SHS.
\subsection{Anomaly Detector Module}
Anomaly detector module uses the data arrays generated in the previous module to train different Machine Learning (ML) algorithms and detect malicious activities in the SHS. We consider two features (low computation/detection time and easy implementation) while choosing ML algorithms for HeatlthGuard. As the delay in anomaly detection can cause critical consequences to patients, low computation/detection time is a must. Again, smart healthcare devices have very low computation capability, which requires easily implementable ML algorithms in the anomaly detector. Based on these needs, we have selected the Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Decision Tree (DT), Random Forest (RF), and K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) algorithm as these offers fast computation and easy implementation feature~\cite{sikder20176thsense, sikder2019context2}
We briefly discuss these ML algorithms and our rationale to choose them below:
\begin{itemize}[nosep, wide=0pt, leftmargin=*]
\item \textit{Artificial Neural Network (ANN):} The artificial neural network is a computational model based on the functions of biological neural networks being adapted by researchers for anomaly detection. Here, the relationship among the attributes of a dataset is compared with the biological neurons, and a relationship map is created to observe the changes for each attribute \cite{linda2009neural}. We chose the Multi-layer Perceptron algorithm (MLP) for training the HealthGuard framework because our classification is multiclass, not binary classification and it is a supervised learning problem.
\item \textit{Decision Tree (DT):} A decision tree uses a non-parametric modeling technique for regression and classification problems.
It uses divide and conquers approach and recursively select the attribute that is used to partition the training dataset into subsets until each leaf node in the tree has a uniform class membership~\cite{witten2016data}. For HealthGuard, we tested our dataset on decision tree because of the hierarchical patterns in our data set.
\item \textit{Random Forest (RF):} Random forest is an ensemble classifier that uses many decision trees to model.
Here, a different subset of training data is selected with replacement to train each tree. We chose random forest to get more accurate and stable prediction for multi-class classification problem \cite{prinzie2008random}.
\item \textit{K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN):} The K-Nearest Neighbors algorithm is instance-based learning that only stores the training samples. But does not generate a specific classification model. During classification, distances between test and training samples are calculated, and the test sample is assigned the same class label as its nearest neighbor. We chose K-nearest neighbor because it required very little training time for multi-class data sets~\cite{guney2012multiclass}.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Action Management Module}
The final module of HealthGuard is the action management module which notifies the healthcare professional in the event of any malicious activity in the SHS. Additionally, HealthGuard can also detect any autonomous decision taken by the system as a result of malicious activities and prevent erroneous actions of the system from avoiding any fatal consequence.
|
\section{Introduction.}\label{intro}
\section{Introduction}
With the rapid growth of data in volume, variety and velocity \citep{zikopoulos2012understanding}, there has been increasing need for modern machine learning models to provide accurate and reliable predictions and assist humans in decision making. The interaction of models and humans naturally calls for users' understanding of machine learning models, especially in high-stake applications such as healthcare, judiciaries, etc \citep{letham2015interpretable,yang2018know,caruana2015intelligible,chen2018interpretable}. Thus, many state-of-the-art machine learning models such as neural networks and ensembles stumble in these domains since they are \emph{black-box} in nature. Black-box models have an opaque or highly complicated decision-making process that is hard for human to understand and rationalize. Driven by the practical needs, researchers have shifted their focus from only predictive performance driven to also account for transparency of models. It has recently been called by EU's General
Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) for the ``right to explanation'' (a right to information about individual decisions made by algorithms) \citep{parliament,phillips2018international} that requires human understandable predictive processes of models.
The recent advances in machine learning has seen an increasing amount of interest and work in \emph{interpretable machine learning}, models and techniques that facilitate human understanding. Different forms of interpretable models have been developed, including rule-based models \citep{wang2017bayesian,lakkaraju2017interpretable}, scoring models \citep{zeng2017interpretable}, case-based models \citep{richter2016case}, etc. While these models can sometimes perform as well as black-box models, the performance loss is often inevitable, especially when the data is large and complex. This is because black-box models are optimized only for the predictive performance while interpretable models also pursue the small complexities. These two types of models have been competitors and mutally exclusive choices for users.
Another popular form of models have also risen quickly to assist human understandability, black-box explainers. Since the first paper of LIME \citep{ribeiro2016should}, a local linear explainer of any black-box model, various explainer models have been proposed \citep{ribeiro2018anchors,lundberg2017unified}. The main idea of explainers is they use simple and easily understandable models like decision rules or linear models, to locally or globally approximate the predictions of black-box models, providing ``post-hoc'' explanations with these simpler replica. However serious concerns have been brought up \citep{rudin2019please, aivodji2019fairwashing,Thibault2019} on potential issues of black-box explainers since explainers only approximate but do not characterize exactly the decision-making process of a black-box model, often yielding an imperfect fidelity to the original black-box model. In addition, there exists ambiguity and inconsistency \citep{ross2017right,lissack2016dealing} in the explanation since there could be different explanations for the same prediction generated by different explainers, or by the same explainer with different parameters. There's a very recent work that demonstrates that explanations can be deceptive and contrary
to the real mechanism in a model \citep{aivodji2019fairwashing}. \citet{Alvarez2018} showed LIME’s explanation of two close points (similar instances) can vary greatly. This is because LIME uses other instances in the neighborhood of the given instance to evaluate the local linear approximation. There are no clear guidelines for choosing an appropriate neighborhood that works the best and changing neighborhoods leads to a change in the explanations. This instability in the explanation demands a cautious and critical use of LIME.
All of the issues result from the fact that the explainers only approximate in a post hoc way. They are not the decision-making process themselves.
In this paper, we propose a new form of model, which combines the intuitive power of interpretable models and the good predictive performance of black-box models, to reach some controllable middle ground where both transparency and good predictive performance is possible.
The idea is simple and straightforward, a complex black-box model may have the best predictive performance overall, but it is not necessarily the best \emph{everywhere} in the data space. Some instances may be accurately predicted by simpler models instead of the black-box model without losing any (or intolerable) predictive performance.
We design a unique mechanism where interpretable models complete and collaborate with a black-box model. Given a $K$ class classification problem, we design $K+1$ models, which we call \emph{agents}. $K$ of the agents are \emph{interpretable}, capturing $K$ classes, respectively. The remaining one is a pre-trained black-box model, called agent $\mathcal{B}$. Given an input $\mathbf{x}$, all of the $K$ agents bid to claim the input by proposing a score. The input is then assigned to the highest bidder with a significant margin over the other agents' scores. If there does not exist a winner (not winning by a large margin), then none of the $K$ agents can claim the input, and it is then sent to agent $\mathcal{B}$ by default. At agent $\mathcal{B}$, the input will be classified, and this classification process is unknown to other agents the whole time, i.e., \emph{model-agnostic}.
In this paper, we let all interpretable agents be linear models, which is one of the most popular forms of interpretable models. The black-box model can be \emph{any} pre-trained multi-class classifier. We propose a model called Model-Agnostic Linear Competitors (MALC).
MALC partitions the feature space into $K+1$ regions, each claimed by an agent. Agent $k (1 \leq k \leq K)$ captures the most representative and confident characteristics of class $k$ by claiming the most plausible area for class $k$. Predictions for this area are inherently interpretable since the agents are linear models with regularized numbers of non-zero coefficients. The unclaimed area represents the subspace where none of the interpretable agents are very certain about, thus left to the most competent black-box agent $\mathcal{B}$. See Figure \ref{fig:framework} for an illustration. Meanwhile, the coefficients of the $K$ linear models also show the most distinctive characteristics of each class, providing an intuitive description of the classes.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0 0 0 0.8cm},clip, width=0.8\linewidth]{framework.png}
\caption{The decision-making process of MALC.
}\label{fig:framework}
\end{figure}
To train MACL, we formulate a carefully designed convex optimization problem which considers the predictive performance, interpretability of the linear agents (coefficients regularization), and most importantly, the percentage of the area claimed by the linear model, which we define as \textbf{transparency} of MALC. Then we use accelerated proximal gradient method~\citep{nesterov2013introductory} to train MALC.
By tuning the parameters, MACL can decide to send more or less area to the linear competitors, at the possible cost of the predictive performance.
Our work is differentiated from linear explainers such as Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explainers (LIME) \citep{ribeiro2016should}, which provide post hoc approximations or explanations but do not participate in the predictive performance. Here our linear models directly compete with the black-box model to generate predictions, equivalent to locally substituting the black-box on a subset of data. Thus, MALC avoids some of the controversial issues of black-box explainers such as ambiguity and inconsistency in the explanations. In addition, LIME provides a local explanation for an instance while MACL characterizes a more global description of each class since it captures subspaces of classes.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We review related work in Section \ref{sec:related}. The model is presented in Section \ref{sec:model}, where we formulate the model and describe the training algorithm. We conduct an experimental evaluation in Section \ref{sec:exp} on public datasets where MALC collaborates with state-of-the-art classifiers.
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related}
Our work is related but different from recent black-box explainers. MALC does not explain or approximate the behavior of a black-box model, but instead, collaborates with the black-box model and shares the prediction task.
We have found a few works in the literature on the combination of multiple models \citep{kohavi1996scaling,towell1994knowledge}. For example, \citep{kohavi1996scaling} combined a decision tree with a Naive Bayes model, \citep{shin2000hybrid} proposed a system combining neural network and memory-based learning, \citep{hua2006hybrid} combined SVM and logistic regression, etc. A recent work \citep{wang2015trading} divides feature spaces into regions with sparse oblique tree splitting and assign local sparse additive experts to individual regions. Besides these more isolated efforts, there has been a large body of continuous work on neural-symbolic or neural-expert systems \citep{garcez2015neural} pursued by a relatively small research community over the last two decades and has yielded several significant results \citep{mcgarry1999hybrid,garcez2012neural,taha1999symbolic,towell1994knowledge}. This line of research has been carried on to combine deep neural networks with expert systems to improve predictive performance \citep{hu2016harnessing}.
Compared to the models discussed above, our method is distinct in that it is model-agnostic and can work with \textbf{\emph{any}} black-box classifier. The black-box can be a carefully calibrated, advanced model using confidential features or techniques. Our model only needs predictions from the black-box and does not need to alter the black-box during training or know any other information from it. This minimal requirement of information from the black-box collaborator renders much more flexibility in creating collaboration between different models, largely preserving confidential information from the more advanced partner.
One work that's closest to ours is Hybrid Rule Sets (HyRS) \citep{wanghybrid2019} that builds a hybrid of decision rules and a black-box model. An input goes through a positive rule set, a negative rule set, and a black-box model sequentially until it is classified by the first model that captures it. HyRS produce interpretable predictions on instances captured by rules. A HyRS only works with binary classification. MALC, on the other hand, can work with multi-class classification. The $K$ interpretable agents compete for an input simultaneously in a fair mechanism.
\section{Model-Agnostic Linear Competitors}\label{sec:model}
In this paper, we focus on the multi-class classification problem. Suppose there are $K$ distinct classes. We consider an approach similar to one-vs-all linear classification. We us review how this classification works. Given a linear classifier $f_i(\mathbf{x}) = \mathbf{w}^\top_i\mathbf{x}$, $i \in [K]:= \{1,2,...,K\}$, if $f_i(\mathbf{x}) - f_j(\mathbf{x}) \geq 0$, for every $j$ other than $i$, then $\mathbf{x}$ belongs to class $i$.
For class $i$, \[\mathcal{P}_i(\mathbf{x}) = \bigcap_{j\not = i} \bigg\{ f_i(\mathbf{x}) - f_j(\mathbf{x}) = 0 \bigg\} \]
is the decision boundary. Most mistakes made by a linear model happen around the decision boundary. Therefore, in a hybrid model, we exploit the high predictive power of a black-box model and leave this more difficult area to it while having the linear classifier classify the rest. Then the linear classifier produces a decision only when it is confident enough, this time comparing against thresholds $\{\theta_i \geq 0\}^K_{i=1}$: to predict class $i$ when $f_i(\mathbf{x}) - f_j(\mathbf{x}) \geq \theta_i$ for every $j$ other than $i$ and unclassified otherwise. Thus the linear model generates $K$ decision boundaries, creating a partition of a data space into $K+1$ regions, a region for each of the $K$ classes and an unclassified region. This unclassified region contains data that the linear model is not confident to decide so that black-box is activated to generate predictions., see Figure \ref{fig:dataspace}.
Thus we build $K$ linear competitors, each advocating for a class, to collaborate with the black-box model. We call this classification method Model-Agnostic Linear Competitors (MALC) model.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{MClass_band_agent.jpg}
\caption{A simplified depiction of partitioning of the data space in the case of three classes, by linear and black-box agents. }\label{fig:dataspace}
\end{figure}
The goal of building such a collaborative linear model is to replace the black-box system with a transparent system on a subset of data, at the minimum loss of predictive accuracy. Therefore a key determinant in the success of MALC is the partitioning of the data, which is determined by the coefficients $\mathbf{w}_i$ in the linear model and the thresholds $\theta_i$, $i \in [K]$.
In this paper, we formulate a convex optimization problem to learn the coefficients and thresholds. The objective function considers the fitness to the training data, captured by a convex loss function, the regularization term, and the sum of thresholds. As $\theta_i$ gets close to $0$, more data can be decided by the linear model, increasing the transparency of the decision-making process, but at the cost of possible loss of predictive performance. Our formulation is compatible with various forms of convex loss function and guarantees global optimality.
We work with a set of training examples $\mathcal{D} = \{(\mathbf{x}_i,y_i)\}_{i=1}^n$ where $\mathbf{x}_i \in \mathbb{R}^d$ is a vector of $d$ attributes and $y_i\in [K] := \{1,2,...,K\}$ is the corresponding class label.
Let $f(\mathbf{x}):\mathbb{R}^d\rightarrow [K]$ represent the MALC classification model that is constructed based on linear models $f_{l,i}(\mathbf{x})=\mathbf{w}^\top_i\mathbf{x}$, $i\in [K]$ and a black-box model $f_b(\mathbf{x}):\mathbb{R}^d\rightarrow[K]$. The black-box model is given, which can be \emph{any} trained model. We need its prediction on the training data $\mathcal{D}$, denoted as $\{y^b_i\}_{i=1}^n$ and $y^b_i=f_b(\mathbf{x}_i)$. Our goal is to learn the coefficients $\mathbf{w_i}$ in the linear models $f_{l,i}$ together with thresholds $\theta_i$ ( $\geq 0$), $i \in [K]$, in order to form a hybrid decision model $f$ as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:hybridf}
f(\mathbf{x})=
\left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
k & \text{ if } \mathbf{w}_k^\top\mathbf{x} - \mathbf{w}_j^\top\mathbf{x} \geq \theta_k,~ k \in [K],~\forall ~ j \in [K]\setminus \{k\}\\
f_b(\mathbf{x})& ~\text {otherwise}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
Note the hybrid model uses $K$ thresholds to partition the data space into $K+1$ regions, a region for each class and an undetermined region left to the black-box model. Data that falls into any of the $K$ class's claimed regions is considered ``transparent'' by the linear model, and we refer to the percentage of this data subset as the \textbf{transparency} of the model.
\subsection{Model Formulation}
In this section, we formulate an optimization framework to build a MALC model.
We consider three factors when building the model: \emph{predictive performance}, \emph{data transparency}, and \emph{model regularization}. We elaborate each of them below.
The (in-sample) predictive performance characterizes the fitness of the model to the training data. Since $f_b$ is pre-given, the predictive performance is determined by two factors, the accuracy of $\fl = [f_{l,1},~f_{l,2},...~,f_{l,K}]$ on instances as described in ($\ref{eq:hybridf}$) and the accuracy of $f_b$ on the remaining examples. We wish to obtain a good partition of data $\mathcal{D}$ by assigning $f_b$ and $\fl$ to a different region of the data such that the strength of $f_b$ and $\fl$ are properly exploited. Second, we include the sum $\sum \theta_i$ as a penalty term in the objective to account for data transparency of the hybrid model. The smaller sum implies more data is classified by the linear model. In the most extreme case where $\sum \theta_i = 0$, all data is sent to the linear model, and the MALC model is reduced to a pure one-vs all linear classifier, i.e., transparency equals one.
Finally, we also need to consider model regularization in the objective. As the weight for the sparsity enforcing regularization term increases, the model encourages using a smaller number of features which increases the interpretability of the model as well as preventing overfitting.
Combining the three factors discussed above, we formulate the learning objective for MALC as:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:obj}
F^*:=\min_{\mathbf{w},\theta\geq 0}\left\{F(\mathbf{w},\theta):=\mathcal{L}(\mathbf{w},\theta;\mathcal{D}) + C_1 \sum^K_{i=1}\theta_i + C_2 r(\mathbf{w})\right\},
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{w} = [\mathbf{w}_1,~\mathbf{w}_2,...~,\mathbf{w}_K]$, $\mathbf{\theta} = [\theta_i,~\theta_2,...~,\theta_K]$, $\mathcal{L}(\mathbf{w},\theta;\mathcal{D})$ is the loss function defined on the training set $\mathcal{D}$ associated to the decision rule $f$ in~\eqref{eq:hybridf}, $\sum^K_{i=1}\theta_i$ is a penalty term to increase the transparency of $f$, $r$ is a convex and closed regularization term (e.g. $\|\mathbf{w}\|_1$, $\frac{1}{2}\|\mathbf{w}\|_2^2$ or an indicator function of a constraint set), and $C_1$ and $C_2$ are non-negative coefficients which balance the importance of the three components in~\eqref{eq:obj}.
Let $I_k = \{i~|~ y_i = k\}$, which is the index set of all the data points $(\mathbf{x})$ belonging to class $k$. Similarly, let $I^+_{k} = \{i \in I_k~|~ y^i_b = y_i\}$ and $I^-_{k} = \{i \in I_k~|~ y^i_b \not = y_i\}$. The loss function in \eqref{eq:obj} over the dataset $\mathcal{D}$ is then defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:loss}
\mathcal{L}(\mathbf{w},\mathbf{\theta};\mathcal{D}) =
\frac{1}{n}\sum^K_{k = 1} \sum_{i\in I^+_k} \sum^K_{j = 1 \atop j \not = k}
\phi(\mathbf{w}_k^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}_j^\top \mathbf{x}_i + \theta_j ) +
\frac{1}{n} \sum^K_{k = 1} \sum_{i\in I^-_k} \sum^K_{j = 1 \atop j \not = k}
\phi(\mathbf{w}_k^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}_j^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \theta_k )
\end{equation}
where function $\phi(z):\mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is a non-increasing convex closed loss function which can be one of those commonly used in linear classification such as the hinge loss $\phi(z)=(1-z)_+$, smooth hinge loss $\phi(z)= \frac{1}{2}(1-z)^2_+$ or the logistic loss $\phi(z)=\log(1+\exp(-z))$. Note that $\{I_k = I^+_{k} \cup I^-_{k}\}^K_{k=1}$ form a partition of $\{1,2,\dots,n\}$. The intuition of this loss function is as follows. Take a data point $\mathbf{x}_i$ with $y_i = k$ and $y^b_i = k$ as an example. Our hybrid model \eqref{eq:hybridf} will classify $\mathbf{x}_i$ correctly as long as it does not fall into the region of a class other than $k$. To ensure $\mathbf{x}_i$ does not fall into another class's region, we need $\mathbf{w}^\top_j \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}^\top_k \mathbf{x}_i < \theta_j$ for every $j$ other than $k$. Hence, with the non-increasing property of $\phi$, the loss term $\phi(\mathbf{w}_k^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}_j^\top \mathbf{x}_i + \theta_j )$ will encourage a positive value of $\mathbf{w}_k^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}_j^\top \mathbf{x}_i + \theta_j $ which means we have $\mathbf{w}_j^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}_k^\top \mathbf{x}_i < \theta_j$. On the other hand, for a data point $\mathbf{x}_i$ with $y_i = k$ and $y^b_i \not = k$, our hybrid model will classify $\mathbf{x}_i$ correctly only when $\mathbf{x}_i$ falls in the class $k$ region, namely, $\mathbf{w}^\top_k \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}^\top_j \mathbf{x}_i \geq \theta_k$ for every $j$ other than $k$. Hence, we use the loss term $\phi(\mathbf{w}_k^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}_j^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \theta_k )$ to encourage a positive value of $\mathbf{w}_k^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \mathbf{w}_j^\top \mathbf{x}_i - \theta_k $.
\subsection{Model Training}
With the loss function defined in \eqref{eq:loss}, the hybrid model can be trained by solving the convex minimization problem~\eqref{eq:obj} for which many efficient optimization techniques are available in literature including subgradient methods~\citep{nemirovski2009robust,duchi2011adaptive}, accelerated gradient methods~\citep{nesterov2013introductory,beck2009fast}, primal-dual methods~\citep{nemirovski2004prox,chambolle2011first} and many stochastic first-order methods based on randomly sampling over coordinates or data~\citep{johnson2013accelerating,duchi2011adaptive}.
The choice of algorithms for~\eqref{eq:obj} depends on various characteristics of the problem such as smoothness, strong convexity, and data size.
Since numerical optimization is not the focus of this paper, we will simply utilize the accelerated proximal gradient method (APG) by Nesterov~\citep{nesterov2013introductory} to solve \eqref{eq:obj} when $\phi$ is smooth.
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:exp}
We perform a detailed experimental evaluation of the proposed model on four public datasets. The goal here is to examine the predictive performance, the transparency, and the model complexity. In addition, we characterize the trade-off between predictive accuracy and transparency using \textbf{efficient frontiers}. To do that, we vary the parameters $C_1$ and $C_2$ to generate a list of models producing an accuracy-transparency curve for each dataset. We also analyze a medical dataset in detail to provide users more intuitive understanding of the model.
\paragraph{Datasets} We analyze four real-world datasets that are publicly available at \citep{LIBSVM, Kaggle,quinlan1986inductive, wang2017bayesian}.
1) \emph{Coupon} \citep{wang2017bayesian} (12079 $\times$ 113) studies responses of consumers to recommendation of coupons when users are driving in different contexts, using feature such as the passenger, destination, weather, time, etc. The three classes are ``decline'', ''accept and will use right away'', and ``accept and will use later'' 2) \emph{Covtype}\citep{LIBSVM} (581,012 $\times$ 54) studies the forest cover type of wilderness areas which include Roosevelt National Forest of northern Colorado. There are seven different forest cover types. The features in the covtype dataset are scaled to $[0,1]$. 3) \emph{Thyroid}\citep{quinlan1986inductive} (9172 $\times$ 63) studies the prediction of thyroid diagnoses based on patients' biomedical information. 4) \emph{Medical} \citep{Kaggle} (106,643 $\times$ 14) provide information about Clinical, Anthropometric and Biochemical (CAB) survey done by Govt. of India. This survey was conducted in nine states of India with a high rate of maternal and infant death rates in the country. We focused on the subset of data for children under the age of five and predicted their illness type. We dropped some features not needed for classification, and the missing values in certain features were replaced by mean or mode values appropriately.
For each dataset, we randomly sample 80\% instances to form the training sets and use the remaining 20\% as the testing sets. Since the \emph{Medical} dataset is highly unbalanced among different classes, we downsample the majority class and upsample the minority class to make them balanced.
\paragraph{Training Black-box Models} We first choose three state-of-the-art black-box classifiers, Random Forest \citep{liaw2002classification}, XGBoost \citep{chen2016xgboost} and fully-connected neural network with two hidden layers. All of these models are implemented with R. The Random Forest model is built using the \emph{ranger} package~\citep{wright2015ranger}. The XGBoost model is built using the \emph{xgboost} package~\citep{chen2015xgboost}. The neural network model is built using the \emph{keras} package~\citep{chollet2017kerasR}. For each model, we identify one or two hyperparameters and, for each dataset, we apply an $80\%$-$20\%$ holdout method on the training set to select the values for these hyperparameters from a discrete set of candidates that give the best validation performance. For Random Forest, we use $500$ trees and tune the minimum node size and maximal tree depth. For XGBoost, we tune maximal tree depth and the number of boosting iterations. For the neural network, we choose the sigmoid function to be the activation function and tune the number of neurons and the dropout rates in the two hidden layers.
\paragraph{Training MALC} We use the predictions of the three black-box models on the training set as the input to build MALC models. In \eqref{eq:obj}, we choose $\phi$ to be the smooth hinge loss and $ r(\mathbf{w}) = \|\mathbf{w}\|_1$. We would like to obtain a list of models that span the entire spectrum of transparency, so we vary $C_1$ and $C_2$ to achieve that goal. Note that $C_1$ is directly related to transparency, and we use grid-search to find a suitable range to achieve transparency from zero to one. $C_2$ is related to the sparsity of the model. Overall, we choose $C_1$ from $[0.005, 0.95]$ and $C_2$ from $[0.03, 0.25]$. For each $C_1$ value, we use $80\%$-$20\%$ holdout on the training set to choose $C_2$ from a discrete set of candidates that give the best validation performance. After choosing the pairs of $(C_1,C_2)$ values, the Algorithm APG is run up to $10,000$ iterations to make sure the change in objective value was less than $0.1 \%$, in the last iterations, to ensure the convergence.
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.1975]{Covtype_CV-MS.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.1975]{Coupon_CV-MS.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.1975]{Health-MS.jpg}
\includegraphics[scale=0.1975]{Thyroid_CV-2.jpg}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{Legend.jpg}
\caption{ The efficient frontiers of MALC when collaborating with different black-box models. The numbers represent the average number of features being used by the MALC model.}
\label{fig:EF-Curves}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Efficient Frontier Analysis}
In Figure \ref{fig:EF-Curves}, each efficient frontier starts with a transparency value of zero, which corresponds to a pure black-box model. The general trend is as transparency increases, accuracy tends to decrease. The medical dataset provides an interesting scenario where the initial increase in transparency does not lead to a decrease in predictive performance. The rate of change of transparency w.r.t predictive performance is different for each dataset. For Thyroid dataset, the accuracy decreases almost linearly, whereas, for coupon and covtype datasets, accuracy decreases steadily as the transparency increases. However, for the medical dataset, the accuracy does not decrease initially and then falls significantly after a certain transparency threshold. Note that the transparency value of one corresponds to a pure linear (interpretable) model. But the interpretability comes at a huge cost of predictive performance, as evident by considerably low accuracy of linear models compared to the accuracy of the black-box models for all datasets.
MALC provides the user with a unique framework of choosing a model from the whole spectrum of options available on an efficient frontier with their desired accuracy and transparency. We recommend the users to choose the models around the tipping point to ensure gain in transparency without a significant loss in accuracy.
\paragraph{Number of Features Analysis} We would also like to make sure the linear models are indeed interpretable, i.e., using a few non-zero terms in the model. We report in Figure \ref{fig:EF-Curves} the average number of non-zero coefficients in MALC, which is calculated as a ratio of the number of non-zero coefficients in $K$ linear models ($\mathbf {w}$) to the number of classes in the dataset. Observe that MALC models require a relatively small number of features from the dataset to gain transparency, preserving the interpretability of linear models.
The control over transparency-accuracy trade-off and use of a small number of features to gain transparency make MALC a strong candidate for real-world applications, particularly when the user wants to avoid the black-box methods.
\subsection{Case Study on the Medical Dataset}
We show an example of MALC on the medical dataset. There are a total of five classes in this datsaet, ``no illness'', diarrhea/dysentery'', ``acute respiratory infection'', ``fever of any type'', and ``other illness''. MALC was built in collaboration with a pre-trained random forest whose accuracy is 66.0\%. After building five linear competitors, the accuracy of MALC reaches 66.4\% while gaining transparency of 77.7\%. The coefficients of the five linear models are shown in Figure \ref{fig:example}. From the linear models, one can easily extract some of the key characteristics for each class. For example, the later children start to receive semisolid food and the longer they are exclusively breastfed (feature ``day\_or\_month\_for\_breast\_feeding )'', the more likely they will be free of any of the illness (Class 1). Children who start receiving semisolid mashed food (feature ``semisolid\_month\_or\_day'') at a very young age, start receiving water at an early age (feature ``water\_month''), and are too late to start receiving animal milk/formula milk (feature ``ani\_milk\_month'') are more likely to have acute respiratory infection (Class 3).
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{healthcare_example.png}
\caption{ An example of MALC in collaboration with a pre-trained random forest}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure}
We chose an example instance and show the input features and the output of the linear models in Figure \ref{fig:example}. This child started receiving animal milk/formula milk at age of $25$ months, almost six times of the average age of receiving animal/formula milk (4.3 months).
This child started receiving semisolid food at 10 months old, later than the average age of children (5.8 months) who start receiving semisolid food. This is helpful for the child's overall health conditions as suggested by classifier 1. However, this effect is completely overtaken by the late usage of formula milk.
In addition, the child was breast fed later than $64\%$ of the children in the dataset. Combining these important features, classifier 3 outputs the highest score, with a large enough margin over the other four linear models. Thus this child is predicted to have acute respiratory infection, which is consistent with the true label.
An interesting observation for this model is it performs slightly better than the black-box alone, which means the 77.7\% transparency is obtained for free. This is the desired situation for hybrid models like MALC to be adopted.
\subsection{Comparison with baselines}
There are two lines of work in interpretable machine learning, stand-alone interpretable models like decision trees and black-box explainers like LIME. MACL has a unique model form does not fall into either of them. We choose representative models from each category. We compare with three decision trees as stand-alone interpretable models and LIME as an explainer. We focus and present results on the medical data. First, comparison with decision trees show that interpretable models are insufficiant for this dataset since they generate lower accuracy. In addition, we report the size of trees represented by the number of nodes in a tree to quantify the model complexity. Decision trees have significantly larger model sizes, as reported in Table \ref{tab:tree}.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{table}[h]
\small
\centering
\vspace{-4mm}
\caption{Performance comparison with baseline models}\label{tab:tree}
\begin{tabular}{l|ccclll}\toprule
& MALC & CART & C4.5 & C5.0 \\ \hline
accuracy & 0.66 & 0.63 & 0.63 & 0.62 \\
\# of rules & -- & 84 & 46 & 67 \\
\# of conditions & 26 non-zero coefficients from 5 linear models & 167 & 91 & 132 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}\normalsize
For comparison with LIME, we sample up to $200$ examples from each of the five classes that are explained by one of the linear classifiers in MALC and use LIME to generate explanations for each of them. We observe two issues with LIME. First, the inter-class explanations of LIME are too similar, as shown by the mean and std of the coefficients of LIME in Figure \ref{fig:LIME}: the means of are almost identical across classes. This makes it difficult for users to understand the difference between classes and it's hard to use the explanations to reason why an instance is classified into a particular class but not others. Unlike LIME, MALC provides different coefficients for different classes (see Figure \ref{fig:example}) so that users can easily understand what features differentiate one class from the others.
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\vspace{-2mm}
\includegraphics[width =\textwidth]{LIME.png}
\caption{ Means and Standard Deviations of Coefficients of LIME}
\label{fig:LIME}
\end{figure}
Second, \citet{Alvarez2018} showed that LIME's explanation of two close (similar) instances can vary greatly. This is because LIME uses other instances in the neighborhood of the given instance to evaluate the local linear approximation. There are no clear guidelines for choosing an appropriate neighborhood that works the best and changing neighborhoods leads to a change in the explanations. This instability in the explanation demands a cautious and critical use of LIME. On the other hand, MALC provides a set of \textit{global} linear models and is relatively independent of the local neighborhood. This means that explanations provided by MALC are more consistent and stable.
\section{Conclusion}
We proposed a Model-Agnostic Linear Competitors (MALC) model for multi-class classification. MALC builds $K$ linear models to collaborate with a pre-trained black-box model. The data space is partitioned by MALC, into regions classified by the linear model and the black-box with linear decision boundaries. We formulated the training of a MALC model as convex optimization, where predictive accuracy and transparency balance through objective function. The optimization problem is solved with the accelerated proximal gradient method.
MALC is model-agnostic, which makes it flexible to collaborate with any black-box model, needing only their predictions on the dataset. In this paper, MALC collaborated with Random Forest, XGBoost, and Neural Networks to solve multiclass classification problems. Experiments show that MALC was able to yield models with different transparency and accuracy values by varying the parameters, thus providing more model options to users. In real applications, users can decide the operating point based on the efficient frontier. The decision will depend on knowing how much loss in accuracy is tolerable and how much transparency is desired in their application.
Compared to post hoc black-box explainers such as LIME, the linear models in MALC are predictive models, which guarantee 100\% fidelity on data that are claimed by them. Also, unlike linear explainers that provide local explanations, the linear models in MALC capture global characteristics of classes by building $K$ linear models at the same time to compete with each other. Thus the coefficients learned are often the most distinguishing features.
The proposed work offers a new perspective in building handshakes between interpretable and black-box models, in addition to using the former as the post hoc analysis to the latter in the current literature. Here we propose to build collaboration between the two to exploit the strength of both. Despite the difference in the goal, existing black-box model explainers such as LIME can still be applied to explain the subset of data sent to the black-box.
\bibliographystyle{ormsv080}
|
\subsection{Introduction}
The knowledge of radiative lifetimes, transition rates, dipole-matrix elements and branching ratios in atoms and molecules is of great importance for, e.g.,
experiments probing the electroweak force\cite{fortson93,roberts15,dutta16} in the search of physics beyond the standard model,
for testing and improving atomic and molecular-structure theories\cite{safronova11,dutta16},
for the development of atomic clocks\cite{dutta16,safronova11b,keller19}
and for the interpretation of astronomical data\cite{carlsson12}.
Traditionally, measurements of such quantities relied on atomic beams and short-pulse laser excitations. For instance, the last experimental evaluation of the radiative lifetime of the (4p)$^2$P$_{3/2}$ state of \Ca{} is dated 20 years back\cite{rosner97} and the most precise value was measured more than 25 years ago\cite{jin93} using such methods. Meanwhile, advances in experimental technology have enabled the control of single trapped atomic ions on the quantum level which led to the development of extremely precise atomic clocks\cite{huntemann16a,brewer19} and to a leading technology for quantum computers\cite{monz16a,linke17a}.
Here, we exploit the high-fidelity control achievable over a single trapped ion to establish a novel method to measure the complete set of lifetimes, transition rates and reduced-dipole-matrix elements of atomic transitions using the complementarity of dispersive and absorptive light-matter interactions and by combining precise experimental measurements with high-level theoretical calculations. To illustrate our approach, we determine the lifetime of the P$_{3/2}$ state in \Ca{} with high precision to $\tP=\tauP$~ns.
While our present value is in excellent agreement with a recent theoretical prediction using a high-precision relativistic all-order method\cite{safronova11} (6.69(6)~ns), it shows a 6-$\sigma$ fold discrepancy with the most precise previous value of Ref. \cite{jin93} (6.924(19)~ns). Interestingly, a similar discrepancy with these 25-years old results\cite{jin93} on the one hand and an agreement with the theoretical calculations\cite{safronova11} on the other hand was also established in a recent measurement of the lifetime of the (4p)~$^2$P$_{1/2}$ state of Ca$^+$ \cite{hettrich15}.
To corroborate the accuracy of the new measurements, highly precise theoretical ratios of reduced dipole matrix elements\cite{safronova11} were used to compare our result of the lifetime of the P$_{3/2}$ state with the recent results on the P$_{1/2}$ state \cite{hettrich15} with good agreement. Conversely, precise values of transition properties for a variety of states can be determined from their measurement for just a single state using the theoretical reduced-dipole-matrix elements. Elaborating on this combination of experiment and theory, previous measurements of the radiative branching ratios of the P$_{3/2}$ \cite{gerritsma08} and P$_{1/2}$ \cite{ramm13} states in Ca$^+$ were compared with excellent agreement and improved values of the polarizabilities of the (4s)$^2$S$_{1/2}$, (3d)$^2$D$_{3/2}$ and (3d)$^2$D$_{5/2}$ states of Ca$^+$ are recommended. The present approach for establishing values of radiative quantities can readily be generalized to non-atomic systems. In particular, it opens up new perspectives for precision measurements on molecules discussed at the end of this paper.
The use of a combination of absorptive and dispersive ion-light interactions to determine dipole-matrix elements and associated values was first demonstrated by Hettrich \textit{et al.} \cite{hettrich15}. In this work, a different variant of that technique which was proposed by Gerritsma \textit{et al.} \cite{gerritsma08} and was recently applied by Arnold \textit{et al.} \cite{arnold19} to measure the polarizability of Lu$^+$ was used.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,trim={14.5cm 3.5cm 23cm 10.5cm},clip]{ExpFigPRL.pdf}
\caption{a) Energy diagram illustrating the present experimental scheme.
b) Typical measurement instance of the scattering rate from the ``dark" state to ``bright" states. Data errors (blue) symbols are binomial projection-noise errors. The red line is a fit to an exponential function. Dashed lines are guides indicating the measured value of the scattering rate.
c) Typical measurement instance of the ac-Stark shift. Data errors (probe-beam on - blue; probe-beam off - red) are binomial projection noise. Lines are fits to Gaussian functions. The dashed line indicates the measured ac-Stark shift.
d) Typical measurement instance of the \DP{} resonance wavelength. The blue and red symbols are scattering rate measurements for ions prepared in the D$_{5/2}$(m=-5/2) and D$_{5/2}$(m=+5/2) states, respectively. Errors are 1-$\sigma$ confidence intervals of the exponential fit to data similar to the ones shown in panel (a). The solid lines are fits to a parabola. The dotted lines indicate the resonance wavelength of each Zeeman transition.}
\label{fig:energy_diagram}
\end{figure}
Our measurement scheme is depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:energy_diagram}. A probe beam detuned from the \DP{} transition at 854 nm by $\Delta$ induces an ac-Stark shift, $\Delta E$, of magnitude (in Joules):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:acshift}
\Delta E/h=\frac{1}{2\pi}\frac{\Omega^2}{4\Delta}.
\end{equation}
Here, $h$ is the Planck constant and $\Omega$ is the Rabi frequency. The probe beam also transfers population from the D$_{5/2}$ ``dark" state to the S$_{1/2}$ and D$_{3/2}$ ``bright" states by photon scattering via the P$_{3/2}$ state. The S$_{1/2}$ and D$_{3/2}$ states are considered ``bright" since both participate in the closed cycle fluorescence transition \DPS{}. The rate by which population is transferred is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:scatter}
\Gamma=\left(\AS+\ADt\right)\frac{\Omega^2}{4\Delta^2}.
\end{equation}
Here, $\AS$ and $\ADt$ are the transition rates (in s$^{-1}$) connecting the excited P$_{3/2}$ state with the ``bright" states.
The scattering rate, $\Gamma$ (in s$^{-1}$), also depends on the Rabi frequency which is difficult to determine with high accuracy in an experiment due to its dependence on the laser intensity and polarization. However, the ratio of the scattering rate and the light shift does not depend on the Rabi frequency which allows for a direct determination of the transition rates without the need for precise characterization of the probe beam intensity and polarization:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ratio}
\AS+\ADt=\frac{\Delta}{2\pi}\frac{\Gamma}{\Delta E/h}.
\end{equation}
Eqs. \ref{eq:acshift},\ref{eq:scatter} are approximations for the ac-Stark shift and scattering rate calculated from a second-order perturbation theory. The first approximation, $\Delta\gg\Omega$, neglects the line shape near resonance (e.g, the Lorentzian scattering profile). The second, $\Delta \ll \omega_0$, with $ \omega_0$ the transition's angular frequency, neglects co-rotating terms when performing the rotating-wave approximation. The third neglects contributions from transitions other than the \DP{}. The last neglects the finite lifetime of the D$_{5/2}$ state. All above approximations were treated as systematic shifts which are listed in Table \ref{tab:errors} and discussed in more details in the supplemental material (SM)\cite{sm}. For the chosen probe-beam detuning and intensity, these approximations hold to a high degree of accuracy compared to the measurement uncertainty and other systematic shifts such that they can be neglected. Further shifts and errors of the measurement will be discussed later in the text.
Our experimental apparatus consists of a linear Paul trap for trapping single Ca$^+$ ions at mK temperatures using Doppler cooling\cite{meir19a}. A narrow-linewidth laser on the \SD{} transition at 729 nm was used to prepare the ion in one of the meta-stable Zeeman states (m=$\pm$5/2,$\pm$3/2) of the D$_{5/2}$ electronic state and to perform precision spectroscopy on the \SD{} transition (see Fig. \ref{fig:energy_diagram}). A probe beam at 854 nm detuned from the \DP{} transition was used to induce scattering from and light shifts of the D$_{5/2}$ state. The probe beam was linearly polarized perpendicular to the external magnetic field such that it excited mostly $\Delta m=\pm1$ transitions. Detection beams at 397 nm and 866 nm which are in resonance with the \DPS{} cycling transitions were used to distinguish between ``bright" and ``dark" states.
The scattering rate, $\Gamma$, was measured by recording the ``dark" population, P$_\textrm{D}$, as a function of the probe time, t$_{854}$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:energy_diagram}b). The ion was prepared in the D$_{5/2}$ state using a $\pi$-pulse of the spectroscopy laser followed by a projection pulse of the detection beams which enables post-selection of experiments starting in the D$_{5/2}$ state only. The probe beam was then turned on using an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) 5 $\mu$s before the experiment began in order to avoid any AOM latency (typically less than 1 $\mu$s). Experimental data was fitted with an exponential function, $\exp{(-\Gamma \left(t_{854}-t_0\right))}$, to extract the scattering rate. Here, $t_{854}$ is the experiment time and $t_0$ accounts for the fact that the AOM was turned on before the experiment began.
The ac-Stark shift, $\Delta E$, was measured by performing Rabi spectroscopy on the \SD{} transition using the narrow-linewidth spectroscopy laser (see Fig. \ref{fig:energy_diagram}c). The probe beam was switched on 5 $\mu$s before the spectroscopy pulse to avoid latency effects. The experimental cycles were interlaced with the probe beam on and off in order to cancel errors from decoherence mechanisms such as magnetic-field and spectroscopy-laser-phase fluctuations. The energy shift between the transitions with the probe beam on and off was determined by comparing the centers of Gaussian fits for each of the observed lines.
The probe-beam wavelength, $\lambda$, was monitored by and locked to a wavemeter (HighFinesse WS-U 30) and scanned by changing the locking set point. The center wavelength of the \DP{} transition, $\lambda_0$, was found by scanning the probe-beam wavelength across resonance using a weak probe-beam power below saturation intensity while measuring the scattering rate from ``dark'' to ``bright'' states (see Fig. \ref{fig:energy_diagram}d). The central wavelength of the transition was determined by fitting the inverse scattering rate to a second-order polynomial. The resonance frequency starting from both D$_{5/2}$(m=$\pm5/2$) Zeeman states was measured to account for Zeeman splittings in a magnetic field of 4.609(2) Gauss. The magnetic field was also measured with high precision on the \SD{} transition using the narrow spectroscopy laser. The probe-beam detuning, $\Delta(m)=2\pi c\left(1/\lambda-1/\lambda_0(m)\right)$, was determined for each of the Zeeman states.
Eq. \ref{eq:ratio} was used to determine the transition rates for each experimental instance. Our measurements of the scattering rate and the ac-Stark shift were repeated 600 times interlacing between different initial Zeeman states, m=$\pm5/2,\pm3/2$, of the D$_{5/2}$ state. Every few hours, the probe-beam detuning and intensity were changed and the transition center wavelength was re-measured to reduce errors due to drifts in the probe-beam frequency. The scattering rate and ac-Stark shift measurements were then continued for a few more hours. In total, four different combinations of probe-beam detunings and intensities were measured for a duration of almost 50 hours (see Fig. \ref{fig:results_time}a).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[trim={0.5cm 11.5cm 6cm 13.5cm},clip=true,width=\textwidth]{ExpFigPRL2.pdf}\\
\caption{a) Measurements results of the transition rates $\AS+\ADt$ prior to systematic shifts corrections. Initial Zeeman states of the D$_{5/2}$ state are marked with different colors and symbols (see legend). Dashed lines indicate the re-measurement of the \DP{} resonance wavelength and the change of probe-beam detuning and intensity settings. Typical error bars representing 1-$\sigma$ confidence intervals of the fits of the scattering rate, ac-Stark shift and detuning measurements are given. The grey area represents the theoretical value and their uncertainty\cite{safronova11}. b) Averaged results of the different Zeeman states (triangles), laser settings (green squares) and all data (Light blue circle). All results up to this point are prior to systematic shifts corrections. The error bars are a combination of statistical standard errors and measurement fitting errors. For the result represented by the black diamond, systematic shifts and additional uncertainties were included (see Table \ref{tab:errors}).}
\label{fig:results_time}
\end{figure*}
All measurements were averaged to determine the sum of the transition rates $\AS+\ADt$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:results_time}b). The total uncertainty of our measurement (0.25\%) includes both the standard error of all individual measurements and the measurement errors arising from the confidence intervals of the fits (see Table \ref{tab:errors}). The measurements were also averaged separately for each Zeeman state and each different detuning and intensity setting.
Possible systematic shifts for this type of measurement are listed in Table \ref{tab:errors} (see SM for detailed discussion and derivation\cite{sm}). The most dominant one is the effect of inelastic Raman scattering\cite{ozeri05} that changes the Zeeman state in the D$_{5/2}$ manifold before scattering to the ``bright'' states. This event changes the Rabi frequency during the scattering-rate measurement and thus shifts the measured value of the scattering rate (see Eq. \ref{eq:scatter}). On the other hand, inelastic Raman scattering events will not shift the value of the ac-Stark shift due to the Zeeman selectivity of the narrow spectroscopy laser.
To evaluate this shift, a numerical calculation of the dynamical optical Bloch equations (DOBE) describing our system was performed (see e.g. \cite{meir17b,meir18a}). The ``dark'' population decay was determined for different initial Zeeman states of the D manifold and was found to deviate from a single exponential decay, as expected due to the small leak into different Zeeman states of the D manifold. Instead, a sum of three exponents was used to better describe the decay owing to the three different Rabi coupling in the D-manifold\cite{sm}. From a fit of all the scattering data the inelastic Raman scattering shift is extracted (see Table \ref{tab:errors}). Notably, while the systematic shift is larger than our measurement uncertainty, it is almost the same for the $\pm5/2,\pm3/2$ Zeeman states. The Raman inelastic scattering effect was experimentally verified by interlacing measurements between $\pm5/2$ states to $\pm1/2$ states which features opposite and distinctively measurable systematic shifts\cite{sm}.
Even after accounting for the inelastic Raman scattering systematic shift, a discrepancy of 2-$\sigma$ between the $\pm$3/2 and the $\pm$5/2 measurements still remains. Since this discrepancy cannot be accounted for, it is added as an uncertainty of 0.56\% which is the dominant contribution to the error of this measurement.
The second-most dominant shift is due to thermal effects in the probe-beam AOM. While the rise time of the AOM is less than 1 $\mu$s, it takes about 15 $\mu$s (1/e) for the AOM to reach stable operation. For the ac-stark shift measurements, due to a 2 ms D-state repump pulse just before the measurement starts, the AOM is in steady-state operation and no systematic shifts were observed experimentally\cite{sm}. However, for the scattering-rate measurements, there is almost a ms where the probe beam is turned off before the measurement starts. We experimentally verified and quantified this systematic shift by omitting the first data points of the scattering from the analysis\cite{sm}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l r r}
\hline
\hline
Effect \hspace{3.8 cm} & Shift [\%] & Uncertainty [\%] \\
\hline
Statistical standard Error & ... & $\pm$0.20\\
Fit error & ... & $\pm$0.16\\
\hspace{0.5 cm} Total statistical error & ... & $\pm$0.25\\
Line shape & $<+0.008$ & ... \\
Rotating-wave approximation & +0.00005 & ...\\
Other lines & -0.0003 & ...\\
D$_{5/2}$ state lifetime & -0.04 & ... \\
Detection threshold & ... & $\pm$0.04\\
Finite detection time & -0.06 & ... \\
AOM thermal effect & +0.41 & $\pm$0.14 \\
Motion-induced Doppler shifts & $<-0.0001$ & ... \\
Inelastic scattering ($m_D=\pm5/2$) & +1.29 & ... \\
Inelastic scattering ($m_D=\pm3/2$) & +1.46 & ... \\
Off-resonant Raman coupling & $<-0.001$ & ... \\
Zeeman states discrepancy & ... & $\pm$0.56 \\
\hspace{0.5 cm} \textbf{Total shifts \& errors} & \textbf{+1.70} & \textbf{$\pm$0.63} \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Systematic shifts and experimental uncertainties. The symbol $<$ is used to indicate that the calculated absolute value of the shift is an upper bound. For shifts with a $+(-)$ sign, the measured value should be increased (decreased) accordingly.}
\label{tab:errors}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In Fig. \ref{fig:results_time}b, the measured value of the summed transition rates $\AS+\ADt$ corrected for all systematic effect is shown and compared to the non-corrected value. Our result of $\AS+\ADt=1.4178(89)\cdot10^8$ s$^{-1}$ agrees well with a theoretical calculation ($1.407(14)\cdot10^8$ s$^{-1}$)\cite{safronova11}.
The lifetime of an excited atomic state is given by the inverse of the sum of the transition rates from that excited state. For the P$_{3/2}$ state in Ca$^+$ one gets
\begin{equation}\label{eq:lifetime}
\tP=\frac{1}{\AS+\ADt+\ADf}.
\end{equation}
Our measurements determined the sum $\AS+\ADt$. The value of $\ADf$ contributing to the P$_{3/2}$ state lifetime can be measured using our technique by switching to a different probe beam that connects the S$_{1/2}$ and P$_{3/2}$ states. Here, however, a high-precision experimental value for the branching ratio, $\textrm{R}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}}=0.0587(2)$ \cite{gerritsma08} was used to determine the recommended value for the total lifetime, $\tP=(1-\textrm{R}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}})/(\AS+\ADt)=\tauP$ ns. In addition, two different theoretical values for the value of $\ADf$ \cite{safronova11,sahoo09} with their respective uncertainties were used to verify our experimental value for the lifetime. Since the value of $\ADf$ is one order of magnitude smaller than $\AS$, even though the two theories disagree within a few standard deviations, all calculated lifetime values agree within the uncertainty limits (see Fig. \ref{fig:comparison}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,trim={3cm 0cm 2.5cm 1cm},clip]{P32lifetime_v5-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of different experimental (blue circles) \cite{smith66,rambow76,ansbacher85,gosselin88,jin93,rosner97} and theoretical (red squares) \cite{theodosiou89,vaeck92,liaw95,sahoo09,safronova11} values for the P$_{3/2}$ lifetime in \Ca{} to this work (black diamond). Some of the theoretical works (red squares with no error bars) did not quote errors. For the recommended lifetime value of this work (black diamond), an experimental branching value from \cite{gerritsma08} was used. Calculation of the lifetime from the $\ADf$ theoretical value of \cite{safronova11} and \cite{sahoo09} is also given (grey diamonds).}
\label{fig:comparison}
\end{figure}
The branching ratio, $\textrm{R}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{S}_{1/2}}=0.9347(3)$ \cite{gerritsma08}, is further used to calculate the transition rate, $\AS=\textrm{R}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{S}_{1/2}}/\tP$, and the reduced dipole matrix element,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:matrix}
\D{3}^2=\left(2J_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}}+1\right)\AS\frac{3\epsilon_0\hbar}{8\pi^2}\lambda_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{S}_{1/2}}^3.
\end{equation}
The value of $\D{3}=4.115(13)$ ea$_0$ is compared to the value of $\D{1}=2.8928(43)$ ea$_0$ (Hettrich \textit{et al.} \cite{hettrich15}) using a high precision theoretical ratio $\D{3}/\D{1}=1.4145(1)$ \cite{safronova11} yielding 4.092(6) ea$_0$. This way, both the experimental values are directly compared without loss of uncertainty and agree to within 1.6 $\sigma$.
\mbox{The reduced-dipole-matrix-elements ratios,} $\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}}/\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}$=3.0068(13), \mbox{$\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}}/\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{1/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}$=1.3421(4) and} $\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}/\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{1/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}$=0.44634(6), are further used to compare the experimental branching ratios of the P$_{3/2}$ with those of the P$_{1/2}$ measured by Ramm \textit{et al.} \cite{ramm13} with excellent agreement. The converted P$_{1/2}$ values are of better precision than the directly measured P$_{3/2}$ ones (Table \ref{tab:comp}).
The matrix-element ratios are of such high precision due to common electronic-correlations contributions for transitions involving different fine-structure components.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|}
\hline
\hline
& P$_{1/2}$ exp. & P$_{3/2}$ & P$_{3/2}$ \\
& converted & experiment & theory \\
\hline
$\textrm{R}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{S}_{1/2}}$ & 0.93463(9) \cite{ramm13,safronova11} & 0.9347(3) \cite{gerritsma08} & 0.9340(9) \cite{safronova11} \\
$\textrm{R}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}}$ & 0.05876(8) \cite{ramm13,safronova11} & 0.0587(2) \cite{gerritsma08} & 0.0593(8) \cite{safronova11} \\
$\textrm{R}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}$ & 0.006602(7) \cite{ramm13,safronova11} & 0.00661(4) \cite{gerritsma08} & 0.00667(9) \cite{safronova11} \\
\hline
$\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{S}_{1/2}}$ & 4.092(6) \cite{hettrich15} & 4.115(13) \cite{tw,gerritsma08} & 4.099(18) \cite{safronova11} \\
$\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}}$ & 3.283(6) \cite{hettrich15,ramm13} & 3.300(12) \cite{tw,gerritsma08} & 3.306(18) \cite{safronova11} \\
$\mathcal{D}_{\textrm{P}_{3/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}$ & 1.092(2) \cite{hettrich15,ramm13} & 1.097(5) \cite{tw,gerritsma08} & 1.100(6) \cite{safronova11} \\
\hline
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Translation of P$_{1/2}$ experimental values of reduced-dipole-matrix elements\cite{hettrich15} and branching ratios\cite{ramm13} to P$_{3/2}$ values and their comparison to the measured experimental values of this work and Ref. \cite{gerritsma08} and the theoretical values of Ref. \cite{safronova11}. The translation is done using high-precision theoretical ratios of reduced-dipole-matrix elements\cite{safronova11}.}
\label{tab:comp}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The directly measured values of reduced-dipole-matrix elements and a high-precision measurement of the differential polarizability $\alpha_0(3d_{5/2})-\alpha(4s)=-44.079(13)$ a.u. by Huang \textit{et al.} \cite{huang19} are used to extract improved recommended values for the scalar polarizabilities $\alpha(4s)=76.40(32)$, $\alpha_0(3d_{3/2})=31.72(22)$ and $\alpha_0(3d_{5/2})=32.32(32)$ and tensor polarizabilities $\alpha_2(3d_{3/2})=-17.18(8)$ and $\alpha_2(3d_{5/2})=-24.42(17)$. All values are in atomic units (see \cite{sm} for further details).
A particularly attractive application of the present method is the measurement of the lifetimes of quantum states of molecular ions within the framework of a quantum-logic experiment\cite{wolf16a,chou17a,meir19a}. Consider, e.g, the N$_2^+$ molecular ion in its electronic (X$^2\Sigma_g^+$) and vibrational (v$''$=0) ground state\cite{tong10a, germann14a}. A probe beam consisting of a 1D optical lattice modulated at the trap frequency and detuned closely to an excited state such as the A$^2\Pi_u^+$ (v$'$=2) will induce an optical-dipole force proportional to the ac-Stark shift experienced by the molecule \cite{meir19a}. The force can be detected by a co-trapped atomic ion using quantum logic protocols\cite{koelemeij07a,hume11a,meir19a}. Upon scattering, the molecule will decay to a vibrational level of the X$^2\Sigma_g^+$ state according to Franck-Condon factors. Scattering into vibrational states other than the ground state (v$''$=0) will diminish the optical-dipole force due to the increased detuning, thus signalling the time of scattering. The ratio of the scattering rate and the ac-Stark shift gives the sum of all transitions rates $\sum_{\textrm{v}''\neq0}\textrm{A}_{2 \rightarrow \textrm{v}''}$ except one, A$_{2\rightarrow0}$, which can be extracted from the ac-Stark shift measurement. The inverse of the sum of all vibronic transitions rates gives the vibronic lifetime, $\tau_{\textrm{v}'=2}=1/\sum_{\textrm{v}''}{\textrm{A}_{2 \rightarrow \textrm{v}''}}$. This discussion only includes vibronic states. Rotational, fine and hyperfine structure can be considered in a similar fashion.
To summarize, measurements of transition rates and branching ratios were combined together with relativistic theory to achieve precision and to validate the accuracy of the lifetime of the (4p)$^2$P$_{3/2}$ excited state of Ca$^+$, $\tP=\tauP$ ns.
The present method can be used to measure transition rates and lifetimes in many types of ionic, atomic and molecular systems both for single and ensembles of particles.
We thank Anna Ladina Leder and Heinz Krummenacher who helped to perform the first proof-of-principle experiments during an undergraduate laboratory project. We also thank Roee Ozeri for helpful comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation, grant nr. CRSII5\_183579, and through the National Competence Centre in Research, Quantum Science and Technology (NCCR-QSIT). MS work was supported in part by U.S. NSF Grant No. PHY-1620687.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
\input{output.bbl}
\newpage
\onecolumngrid
\section*{Supplemental Material}
\section{Systematic shifts}
According to Eq. [3] of the main text, the ratio of three experimentally measured parameters ($\Gamma$, $\Delta E$, $\Delta$) equals to the sum of the transitions rates $\AS+\ADf$ which we will denote as A from now on for brevity. This equality holds for the approximate equations of the ac-Stark shift (Eq. [1] of the main text) and the scattering rate (Eq. [2] of the main text). The experimentally measured values, however, follow the exact formulas for these parameters and hence the ratio given in Eq. [3] in the main text does not equate exactly to A, but it differs by a small amount,
\begin{equation*}
x_i\equiv\frac{\Delta_i}{2\pi}\frac{\Gamma_i}{\Delta E_i/h}=\textrm{A}_i\left(1-\varepsilon_i\right).
\end{equation*}
Here, $x_i$ is the value calculated from the measurements in the experimental instance $i$ and $\varepsilon_i$ is the systematic shift of that experimental instance. Positive $\varepsilon_i>0$ means that our measured value of $x_i$ should be increased by $\varepsilon_i$ since $\textrm{A}_i\approx x_i(1+\varepsilon_i)$ for $|\varepsilon_i|\ll1$.
In our experiment, we performed measurements with different laser powers and detunings while interlacing between different Zeeman states. For each instance of the experiment, $i$, we calculate a systematic shift, $\varepsilon_i$. Our best estimate for A is given by the mean of all our measurements:
\begin{equation*}
\textrm{A}=\langle x_i\left(1+\varepsilon_i\right)\rangle=\langle x_i\rangle+\langle x_i\varepsilon_i\rangle\equiv\langle x_i\rangle\left(1+\varepsilon\right).
\end{equation*}
Here, $\langle x_i\rangle$ is the mean of all measured values of the transition rates without correction and
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon=\frac{\langle x_i\varepsilon_i\rangle}{\langle x_i\rangle}.
\end{equation*}
is the weighted mean of the systematic shifts of each experimental instance. The value of $\varepsilon$ calculated for different types of systematic shifts is given in The Table I of the main text.
\subsection{Line shape}
The solution of a two-level system interacting with the classical electric field of an electromagnetic wave in the rotating-wave approximation gives rise to the well-known Lorentzian profile for the excited-state population \cite{kimble76}:
\begin{equation*}
p_e=\frac{\Omega^2/4}{\Omega^2/2+\Delta^2+(1/\tP)^2/4}.
\end{equation*}
The scattering rate to ``bright" states which decouple from the two-level system is given by:
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma=p_e \textrm{A}
\end{equation*}
For large enough detuning, $\Delta\gg\Omega,\ADf$, these equations approximate to Eq. [2] of the main text and give rise to a systematic shift:
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon_i\approx\frac{\Omega_i^2/2+(1/\tP)^2/4}{\Delta_i^2}.
\end{equation*}
We determine the Rabi frequency using Eq. [1] of the main text. We take the value of $\tP$ from Ref. \cite{safronova11}, $\tP=6.69$ ns. The mean systematic shift of all experimental instances is $\varepsilon < 7.7\cdot10^{-5}$ which is negligible compared to the measurement uncertainty. This shift is an upper bound since as the exact scattering rate decreases as compared to the approximated value (Eq. [2] of the main text) when approaching the resonance, the exact ac-Stark shift also decreases as compared to the approximated value (Eq. [1] of the main text). These two effects effectively cancel leading to a much smaller shift. Nevertheless, the upper bound is small enough such that it is not necessary to account for this effect in the present case.
\subsection{Rotating-wave approximation}
Outside the rotating-wave approximation, the ac-Stark shift takes the form \cite{grimm00a,zhou10}:
\begin{equation*}
\Delta E/h=\frac{1}{2\pi}\frac{\Omega^2}{4}\cdot\left(\frac{1}{\omega-\omega_0}-\frac{1}{\omega+\omega_0}\right).
\end{equation*}
Here, $\omega$ is the laser frequency and $\omega_0$ is the transition frequency such that: $\Delta=\omega-\omega_0$. The scattering rate outside the rotating-wave approximation is given by \cite{grimm00a},
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma=\textrm{A}\frac{\Omega^2}{4}\left(\frac{\omega}{\omega_0}\right)^3\left(\frac{1}{\omega_0-\omega}+\frac{1}{\omega_0+\omega}\right)^2.
\end{equation*}
For $\Delta\ll\omega_0$ both equations approximate to Eq. [1] and Eq. [2] of the main text and give rise to a systematic shift:
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon_i=\Delta_i\left(\frac{3}{\omega_{0,i}}+\frac{1}{\omega_{0,i}+\omega}\right).
\end{equation*}
Note that this systematic shift depends on the sign of the detuning, and in our experiment we used both red and blue detuned probe lasers such that the systematic shifts partially cancel giving rise to $\varepsilon=5.1\cdot10^{-7}$. Nevertheless, the maximum absolute value of this systematic shift is $|\varepsilon_i|<3.4\cdot10^{-5}$ which is negligible with respect to our measurement uncertainty.
\subsection{Other lines}
The probe beam mainly interacts with the \DP{} transition near 854.4 nm and shifts both the D$_{5/2}$ and the P$_{3/2}$ levels. We monitored this ac-Stark shift by performing precision spectroscopy on the \SD{} transition using a narrow-linewidth laser beam at 729 nm as discussed in the main text. The probe beam interacts with all other allowed transitions from both the S$_{1/2}$ and the D$_{5/2}$ states. These interactions induce a systematic shift of the measured ac-Stark shift value. Due to the $\Delta^{-2}$ dependence of the scattering rate and the large detuning for any other transition, the scattering effect is negligible.
The dominant interaction of the probe beam other than with the \DP{} transition is with the P$_{1/2}\leftarrow$S$_{1/2}$ and the P$_{3/2}\leftarrow$S$_{1/2}$ transitions. The probe beam at 854.4 nm was highly red detuned from these transitions at 397 nm and 393 nm respectively. The S$_{1/2}$ level was shifted by -1 Hz to -3 Hz depending on the laser parameters. Our measured value of the ac-Stark shift is then composed of two contributions:
\begin{equation*}
\Delta E=\Delta E_\textrm{PD}-\Delta E_\textrm{PS}.
\end{equation*}
The systematic shift of every experimental instance is given by,
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon_i=-\frac{\Delta E_{\textrm{PS},i}}{\Delta E_{\textrm{PD},i}}.
\end{equation*}
Note that, as in the case of the shift due to the rotating-wave approximation, we have cancellation of systematic shifts from blue and red detuned experiments. When we change the detuning from red to blue in the experiment, $\Delta E_\textrm{PD}$ either assumes positive or negative values while $\Delta E_\textrm{PS}$ is always negative resulting in $\varepsilon=-3.4\cdot10^{-6}$. Nevertheless, the maximal value of the systematic shift is $|\varepsilon_i|<6.5\cdot10^{-5}$ which is negligible compared to our experimental uncertainty.
\subsection{Finite D$_{5/2}$ state lifetime}
Due to finite lifetime of the D$_{5/2}$ state, Eq. [2] of the main text is changed to:
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma=\textrm{A}\frac{\Omega^2}{4\Delta^2}+\left(\textrm{A}_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}\rightarrow\textrm{S}_{1/2}}+\textrm{A}_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}\right).
\end{equation*}
Here, $\left(\textrm{A}_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}\rightarrow\textrm{S}_{1/2}}+\textrm{A}_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{3/2}}\right)=\tau_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}}^{-1}$ are the two transition rates connecting the D$_{5/2}$ ``dark'' state to the S$_{1/2}$ and D$_{3/2}$ ``bright'' states which give rise to a finite lifetime, $\tau_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}}=1.1649(44)$ s \cite{shao17}, of this state. We experimentally verified this lifetime (with less precision) in our experiment to overrule spurious optical pumping effects.
The systematic shift for each experimental instance is given by,
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon_i=-\frac{\tau_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}}^{-1}}{\Gamma_i},
\end{equation*}
and the mean systematic shift is $\varepsilon=-3.7\cdot10^{-4}$ which is small compared to our measurement uncertainty.
\subsection{Detection threshold}
We determined whether the ion was in a ``dark'' or ``bright'' state by counting photons ($n$) over 0.5~ms in the first experiments (17/5/19-19/5/19) and over 0.75~ms in the later ones (27/5/19-4/6/19) and setting a photon threshold ($t$) such that for $n\leq t$ the ion was considered ``dark'' while for $n>t$ the ion was considered ``bright". Photon counting traces for two experiments with two different detection times and their thresholds are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:detection_err}a,c. In the latter experiment, the cooling laser fell out of lock such that the mean ``bright'' photon number drifted during the experiment. Nevertheless, even with unlocked detection and cooling laser, no detectable systematic shifts were observed within the measurement errors.
We determined the threshold value to minimize both ``dark'' and ``bright'' counting errors by choosing the point of lowest counting probability between the ``dark'' and ``bright'' histograms (see Fig. \ref{fig:detection_err}b,d blue trace). To quantify the effect of this threshold value on the experimental results, we calculated the dependence of the transition rate on the threshold, A($t$). The results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:detection_err}b,d for the two different detection times. We observe that the experimental value, A($t$), is almost independent of $t$ around the chosen threshold value. There is a small linear slope of -0.0002$\cdot10^8$ s$^{-1}$/$\Delta t$ from which we estimate an uncertainty of $4\cdot10^{-4}$ due to possible error of $\pm3$ photons in the determination of the photon-count threshold. This uncertainty is small compared to our measurement uncertainty.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.23]{Detection_errors_run3_rawdata.jpg}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.23]{Detection_errors_run3_v2.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.23]{Detection_error_raw_data_20190604.jpg}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[scale=0.23]{Detection_errors_20190604_v2.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{a) Photon number counts (blue) for an experiment (19/5, 10 hrs) with 0.5 ms detection time. The black line is the photon threshold used in the analysis. b) Histogram (blue) of the photon number count in (a). The values of the transition rates determined for different thresholds around the one used in the experiment (black symbol) are given as red symbols. A linear fit of the transition rates in an interval of $\pm3$ photons around the threshold value is shown in black. The dashed grey area represents the theoretical value and uncertainty from Ref. \cite{safronova11}. c) same as (a) for an experiment (4/6, 7 hrs) with 0.75 ms detection time. Here, the detection laser fell out of lock after ~1.75 hrs. d) Same as (b) for the photon number count in (c).}
\label{fig:detection_err}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Finite detection time}
In the previous section, we considered the case of the counting error due to photon statistics. This error can be reduced by increasing the detection time. However, increasing the detection time will increase the probability of a decay of the ``dark'' state into the ``bright'' state during the course of detection due to the finite lifetime of the ``dark'' state, $\tau_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}}$.
We calculated the effective decay time, $t_\textrm{eff}$, up to which a ``dark'' state is considered ``bright'', by linearizing the photon accumulation rate,
\begin{equation*}
t_\textrm{eff}=t_\textrm{det}\frac{\bar{b}-t}{\bar{b}-\bar{d}}.
\end{equation*}
This equation accounts for the fact that with high photon threshold ``dark'' events that scatter during the detection time can still be counted correctly as ``dark'' events given that the scatter event occurred at the end of the detection period. Here, $t_\textrm{det}=0.5,0.75$ ms is the total detection time, $\bar{d}<t<\bar{b}$ is the photon threshold value introduced in the previous section and $\bar{b}$ ($\bar{d}$) are the mean ``bright'' (``dark'') photons counted in the experiment.
The number of excessively measured ``bright'' (``dark'') photons, $\Delta b$ ($\Delta d$) is then given by,
\begin{equation*}
\Delta b = -\Delta d = d\cdot\left(e^{t_\textrm{eff}/\tau_{\textrm{D}_{5/2}}}-1\right).
\end{equation*}
Here, $d$ is the measured number of ``dark'' photons. For the experiment in Fig \ref{fig:detection_err}a,b we estimated 180 photons which are falsely detected as ``bright'' out of total $\sim$600,000 ``dark'' counts. For the experiment in Fig. \ref{fig:detection_err}c,d we estimated 210 false detected photons out of $\sim$470,000.
To estimate the systematic shift induced by this effect, we changed the threshold value such that 180 (210) photons were transferred from ``dark'' to ``bright'' for the two experiments. We found a systemic error of $\varepsilon=-6\cdot10^{-4}$ for both experiments. This value is small compared to our measurement uncertainty.
\subsection{Thermal effect in AOM power stabilization}
We used an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) to control the duration of the probe-beam pulse during the experiment. The AOM rise time is very short, typically less than a $\mu$s, however, to reach a steady-state power it takes the AOM about 15 $\mu$s (1/e). This effect is due to thermalization of the AOM crystal with the incident probe beam. In Fig. \ref{fig:lifetime_fit_bias}a we show a typical snapshot of the probe-beam power measured on a fast detector during a scattering rate measurement.
Even though the Rabi frequency cancels in the calculation of the transition rates, different effective powers between the ac-shift and the scattering rate measurements will lead to systematic errors. In the case of the ac-stark shift measurements, we applied a 2 ms D-state repump pulse using the probe-beam just before the ac-stark shift measurement began. This pulse eliminated the AOM thermal effect. We experimentally verified that there are no systematic shifts in the ac-stark shift measurement by adding a 150 $\mu$s pulse prior to the ac-stark shift measurement and comparing the resulting ac-shift with an experiment with no such pulse. The relative difference between the two measurements was 0.08(18)\% which is consistent with no shift.
On the other hand, in the case of the scattering-rate measurements, there is almost a ms delay between the D-state repump pulse and the measurement pulse due to D-shelving and state-purification pulses. For that, the AOM thermal effect is present in the scattering rate measurement and it induced a systematic shift.
To test the magnitude of this systematic shift, we analyzed the scattering-rate data excluding between 0 to 7 of the first data points of the decay curve, thus, effectively starting the scattering measurement after a time period which the AOM could reach its steady-state power. On average, each point of data we excluded amounts for roughly 25 $\mu$s of pre-AOM time.
The results of the transition rates for this analysis are given in Fig. \ref{fig:lifetime_fit_bias}b. As expected, the transition rates value increases when excluding the first point due to the increase in the effective Rabi frequency in the measurement. The value of the transition rates remains constant when excluding from one up to three of the first data points. These values are used to calculate a systematic shift of $\varepsilon$=+0.0041. The use of less data points in the fit analysis increase the statistical error of our measurement. We quantify this as an additional error of 0.0014 to the non-corrected value.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth,trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm},clip]{AOM_thermal_effect.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth,trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm},clip]{Lifetime_fit_bias_v3b.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{a) Typical snapshot of the probe-beam power measured on a fast photo-detector (blue) during a scattering-rate measurement. Red line is an exponential fit with a characteristic time of about 15 $\mu$s. b) Transition rates, $\AS+\ADt$, in which we excluded from 0 to 7 of the first data points of the scattering-rate decay curve. The results before correction reported in the main text are given in light blue circle. The values used for extracting the systematic shift are given in red diamonds where the corrected value for this systematic shift is given in black diamond. The gray-shaded area is the theoretical value of Safronova et. al. \cite{safronova11}.}
\label{fig:lifetime_fit_bias}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Motion-induced Doppler shifts}
Mechanical effects of the ion motion affect the instantaneous detuning, $\Delta_\textrm{inst.}$, of the probe-beam light through the Doppler shift,
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_\textrm{inst.}=\Delta+k x \omega \cos \left( \omega t\right)\equiv \Delta\left(1+\beta\cos \left( \omega t\right)\right).
\end{equation*}
Here, $k=2\pi/\lambda$ is the projection of the $k$-vector of the probe beam onto the direction of motion, $x$, with oscillation frequency $\omega$. The motion of the ion is composed of both thermal motion and micromotion with two different frequencies (700 kHz and 16.8 MHz respectively). The modulation index, $\beta=k x \omega / \Delta$, quantifies the modulation amplitude.
The duration of the scattering-rate and ac-Stark-shift measurements is much longer than one cycle of modulation. Hence, we can consider the average scattering-rate and ac-Stark-shift values,
\begin{equation*}
\Gamma=\langle \Gamma_\textrm{inst.} \rangle = \Gamma_0 \left \langle \frac{1}{(1+\beta\cos (\omega t))^2} \right \rangle = \Gamma_0 \left (1+\frac{3}{2}\beta^2\right ),
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\Delta E=\langle \Delta E_\textrm{inst.} \rangle = \Delta E_0 \left \langle \frac{1}{1+\beta\cos (\omega t)} \right \rangle = \Delta E_0 \left (1+\frac{1}{2}\beta^2 \right ).
\end{equation*}
Here, $\Delta E_0$ and $\Gamma_0$ are the values of the ac-Stark shift and scattering rate without the mechanical effect as given in Eqs. [1,2] of the main text. The effect of mechanical motion on the transition rates is given by,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\textrm{A}}{\textrm{A}_0}=\frac{1+\frac{3}{2}\beta^2}{1+\frac{1}{2}\beta^2}\approx 1+\beta^2,
\end{equation*}
thus the systematic shift due to mechanical motion is $\varepsilon=-\beta^2$.
For the case of thermal motion, the ion is Doppler cooled to $\sim$0.5 mK such that amplitude of the thermal motion is less than 100 nm. The resulting modulation index is $\beta < 5\cdot10^{-4}$ and the systematic shift is $|\varepsilon| < 3 \cdot 10^{-7}$ which is negligible compared to our measurement uncertainty.
For the case of excess micromotion, its amplitude was compensated below our detection limit. For that, it is safe to estimate the micromotion amplitude to be smaller than 10 nm. In this case, the modulation index is $\beta < 1\cdot10^{-3}$ and the systematic shift is $|\varepsilon| < 1\cdot10^{-6}$ which is also negligible compared to our measurement uncertainty.
\subsection{Inelastic Raman scattering}
In the formula of the scattering rate given in Eq. [2] of the main text, we assumed that either the ion decays to ``bright'' states or it decays back to its initial Zeeman ``dark'' state (also known as elastic Rayleigh scattering). This assumption neglects the inelastic Raman scattering in which the ion can decay to different Zeeman states of the D$_{5/2}$ manifold (see Fig. \ref{fig:inelastic}a). Inelastic scattering results in the change of the Rabi frequency during the measurement instance due to different angular factors in the transition moment.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.50\linewidth,trim={2.5cm 8cm 5cm 5cm},clip]{Inelastic.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.40\linewidth,trim={0cm 8cm 0cm 8cm},clip]{Inelastic_exp_v2_arxiv.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{a) Schematic of inelastic Raman scattering from the initial D$_{5/2}$($m_D$=-5/2) state. A probe-beam (solid purple arrow) couples the D$_{5/2}$($m_D$=-5/2) state to the P$_{3/2}$($m_P$=-3/2) excited state. From this excited state, the ion can decay either to the S$_{1/2}$ or D$_{3/2}$ ``bright'' states or back to the D$_{5/2}$ ``dark'' state. The latter breaks into elastic scattering to the $m_D$=-5/2 state or inelastic scattering to the $m_D$=-3/2,-1/2 states (dotted blue arrows). The branching ratios for these events are 10:4:1 respectively. After an inelastic scattering event occurs, the probe beam couples the ion to different excited Zeeman states of the P$_{3/2}$ level (dashed purple arrows). b) Experimental verification of the inelastic process. Transition rates for an ion prepared in the D$_{5/2}$($m_D=\pm5/2$) (blue) and the D$_{5/2}$($m_D=\pm1/2$) (red) states. Circles (diamonds) represent values before (after) the correction of the systematic shift for inelastic scattering. The black diamond is the corrected value given in the main text. The gray-shaded area is the theoretical value of Safronova et. al. \cite{safronova11}.}
\label{fig:inelastic}
\end{figure}
As an example (see Fig. \ref{fig:inelastic}a), we consider the case of an ion prepared in the D$_{5/2}(m=-5/2)$ state. A probe-beam with linear horizontal polarization couples this state to the P$_{3/2}(m=-3/2)$ state. From this excited state, there is a probability, $p_b=(\AS+\ADt)/(\AS+\ADt+\ADf)=0.941$, to decay to the ``bright'' states and $p_d=(1-p_b)=0.059$ probability to decay back to the D$_{5/2}$ state. In the case of decaying back to the D$_{5/2}$ state, the probability to decay to the different Zeeman states is given by,
\begin{equation*}
p\left({\textrm{P}_{3/2}(m_P)\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}(m_D)}\right)=(2\cdot3/2+1)\cdot \tj{3/2}{1}{5/2}{-m_P}{m_P-m_D}{m_D}^2.
\end{equation*}
Here, the big brackets stand for a Wigner 3j symbol. In our example, there is a $2/3$ chance to decay back to the initial $m=-5/2$ and $4/15$ ($1/15$) chance to decay to the $m=-3/2$ ($m=-1/2$) state. The total probability for the inelastic scattering event is then given by, $p_d\cdot1/3=0.02$. Note that for the electronic ground state, S$_{1/2}$, Raman scattering is known to vanish due to destructive interference from the P$_{1/2}$ and P$_{3/2}$ states \cite{ozeri05}. In our case, due to the single transition involved, there is no such destructive interference. When the ion decays to a different Zeeman state, the Rabi frequency changes accordingly and thus the rate in which a second scattering event occurs. The Rabi frequencies for the different Zeeman states of the D$_{5/2}$ level are proportional to,
\begin{equation*}
\Omega^2(m_D)\propto\tj{3/2}{1}{5/2}{-1-m_D}{1}{m_D}^2+\tj{3/2}{1}{5/2}{1-m_D}{-1}{m_D}^2.
\end{equation*}
In our example, $\Omega^2(-3/2)/\Omega^2(-5/2)=3/5$ and $\Omega^2(-1/2)/\Omega^2(-5/2)=2/5$.
Including the inelastic process, the decay of the ``dark'' state changes from a single exponential decay to the following expression,
\begin{equation*}
p(\textrm{dark})=p_b e^{-\Gamma(m_D)t}+p_d\sum_{m_D'}p(\textrm{P}_{3/2}(m_P)\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}(m_D')) e^{-\Gamma(m_D')t},
\end{equation*}
with $\Gamma(m_D')=\Gamma(m_D)\cdot \Omega^2(m_D') / \Omega^2(m_D)$. For the initial Zeeman state, $m_D=\pm1/2$, the expression becomes more complicated since the probe beam initially populates two Zeeman states in the excited P$_{3/2}$ level ($m_P=\pm3/2$,$\mp1/2$). The probability to populate each of these states is given by,
\begin{equation*}
p(m_P^\pm)=\frac{\tj{3/2}{1}{5/2}{\mp1-m_D}{\pm1}{m_D}^2}{\tj{3/2}{1}{5/2}{-1-m_D}{1}{m_D}^2+\tj{3/2}{1}{5/2}{1-m_D}{-1}{m_D}^2},
\end{equation*}
and the expression for the decay of the ``dark'' state changes accordingly,
\begin{equation*}
p(\textrm{dark})=p_b e^{-\Gamma(m_D)t}+p_d\sum_{m_P^\pm}\sum_{m_D'}p(m_P^\pm)p(\textrm{P}_{3/2}(m_P^\pm)\rightarrow\textrm{D}_{5/2}(m_D')) e^{-\Gamma(m_D')t}.
\end{equation*}
Here, $m_P^\pm$ stands for exciting a state with Zeeman quantum number $m_P=m_D\pm1$.
The dark state population can be written in general form,
\begin{equation*}
\textrm{p}(\textrm{``dark''})=p_\frac{5}{2}e^{-\Gamma(\frac{5}{2})(t-t_0)}+p_\frac{3}{2}e^{-\Gamma(\frac{3}{2})(t-t_0)}+p_\frac{1}{2}e^{-\Gamma(\frac{1}{2})(t-t_0)}.
\end{equation*}
Here, we used the symmetry of the Zeeman states, $\Gamma(m_D)=\Gamma(-m_D)$, and introduced back, $t_0$, which accounts for the fact that the AOM was turned on before the experiment began. The probabilities, $p_{|m|}$, indicate from which Zeeman state the ion scatters from ``dark'' to ``bright''.
In the previous paragraph, we showed how to derive the probabilities within the approximation of a single inelastic Raman scattering event. To check our calculations and to derive more accurate probabilities, we solved the dynamical optical Bloch equations (DOBE) of our system \cite{meir17b,meir18a}. The treatment considers the 12 Zeeman levels of the S$_{1/2}$,P$_{3/2}$ and D$_{5/2}$ states (for simplicity we omitted the D$_{3/2}$ levels), a probe-beam that couples the D$_{5/2}$ and the P$_{3/2}$ states with horizontal linear polarization and all spontaneous decay channels. We initialized the density matrix in a single Zeeman state of the D$_{5/2}$ manifold and numerically calculated the density matrix evolution in time during the decay to the S$_{1/2}$ levels. We then fitted the probabilities to the DOBE numerical solution. The results of the probabilities for different initial Zeeman states using the DOBE and the single Raman scattering analytic derivation are given in Table \ref{tab:prob}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c c c|l|}
\hline
Initial state & $p_{|\frac{5}{2}|}$ & $p_{|\frac{3}{2}|}$ & $p_{|\frac{1}{2}|}$ & Method\\
\hline
\hline
$m=\pm$5/2 & 1 & 0 & 0 & No correction \\
\hline
$m=\pm$5/2 & 0.9896 & 0 & 0.0104 & DOBE \\
\hline
$m=\pm$5/2 & 0.9802 & 0.0158 & 0.0040 & Single scattering \\
\hline
\hline
$m=\pm$3/2 & 0 & 1 & 0 & No correction \\
\hline
$m=\pm$3/2 & 0.0160 & 0.9407 & 0.0430 & DOBE \\
\hline
$m=\pm$3/2 & 0 & 0.9644 & 0.0356 & Single scattering \\
\hline
\hline
$m=\pm$1/2 & 0 & 0 & 1 & No correction \\
\hline
$m=\pm$1/2 & 0 & 0.0278 & 0.9722 & DOBE \\
\hline
$m=\pm$1/2 & 0.0099 & 0.0218 & 0.9684 & Single scattering \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Probabilities, $p_{|m|}$, of the Zeeman state before scattering from ``dark'' to ``bright'' derived from DOBE and single-scattering analytic calculations for all initial Zeeman states of the D$_{5/2}$ manifold. ``No correction" stands for the limiting case of no inelastic Raman scattering shift described by Eq. [2] of the main text.}
\label{tab:prob}
\end{center}
\end{table}
For the $m_D=\pm5/2,\pm3/2$ states, the inelastic Raman scattering tends to decrease the scattering rate due to pumping to states with lower Rabi frequency.
The $m_D=\pm1/2$ states, however, show an increase in the scattering rate since they posses the lowest Rabi frequency. To verify the inelastic Raman effect experimentally, we performed an experiment in which the ion is prepared in the $m_D=\pm5/2$ and $m_D=\pm1/2$ states. In that experiment, we used a spectroscopy laser with different orientation with respect to the trap axis and different polarization with respect to the magnetic field axis than the one used in the original experiments to allow preparation of the ion in both the $\pm1/2,\pm5/2$ Zeeman states. The results are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:inelastic}b and are in agreement with our calculations.
\subsection{Off-resonant Raman coupling}
Since we used a linear-horizontal polarized laser beam in the experiment, we allowed for off-resonant Raman coupling between Zeeman states in the D$_{5/2}$ level which satisfy $\Delta m_D=\pm2$. This off-resonant coherent coupling dresses our initial Zeeman state with Zeeman states of $\Delta m_D=\pm2$ and thus changes the coupling to the excited P$_{3/2}$ level.
We estimate the mixing by considering the bare-Raman coupling,
\begin{equation*}
\Omega_\textrm{Raman}=\frac{\Omega(m_D)\Omega(m_D\pm2)}{\Delta}.
\end{equation*}
Here, $\Omega(m_D)$ is the Rabi frequency of the probe beam that couples the D$_{5/2}(m_D)$ state with the excited P$_{3/2}$ state and $\Delta$ is the detuning of the probe beam from the excited state. We estimate an upper bound for the mixing due to this coupling by considering an off-resonant Rabi flop. The average population in the coupled Zeeman state is then given by,
\begin{equation*}
p_\textrm{mix}=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\Omega_\textrm{Raman}^2}{\Omega_\textrm{Raman}^2+\Delta_\textrm{Raman}^2}.
\end{equation*}
Here, $\Delta_\textrm{Raman}$ is the detuning between the two Zeeman states due to the external magnetic field of 4.609 Gauss. We now can calculate the upper bound for this systematic shift,
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon=p_\textrm{mix}\left(\frac{\Omega^2(m_D+2)}{\Omega^2(m_D)}-1\right)\leq-1.4\cdot10^{-5}.
\end{equation*}
We consider this calculated shift as an upper bound since we only included the effect on the scattering rate measurements. Similar considerations can be made for the ac-Stark shift measurements which will result in reduction of this systematic effect.
\section{Extraction of polarizabilities}
The matrix elements that we obtained in this work as well as extracted from other measurements~\cite{gerritsma08,ramm13,hettrich15} can also be used to improve knowledge of the $4s$ and $3d_j$ polarizabilities. These quantities are of particular interest due to their relevance in the determinations of the blackbody radiation shift in the Ca$^+$ clock \cite{safronova11,huang19}. The valence static scalar polarizability $\alpha_{0}(v)$ of an atom with one valence electron $v$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\alpha _{\text{0}}(v)\ =\frac{2}{3(2j_{v}+1)}\sum_{k}\frac{|\langle v||D||k\rangle |^{2}}{E_{k}-E_{v}}, \label{one}
\end{equation}
where $|\langle v||D||k\rangle$ is a reduced electric-dipole matrix element and the indices $k$ range over the $np$ states for the $4s$ electron and over the $np$ and $nf$ states for the $3d$ electron. The $4s-4p_{j}$ contributions dominate the $4s$ value so increased precision of the matrix elements improves the $4s$ polarizability. Results obtained with the matrix elements from this work, Ref.~\cite{hettrich15} and combination of the two are listed in Columns A, B and C of Table~\ref{table5}, respectively. Theory values from \cite{safronova11} are listed for comparison. Relative uncertainties in the polarizability contributions are twice the uncertainties of the corresponding matrix elements. When values are correlated such as in the uncertainties in the $4s-4p_{1/2}$ and $4s-4p_{3/2}$ matrix elements extracted from the same work, we linearly add the uncertainties.
The differential scalar polarizability for the $4s-3d_{5/2}$ clock transition was measured in \cite{huang19} to be $-44.079(13)$~a.u. We use this value and the ground state polarizabilities from Table~\ref{table5} to extract a value of the $3d_{5/2}$ scalar polarizability, listed in the columns A, B and C last row of Table~\ref{table5}. All values are in agreement with the theory \cite{safronova11}, validating theory calculations obtained using the same method for similar systems.
\begin{table*} [th]
\caption{\label{table5} Ca$^+$ static polarizabilities (in a.u.) obtained with the matrix elements from this work (Column A), Ref.~\cite{hettrich15} (Column B) and combination of the two (Column C). The scalar $3d_{5/2}$ polarizability in columns A,B and C is extracted by combining the resulting ground state polarizability and the differential Ca$^+$ clock polarizability $\delta\alpha_0(3d_{5/2}-4s)=-44.079(13)$~a.u. measured in \cite{huang19}. Theory values from \cite{safronova11} are listed for comparison.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{lcccc}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{Theory~\cite{safronova11}}&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{A}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{B}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{C} \\
\hline $4p_{1/2} - 4s$ & 24.4(2) & 24.58(15) & 24.30(7) & 24.30(7) \\
$4p_{3/2} - 4s$ & 48.4(4) & 48.74(31) & 48.20(14) & 48.74(31) \\
Other \cite{safronova11} & 3.36(5) & 3.36(5) & 3.36(5) & 3.36(5) \\
Total $\alpha(4s)$ & 76.1(5) & 76.68(46) & 75.86(21) & 76.40(32) \\
Total $\alpha_0(3d_{5/2})$ & 31.8(3) & 32.60(46) & 31.78(21) & 32.32(32) \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
We also used the $4p-3d$ matrix elements extracted in this work to evaluate $3d_j$ scalar and tensor polarizabilites, as well as provide a consistency check of the $3d_{5/2}$ static value obtaind from the \cite{huang19} measurement that was presented in Table \ref{table5}. Tensor polarizabilities are given by
\begin{align}
\alpha _{2}(v) & \ =(-1)^{j_{v}}\sqrt{\frac{40j_{v}(2j_{v}-1)}{3(j_{v}+1)(2j_{v}+1)(2j_{v}+3)}}\ \nonumber\\& \times \sum_{k}(-1)^{j}\left\{
\begin{array}{lll}
j_{v} & 1 & j \\
1 & j_{v} & 2
\end{array}
\right\} \frac{|\langle v||D||k\rangle |^{2}}{E_{k}-E_{v}}, \label{two}
\end{align}
where the curly bracket stands for the Wigner 6j symbol. The results are given in Table~\ref{table6}. The scalar $3d_{5/2}$ value obtained using this method is in agreement with the results given in Table~\ref{table5}.
\begin{table*} [th]
\caption{\label{table6} Ca$^+$ $3d$ static scalar ($\alpha_0$) and tensor ($\alpha_2$) polarizabilities (in a.u.) obtained with the matrix elements from this work (Column A), Ref.~\cite{hettrich15} (Column B) and combination of the two (Column C). The other contributions are taken from \cite{safronova11}.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{llccccccccc}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{State}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{Contr.}& \multicolumn{3}{c}{$\alpha_0$}&\multicolumn{3}{c}{$\alpha_2$}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{}&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{A}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{B}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{C} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{A}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{B}&\multicolumn{1}{c}{C} \\
\hline
$3d_{3/2}$& $3d_{3/2}- 4p_{1/2}$& 19.16(14)&18.97(7)&18.97(7)
&-19.16(14)&-18.97(7)&-18.97(7) \\
& $3d_{3/2}- 4p_{3/2}$& 3.74(3)&3.71(1)&3.74(3)
&2.99(3)&2.97(1)&2.99(3) \\
& Other \cite{safronova11} &9.01(21)&9.01(21)&9.01(21) &-1.20(4)&-1.20(4)&-1.20(4) \\
& Total &31.91(27)&31.69(23)&31.72(22)
&-17.37(16)&-17.20(9)&-17.18(8) \\
\hline
$3d_{5/2}$& $3d_{5/2}- 4p_{3/2}$& 22.69(17)&22.46(8)&
&-22.69(17)&-22.46(8)& \\
& Other \cite{safronova11} &9.02(17)&9.02(17)&
&-1.73(4)&-1.73(4)& \\
&Total &31.71(24)&31.48(19)&
&-24.42(17)&-24.19(9)& \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
Stochastic programming is an effective mathematical framework for modeling multi-stage decision problems that involve uncertainty~\cite{Birge2011}. It has been used to model complex real-world problems in diverse fields such as power systems~\cite{Fleten2007,Groewe-Kuska2005,petra_real-time_2014}, finance~\cite{Krokhmal2005,Zenios2005}, and transportation~\cite{Powell1987,Powell2005}. The classical setting is linear stochastic programs where an actor takes decisions in two stages:
\begin{equation*}
\text{initial decision } x \quad\rightarrow\quad \text{observation } \omega \quad\rightarrow\quad \text{recourse action } y(x, \xi(\omega))
\end{equation*}
The actor first takes a decision $x$. Then, the realization of a random event $\omega$ alters the state of the world. The actor can observe $\omega$ and take a recourse action $y$ with respect to $x$ and the output of some random variable $\xi(\omega)$. We are interested in finding the optimal decision $x$, accounting for the ability to make a recourse action once $\omega$ has been observed. The notion of an optimal decision is captured by letting $x$ and $y$ be optimization variables in linear programs, where $\xi(\omega)$ parameterizes the second-stage problem for each event $\omega$.
In applications, a stochastic program models some real-world decision problem under a statistical model of $\xi$. We can then compute approximations of optimal decision policies by solving approximated instances of the stochastic program. In brief, this involves computing a first-stage decision $\hat{x}$ that is optimal in expectation over a set of second-stage scenarios $\xi(\omega_i)$ sampled from the model of $\xi$. This technique is known as sampled average approximation (SAA). In the linear setting, one can in principle formulate sampled instances on a extensive form that considers all available scenarios at once. This mathematical program can be solved using standard linear programming solvers, including both open-source solvers such as GLPK~\cite{glpk} and commercial solvers such as Gurobi~\cite{gurobi}. However, the size of the extensive form grows linearly in the number of scenarios, and industry-scale applications typically involve 10,000+ scenarios. For example, the 24-hour unit commitment problem studied in~\cite{petra_real-time_2014} has 16,384 scenarios and the resulting extensive form has 4 billion variables. Solving the extensive form in such applications becomes practically infeasible. Moreover, the memory requirement for storing the stochastic program instances will eventually exceed the capacity of a single machine. This clarifies the need for a distributed approach for modeling large-scale stochastic programs. Structure-exploiting decomposition methods~\cite{Rockafellar1991,van_slyke_l-shaped_1969} that operate in parallel on distributed data become essential to solve large-scale instances.
\subsection{Contribution}
\label{sec:contribution}
\sloppy
In this work, we present a user-friendly open-source software framework for efficiently modeling and solving stochastic programs in a distributed-memory setting. The framework allows researchers to formulate complex stochastic models and quickly typeset and test novel optimization algorithms. Stochastic programming educators will benefit from the clean and expressive syntax. Also, the framework supports analysis tools and stochastic programming constructs from classical theory and leading textbooks. Industrial practitioners can make use of the framework to rapidly formulate complex models, analyze small instances locally, and then run large-scale instances in production on a supercomputer or a cloud cluster. We implemented the framework in the Julia~\cite{Bezanson2017} programming language. Henceforth, we refer to the framework as SPjl. The framework is freely available through the registered Julia package \jlinl{StochasticPrograms.jl}.
The design philosophy adopted during implementation of SPjl is centered around flexibility and efficiency, with the aim to provide a feature-rich and user-friendly experience. Also, the framework should be scalable to support large-scale problems. With this in mind, we adhered to the fundamental principle that the optimization modeling should be separated from the data modeling. This design principle results in two key software innovations: deferred model instantiation and data injection. Optimization models are formulated in stages using a straightforward syntax that simultaneously specifies the data dependencies between the stages. The data structures related to future scenarios, and their statistical properties, are defined separately. An essential consequence of this design is that we can efficiently distribute stochastic program instances in memory, reducing interprocess communication to a minimum. Many computations involving distributed stochastic programs can then natively be run in parallel. Moreover, when the sample space is infinite, it becomes possible to adequately distinguish between the abstract representation of a stochastic program and finite sampled instances. The design also enables swift implementation of various constructs from classical stochastic programming theory. Another design choice is that the solver suites included in the framework are developed using policy-based techniques. We have shown in prior work how policy-based design can be used to create customizable and efficient optimization algorithms~\cite{polojl}. In short, SPjl is a powerful, versatile, and extensible framework for stochastic programming. It provides both an educational setting for new practitioners and a research setting were experts can further the field of stochastic programming.
\sloppy
We developed SPjl in Julia, which has several distinct benefits. Through just-in-time compilation and type inference, Julia can achieve C-like performance while being as expressive as similar dynamic languages such as Python or Matlab. Using the high-level metaprogramming capabilities of Julia, it is possible to create domain-specific tools with expressive syntax and high performance. Another benefit is access to Julia's large and rapidly expanding ecosystem of libraries, many of which play a central role in SPjl. For example, the parallel capabilities of SPjl are implemented using the standard library module for distributed computing, while optimization models are formulated using the JuMP~\cite{Dunning2017} ecosystem. JuMP is an algebraic modeling language implemented in Julia using similar metaprogramming tools. It has been shown to achieve similar performance to AMPL~\cite{Dunning2017}, with syntax that is both readable and expressive. Also, it is possible to mutate model instances at runtime, which we utilize in the structure-exploiting algorithms. Recently, the backend of JuMP was redesigned into the new MathOptInterface~\cite{moi}. The redesign introduces automatic reformulation bridges, which are used frequently in the current implementation of the SPjl framework. JuMP implements interfaces to many third-party optimization solvers, both open-source and commercial. These can be hooked in to solve extensive forms of stochastic programs or subproblems that arise in decomposition methods.
\subsection{Related work}
\label{sec:related-work}
We give a short survey of similar software packages and highlight distinguishing features of SPjl. The most similar approach is the PySP framework~\cite{Watson2012}, implemented in the Python language. Optimization models in PySP are created using Pyomo~\cite{Hart2017}; an algebraic modeling language also implemented in Python. In contrast, SPjl is written in the Julia language and formulates optimization models in JuMP, which has been shown to outperform Pyomo in various benchmarks~\cite{Dunning2017}. In PySP, stochastic programs are composed of multiple \texttt{.dat} files and \texttt{.py} files, and the models are solved by running different solver scripts. In SPjl, all models are described in pure Julia and can be created, analyzed and solved in a single interactive session. Moreover, all operations are natively distributed in memory and run in parallel if multiple Julia processes are available. The parallel capabilities of PySP extend to running parallelized versions of the solver scripts. The primary function of PySP is to formulate and solve stochastic programs, while SPjl also provides a large set of stochastic programming constructs and analysis tools. The expressiveness of the modeling syntax can be compared by observing how the well-known farmer problem~\cite{Birge2011} is modeled using PySP~\cite{Watson2012} and how it is modeled using SPjl, as shown in Appendix~\ref{sec:farmer-problem}. In particular, the PySP definition requires about $\num{100}$ lines of code spread out over four different files, while SPjl requires $\num{30}$ lines of code with the added benefit of being more readable. In addition, the resulting model can be analyzed interactively in Julia in a user-friendly way.
A more extensive list of similar software approaches is provided in~\cite{Watson2012}, along with comparisons to PySP. This allows for a transitive comparison to SPjl. Other notable examples include the commercial FortSP solvers~\cite{fortsp} coupled with the AMPL extension SAMPL for modeling. Out of all these approaches, SPjl has the most user-friendly interface and is also freely available.
The StructJuMP package~\cite{Huchette2014} provides a simple interface to create block-structured JuMP models. The primary reason for developing StructJuMP was to facilitate a parallel modeling interface to existing structured solvers~\cite{lubin_parallel_2013, petra_real-time_2014} that operate in computer clusters. These parallel solvers are implemented in C++ and are parallelized using MPI. This led to StructJuMP also making use of MPI to distribute stochastic programs in blocks. Apart from formulating distributed stochastic programs in a cluster, StructJuMP does not offer any modeling tools nor any way to generate the extensive form of a stochastic program. In comparison, SPjl provides numerous analysis tools as well as a compatible suite of structured solvers. In addition, SPjl natively distributes and solves stochastic programs using Julia, without relying on external software such as MPI.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:preliminaries}
We give a short mathematical introduction to linear stochastic programming. The purpose is to provide background for the code examples presented in the subsequent section and also to keep this work self-contained. A more thorough introduction to the field is given in the textbook by~\cite{Birge2011}.
\subsection{Stochastic programming}
\label{sec:stoch-progr-1}
A linear two-stage recourse model enables a simple but powerful framework for making decisions under uncertainty. We formalize this procedure in the following brief review. The first-stage decision made by the actor is denoted by $x \in \mathbb{R}^n$. We associate $x$ with a linear cost function $c^Tx$ that the actor pays after making the decision. Moreover, $x$ is constrained to the standard polyhedron in linear programming, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
\Set{x \in \mathbb{R}^n \given Ax = b,\; x \geq 0}
\end{equation*}
where $A \in \mathbb{R}^{p \times n}$ and $b \in \mathbb{R}^p$. The recourse actions are represented by $y \in \mathbb{R}^m$. To describe the uncertainty in the decision problem, we consider some probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal{F},\pi)$ where $\Omega$ is a sample space, $\mathcal{F}$ is a $\sigma$-algebra over $\Omega$ and $\pi: \mathcal{F} \to [0,1]$ is a probability measure. Let $\xi(\omega): \Omega \to \mathbb{R}^{N}$ be some random variable on $\Omega$ and let $\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}_{\xi}$ denote expectation with respect to $\xi$. We can now let $\omega \in \Omega$ denote a scenario observed after deciding $x$. The scenario affects both cost and the constraints of the recourse action. Specifically, after realization of $\omega$, the following second-stage problem is formulated to determine $y$ with respect to $x$ and $\xi(\omega)$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lssubprob}
\begin{aligned}
Q(x,\xi(\omega)) = \min_{\mathclap{y \in \mathbb{R}^m}} & \quad q_{\omega}^T y \\
\st & \quad T_{\omega}x + Wy = h_{\omega} \\
& \quad y \geq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In other words, the random variable takes on the form $\xi(\omega) = \begin{pmatrix}
q_{\omega} & T_{\omega} & h_{\omega}
\end{pmatrix}^T$ in this linear setting. Note that $q_{\omega} \in \mathbb{R}^m$, $T_{\omega} \in \mathbb{R}^{q \times n}$ and $h_{\omega} \in \mathbb{R}^q$ are scenario-dependent while $W \in \mathbb{R}^{q \times m}$ is fixed. This is a standard setting in literature, which covers a wide range of problems~\cite{Birge2011}. It is possible to define $W$ as scenario-dependent in the framework, but standard algorithms are then no longer certain to converge. Now, we formulate the two-stage recourse problem as follows.
\begin{equation} \label{eq:linearsp}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{x \in \mathbb{R}^n}} & \quad c^T x + \expect[\xi]{Q(x,\xi(\omega))} \\
\sbj & \quad Ax = b \\
& \quad x \geq 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The optimal value of~\eqref{eq:linearsp} is referred to as the \emph{value of the recourse problem} (VRP).
Apart from solving~\eqref{eq:linearsp}, we can compute two classical measures of stochastic performance. The first measures the value of knowing the random outcome before making the decision. This is achieved by taking the expectation in~\eqref{eq:linearsp} outside the minimization, to obtain the wait-and-see problem:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:waitsee}
\mathrm{EWS} = \expect[\xi]{
\begin{aligned}
\min_{x \in \mathbb{R}^n} & \quad c^T x + Q(x,\xi(\omega)) \\
\st & \quad Ax = b \\
& \quad x \geq 0.
\end{aligned}}
\end{equation}
Now, the first- and second-stage decisions are taken with knowledge about the uncertainty. The difference between the expected wait-and-see value and the value of the recourse problem is known as the \emph{expected value of perfect information}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:evpi}
\mathrm{EVPI} = \mathrm{EWS} - \mathrm{VRP}.
\end{equation}
The EVPI measures the expected loss of not knowing the exact outcome beforehand. It quantifies the value of having access to an accurate forecast.
Finally, we introduce the concept of decision evaluation to quantify the performance of a candidate first-stage decision $x$ in the stochastic program~\eqref{eq:linearsp}. The \emph{expected result} of $x$ is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:expectedresult}
V(x) = c^Tx + \expect[\xi]{Q(x,\xi(\omega))}.
\end{equation}
This concept is used to compute the second classical measure. If the expectation in~\eqref{eq:linearsp} is instead taken inside the second-stage objective function $Q$, we obtain the expected-value-problem:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ev}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{x \in \mathbb{R}^n} & \quad c^T x + Q(x,\expect[\xi]{\xi(\omega)}) \\
\sbj & \quad Ax = b \\
& \quad x \geq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The solution to the expected-value-problem is known as the \emph{expected value decision}, and is denote by $\bar{x}$. The \emph{expected result} of taking the \emph{expected value decision} is known as the \emph{expected result of the expected value decision}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:eev}
\mathrm{EEV} = c^T \bar{x} + \expect[\xi]{Q(\bar{x},\xi(\omega))}.
\end{equation}
The difference between the value of the recourse problem and the expected result of the expected value decision is known as the \emph{value of the stochastic solution}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:vss}
\mathrm{VSS} = \mathrm{EEV} - \mathrm{VRP}.
\end{equation}
The VSS measures the expected loss of ignoring the uncertainty in the problem. A large VSS indicates that the second stage is sensitive to the stochastic data.
The EVPI, VSS, and VRP are important tools when gauging the performance of a stochastic model. All of these introduced measures are readily computed in the SPjl framework, which allows for easy analysis of user-defined models. Next, we discuss how to calculate the VRP, EVPI, and VSS depending on the form of the sample space $\Omega$.
\subsection{The finite extensive form and sample average approximation}
\label{sec:finite-extens-form-saa}
If $\Omega$ is finite, say with $n$ scenarios of probability $\pi_1, \dots, \pi_n$, then we can represent~\eqref{eq:linearsp} compactly as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:finitesp}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{x \in \mathbb{R}^n, y_s \in \mathbb{R}^m}} & \quad c^T x + \sum_{s = 1}^{n} \pi_s q_s^T y_s & \\
\sbj & \quad Ax = b & \\
& \quad T_s x + W y_s = h_s, \quad &&s = 1,\dots,n \\
& \quad x \geq 0, \, y_s \geq 0, \quad &&s = 1,\dots,n.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We refer to this problem as the \emph{finite extensive form}. It is often recognized in literature as the \emph{deterministic equivalent problem} (DEP). Similar closed forms can be determined for the EVPI and the VSS. For small $n$, it is viable to solve this problem with standard linear programming solvers. For large $n$, decomposition approaches are required. In SPjl, the user provides a description of the abstract stochastic model~\eqref{eq:linearsp} and a separate description of the uncertainty model of $\xi$. These are then combined internally to generate instances of the finite form~\eqref{eq:finitesp}, which are stored and solved efficiently on a computer or a compute cluster.
If $\Omega$ is not finite, the stochastic program~\eqref{eq:linearsp} is exactly computable only under certain assumptions~\cite{Birge2011}. However, it is possible to formulate computationally tractable approximations of~\eqref{eq:linearsp} using the finite form~\eqref{eq:finitesp}. The most common approximation technique is the \textit{sample average approximation} (SAA)~\cite{saa}. Assume that we sample $n$ scenarios $\omega_s,\; s = 1,\dots,n$ independently from $\Omega$ with equal probability. These scenarios now constitute a finite sample space $\tilde{\Omega}$ and we can use them to create a sampled model in finite extensive form~\eqref{eq:finitesp}. An optimal solution to this sampled model approximates the optimal solution to~\eqref{eq:linearsp} in the sense that the empirical average second-stage cost $V_n = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{s = 1}^{n}q_s^T \hat{y}_s,$ where $\hat{y}_s = \argmin[y \in \mathbb{R}^m]{Q(x, \xi(\omega_s))}$, converges pointwise with probability $1$ to $\hat{V} = \expect[\xi]{Q(x,\xi(\omega))}$ as $n$ goes to infinity~\cite{saaconvergence}. Further, under certain assumptions it can be shown that $\sqrt{n}(V_n - \hat{V}) \to N(0,\var[\xi]{Q(\hat{x},\xi)})$ in distribution as $n$ goes to infinity~\cite{saadist}. This result provides a basis for calculating confidence intervals around the VRP of~\eqref{eq:linearsp}~\cite{saa, saacomp}, as well as around the EVPI and the VSS.
\subsection{Structure-exploiting solvers}
\label{sec:struct-expl-solv}
Efficient methods for storing and solving finite stochastic programs on the form~\eqref{eq:finitesp} are key for high-performance stochastic programming computations. Therefore, this has been a main focus in the development of the SPjl framework. An important insight is that the finite extensive form~\eqref{eq:finitesp} lends itself to block-decomposition approaches, which allow the stochastic program to be efficiently distributed in memory. Moreover, structure-exploiting solvers can be employed to solve the decomposed models efficiently. These approaches also readily extend to parallel settings where the stochastic program is distributed over several compute nodes. A key idea in the SPjl framework is to let the storage of the stochastic program depend on the type of optimizer used to solve it. In this way, the memory structure is optimized for the solver operation, and there is no redundant storage for other operations such as decision evaluation. We say that the underlying structure of the stochastic program is induced by the solver. Henceforth, we will refer to the treatment of~\eqref{eq:finitesp} as one large optimization problem as the \emph{deterministic} structure. This is the default structure for standard third-party solvers. For block-decomposition approaches, we adopt the terminology introduced in~\cite{Watson2012} and divide such strategies into two classes. In short, ``\emph{vertical} strategies decompose a stochastic program by stages'' while ``\emph{horizontal} strategies decompose a stochastic program by scenarios''~\cite{Watson2012}. In the following, we will introduce two different solver algorithms that fall into these two categories and highlight the stochastic program structures they induce.
\subsubsection{The L-shaped algorithm}
\label{sec:l-shaped-algorithm}
The L-shaped algorithm is an efficient cutting-plane method for solving the finite extensive form~\eqref{eq:finitesp} by decomposing into a master problem and a set of subproblems. The master problem has the form
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{x \in \mathbb{R}^n, y_s \in \mathbb{R}^m}} & \quad c^T x + \theta \\
\sbj & \quad Ax = b & \\
& \quad \theta \geq \tilde{Q}(x) \\
& \quad x \geq 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where $\tilde{Q}(x)$ is a lower bound on
\begin{equation*}
Q(x) = \sum_{s = 1}^{n}\pi_sQ_s(x).
\end{equation*}
Here, each $Q_s(x)$ is the optimal value to a subproblem of the form~\eqref{eq:lssubprob}. The idea of the L-shaped algorithm is to generate increasingly tight piecewise linear lower bounds on $Q$. We refer to the memory structure inferred by the L-shaped algorithm henceforth as the \emph{vertical} structure.
During the L-shaped procedure, solution candidates $x_k$ are generated by solving the master problem~\eqref{eq:lsmaster}, which are then used to parameterize subproblems of the form~\eqref{eq:lssubprob}. Optimal dual variables in these subproblems are then used to improve the bound of $Q(x)$ before the next solution candidate $x_{k+1}$ is computed. Specifically, it follows from duality theory that $\lambda_s^T(h_s-T_sx)$, where $\lambda_s$ is the dual optimizer of~\eqref{eq:lssubprob}, is a valid support function for $Q_s(x)$, and hence,
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{s = 1}^{n}\pi_s \lambda_s^T(h_s-T_sx)
\end{equation*}
is a valid support function for $Q(x)$. In the original formulation of the L-shaped algorithm~\cite{van_slyke_l-shaped_1969}, the above result is used at each iteration $k$ to construct \emph{optimality cuts} by introducing
\begin{equation*}
\partial Q_{k} = \sum_{s = 1}^{n} \pi_s\lambda_s^T T_s \qquad q_k = \sum_{s = 1}^{n}\pi_s\lambda_s^Th_s,
\end{equation*}
and add to the master problem as the constraint $\partial Q_k x + \theta \geq q_k$. Aggregating the results from all subproblems in this way is known as the single-cut approach. This was later extended to a multi-cut variant where separate cuts are constructed for each subproblem~\cite{Birge1988}. If the iterate $x_k$ is not second-stage feasible, some subproblems will be infeasible. We handle this by solving the auxilliary problem:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:feascheck}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{y_s \in \mathrm{R}^m}} & \quad w_s = e^Tv_s^{+} + e^Tv_s^{-} \\
\sbj & \quad Wy_s + v_s^{+} - v_s^{-}= h_s - T_s x_k \\
& \quad y_s \geq 0, \; v_s^{+} \geq 0, \; v_s^{-} \geq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
If $w_s > 0$, then subproblem $s$ is infeasible for the current iterate $x_k$. Further, it follows from duality theory that $\sigma_s^T(h_s-T_sx) \leq 0$, where $\sigma_s$ is the dual optimizer of~\eqref{eq:feascheck}, is necessary for $x$ to be second-stage feasible. The above result can be used to both check for second-stage infeasibility and construct \emph{feasibility cuts} by introducing
\begin{equation*}
F_k = \begin{pmatrix}
\sigma_1^T T_1 \\
\vdots \\
\sigma_f^T T_f
\end{pmatrix}, \quad
f_k = \begin{pmatrix}
\sigma_1^Th_1 \\
\vdots \\
\sigma_f^T h_f
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
for all infeasible subproblems $1,\dots,f$. Because $W$ has a finite number of bases, finitely many feasibility cuts are required to completely describe the set of feasible first-stage decisions~\cite{van_slyke_l-shaped_1969}. The optimality cuts and the feasibility cuts enter the master problem as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lsmaster}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{x \in \mathbb{R}^n}} & \quad c^T x + \theta \\
\sbj & \quad Ax = b \\
& \quad F_k x \geq f_k, \quad && \forall k \\
& \quad \partial Q_k x + \theta \geq q_k, \quad && \forall k \\
& \quad x \geq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The master problem is then re-solved to generate the next iterate $x_{k+1}, \theta_{k+1}$. This is repeated until the gap between the upper bound $Q(x_k)$ and lower bound $\theta_{k+1}$ becomes small, upon which the algorithm terminates. Many variations can be introduced to improve the performance of the L-shaped algorithm. We provide an overview of such improvements available in SPjl in Section~\ref{sec:algor-impr}.
\subsubsection{The progressive-hedging algorithm}
\label{sec:progr-hedg-algor}
The progressive-hedging algorithm was first introduced in~\cite{Rockafellar1991}. In contrast to the L-shaped algorithm, applying progressive-hedging to solve~\eqref{eq:finitesp} yields a complete decomposition over the $n$ scenarios. The method is a specialization of the proximal-point algorithm~\cite{Rockafellar1976}, and convergence in the linear case~\eqref{eq:finitesp} is derived in~\cite{Rockafellar1991}. The main idea behind this approach is to introduce individual first-stage decisions $x_s$ to each scenario but force them to be equal. We then relax (dualize) these consistency constraints and solve the corresponding augmented Lagrangian problem. In other words, we consider the following problem:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:phform}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{x_s \in \mathbb{R}^n, y_s \in \mathbb{R}^m}} & \quad \sum_{s = 1}^{n} \pi_s \parentheses*{c^Tx_s + q_s^T y_s} & \\
\sbj & \quad x_s = \xi \quad &&s = 1,\dots,n \\
& \quad Ax_s = b \quad &&s = 1,\dots,n \\
& \quad T_s x_s + W y_s = h_s, \quad &&s = 1,\dots,n \\
& \quad x_s \geq 0, \; y_s \geq 0, \quad &&s = 1,\dots,n.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The consistency constraints $x_s = \xi,\; s = 1,\dots,n$ are called \emph{non-anticipative} because they make the $x_s$ independent of scenario and enforce the fact that the first-stage decision is known when the second-stage uncertainty is realized. We refer to the memory structure inferred by the progressive-hedging algorithm henceforth as the \emph{horizontal} structure. Separability across the $n$ scenarios is achieved by introducing the following regularized relaxation of each subproblem:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{x_s \in \mathbb{R}^n, y_s \in \mathbb{R}^m}} & \quad c^Tx_s + q_s^T y_s + \rho_s(x_s-\xi) + \frac{r}{2}\norm{x_s-\xi}_2^2 \\
\sbj & \quad Ax_s = b \\
& \quad T_s x_s + W y_s = h_s \\
& \quad x_s \geq 0, \; y_s \geq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
The algorithm now proceeds by iteratively alternating between generating new admissible solutions $x_s^k, \; s = 1,\dots, n$, and an implementable solution $\xi_k$. In the two-stage setting, an admissible solution is feasible in every scenario, and an implementable solution is consistent in the sense that $x_s = \xi$ for all $s$. We obtain the implementable solution through aggregation:
\begin{equation*}
\xi_k = \sum_{s = 1}^{n}\pi_sx_s^k
\end{equation*}
and the Lagrange multipliers are updated scenario-wise through
\begin{equation*}
\rho_s^{k+1} = \rho_s^{k} + r(x_s^k-\xi_k).
\end{equation*}
Hence, the non-anticipative constraints are enforced while the dual variables converge. Progressive-hedging is a primal dual algorithm that is run until both the primal gap $\norm{\xi_k - \xi_{k-1}}_2^2$ and the dual gap $\sum_{s = 1}^{n}\pi_s\norm{x_s^k - \xi_k}_2^2$ are small.
\section{StochasticPrograms.jl}
\label{sec:spjl}
In this section, we showcase the capabilities of SPjl. We first give a brief overview of the framework and introduce the main functionality through a set of simple examples. Accompanying code excerpts are included. Next, we exemplify the effectiveness of SPjl model creation by giving a compact definition of the farmer problem. Finally, we summarize the algorithmic improvements and variations included in the framework.
\sloppy
SPjl extends the well-known JuMP syntax to support the definition of stages, decision variables, and uncertain parameters. Models are defined using the \jlinl{@stochastic_model} macro. This creates a lightweight model object that can be used to instantiate finite stochastic programs by supplying a description of the uncertain parameters. Specifically, the user provides a list of discrete scenarios, or a sampler object capable of generating scenarios, to the model object. The object then combines the model definition with the supplied uncertainty data and generates a finite stochastic program instance. The instantiated stochastic program can then be inspected, analyzed and solved in an interactive Julia session. This is useful in educational settings, but also for reasoning about complex models on a small scale. SPjl also supports reading problems specified in the SMPS format. For large-scale instances, SPjl provides scalable block-structured instantiation and structure-exploiting solvers that can operate in parallel. In addition, operations such as EWS calculation and decision evaluation are embarrassingly parallel over the subproblems. In other words, the workload is readily decoupled into independent subtasks that can be executed in parallel. This is leveraged when instantiating vertical or horizontal structures in distributed environments.
\sloppy
SPjl can be installed directly from the command line through Julia's package manager (\jlinl{pkg> add StochasticPrograms}). Provided that a basic linear quadratic solver, such as \jlinl{GLPK} or \jlinl{Ipopt}, is installed, all code examples in this paper can be repeated by copying the lines verbatim. A more extensive introduction to the framework is given by the ``Quick start'' section of the online documentation~\footnote{\url{https://martinbiel.github.io/StochasticPrograms.jl/dev/}}.
\subsection{A simple textbook example}
\label{sec:simple-example}
Consider the following simple instance of~\eqref{eq:linearsp}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:simpleproblem}
\begin{aligned}
\minimize_{\mathclap{x_1,x_2 \in \mathbb{R}}} & \quad 100x_1 + 150x_2 + \expect[\omega]{Q(x_1,x_2,\xi(\omega))} \\
\sbj & \quad x_1+x_2 \leq 120 \\
& \quad x_1 \geq 40 \\
& \quad x_2 \geq 20
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:simplesubproblem}
\begin{aligned}
Q(x_1,x_2,\xi(\omega)) = \max_{\mathclap{y_1,y_2 \in \mathbb{R}}} & \quad q_1(\omega)y_1 + q_2(\omega)y_2 \\
\st & \quad 6y_1+10y_2 \leq 60x_1 \\
& \quad 8y_1 + 5y_2 \leq 80x_2 \\
& \quad 0 \leq y_1 \leq d_1(\omega) \\
& \quad 0 \leq y_2 \leq d_2(\omega)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and the stochastic variable
\begin{equation*}
\xi(\omega) = \begin{pmatrix}
q_1(\omega) & q_2(\omega) & d_1(\omega) & d_2(\omega)
\end{pmatrix}^T
\end{equation*}
parameterizes the second-stage model. This is a recurring textbook example and correctness of our numerical results can be verified by comparing with~\cite{Birge2011}.
In SPjl, we create the model~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} in two steps. First, we formulate the optimization models as shown in Listing~\ref{lst:simpledef}.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, floatplacement = H, caption={Definition of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} in SPjl.}, label={lst:simpledef}]
# Load SPjl framework
julia> using StochasticPrograms
# Create simple stochastic model
julia> simple_model = @stochastic_model begin
@stage 1 begin
@decision(model, x₁ >= 40)
@decision(model, x₂ >= 20)
@objective(model, Min, 100*x₁ + 150*x₂)
@constraint(model, x₁+x₂ <= 120)
end
@stage 2 begin
@uncertain q₁ q₂ d₁ d₂
@recourse(model, 0 <= y₁ <= d₁)
@recourse(model, 0 <= y₂ <= d₂)
@objective(model, Max, q₁*y₁ + q₂*y₂)
@constraint(model, 6*y₁ + 10*y₂ <= 60*x₁)
@constraint(model, 8*y₁ + 5*y₂ <= 80*x₂)
end
end;
\end{lstlisting}
\noindent
\sloppy
This creates a stochastic model where the two stages are given by the mathematical programs~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} and~\eqref{eq:simplesubproblem}, expressed using an enhanced JuMP syntax. The \jlinl{@decision} and \jlinl{@recourse} lines work as standard \jlinl{@variable} definitions in JuMP, but behind the scenes they also specify internal data dependencies between the first and second stage; and the \jlinl{@uncertain} line annotates the random parameters and defines a point of data injection. The code specifies how the optimization models should be defined, but the actual model instantiation is deferred until we add a stochastic model of the uncertainties. We will consider two different distributions of $\xi$ and use the same model object \jlinl{simple_model} from Listing~\ref{lst:simpledef} to instantiate stochastic programs. This is a key feature in SPjl. The underlying stochastic model~\eqref{eq:linearsp} object can be re-used to generate different finite stochastic program instances. Regardless of the distribution of $\xi$, a stochastic program instance is always a finite program of the form~\eqref{eq:finitesp}. This allows us to evaluate the same problem under different uncertainty models and to automatically adapt the underlying memory structure to optimize solver performance.
\subsection{Finite sample space}
\label{sec:finite-sample-space}
First, let $\xi$ be a discrete distribution, taking on the values
\begin{equation*}
\xi_1 = \begin{pmatrix}
500 & 100 & 24 & 28
\end{pmatrix}^T, \quad \xi_2 = \begin{pmatrix}
300 & 300 & 28 & 32
\end{pmatrix}^T
\end{equation*}
with probability $0.4$ and $0.6$ respectively. In Listing~\ref{lst:simplediscrete}, an instance of the stochastic program~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} is created for this distribution.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption = {Instantiation of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem}.}, label = {lst:simplediscrete}]
# Create two scenarios
julia> ξ₁ = @scenario q₁ = 24.0 q₂ = 28.0 d₁ = 500.0 d₂ = 100.0 probability = 0.4;
ξ₂ = @scenario q₁ = 28.0 q₂ = 32.0 d₁ = 300.0 d₂ = 300.0 probability = 0.6;
# Instantiate without optimizer
julia> sp = instantiate(simple_model, [ξ₁, ξ₂])
Stochastic program with:
* 2 decision variables
* 2 scenarios of type Scenario
Structure: Deterministic equivalent
Solver name: No optimizer attached.
# Print to show structure of generated problem
julia> print(sp)
Deterministic equivalent problem
Min 100 x₁ + 150 x₂ - 9.6 y₁₁ - 11.2 y₂₁ - 16.8 y₁₂ - 19.2 y₂₂
Subject to
y₁₁ ≥ 0.0
y₂₁ ≥ 0.0
y₁₂ ≥ 0.0
y₂₂ ≥ 0.0
y₁₁ ≤ 500.0
y₂₁ ≤ 100.0
y₁₂ ≤ 300.0
y₂₂ ≤ 300.0
x₁ ∈ Decisions
x₂ ∈ Decisions
x₁ ≥ 40.0
x₂ ≥ 20.0
x₁ + x₂ ≤ 120.0
-60 x₁ + 6 y₁₁ + 10 y₂₁ ≤ 0.0
-80 x₂ + 8 y₁₁ + 5 y₂₁ ≤ 0.0
-60 x₁ + 6 y₁₂ + 10 y₂₂ ≤ 0.0
-80 x₂ + 8 y₁₂ + 5 y₂₂ ≤ 0.0
Solver name: No optimizer attached.
\end{lstlisting}
\noindent
\sloppy
This code uses the model recipe created in Listing~\ref{lst:simpledef} to create second-stage models for each of the supplied scenarios. Here, we have used the default scenario constructor \jlinl{@scenario}, where data values are named in accordance with the \jlinl{@uncertain} annotation. The deterministic structure (extensive form) is used by default. Because this is a small example, correctness of the generated problem is easily verified. We can now set an optimizer and solve the model, as shown in Listing~\ref{lst:depsolve}.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption = {Solving the finite extensive form of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem}.}, label = {lst:depsolve}]
julia> using GLPK
# Set the optimizer to GLPK
julia> set_optimizer(sp, GLPK.Optimizer)
# Optimize (deterministic structure)
julia> optimize!(sp)
# Check termination status
julia> @show termination_status(sp);
termination_status(sp) = MathOptInterface.OPTIMAL
# Query optimal value
julia> @show objective_value(sp);
objective_value(sp) = -855.833333333333
# Calculate EVPI
julia> EVPI(sp)
662.916666666667
# Calculate VSS
julia> VSS(simple_model, SimpleSampler(μ, Σ))
286.9166666666688
\end{lstlisting}
\noindent
\sloppy
The underlying memory structure can be set explicitly by setting the \jlinl{instantiation} keyword to any of the supported structures during model instantiation. Alternatively, if an optimizer is chosen during instantiation, an appropriate structure is chosen automatically. For example, if we instantiate the same problem with an L-shaped optimizer the vertical structure is used instead, as can be seen in Listing~\ref{lst:simplels}.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption = {Re-instantiation and optimization of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} with an L-shaped optimizer}, label = {lst:simplels}]
# Instantiate with L-shaped optimizer
julia> sp = instantiate(simple_model, [ξ₁, ξ₂], optimizer = LShaped.Optimizer)
Stochastic program with:
* 2 decision variables
* 2 scenarios of type Scenario
Structure: Vertical
Solver name: L-shaped with disaggregate cuts
# Print to compare structure of generated problem
julia> print(sp)
First-stage
==============
Min 100 x₁ + 150 x₂
Subject to
x₁ ∈ Decisions
x₂ ∈ Decisions
x₁ ≥ 40.0
x₂ ≥ 20.0
x₁ + x₂ ≤ 120.0
Second-stage
==============
Subproblem 1 (p = 0.40):
Max 24 y₁ + 28 y₂
Subject to
y₁ ≥ 0.0
y₂ ≥ 0.0
y₁ ≤ 500.0
y₂ ≤ 100.0
x₁ ∈ Known
x₂ ∈ Known
6 y₁ + 10 y₂ - 60 x₁ ≤ 0.0
8 y₁ + 5 y₂ - 80 x₂ ≤ 0.0
Subproblem 2 (p = 0.60):
Max 28 y₁ + 32 y₂
Subject to
y₁ ≥ 0.0
y₂ ≥ 0.0
y₁ ≤ 300.0
y₂ ≤ 300.0
x₁ ∈ Known
x₂ ∈ Known
6 y₁ + 10 y₂ - 60 x₁ ≤ 0.0
8 y₁ + 5 y₂ - 80 x₂ ≤ 0.0
Solver name: L-shaped with disaggregate cuts
# Set GLPK optimizer for the solving master problem and subproblems
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(sp, MasterOptimizer(), GLPK.Optimizer)
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(sp, SubproblemOptimizer(), GLPK.Optimizer)
# Optimize (vertical structure)
julia> optimize!(sp)
L-Shaped Gap Time: 0:00:02 (6 iterations)
Objective: -855.8333333333358
Gap: 0.0
Number of cuts: 8
Iterations: 6
# Check termination status and query optimal value
julia> @show termination_status(sp);
termination_status(sp) = MathOptInterface.OPTIMAL
julia> @show objective_value(sp);
objective_value(sp) = -855.8333333333358
\end{lstlisting}
\noindent
\sloppy
The same stochastic program has now been decomposed into a first-stage master problem and two second-stage subproblems. For completeness we also exemplify how the same problem is instantiated and solved using the progressive-hedging algorithm in Listing~\ref{lst:simpleph}.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption = {Re-instantiation and optimization of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} with a progressive-hedging optimizer}, label = {lst:simpleph}]
# Instantiate with progressive-hedging optimizer
julia> sp = instantiate(simple_model, [ξ₁, ξ₂],
optimizer = ProgressiveHedging.Optimizer)
Stochastic program with:
* 2 decision variables
* 2 scenarios of type Scenario
Structure: Horizontal
Solver name: Progressive-hedging with fixed penalty
# Print to compare structure of generated problem
julia> print(sp)
Horizontal scenario problems
==============
Subproblem 1 (p = 0.40):
Min 100 x₁ + 150 x₂ - 24 y₁ - 28 y₂
Subject to
y₁ ≥ 0.0
y₂ ≥ 0.0
y₁ ≤ 500.0
y₂ ≤ 100.0
x₁ ∈ Decisions
x₂ ∈ Decisions
x₁ ≥ 40.0
x₂ ≥ 20.0
x₁ + x₂ ≤ 120.0
-60 x₁ + 6 y₁ + 10 y₂ ≤ 0.0
-80 x₂ + 8 y₁ + 5 y₂ ≤ 0.0
Subproblem 2 (p = 0.60):
Min 100 x₁ + 150 x₂ - 28 y₁ - 32 y₂
Subject to
y₁ ≥ 0.0
y₂ ≥ 0.0
y₁ ≤ 300.0
y₂ ≤ 300.0
x₁ ∈ Decisions
x₂ ∈ Decisions
x₁ ≥ 40.0
x₂ ≥ 20.0
x₁ + x₂ ≤ 120.0
-60 x₁ + 6 y₁ + 10 y₂ ≤ 0.0
-80 x₂ + 8 y₁ + 5 y₂ ≤ 0.0
Solver name: Progressive-hedging with fixed penalty
julia> using Ipopt
# Set Ipopt optimizer for soving emerging subproblems
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(sp, SubproblemOptimizer(), Ipopt.Optimizer)
# Silence Ipopt
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(sp, RawSubproblemOptimizerParameter("print_level"), 0)
# Optimize (horizontal structure)
julia> optimize!(sp)
Progressive Hedging Time: 0:00:05 (303 iterations)
Objective: -855.5842547490254
Primal gap: 7.2622997706326046e-6
Dual gap: 8.749063651111478e-6
Iterations: 302
# Check termination status and query optimal value
julia> @show termination_status(sp);
termination_status(sp) = MathOptInterface.OPTIMAL
julia> @show objective_value(sp);
objective_value(sp) = -855.5842547490254
\end{lstlisting}
\subsection{Infinite sample space}
\label{sec:infin-sample-space}
To demonstrate how SPjl handles continuous distributions for uncertain parameters, we assume that the uncertainties in our simple example follow a multivariate normal distribution, $\xi \sim \mathcal{N}(\mu, \Sigma)$. In general, there is no closed form solution of~\eqref{eq:linearsp} when $\xi$ has a continuous distribution. However, by the law of large numbers, a viable discrete approximation can be obtained by sampling scenarios from the continuous distribution. In SPjl, we achieve this by creating a sampler object associated with the defined scenario structure. In Listing~\ref{lst:simplecont}, a sampler object for a multivariate distribution with
\begin{equation*}
\mu = \begin{pmatrix}
24 \\
32 \\
400 \\
200
\end{pmatrix}, \quad \Sigma = \begin{pmatrix}
2 & 0.5 & 0 & 0 \\
0.5 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 50 & 20 \\
0 & 0 & 20 & 30
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
is created and used to generate an instance of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} with $100$ sampled scenarios.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption = {Creating a sampled instance of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} in SPjl.}, label = {lst:simplecont}]
julia> using Distributions
# Define sampler object
julia> @sampler SimpleSampler = begin
N::MvNormal # Normal distribution
SimpleSampler(μ, Σ) = new(MvNormal(μ, Σ))
@sample Scenario begin
# Sample from normal distribution
x = rand(sampler.N)
# Create scenario matching @uncertain annotation
return @scenario q₁ = x[1] q₂ = x[2] d₁ = x[3] d₂ = x[4]
end
end
# Create mean
julia> μ = [24, 32, 400, 200];
# Create variance
julia> Σ = [2 0.5 0 0
0.5 1 0 0
0 0 50 20
0 0 20 30];
# Instantiate sampled stochastic program with 100 scenarios
julia> sp = instantiate(simple_model, SimpleSampler(μ, Σ), 100)
Stochastic program with:
* 2 decision variables
* 100 scenarios of type Scenario
Structure: Deterministic equivalent
Solver name: No optimizer attached.
\end{lstlisting}
\noindent
\sloppy
Note that the same stochastic model object defined in Listing~\ref{lst:simpledef} is used in Listing~\ref{lst:simplecont} to generate the sampled instance.
With the ability to instantiate sampled models with an arbitrary number of scenarios, we can adopt the SAA methodologies developed in~\cite{saa} to calculate confidence intervals around the optimal value of~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} as well as around the EVPI and the VSS. This is exemplified in Listing~\ref{lst:saasolve}.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption = {Approximately solving~\eqref{eq:simpleproblem} when $\xi$ follows a normal distribution.}, label = {lst:saasolve}]
# Set optimizer to SAA
julia> set_optimizer(simple_model, SAA.Optimizer)
# Emerging stochastic programming instances solved by GLPK
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(simple_model, InstanceOptimizer(), GLPK.Optimizer)
# Set attributes that value solution speed over accuracy
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(simple_model, NumEvalSamples(), 300)
# Set target relative tolerance of the resulting confidence interval
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(simple_model, RelativeTolerance(), 5e-2)
# Approximate optimization using sample average approximation
julia> optimize!(simple_model, SimpleSampler(μ, Σ))
SAA gap Time: 0:00:03 (4 iterations)
Confidence interval: Confidence interval (p = 9
Relative error: 0.021487453807842415
Sample size: 64
# Check termination status
julia> @show termination_status(simple_model);
termination_status(sp) = MathOptInterface.OPTIMAL
# Query optimal value
julia> @show objective_value(simple_model);
objective_value(simple_model) = Confidence interval (p = 9
# Disable logging
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(simple_model, MOI.Silent(), true)
# Calculate approximate EVPI
julia> EVPI(simple_model, SimpleSampler(μ, Σ))
Confidence interval (p = 9
# Calculate approximate VSS
julia> VSS(simple_model, SimpleSampler(μ, Σ))
Warning: VSS is not statistically significant to the chosen confidence level and tolerance
Confidence interval (p = 9
\end{lstlisting}
\noindent
\sloppy
These methods require re-solving sampled stochastic programs multiple times and the accuracy of the solution is increased by increasing the number of scenarios in the sampled models. Consequently, the parallel capabilities of SPjl become significant as these subproblems can become too large for single-core approaches. If multiple Julia processes are available, either locally or remotely, then the code in Listing~\ref{lst:simplecont} would automatically distribute the stochastic program on the available nodes in either a vertical or a horizontal structure. Although not practically required for this small example, this leads to significant performance gains for large-scale industrial models. See for example the scaling results presented in Section~\ref{sec:numerical-benchmarks}.
\section{The farmer problem}
\label{sec:farmer-problem}
To exemplify functional correctness, and allow for comparisons with similar tools, we consider the instructive farmer problem by~\cite{Birge2011}. Listing~\ref{lst:farmer} shows a suggested code excerpt for how the farmer problem can be defined in SPjl and Listing~\ref{lst:farmer_solve} shows how the problem can be instantiated, solved, and analyzed using various solvers. The correctness of the numerical values can be verified in~\cite{Birge2011}. For comparison, the same problem is defined in PySP as outlined in~\cite{Watson2012} in about $\num{100}$ lines spread out in separate files. Again, we stress that only $\num{30}$ lines of Julia code are required to define the farmer problem in SPjl. Moreover, the optimal value, as well as the EVPI and VSS, can be calculated interactively in the same Julia session. This feature distinguished SPjl from other similar tools such as PySP. The time required to solve the farmer problem using the L-shaped algorithm was $\num{0.57}$ seconds for both SPjl and PySP, measured on the same master node as the numerical benchmarks presented in the paper. Hence, there is no performance decrease from using SPjl instead of PySP for this small problem, with the added benefit of SPjl being more user-friendly.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption={Definition of the farmer problem in SPjl}, label={lst:farmer}]
farmer = @stochastic_model begin
@stage 1 begin
@parameters begin
Crops = [:wheat, :corn, :beets]
Cost = Dict(:wheat=>150, :corn=>230, :beets=>260)
Budget = 500
end
@decision(model, x[c in Crops] >= 0)
@objective(model, Min, sum(Cost[c]*x[c] for c in Crops))
@constraint(model, sum(x[c] for c in Crops) <= Budget)
end
@stage 2 begin
@parameters begin
Crops = [:wheat, :corn, :beets]
Required = Dict(:wheat=>200, :corn=>240, :beets=>0)
PurchasePrice = Dict(:wheat=>238, :corn=>210)
SellPrice = Dict(:wheat=>170, :corn=>150, :beets=>36, :extra_beets=>10)
end
@uncertain ξ[c in Crops]
@recourse(model, y[p in setdiff(Crops, [:beets])] >= 0)
@recourse(model, w[s in Crops ∪ [:extra_beets]] >= 0)
@objective(model, Min, sum(PurchasePrice[p] * y[p] for p in setdiff(Crops, [:beets]))
- sum(SellPrice[s] * w[s] for s in Crops ∪ [:extra_beets]))
@constraint(model, minimum_requirement[p in setdiff(Crops, [:beets])],
ξ[p] * x[p] + y[p] - w[p] >= Required[p])
@constraint(model, minimum_requirement_beets,
ξ[:beets] * x[:beets] - w[:beets] - w[:extra_beets] >= Required[:beets])
@constraint(model, beets_quota, w[:beets] <= 6000)
end
end
\end{lstlisting}
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, caption={Instantiation, optimization, and analysis of the farmer problem in SPjl}, label={lst:farmer_solve}]
# Define the three yield scenarios
julia> Crops = [:wheat, :corn, :beets];
ξ₁ = @scenario ξ[c in Crops] = [3.0, 3.6, 24.0] probability = 1/3;
ξ₂ = @scenario ξ[c in Crops] = [2.5, 3.0, 20.0] probability = 1/3;
ξ₃ = @scenario ξ[c in Crops] = [2.0, 2.4, 16.0] probability = 1/3;
# Instantiate with GLPK optimizer
julia> farmer_problem = instantiate(farmer_model, [ξ₁,ξ₂,ξ₃], optimizer = GLPK.Optimizer)
# Optimize stochastic program (through extensive form)
julia> optimize!(farmer_problem)
# Inspect optimal decision
julia> x̂ = optimal_decision(farmer_problem)
3-element Array{Float64,1}:
170.0
80.0
250.0
# Inspect optimal recourse decision in scenario 1
julia> optimal_recourse_decision(farmer_problem, 1)
6-element Array{Float64,1}:
0.0
0.0
310.00000000000017
48.000000000000036
6000.0
0.0
# Inspect optimal value
julia> objective_value(farmer_problem)
-108390.0
# Calculate expected value of perfect information
julia> EVPI(farmer_problem)
7015.6
# Calculate value of the stochastic solution
julia> VSS(farmer_problem)
1150.0
# Initialize with vertical structure
julia> farmer_ls = instantiate(farmer_model, [ξ₁,ξ₂,ξ₃], optimizer = LShaped.Optimizer);
# Set GLPK optimizer for the solving master problem
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(farmer_ls, MasterOptimizer(), GLPK.Optimizer);
# Set GLPK optimizer for the solving subproblems
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(farmer_ls, SubproblemOptimizer(), GLPK.Optimizer);
# Solve using L-shaped
julia> optimize!(farmer_ls)
L-Shaped Gap Time: 0:00:00 (6 iterations)
Objective: -108390.0
Gap: 0.0
Number of cuts: 14
Iterations: 6
# Initialize with horizontal structure
julia> farmer_ph = instantiate(farmer_model, [ξ₁,ξ₂,ξ₃],
optimizer = ProgressiveHedging.Optimizer);
# Set Ipopt optimizer for soving emerging subproblems
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(farmer_ph, SubproblemOptimizer(), Ipopt.Optimizer)
# Silence Ipopt
julia> set_optimizer_attribute(farmer_ph, RawSubproblemOptimizerParameter("print_level"), 0
# Solve using progressive-hedging
julia> optimize!(farmer_ph)
Progressive Hedging Time: 0:00:05 (86 iterations)
Objective: -108390.3601369591
Primal gap: 3.984637579811031e-6
Dual gap: 5.634811373041405e-6
Iterations: 85
\end{lstlisting}
\subsection{Advanced solver configurations in the SPjl framework}
\label{sec:algor-impr}
The SPjl framework includes a variety of customizable improvements to the L-shaped and progressive-hedging algorithms. The possible variations of the classical algorithms included in the framework range from efficient implementations of influential research papers~\cite{ruszczynski_regularized_1986, linderoth_decomposition_2003, Fabian2006} to novel variants developed by the framework authors~\cite{cutaggregation} or others~\cite{adaptive_penalty, Wolf2013, Trukhanov2010}. We provide a summary of the improvements available for both L-shaped and progressive-hedging. In brief, each algorithm has a set of options that can be varied through a simple interface. In all examples, it is assumed that a given stochastic program instance \jlinl{sp} has been instantiated with an appropriate optimizer. We can then use \jlinl{set_optimizer_attribute(sp, option, value)} to customize the optimizer algorithm used by \jlinl{sp}.
\subsubsection{L-shaped}
\label{sec:l-shaped}
The L-shaped solver suite of SPjl includes a large set of customizable options. These are summarized below.
\textbf{Regularization}: A Regularization procedure limits the candidate search to a neighborhood of the current best iterate in the master problem. It tends to result in more effective cutting planes and improved performance of the L-shaped algorithm. Moreover, regularization enables warm-starting the L-shaped procedure with initial decisions. We have previously covered the regularization procedures in SPjl more in depth in~\cite{distlshaped}.
The SPjl framework includes the following regularizations: Trust-region regularization~\cite{linderoth_decomposition_2003}, Regularized decomposition~\cite{ruszczynski_regularized_1986}, Level set regularization~\cite{Fabian2006}. Since the two latter techniques involve solving problems with quadratic penalty terms, the SPjl framework also provide an option for replacing quadratic penalties with various linear approximations, if only a linear solver is available.
\sloppy
\textbf{Aggregation}: Cut aggregation can reduce communication overhead and load imbalance and yield major performance improvements in distributed settings. In the classical L-shaped algorithm~\cite{van_slyke_l-shaped_1969}, all cuts are aggregated every iteration. The authors of~\cite{Birge1988} suggested a multi-cut variant where cuts are added separately in a disaggregate form, which on average yields faster convergence. We recently explored a novel set of aggregation approaches~\cite{cutaggregation}, which are all included in SPjl.
\sloppy
\textbf{Consolidation}: Cut consolidation, as proposed by~\cite{Wolf2013}, is also implemented in SPjl to reduce load imbalance by removing stale cuts from the master.
\textbf{Execution}: In a distributed environment with multiple Julia processes, the execution policy of the L-shaped algorithm can be executed in a serial, synchronous or asynchronous mode. The synchronous variant runs the L-shaped algorithm in parallel using a map-reduce pattern each iteration. The asynchronous scheme is appropriate in a heterogeneous environment where some workers may finish slower than others. We show how these algorithm policies can be applied to increase performance on large-scale problems in Section~\ref{sec:numerical-benchmarks}.
\subsubsection{Progressive-hedging}
\label{sec:progressive-hedging}
\sloppy
The progressive-hedging solver suite shares a few options with the L-shaped suite. First, as each subproblem in the progressive-hedging procedure includes a quadratic penalty term, the same linear approximations as for L-shaped regularizations can be applied. Second, just like the L-shaped solvers, the progressive-hedging algorithms can be run serially, synchronously or asynchronously.
\textbf{Penalization}: The convergence rate of the progressive-hedging algorithm is sensitive to the choice of the penalty parameter $r$. The SPjl framework supports both a fixed penalty parameter and the adaptive strategy introduced in~\cite{adaptive_penalty}.
\section{Implementation details}
\label{sec:implementation}
In this section, we provide a summary of the main software innovations in SPjl. We also discuss the implementation of the framework's distributed capabilities. The inner workings of SPjl are primarily based on two ideas: deferred model instantiation and data injection. In brief, a model definition in SPjl is a recipe for how to use data structures when building optimization models, while the actual model creation is deferred until data is provided. When a specific model is instantiated, the provided data is injected where required to construct the model. The main effect of this approach is that the stochastic model formulation is separated from the design of stochastic data parameters, which makes the SPjl framework versatile and flexible to use. For instance, it is possible to test small instances of a model locally to ensure that it is properly defined, and then run the same model in a distributed environment with a large set of scenarios. Deferred model instances and data injection also play a large role when distributing stochastic program instances in memory.
\subsection{Deferred model instantiation}
\label{sec:deferr-model-instant}
\sloppy
The advantages of deferred model instantiation is a smaller memory footprint and the ability to create various structures that use the first- and second-stage recipes as building blocks in a clever way. Examples include the deterministic, vertical, and horizontal structures, as well as wait-and-see problems and expected-value problems. The technique is also a premise for implementing data injection. In contrast to standard JuMP models, SPjl models defined through the \jlinl{@stage} macros are not necessarily instantiated immediately. Instead, the user-defined Julia code that constructs the optimization problems is stored in lambda functions as model recipes. In other words, instead of creating and storing a JuMP object, the lines of code required to create the JuMP object is stored. This is achievable since Julia code is itself a data structure defined within the Julia language.
\sloppy
Deferred model instantiation is made possible through metaprogamming and the automatic reformulation bridges introduced in \jlinl{MathOptInterface}~\cite{moi}. These techniques allow us to add linking constraints between the stages that adhere to the data dependencies defined by the user. During model creation, any \jlinl{@decision} line in a \jlinl{@stage} definition creates special JuMP variables whose behaviour depends on the context of the instantiation. Any variable defined in this way can be included in \jlinl{@constraint} definitions in subsequent stages. See for example Listing~\ref{lst:simpledef}, where the last two constraint definitions in the second stage include references to \jlinl{x₁} and \jlinl{x₂} which were defined with \jlinl{@decision} in the first stage. Next, we will discuss in more detail how instantiation is implemented for the main underlying structures: deterministic, vertical, and horizontal. In addition, we explain how decision evaluation is implemented in the different structures.
\subsubsection{Deterministic structure}
\label{sec:determ-struct}
\sloppy
We construct the extensive form of a finite model~\eqref{eq:finitesp} in steps using the stored model recipes. First, we generate the first-stage model in full using the corresponding recipe. Next, we process all available scenarios iteratively. For each scenario, we apply the second-stage recipe and append the resulting subproblem to the extensive model. In this context, any variables defined with \jlinl{@decision} in the first stage are treated as regular JuMP variables. Before generating the subsequent scenario problem, we internally annotate the variables and constraints to associate them with the scenario they originated from. This labeling is visible in the printout shown in Listing~\ref{lst:simplediscrete}. During decision evaluation, all variables defined with \jlinl{@decision} are fixed to their corresponding values. The deterministic equivalent problem is then solved as usual, giving exactly~\eqref{eq:expectedresult}.
\subsubsection{Vertical structure}
\label{sec:vertical-struct}
\sloppy
The vertical structure, introduced in Section~\ref{sec:l-shaped-algorithm}, is also instantiated in steps. First, the first-stage master problem~\eqref{eq:lsmaster} is created using the corresponding recipe. Here, the \jlinl{@decision} variables are again treated as regular JuMP variables. Next, subproblem instances of the form~\eqref{eq:lssubprob} are created for each possible scenario using the second-stage recipe. During second-stage generation, first-stage variables annotated with \jlinl{@decision} enter the model as so called \emph{known decisions}. These are not optimization variables, but rather parameters with given values. This design reflects the fact that the first-stage decisions have already been taken when the second stage is reached. The values of the first-stage decisions can be entered into the second-stage constraints in which they appear through automatic reformulation bridges. Internally, all decisions defined in the first-stage are made known to the second stage by the \jlinl{@stochastic_model} macro. It is also possible to explicitly add \jlinl{@known} annotations to the second-stage definition to mark variables that originate from previous stages.
\sloppy
The subproblems are either stored in vector format on the master node or distributed on remote nodes as described in Section~\ref{sec:distr-comp}. We distribute new scenarios and generated subproblems as evenly as possible on remote nodes to achieve load balance. During decision evaluation, all variables defined with \jlinl{@decision} are fixed to their corresponding values in the first stage. Further, these values are communicated to all subproblems, that can then update their respective second-stage constraints. The first stage and second stage problems are then solved separately, in parallel if possible, and the results are map-reduced to form~\eqref{eq:expectedresult}.
\subsubsection{Horizontal structure}
\label{sec:horizontal-struct}
\sloppy
Instantiation of the horizontal structure introduced in Section~\ref{sec:progr-hedg-algor} is similar to instantiation of the vertical structure. They differ in that there is no master problem and in that the subproblems have the structure given in~\eqref{eq:phform} instead of~\eqref{eq:lssubprob}. The process for generating subproblems of this wait-and-see form is equivalent to one iteration of the finite extensive form generation. In short, the first-stage recipe is applied, followed by applying the second-stage recipe on the scenario data corresponding to the subproblem. Now, the variables defined with \jlinl{@decision} are again treated as standard JuMP variables. Note that generation of the expected-value-problem~\eqref{eq:ev} is equivalent to generating a wait-and-see model on the expected scenario of all available scenarios. The implementable solution $\xi$ that enter the horizontal form~\eqref{eq:phform} through the non-anticipative constraints is added as a known decision to the subproblems. During the progressive-hedging procedure, the value of $\xi$ can then be updated efficiently through bridges. This design is also used to implement proximal terms in the regularized variants of the L-shaped algorithm. Decision evaluation is performed similar to the other structures. In each subproblem, the first-stage decisions are fixed to their corresponding values and the subproblem is solved as usual. The results are then map-reduced to form~\eqref{eq:expectedresult}. Again, the decision evaluation process is embarrassingly parallel in a distributed environment.
\subsection{Data injection}
\label{sec:data-injection}
\sloppy
Data injection is the second software pattern used to separate model and data design in SPjl. The aim is to make an object independent of how its dependencies are created. In SPjl, the dependencies consist of the data required to construct the optimization problems as described by the model recipes. The data includes uncertain parameters, as well as first-stage decisions and deterministic parameters. By adopting this approach, users of SPjl can focus on the design of the optimization model and the uncertainty model separately, while the framework is responsible for combining these designs into actual stochastic program instances. In the following, we describe the data injection functionality in more detail.
When an SPjl model is formulated using \jlinl{@stochastic_model}, special annotations are used inside the \jlinl{@stage} blocks to specify points of data injection. These annotations inform the framework which parameters are necessary to construct the model according to the \jlinl{@stochastic_model} definition. The \jlinl{@stage} macro transforms the stage blocks into anonymous lambda functions that map supplied data into optimization problems. Internally, when the user wants to instantiate the defined SPjl model, the required data is passed to the stored lambda functions according to one of the instantiation procedures outlined in the previous section.
We give a short review of the different types of data dependencies that can be specified in an SPjl model. Consider the simple second-stage formulation in Listing~\ref{lst:injectionexample}, which includes several data injection annotations.
\begin{lstlisting}[language = julia, float, floatplacement=H, caption={Simple showcase of data injection in SPjl}, label={lst:injectionexample}]
@stochastic_model begin
@stage 1 begin
@decision(model, x)
end
@stage 2 begin
@parameters d
@known x
@uncertain ξ
@recourse(model, y <= d)
@constraint(model, x + y <= ξ)
end
end
\end{lstlisting}
\noindent
\sloppy
\textbf{Deterministic data}: The \jlinl{@parameters} annotation specifies scenario-independent data, i.e., deterministic parameters that are the same across all scenarios. Default parameter values can be specified inside the \jlinl{@parameters} block. Otherwise, the values must be supplied during instantiation.
\textbf{Uncertain data}: The \jlinl{@uncertain} annotation specifies the scenario-specific data. The scenario-dependent values are either created and supplied directly by the user or by some user-defined sampler object that models the uncertainty.
\textbf{Decisions}: The \jlinl{@known} annotation makes the first-stage decision \jlinl{x} available in the second-stage. Note again that \jlinl{@known} annotations are implicitly added by \jlinl{@stochastic_model} because of the \jlinl{@decision x} in the first stage. When the second-stage generator is run, the framework will have already created a decision variable \jlinl{x} using the first-stage generator, either as a standard JuMP variable or as a fixed known decision. All such first-stage variables are injected into the second-stage generator. These can then be used as if they were ordinary JuMP variables. See for example the last \jlinl{@constraint} definition in the second stage of Listing~\ref{lst:injectionexample}.
\textbf{Models}: The \jlinl{model} keyword is a placeholder for a JuMP object that stores the actual optimization problem. In a deterministic structure, the model object is the same in every generator call. In the block-decomposition structures, the generators are instead applied to multiple JuMP models that form subproblems.
\sloppy
The use of data injection adds versatility to the framework. The user is only restricted to use the \jlinl{model} keyword in the JuMP macro calls. Otherwise, all JuMP features are supported in the stage blocks. Also, there is no restriction on the scenario data types. Hence, instead of a simple structure with fields, it is possible to define a more complex data type that for example performs calculations at runtime to determine optimization parameters. In addition, any Julia methods defined on the scenario type become available in the stage blocks. This allows the user to design complex models of the uncertainty orthogonally to the definition of the stochastic program.
Because the model definition is decoupled from the data, it is possible to send the model recipe to a remote process where the scenario data resides and create the model from there. This is the foundation of the distributed implementation described next.
\subsection{Distributed computations}
\label{sec:distr-comp}
\sloppy
SPjl has distributed capabilities for both modeling, analysis and optimization. All implementations rely on the \jlinl{Distributed} module in Julia. This allows us to develop SPjl using high-level abstractions that utilize the efficient low-level communication protocols in Julia. In this way, the same codebase can be used to distribute computations locally, using shared-memory, and remotely, in a cluster or in the cloud.
\sloppy
Distributed computing in Julia is centered around the concepts of remote references and remote calls. Remote references are used to administer which node particular data resides on and to provide the remaining processes access to the remote data. Remote calls are used to schedule tasks on the nodes. Any process can \jlinl{wait} on a remote reference, which blocks until data can be fetched, and then \jlinl{fetch} the result when it is ready. The \jlinl{RemoteChannel} objects are special remote references where processes can also \jlinl{put!} data. Besides, specialized channel objects can be designed for specific data types. This feature is used frequently in the implementation of the distributed structured solvers.
\subsubsection{Distributed stochastic programs}
\label{sec:distr-stoch-progr}
\sloppy
The distributed capabilities of SPjl were designed with the aim to minimize the amount of data passing. This is mainly achieved through the deferred instantiation and data injection techniques outlined above. In principle, a stochastic program can be instantiated in a distributed environment by passing all necessary data to each worker node. However, the data injection technique is independent of the way data is created. Therefore, a far more efficient approach is to let the workers generate the necessary scenario data and the optimization models themselves, with minimal data passing. This is possible since SPjl has support for passing lightweight sampler objects capable of randomly generating scenario data, such as the one in defined in Listing~\ref{lst:simplecont}, along with passing the lightweight model recipes created in the \jlinl{@stage} blocks. Scenario data and subproblems can then be generated in parallel on the worker nodes. The master keeps track of the scenario distribution and ensures that new scenarios and subproblems are generated on available workers in a way that promotes load-balance.
If multiple Julia processes are available, then any instantiated stochastic program in SPjl is automatically distributed in memory according to either a vertical structure or a horizontal structure. In a vertical structure, the master node administers the first-stage problem and schedules tasks and data transfers. In a horizontal structure, the master node is only responsible for task scheduling and data transfers. Aside from distributing the models in memory, SPjl parallelizes as many computations as possible. In many cases, speedups stem from subtasks being embarrassingly parallel over the independent subproblems. For example, this occurs during decision evaluation and calculation of EVPI and VSS. In these instances, the master schedules the same computation tasks on all workers using remote calls and then initiates any necessary reductions after the workers have finished using a standard map-reduce pattern. The more involved parallelization strategies in SPjl relate mostly to the structure-exploiting distributed solvers described in more detail in Appendix~\ref{sec:distr-comp-deta}.
\subsubsection{Distributed structured optimization algorithms}
\label{sec:distr-comp-deta}
The implementations of the distributed structured solvers are also centered around remote calls and channels. Here, remote calls are used to initiate running tasks on every worker node, and the algorithm logic is driven by having the master and worker tasks wait on and write/fetch to/from specialized queue channels.
\sloppy
In the case of the L-shaped method, whenever the master node re-solves the master problem~\eqref{eq:lsmaster}, it writes the new decision vector to a specialized \jlinl{Decision} channel. It then sends a corresponding index to a \jlinl{Work} channel on every remote node. Every worker continuously fetches tasks from its \jlinl{Work} channel and uses the acquired index to fetch the latest decision vector from the master. Every new decision candidate infers a batch of subproblems to solve for each worker. After a worker has solved a subproblem~\eqref{eq:lssubprob}, it sends the computed cutting planes to a \jlinl{CutQueue} channel on the master. The master continuously fetches cuts from the \jlinl{CutQueue} and appends them to the master problem. In the synchronous variant, the master only updates after all workers have finished their work for the current iteration. In other words, the synchronous algorithm is driven by the master node initiating and waiting for worker tasks through remote calls. In the asynchronous version, the master updates after it has received $\kappa n$ cuts, where $n$ is the total number of subproblems. Timestamps are communicated throughout to keep track of the algorithm history and allow synchronized convergence checks. All subproblems are solved to completion each iteration regardless of the value of $\kappa$, to be able to check convergence properly. When the master has received all cuts corresponding to a specific iteration, it performs a convergence check and terminates if appropriate. For clarity, the procedure is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:async-l-shaped}. A similar design is used to implement synchronous and asynchronous variants of the progressive-hedging algorithm.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\input{async-l-shaped}
\caption{Asynchronous L-shaped procedure}
\label{fig:async-l-shaped}
\end{figure}
\section{Numerical benchmarks}
\label{sec:numerical-benchmarks}
We now evaluate the distributed performance of SPjl by benchmarking the structure-exploiting solvers on a large-scale planning problem. The numerical experiments are performed in a multi-node setup where a laptop computer acts as the master node and a desktop compute server of up to $\num{32}$ cores provides worker nodes.
\subsection{The SSN problem}
\label{sec:ssn}
We evaluate the solvers on the telecommunications problem SSN, first introduced in~\cite{ssn}. This problem is often included in similar benchmarks~\cite{linderoth_decomposition_2003, Trukhanov2010}. The SSN problem is formulated to plan bandwidth capacity expansion in a network before customer demands are known. The problem is freely available in the SMPS format~\footnote{https://core.isrd.isi.edu/}. The problem has $\num{89}$ decision variables in the first stage, and $\num{706}$ variables and $\num{175}$ constraints in the second stage. We first run an SAA procedure to gauge the number of scenarios required to obtain a stable solution. The results are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ssn_confidence_intervals}. There is no visible improvement after $\num{6000}$ scenarios. Moreover, the confidence interval around the optimal value is considered relatively tight at this point and is consistent with similar experiments~\cite{saacomp}. With $\num{6000}$ scenarios, the extensive form of the SAA model has 4.2 million variables and 5.3 million constraints, and about 20 minutes is required to build and solve the extensive form using Gurobi~\cite{gurobi}. From this baseline, we run the distributed benchmarks.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\input{ssn_confidence_intervals.tex}
\caption{$90\%$ Confidence intervals around the optimal value of the SSN problem as a function of sample size.}
\label{fig:ssn_confidence_intervals}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Benchmarks}
\label{sec:distr-benchm}
We evaluate the structured solvers by solving distributed SSN instances of $\num{6000}$ scenarios. Benchmarks are performed using the Julia package BenchmarkTools.jl, which schedules multiple solve procedures and reports median computation times. Every solver runs until convergence criteria are reached with a relative tolerance of $10^{-2}$. The master node is a laptop computer with a 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7 processor and 16 GB of RAM. We spawn workers on a remote multi-core machine with two 3.1 GHz Intel Xeon processors (total 32 cores) and 128 GB of RAM. The two machines were $\num{30}$ kilometers apart at the time of the experiments. The time required to pass a single decision or optimality cut at this distance is about $\num{0.01}$ seconds. Hence, the communication latency is small, but not negligible as will be apparent in the results. For single-core experiments we only run the procedures once because the time to convergence is long and the measurement variance becomes relatively small. Throughout, the Gurobi optimizer~\cite{gurobi} is used to solve emerging subproblems.
We first benchmark a set of L-shaped solvers. The nominal method is the multi-cut L-shaped algorithm without any advanced configuration. On average, this algorithm requires $\num{19}$ iterations and $\num{92000}$ optimality cuts to solve an SSN instance of $\num{6000}$ scenarios. This takes just over $\num{30}$ minutes on the master node under serial execution. We run a strong scaling test where the number of worker cores on the remote machine is doubled in size up to $\num{32}$ cores. Apart from multi-cut L-shaped, we also evaluate two variants with advanced algorithm policies. Specifically, one solver is configured to use trust-region regularization and partial cut aggregation with $\num{32}$ cuts in each bundle. This aggregation scheme is static; the cuts are partitioned into groups of $\num{32}$ in the same order each iteration. The second solver is configured to use level-set regularization and K-medoids cluster aggregation. This is a dynamic aggregation scheme where the cuts are clustered using the K-medoids algorithm based on a generalized cut distance matrix each iteration. We fix the partitioning scheme of the dynamic method after the first five iterations, as outline in~\cite{cutaggregation}. All solvers are configured to use synchronous execution. The results from these experiments are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:strong_scaling}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\input{strong_scaling}
\caption{Median computation time required for different L-shaped algorithms to solve SSN instances of 6000 scenarios, as a function of number of worker cores. All experiments were run under synchronous execution.}
\label{fig:strong_scaling}
\end{figure}
First, we just consider the multi-cut method. The initial scaling is very poor with almost no speedup. We then observe speedups up to eight cores upon which the scaling curve flattens. The primary sources of inefficiency in distributed L-shaped algorithms are communication latency and load imbalance. This is especially true for multi-cut L-shaped because all cuts are passed separately and the master increases in size by the maximum number of constraints possible each iteration. We re-ran the two-core experiment on the master node with local threads as workers. In other words, without communication overhead. The time to convergence was then about $\num{18}$ minutes. With $\num{0.01}$ seconds required to pass a single cut and $\num{92000}$ cuts passed in total, this accounts for the extra $\num{15}$ minutes required to converge in the multi-node setup. Therefore, we can conclude that much of the inefficiency stems from communication latency. The fact that the scaling curve flattens stems mostly from load imbalance. In the final iterations, most of the time is spent solving the now large master problem or passing cuts, so the worker nodes are not utilized optimally.
Next, we consider the advanced methods. The distributed performance is significantly improved compared to the multi-cut method. The main reason for this is that cut aggregation reduces both communication latency and load imbalance. Because cuts are aggregated, less data is passed each iteration. Further, the master problem does not grow as fast. Hence, the workload is more evenly spread out between master and workers, which improves parallel performance. In this particular case, the more advanced aggregation scheme yields slightly better performance, but it could also hold that level-set regularization is more performant than trust-region regularization on the SSN problem. Even with cut aggregation, the size of the master eventually exceeds the size of the subproblems and data passing still becomes a bottle-neck as the number of cores increase. Therefore, the scaling curves still flatten for larger numbers of cores. We do not claim that these configurations are the best possible. We can for example note that they are not optimal for single-core execution where both variants are outperformed by the multi-cut method. Also, the parallel efficiency increase as workers are added is not uniform. This is because the aggregation schemes are more optimal for some work granularities. We could possibly improve the convergence times further by parameter tuning. For this particular configurations, we could also let a processor on the remote machine act as the master node and remove communication latency all together. However, we believe that our results are a strong encouragement for the distributed capability of the SPjl framework. With non-negligible communication latency we are able to solve a large-scale planning problem in just over a minute by employing some of the readily available algorithm policies in the framework. This can be seen as a proof of concept for running industrial planning problems in a modern cloud architecture.
We tested the algorithms with asynchronous execution as well, but saw no performance improvements. Even though there is communication latency between the master node and the remote node, worker performance is even. Moreover, the subproblems are equally difficult to solve. There is therefore no immediate gain from introducing asynchrony and the overhead from doing so decreases performance. The asynchronous variants are expected to yield better performance in a more heterogeneous environment with stalling workers.
Next, we evaluate the performance of the progressive-hedging methods. Using the nominal method, we did not observe convergence even after long waiting times. Using the adaptive penalty policy eventually yields convergence. We configure the solvers to use adaptive penalty and synchronous execution and run the same strong scaling experiment as for the L-shaped methods. The results are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ph_scaling}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\input{ph_scaling}
\caption{Median computation time required for the progressive-hedging algorithm to solve SSN instances of 6000 scenarios, as a function of number of worker cores. All experiments were run under synchronous execution.}
\label{fig:ph_scaling}
\end{figure}
Although at much worse time-to-solution than the L-shaped methods initially, the distributed progressive-hedging algorithm displays great scaling and outperforms the multi-cut L-shaped method after $\num{16}$ cores. The efficiency probably stems from the problem being load-balanced across the workers. Communication latency again becomes a bottle-neck at $\num{32}$ cores from which we attribute the worsened scaling. Again, the subproblems appear equally difficult as there were no stalling workers. Consequently, we did not observe any speedups from running the asynchronous variant. The time to convergence is notably large and the progressive-hedging method is consistently outperformed by the advanced L-shaped methods. This is not surprising as we have spent more time on L-shaped improvements. Future work includes further algorithmic improvements to the progressive-hedging algorithms.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this work, we have presented an open-source framework, \jlinl{StochasticPrograms.jl}, for large-scale stochastic programming. It is written entirely in Julia and includes both modeling tools and solver algorithms. The framework is designed for distributed computations and naturally scales to high-performance clusters or the cloud. By using the extensive form, which is efficiently generated using metaprogramming techniques, stochastic program instances can be solved using open-source or commercial solvers. Through deferred model instantiation, data injection, and clever algorithm policies, the framework can operate in distributed architectures with minimal data passing. In addition, several analysis tools and stochastic programming constructs are included with efficient implementations, many of which can run in parallel.
The framework also includes a solver suite of scalable algorithms that exploit the structure of the stochastic programs. The structured solvers are shown to perform well on large-scale planning problems. High parallel efficiency is achieved for distributed L-shaped methods using cut aggregation techniques and regularizations. Moreover, distributed progressive-hedging algorithms are accelerated using an adaptive penalty procedure. The solver suites are made modular through a policy-based design, so that future improvements can readily be added.
There are several directions for future additions to the framework. First, SPjl does not yet fully support multi-stage problems. We have finished an infrastructure for representing multi-stage problems in a way that leverages the two-stage design. Ongoing work involves designing a suitable Julian syntax for encoding transitive probabilities in a multi-stage scenario tree. Second, we will consider further algorithmic improvements to the existing L-shaped and progressive-hedging solvers. We also want to explore alternative sample-based approaches to the SAA method where the sampling is instead performed inside the structure-exploiting algorithm procedure. Examples of such approaches include L-shaped with importance sampling~\cite{Infanger1992} or stochastic decomposition~\cite{sd}.
\sloppy
The framework is well-tested through continuous integration and is freely available on Github\footnote{\url{https://github.com/martinbiel/StochasticPrograms.jl}}. A comprehensive documentation is included\footnote{\url{https://martinbiel.github.io/StochasticPrograms.jl/dev/}}. The modeling framework, \jlinl{StochasticPrograms.jl}, exists as a registered Julia package, which can be installed and run in any interactive Julia session.
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
Today, mass customization of products such as automobiles and consumer electronics is forcing companies to provide a very large product variety to address the diverse customer requirements. Digital manufacturing technologies make it possible to accommodate mass customization during product design and manufacturing. For example, parametric designs in computer aided design (CAD) software allow for the specification of configurable products, and computer aided manufacturing (CAM) algorithms allow for the fabrication of products on different machines. Unfortunately, there is very limited engineering tool support for product assembly planning. Although some companies use \textit{design for assembly} (DfA)~\cite{Kretschmer} and \textit{design for manufacturing and assembly} (DfMA)~\cite{FAVI} methodologies that attempt to develop product structures that facilitate their assembly, their implementation is ad-hoc. Therefore, assembly planning is a task that is loosely coupled to the rest of the digital manufacturing pipeline. The objective of this paper is to open new avenues for \textit{interoperable} assembly planning that is tightly coupled to the upstream design activities, and the downstream assembly tasks.
String diagrams are a powerful graphical calculus for reasoning in category theory \cite{selinger}. String diagrams have also proven useful in many other domains. They have been shown to provide a mathematically sound graphical language in domains including linguistics \cite{coecke}, systems engineering \cite{baez}, and computer science \cite{master}. Generally, string diagrams represent processes which require and produce resources. Assembly planning is the discipline of understanding how to optimally chain assembly processes together to craft a whole product from separate parts~\cite{Ghandi}. Thus, string diagrams are a natural tool for formulating assembly planning problems and constructing their solutions.
To demonstrate this thesis we show that string diagrams can be used to build construction schedules for various LEGO models. From each LEGO 3D CAD file we generate a \textit{connectivity graph} where the nodes represent LEGO pieces and the edges indicate that they are connected in the final model. Given a hierarchical clustering of this connectivity graph, we generate a \textit{construction plan} represented by string diagrams which is hierarchical, compositional, and interpretable. Using the formalism of string diagrams, complex sub-assemblies can be \textit{black boxed} into larger string diagrams. Having this hierarchical structure allows us to manipulate or adapt our plan at a desired level of abstraction. Furthermore, there is a categorical formalism that enables schedules to be generated from these string diagrams. We use topological sorting, Girvan-Newman, and Leiden algorithms to generate assembly plans and schedules with different properties. Finally, we use Minecraft \cite{minecraftgame} as a simulator to validate the resulting schedules and measure their time-to-build performance.
In this paper, we demonstrate the versatility of this approach with a framework, \textsc{CompositionalPlanning}, that provides a new way of talking about assembly planning. Our category theoretic interpretation provides a flexible mathematical foundation that allows for an end-to-end demonstration from CAD design to assembly simulation. The contributions of this paper are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item we show how string diagrams are an intuitive yet mathematically sound language to represent an assembly planning domain.
\item as large string diagrams can be tedious and cumbersome for humans to work with, our framework automates the creation of large string diagrams and thus eliminates the overhead traditionally associated with them.
\item a novel algorithm that converts string diagrams to \textit{expressions} that result in highly parallel assembly plans
\item a Minecraft based simulation environment modification or ``mod'' to execute LEGO assembly plans.
\item we publish the \textsc{CompositonalPlanning} framework as a Julia~\cite{Julia} package for others to reproduce and build upon our work\footnote{\textsc{CompositionalPlanning} - https://github.com/CompositionalPlanning/}.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}
Assembly planning problems and approaches have been widely investigated. A comprehensive survey of them can be found in ~\cite{Ghandi}. In ~\cite{zha1998integrated}, a survey of assembly design and planning systems is presented. In particular, the \textit{Assembly Sequence Planning} (ASP) problem that we target in this paper is an NP-hard problem. ASP's goal is to find a collision-free sequence of assembly operations that put together individual parts given the geometry of the final product and the relative positions of parts in the final product. ASP is considered a combinatorial problem and therefore representations of the space of possible sequences has been an active area of research~\cite{Jimenez}. While various representations ranging from AND-OR graphs ~\cite{de1990and} to Petri nets ~\cite{rosell2004assembly} have been proposed, we are the first to study ASP under a category theoretic framework. In this paper, we show that category theory provides both an \textit{explicit} and an \textit{implicit} representation on assembly sequences. On the one hand, string diagrams provide an explicit ASP representation of partial and full assemblies. On the other hand, expressions provide us mathematical soundness and rigor as they implicitly encode precedence assembly relationships.
Although this paper focuses on LEGO and Minecraft models, the \textsc{CompositionalPlanning} framework can be easily adapted to other domains. In 3D CAD modeling, for example, parts are composed into assemblies in a similar way to how LEGO pieces compose into LEGO models. The specification of the parts themselves and their composition of assemblies is defined in a CAD file that is analogous to a LEGO 3D CAD file. Therefore, the first step would be to create a custom parser for a specific CAD file format to extract a connectivity graph from the information about parts and their composition. Given that there are many CAD file formats in the market today~\cite{NISTCAD}, the scalability of \textsc{CompositionalPlanning} in the CAD domain is dependent on the availability of custom parsers.
Related work in automated assembly planning illustrates how this field is highly fragmented. Most researchers develop custom assembly planning solutions that work for specific products and processes. In~\cite{Boschert}, the authors present a system to address the assembly planning of multi-variant products in modular production systems. The product requirements and their feasible assembly orders are modeled in a directed graph referred to as the \textit{Augmented Assembly Priority Plan} (AAPP). The AAPP encodes how two initial subassemblies are joined together to form a new subassembly through a value adding task such as ``assembly'' or ``screwing''. From the authors' description, the AAPP can be mapped as a string diagram to leverage the planning capabilities of our \textsc{CompositionalPlanning} framework. Similarly, the authors in~\cite{Pintzos} present a system to generate \textit{assembly precedence graphs} from CAD files. Similar to our results, they show that an assembly precedence graph contains all the valid sequences of an assembly. Their assembly precedence graphs correspond to our connectivity graph, and their assembly sequences correspond to our plans and schedules. There are two important differences compared to our work: (a) their means of user-interaction and visualization are spreadsheets instead of graphs, and (b) their implementation is based on a proprietary CAD software.
\section{Categorical Assembly Planning Framework}
Our \textsc{CompositionalPlanning} framework, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline}, consists of five reusable software components. The first step is to infer a connectivity graph from the CAD model that describes how the different parts come together in terms of their geometry (e.g., orientation) and assembly operations (e.g., snap, glue, weld, insert). This step is necessary because most CAD models list quantities of all parts and detailed structural functions in relation to a finished product, and this information does not directly map to their assembly.
\vspace{-0.2in}
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\center{\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{pipeline.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig:pipeline}\textsc{CompositionalPlanning} framework pipeline.}
\end{figure*}
\vspace{-0.2in}
The second step consists of plan generation~\cite{FoxKempf} -- described by different string diagrams -- that have different properties of order and parallelism. These plans, although expressed by different expressions of string diagrams, generate the same LEGO model as they: (i) bring an initial world to a goal world using a set of assembly operators, and (ii) minimally impose ordering constraints.
The third step generates a schedule using a plan and a detailed knowledge of the execution environment (e.g., number of workers, machines). The job of the schedule generation~\cite{FoxKempf} is to impose further ordering constraints on the assembly operator application to achieve a robust (e.g., against failures) and time-efficient execution of the assembly task (e.g., time-to-assembly).
The fourth and final step consists of executing the schedule in a simulator to visualize the assembly task, and to generate performance metrics. Although this paper focuses on LEGO CAD models as an input, and Minecraft simulations as an output, our components are domain agnostic, and they can be easily adapted for use in other domains.
\subsection{Connectivity Diagram Generation from CAD}
\textsc{CompositionalPlanning} parses the text-based LDraw files~\cite{ldraw} and automatically builds the connectivity diagram. Every LEGO model has a unique connectivity diagram that describes how the pieces are connected to each other. LDraw files~\cite{ldraw} describe all the bricks in the model by type (e.g., 2$\times$2, 2$\times$4), color, center coordinates ($x$, $y$, $z$), and a 3$\times$3 rotation matrix. This LDraw file represents the bill of materials (BOM) of the LEGO model and does not contain any information about the connectivity of the bricks. Therefore, the first step is to parse this information from the LDraw file $f$ and generate a list of LegoObjects. The second step is to create a directed graph and add a node for every object in the LegoObjects list. Note that these nodes are not yet connected by edges.
Vertical stacking is the most common operation with LEGO bricks as shown in the example in Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline}. Therefore, the third step in our framework is to infer the vertical connectivity in the LEGO CAD model. In LDraw's coordinate system $-y$ is ``up''. Therefore, two bricks are connected if: (a) the top face of one brick has the same $y$ coordinate as the other brick's down face ($ a.top\_ycoord() == b.bottom\_ycoord()$); (b) and their boxes (defined by $(x, z)$ center coordinates and the brick's $width$ and $length$) intersect ($(abs(a.x - b.x) * 2 < (a.length + b.length))~and~(abs(a.z - b.z) * 2 < (a.width + b.width))$). For every connected pair of objects we create an edge from $a$ to $b$ in the connectivity diagram. Other less common operations such as horizontal stacking, and operations involving other LEGO pieces such as pegs are left for future work. However, the connectivity inference would follow a similar principle as the one described above.
The fourth step consists of grounding all nodes in the connectivity diagram that do not have any predecessors. Having explicit ground nodes helps the processing of the connectivity diagram by the following algorithms. As an illustrative example consider the LEGO model and its connectivity diagram shown in Figure~\ref{fig:pipeline}. It consists of seven bricks sequentially numbered from $\circled{1}, ..., \circled{7}$. In addition, our algorithm also includes the ``ground'' nodes to facilitate the model construction using the base build plate. In this example, the ground nodes $\groundedcircled{9}$ and $\groundedcircled{8}$ connected to $\circled{6}$ and $\circled{1}$, respectively.
Extending our framework beyond LEGO would require new parsers to read CAD file formats, and new inference algorithms to derive the connectivity between parts.
\subsection{String Diagrams}
String diagrams are diagrams where resources are represented by strings (wires) and processes are represented by boxes. For example a process which snaps a peg into a hole is represented by
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[remember picture,font={\fontsize{9}{14.4}},container/.style={inner sep=0},every path/.style={solid, line width=0.4pt},decoration={markings, mark=at position 0.5 with {\arrow{Stealth}}},execute at begin node=$,execute at end node=$]
\node[container] (n) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[minimum height=4.5em] (n1) {};
\node[draw,solid,inner sep=0.333em,rectangle,rounded corners,minimum height=4.5em,right=2em of n1)] (n2) {\mathrm{snap}};
\draw[postaction={decorate}] ($(n1.center)+(0,1.25em)$) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {\mathrm{L1}} ($(n2.west)+(0,1.25em)$);
\draw[postaction={decorate}] ($(n1.center)+(0,-1.25em)$) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {\mathrm{L2}} ($(n2.west)+(0,-1.25em)$);
\node[minimum height=2.0em,right=2em of n2)] (n3) {};
\draw[postaction={decorate}] (n2.east) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {\mathrm{base}} (n3.center);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
String diagrams can be composed in sequence
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[remember picture,font={\fontsize{9}{14.4}},container/.style={inner sep=0},every path/.style={solid, line width=0.4pt},decoration={markings, mark=at position 0.5 with {\arrow{Stealth}}},execute at begin node=$,execute at end node=$]
\node[container] (n) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[minimum height=7.0em] (n1) {};
\node[container,right=2em of n1)] (n2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[draw,solid,inner sep=0.333em,rectangle,rounded corners,minimum height=4.5em] (n21) {\mathrm{snap}};
\node[minimum height=2.0em,below=0.5em of n21] (n22) {};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\draw[postaction={decorate}] ($(n1.center)+(0,2.5em)$) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {L1} ($(n21.west)+(0,1.25em)$);
\draw[postaction={decorate}] ($(n1.center)+(0,0.0em)$) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {L2} ($(n21.west)+(0,-1.25em)$);
\draw[postaction={decorate}] ($(n1.center)+(0,-2.5em)$) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {L3} (n22.center);
\node[draw,solid,inner sep=0.333em,rectangle,rounded corners,minimum height=4.5em,right=2em of n2)] (n3) {\mathrm{snap}};
\draw[postaction={decorate}] (n21.east) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {\mathrm{base}} ($(n3.west)+(0,1.25em)$);
\draw[postaction={decorate}] (n22.center) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {} ($(n3.west)+(0,-1.25em)$);
\node[minimum height=2.0em,right=2em of n3)] (n4) {};
\draw[postaction={decorate}] (n3.east) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {C} (n4.center);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
indicating that the processes must be performed in sequence. String diagrams can also be composed in parallel
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[remember picture,font={\fontsize{9}{14.4}},container/.style={inner sep=0},every path/.style={solid, line width=0.4pt},decoration={markings, mark=at position 0.5 with {\arrow{Stealth}}},execute at begin node=$,execute at end node=$]
\node[container] (n) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[minimum height=4.5em] (n1) {};
\node[container,right=2em of n1)] (n2) {
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[draw,solid,inner sep=0.333em,rectangle,rounded corners,minimum height=2.0em] (n21) {\mathrm{buildcolumn}};
\node[draw,solid,inner sep=0.333em,rectangle,rounded corners,minimum height=2.0em,below=0.5em of n21] (n22) {\mathrm{buildroof}};
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\draw[postaction={decorate}] ($(n1.center)+(0,1.25em)$) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {A1} (n21.west);
\draw[postaction={decorate}] ($(n1.center)+(0,-1.25em)$) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {A2} (n22.west);
\node[minimum height=4.5em,right=2em of n2)] (n3) {};
\draw[postaction={decorate}] (n21.east) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {B1} ($(n3.center)+(0,1.25em)$);
\draw[postaction={decorate}] (n22.east) to[out=0,in=180] node[above=0.25em,midway] {B2} ($(n3.center)+(0,-1.25em)$);
\end{tikzpicture}
};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
indicating that the order in which the tasks are performed does not matter. String diagrams also have algebraic expressions called morphisms. For example, the first example has a corresponding algebraic expression given by
\[ \mathrm{snap} \colon \mathrm{L1} \otimes \mathrm{L2} \to \mathrm{base} \]
Note that this expression is both functional and typed. This makes \textsc{CompositionalPlanning} an efficient and type-safe framework. In a similar way, the expressions which string diagrams represent can be composed in sequence and parallel using the two operations \begin{equation}
(f \colon x \to y, g \colon y \to z) \mapsto f \cdot g \colon x \to z
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} (f \colon x \to y, f' \colon x' \to y') \mapsto f \otimes f' \colon x \otimes x' \to y \otimes y' \end{equation}
Rather complicated expressions can be built using these operations, e.g., see the string diagrams in Figure \ref{fig:sequential_plans}. A natural question to ask is when two expressions correspond to the same string diagram. The answer to this question is essential to understanding how planning domain dependencies represented in string diagrams can be algebraically manipulated. It turns out that if the algebraic expressions satisfy the right set of axioms, then the way that a string diagram is drawn is independent of the expression it generates. A structure of algebraic expressions satisfying these axioms is a well-known structure in category theory called a symmetric monoidal category. In~\cite{jstreet} it is shown that string diagrams unambiguously represent morphisms in a given symmetric monoidal category. The following theorem ensures the soundness of string diagrams in the LEGO assembly domain.
\begin{theorem}
Let $G=(E,V)$ be a simple graph whose nodes $V$ represent pieces of a LEGO model and whose edges $E$ indicate a connection in the completed structure. Then, there is a symmetric monoidal category where:
\begin{itemize}
\item an object is finite tensor product $X_1 \otimes X_2 \ldots X_n$ of subsets of $V$ i.e. all possible tensors of subassemblies.
\item A morphism $f \colon X_1 \otimes X_2 \ldots \otimes X_n \to Y_1 \otimes Y_2 \ldots Y_n$ is a construction plan which turns the subassemblies $X_1 \otimes X_2 \ldots \otimes X_n $ into the subassemblies $Y_1 \otimes Y_2 \ldots \otimes Y_n$ using only the joins allowed by the edges of $G$.
\item The composite $g \cdot f$ represents the construction plan where $f$ and $g$ are performed in sequence.
\item The tensor product $g \otimes f$ represents the construction plan where $f$ and $g$ are performed in parallel.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Symmetric monoidal categories can be freely generated from the data of a Petri net. In ``On the Category of Petri Net Computations", Sassone showed that for a Petri net $P$, there is a strict symmetric monoidal category $\mathcal{Q}[P]$ whose objects are finite strings of places in your Petri net and whose morphisms correspond to \emph{strongly concatenable processes} \cite{SassoneStrong}. These are sequences of events which can occur using the transitions of your Petri net in sequence and in parallel.
Recall that a Petri net is a tuple $(T,P,s,t)$ where
\begin{itemize}
\item $T$ is a finite set of events which can occur,
\item $P$ is a finite set of available resources,
\item $s \colon T \to P^{\oplus}$ is a function from events to multisets of resources indicating which resources are required for each event and,
\item $t \colon T \to P^{\oplus}$ is a function from events to multisets of resources indicating which resources are produced by each event.
\end{itemize}
To construct the desired symmetric monoidal category, we set $T$ equal to $\mathcal{P}(E)$, the set of subets of edges in $G$ and set $P$ equal to $\mathcal{P}(V)$ the set of subsets of nodes in $G$ i.e. all possible sub-assemblies of the LEGO model. Define $s \colon \mathcal{P} (E) \to \mathcal{P}(V)^{\oplus}$
by the rule
\[\{(x_1,y_1), (x_2,y_2), \ldots (x_n,y_n) \} \mapsto \{x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n\} + \{y_1,y_2,\ldots,y_n\}. \]
where $+$ indicates the occurrence of both subsets in the multiset $\mathcal{P}(V)^{\oplus}$. Define $t \colon \mathcal{P} (E) \to \mathcal{P}(V)^{\oplus}$ by the rule
\[\{(x_1,y_1), (x_2,y_2), \ldots (x_n,y_n) \} \mapsto \{x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n\} \cup \{y_1,y_2,\ldots,y_n\}. \]
The symmetric monoidal category in the theorem statement is obtained by taking the category of strongly concatenable processes on this Petri net.
\end{proof}
The next section describes how the string diagrams of these symmetric monoidal categories can be leveraged to produce construction plans.
\subsection{Planning}\label{sec:plans}
A LEGO CAD model and its connectivity graph describe an object in its final, assembled state, but not how to assemble it. A \textit{plan} consists of step-by-step instructions on how to assemble the atomic parts (LEGO bricks) into the desired object. In general, there are many possible plans for assembling the same object, corresponding to different ways of forming intermediate sub-assemblies.
For us, plans are string diagrams. In such a diagram, the strings represent sub-assemblies and the boxes represent operations of joining together sub-assemblies to make a larger sub-assembly. Formally, a sub-assembly is a subset of the atomic parts, interpreted as being assembled. Each join operation takes two disjoint sub-assemblies $A$ and $B$ as inputs and produces a single output, the union $A \cup B$. A plan is a string diagram that takes all the singleton sets (sub-assemblies consisting of a single part) as inputs and produces as output the set of all parts (full assembly). Although every plan is valid at this level of description, not every plan will be physically feasible.
As proof of concept, we implemented two simple algorithms for assembly planning. In the \textit{sequential algorithm}, we topologically order the edges of the connectivity graph. That is, we first topologically order the nodes, where a topological ordering is any total ordering consistent with the directed edges. Then we lexicographically order the edges, viewed as ordered pairs of nodes. For each edge, taken in this order, we join the two sub-assemblies containing the source and target, if they are distinct; otherwise, we do nothing. We continue in this way until all the edges have been exhausted, at which point the object is fully assembled. When the connectivity graph is a path graph, the sequential plan is the obvious plan that joins the parts together one-at-a-time.
In the \textit{parallel algorithm}, we create more opportunities for parallelism by partitioning the connectivity graph into components, making plans on each component, and then treating these plans as black boxes in a higher-level plan. This meta-algorithm has several knobs to tune, and it can be applied recursively. To partition the graph, we can apply any community detection algorithm that finds non-overlapping communities. In our experiments, we use the Girvan-Newman algorithm \cite{girvan2002} and a variant of the Louvain method \cite{blondel2008}, the Leiden algorithm \cite{traag2019}. We perform only one level of partitioning and we do sequential planning within each partition and also to assemble the resulting sub-plans. The use of community detection to find opportunities for parallelism is a heuristic, but works well in our experiments.
\subsection{Scheduling}
A plan, in the form of a string diagram, says what steps to perform and how the steps depend on each other. A \textit{schedule} extends the information in a plan by assigning the steps a definite order; formally, a schedule is any linear extension of the topological ordering of the operations (boxes) in the plan. For simplicity, we take a resource-agnostic view of scheduling, in which the number of workers is unknown at the time of planning and scheduling. The aim in scheduling is therefore to maximize the opportunities for parallelism, given the constraints imposed by the plan \cite{rosenberg2016}.
Our scheduling algorithms have two major phases. First, we create a syntactic expression representing the plan. In general, a single string diagram can be represented by many different expressions; we construct one of them. We then linearize the expression, using a simple recursive algorithm, to obtain a schedule.
A small example will illustrate the relationship between string diagrams and syntactic expressions. Consider the string diagram shown in Figure~\ref{fig:fghk}, the composite of $f$ and $g$ in parallel with composite of $h$ and $k$. We can represent this diagram by either of the expressions $(f \cdot g) \otimes (h \cdot k)$ (read ``$f$ then $g$, and $h$ then $k$'') and $(f \otimes h) \cdot (g \otimes k)$ (read ``$f$ and $h$, then $g$ and $k$'').
\vspace{-0.2in}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\center{\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{fghk.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:fghk} Relationship between string diagrams and syntactic expressions}}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.2in}
We have developed an algorithm to find an expression for any string diagram representing a morphism in a symmetric monoidal category. As the algorithm is fairly elaborate, we will not digress to present it carefully, except to say that it is inspired by existing algorithms that recognize in a DAG, or reduce a DAG to, a series-parallel digraph \cite{valdes1982,mitchell2004}.
The second phase of scheduling is more straightforward. Having formed an expression for the plan, we schedule the plan by recursively linearizing the expression tree. Given a composition $f \cdot g$ , we simply concatenate the schedules for $f$ and $g$. Given a product $f \otimes g$, we \textit{interleave} the schedules for $f$ and $g$, meaning that we take the first element of the $f$-schedule, then the first element of the $g$-schedule, then the second element of the $f$-schedule, and so on, until the both schedules have been exhausted. For example, both of the above expressions $(f \cdot g) \otimes (h \cdot k)$ and $(f \otimes h) \cdot (g \otimes k)$ yield the same schedule $(f,h,g,k)$. Note that the ordering of the monoidal products affects the schedule, so that $f \otimes g$ yields a different schedule than $g \otimes f$. This procedure can be seen as a special case of an existing algorithm for optimally scheduling series-parallel digraphs \cite{cordasco2014}.
\subsection{Simulation}
Minecraft is an immensely popular 3D open-world video game where players can build their own structures~\cite{Duncan}. The game world and most of its elements are made of different kinds of blocks. These blocks can be used to create structures of any complexity. This versatility makes Minecraft a good fit to represent the CAD model and to simulate their assembly process. It has already proven to be a well-suited simulation tool in other robotics domains~\cite{aluru2015minecraft}. To execute the schedule generated by our framework we extended Minecraft by a new mod. With this ``mod'' we can simulate the whole assembly process of the CAD model described by the schedule. The simulation not only provides us with a comprehensible visual representation of the process, but also allows us to quantify execution time and worker occupancy of different schedules.
Our open source Minecraft ``mod'' executes the assembly operations in the correct order as dictated by the generated schedule. The geometric CAD information is encoded in the connectivity diagram and it is parsed by our mod. Each LEGO brick is represented by a single or multiple Minecraft blocks. The schedule and the operations specified in it determine which and how many bricks can be connected to each other per step. In addition to the precedence constraints encoded in the schedule, we can define a number of \textit{workers}. Each worker is allowed to perform a single operation per step. Operations are dispatched to workers in the order they appear in the schedule. Only operations for which a worker is available can be executed. Hence, the level of parallelism of the schedule and the number of workers determine the time it takes to complete the assembly. Disjoint sub-assemblies are assembled in their own area respectively until they are connected to each other forming a new (sub-)assembly. The assembly process is finished when all of the schedule’s operations have been completed by the available workers.
\section{Results}
To validate the \textsc{CompositionalPlanning}'s pipeline we designed the two LEGO CAD models shown in Figure~\ref{fig:cad_models}(a-b). The design objective was to have two LEGO models of around 100 bricks each with a rich set of features and a few human-intuitive sub-assemblies to validate our approach. The Columns model (Figure~\ref{fig:cad_models}(a)) is inspired by roman temples and consists of 77 bricks. This model consists of four column sub-assemblies, each composed of 12 vertically stacked 2$\times$2 bricks each. The roof sub-assembly consists of two pairs of support beams, each arranged in a stair configuration supporting a flat roof. The House model (Figure~\ref{fig:cad_models}(b)) consists of 86 bricks. The house foundation sub-assembly consists of eight 4$\times$10 green bricks and supports the house sub-assembly and an electric pole. The house sub-assembly consists of four non-identical walls. We designed each wall using different compositions of bricks (i.e., 1$\times$1, 1$\times$8, 1$\times$10, 1$\times$2$\times$2, etc.) that result in different connectivity features as highlighted by the different shades of brown. The front wall has a square window and a door. The two side walls have two windows each while the back wall is solid. The four walls support a two layer roof. The pole sub-assembly consists of eleven 1$\times$1 bricks, and one 1$\times$6 brick on top.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\center{\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{cad_models.pdf}}
\caption{\label{fig:cad_models}LEGO CAD models and their inferred connectivity diagrams.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Connectivity Diagrams}
The generated connectivity diagrams for the two CAD models are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:cad_models}(c-d). The Columns model was designed with regularity and symmetry in mind. These features are explicit in its connectivity diagram in Figure~\ref{fig:cad_models}(c) with the four long strands representing the columns, and the dense layer on top representing the roof. On the other hand, the House model was designed with asymmetry and irregularity in mind. These features are clearly visible in its connectivity diagram in Figure~\ref{fig:cad_models}(d). In the House connectivity diagram, the walls are irregular and asymmetric with gaps representing the windows and the door. The pole is represented by the long strand.
Typically, LEGO models come with assembly instructions, or \textit{build instructions}~\cite{legomanuals}. These instructions are, most likely, made for human enjoyment and therefore must be intuitive. One natural way to organize these instructions is by sub-assemblies such that humans can relate to the structure they are constructing (e.g., a house). In some cases, these sub-assemblies are obvious. For example, the column and roof sub-assemblies in the Columns connectivity diagram (Fig.~\ref{fig:cad_models}(c)) are easily distinguishable and therefore can be decomposed into a reasonable build plan. However, there are other cases when these sub-assemblies are not obvious. For example, decomposing the interlinked wall sub-assembly in the House model (Fig.~\ref{fig:cad_models}(d)) into a reasonable plan is not trivial. For both examples, our plan generation pipeline on string diagrams can be used to generate sequential and highly parallel assembly plans.
\subsection{Plan Generation}
In this paper, the quality of an assembly plan is determined in terms of how many operations can be executed in parallel, rather than on maximizing human enjoyment. For each LEGO CAD model, we generate two schedules. A sequential schedule is generated by topologically sorting the connectivity diagram, and a parallel schedule is generated with the algorithms introduced in Section~\ref{sec:plans}. Figure~\ref{fig:sequential_plans} shows the sequential schedules generated for the Columns and the House models.
The column symmetry in the Columns model allows the sequential schedule to expose some parallelism as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sequential_plans}(a). If several workers are available, this natural parallelism can be exploited to reduce the time-to-build. The sequential schedule for the House model, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sequential_plans}(b), exposes very little parallelism due to the asymmetry and irregularity in the model. These two examples help us illustrate the inherent limitations of sequential schedules.
\vspace{-0.2in}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\center{\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{plans.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:sequential_plans}Sequential plans generated for the two LEGO CAD models.}}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.2in}
Using the parallel plan generation algorithms described in Section~\ref{sec:plans}, our framework exposes higher levels of parallelism as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:parallel_plans}. Here, the black boxes corresponding to a partitioning of the connectivity diagram are shown by the labeled black boxes. The number in each black box represents the number of bricks within the black box sub-plan. The execution schedules are derived from these parallel plans. Even in the case of a purely sequential plan of the black boxes (represented by the width of the black boxes), it can be observed that the amount of parallelism is higher compared to the sequential schedules in Figure~\ref{fig:sequential_plans}. In particular, the House model's parallel plan in Figure~\ref{fig:parallel_plans}(b) exposes much higher parallelism when compared to the its sequential plan in Figure~\ref{fig:sequential_plans}(b) consisting of a stairs configuration with minimum parallelism.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\center{\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{parallel_plans.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:parallel_plans}Parallel plans generated for the two LEGO CAD models. The width of the black boxes represent a sub-plan (i.e., a stairs configuration).}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Simulated Schedule Execution}
The schedule and the number of workers determines how many operations can be executed in parallel. This parallelism can be visualized in the simulation when multiple sub-assemblies are constructed at the same time. Figure \ref{fig:assembly_process} shows a time-lapse of the parallel assembly process for the Columns and House models with an unlimited number of workers. The top row shows the assembly process at an early stage after a few blocks were already added. Note the parallel construction areas of the assemblies highlighted by the red squares. Furthermore, the main construction area where pieces and sub-assemblies will eventually be connected to each other can be recognized. Sub-assemblies that are connected to the ground are not constructed in separate construction areas but at their final position in the main construction area. This prevents excessive shifting of assemblies. While all the sub-assemblies are easily distinguishable for the Columns model, the House's main construction area already consists of three sub-assemblies which can be recognized by the three separate walls on top of the House's base. These construction areas are based on the black boxes of the plans and their representation in the corresponding schedule. The (sub-)schedule for a black box may contain some level of parallelism like the Columns model. Besides the parallel assembly of the columns the derived schedule allows for a parallel assembly of the roof in three separate construction areas. The middle row shows the half completed assemblies. The structures are more advanced, and some sub-assemblies have already been connected to other assemblies. The bottom row shows the fully assembled Columns and House LEGO models.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\center{\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{assembly_process.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:assembly_process}Time-lapse of the execution of parallel plans. Black box sub-assemblies are built simultaneously on different construction areas highlighted by the red squares.}}
\end{figure}
To assess the quality of the generated plans we simulate the assembly process for the sequential and the parallel schedules for both models. The simulation is run with a varying number of workers – 1, 2, 4, 8 and 16. For each configuration we measured the total number of steps it takes to build the assembly and the average occupancy ratio of the workers. Table \ref{tab:resultData} summarizes the results. Our baselines are simulations run with a single worker. While pieces can be snapped to the ground or to an already existing assembly, two single pieces can also be combined to a new sub-assembly. In the latter case we must first connect a LEGO brick to the ground and this occupies a worker for a time step. For this reason, the time-to-built for the parallel schedule with a single worker is higher than the one for the sequential schedule.
Unsurprisingly, the parallel schedule with more than one worker always requires fewer steps to complete the assembly while maintaining a higher occupancy rate than its sequential counterpart. The performance difference between the sequential and parallel schedules for the Columns model is rather small because of its architecture. Its sequential plan (Figure~\ref{fig:sequential_plans}(a)) already exposes some parallelism. However, our parallel schedule is able to exploit additional opportunities and provides slightly better performance over the sequential schedule.
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\caption{Execution time and worker occupancy for different schedules with varying number of workers.}
\begin{tabular}{@{\extracolsep{4pt}}lp{1.2cm}llll}
\toprule
{} & {} & \multicolumn{2}{l}{Columns model}& \multicolumn{2}{l}{House model} \\
{Schedule} & {Workers} & Steps & Occupancy & Steps & Occupancy\\
\midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\makecell[l]{Sequential}}
& 1 & 92 & 1.00 & 93 & 1.00 \\
& 2 & 50 & 0.92 & 75 & 0.62 \\
& 4 & 33 & 0.70 & 69 & 0.34 \\
& 8 & 25 & 0.46 & 65 & 0.18 \\
& 16 & 23 & 0.25 & 65 & 0.09\\
\midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{\makecell[l]{Parallel}}
& 1 & 95 & 1.00 & 98 & 1.00 \\
& 2 & 50 & 0.95 & 55 & 0.89 \\
& 4 & 30 & 0.79 & 36 & 0.68 \\
& 8 & 19 & 0.63 & 26 & 0.47 \\
& 16 & 17 & 0.35 & 21 & 0.29\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:resultData}
\end{table}
For the House model on the other hand, the parallel schedule yields significantly faster assembly times with an increasing number of workers; up to 3 times with 16 workers. Additionally, the workers are used to a higher capacity and the occupancy ratio deteriorates at a slower rate as the number of workers increases. This model shows that our algorithms are able to identify and exploit non-obvious parallelism in less regular and symmetric models.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
In this paper, we studied the use of string diagrams for assembly planning and developed a framework to demonstrate this approach in the LEGO domain. This new perspective gives us multiple advantages. First, it provides us with a powerful graphical calculus for reasoning about the assembly planning domain in category theory. Second, this formalism allows string diagrams to be easily manipulated within a programming framework to generate plans and schedules. This allows us to seamlessly interconnect the different disciplines involved in assembly planning. Third, with a novel hierarchical planning approach using black boxes, we demonstrated that the resulting plans expose high-degrees of parallelism that result in efficient assembly. Our \textsc{CompositionalPlanning} framework has several limitations that prescribe future research. (i) As a proof of concept, we focused on the most popular LEGO assembly operations. Since our framework is domain agnostic, extending to other domains is an important direction for future work. (ii) We implemented three planning and one scheduling algorithm. Implementing other algorithms will help us validate the full potential of string diagrams for assembly planning. (iii) The planning algorithms yield different string diagrams. Developing new algorithms to \textit{morph} a string diagram to another with different properties (e.g., more parallelism) is a challenging but very interesting research direction.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
Topology optimization (TO) via level set (LS) methods typically relies on shape sensitivities along material interfaces to evolve the design. Considering material-void problems, holes cannot nucleate, only merge, split or disappear.
To facilitate topological changes in the optimization process, either the initial design domain is seeded with an array of holes or holes are introduced at distinct stages of the optimization process.
In this paper, two alternative hole seeding approaches that nucleate holes during the design process are proposed.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{figs/holesArrangementDependency}
\caption{Stages of the optimization process for a 2D Beam LS TO problem that minimizes the strain energy ($\Psi$) using different initial holes seeding patterns.}
\label{fig:holesArrangementDependency}
\end{figure*}
In absence of any additional mechanism that introduces holes in the course of the optimization process, appropriate initial hole seeding is critical to avoid suboptimal designs (\cite{van2013level}).
In cases where the geometry and the associated mechanical properties of a particular hole pattern violate design constraints (e.g., mass, stress, stiffness), often the majority of holes merge in the early stages of the evolution of the design.
Premature hole merging can restrict the final design to simplistic geometries and, in certain cases, trigger the appearance of large disconnected subdomains.
The latter can result in ill-posed problems and may compromise the stability of the TO process.
Even small variations in seeding parameters (i.e., number, size, shape or arrangement of holes) can degenerate the evolution of the design and severely affect its performance (\cite{wang2007hole}).
An example of this scenario is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:holesArrangementDependency} for a strain energy minimization problem subject to a mass constraint (\cite{bendsoe2004topology}).
Stages of the design process with different initial seeding patterns are shown to demonstrate that early merging of holes (bottom row) can result in final designs with poor performance ($>400\%$ difference).
In some cases, the shortcomings mentioned above can be mitigated by using a ``large enough" number of holes as an initial guess, see \cite{villanueva2014density}.
Excessive hole seeding, however, requires a fine mesh and a considerable number of design iterations to substantially change the shape of the initial hole pattern and alter conceptually the geometry.
Furthermore, overseeding may produce more refined features without necessarily converging to one specific final design nor impacting performance significantly.
This case is displayed in Fig. \ref{fig:numHolesDependency} where, despite noticeable differences in the final designs, similar performances are achieved for initial designs using 12, 24, 48, and 96 holes.
\begin{figure}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/numHolesDependency}
\caption{Initial designs with different number of holes seeded (left) and their corresponding final designs (right) for a 2D beam strain energy ($\Psi$) minimization problem.}
\label{fig:numHolesDependency}
\end{figure}
The aforementioned issues have motivated LS approaches capable of nucleating holes. These methods not only circumvent the computational burden present when using a large number of initial holes, but they also eliminate the difficulty of finding a suitable initial seeding pattern.
Originated from the bubble method (\cite{eschenauer1994bubble}), topological derivatives can be used to seed new holes during the optimization process (\cite{allaire2005structural,burger2004incorporating,wang2004incorporating,norato2007topological,andreasen2019CutFem}). These derivatives evaluate the influence of introducing infinitesimal holes at any point in the design domain during the optimization problem.
Typically, finite size holes are inserted at locations of minimal topological derivative at distinct steps in the optimization process.
Strategies based on topological sensitivity formulations that nucleate holes in regions of low strain energy and stress, among others, have been proposed (\cite{sethian2000structural,belytschko2003topology,sokolowski1999topological,park2008topology}.
However, regardless of the underlying formulation, using topological derivatives as a guide for hole nucleation introduces user-defined parameters that control the number, frequency, and shape of the seeded holes.
This can lead to adding arbirtrarily-shaped holes either excessively or scarcely and, as a result, compromise efficiency, robustness and performance (\cite{allaire2004structural}).
A systematic procedure for deciding if and when nucleating a hole is currently lacking.
Alternative hole seeding mechanisms that use topological derivatives in a non-classical sense, as well as schemes that do not rely on these derivatives, have also been developed.
For example, a topological derivative field can be used to directly extract a geometry if interpreted as a level set field (LSF).
In \cite{suresh2010199,suresh2013efficient,suresh2013stress,deng2015multi,deng2016multi}, holes are nucleated by redefining the isocontour that separates the material from the void subdomains.
If an implicit LS TO framework is used, the solution of the Hamilton-Jacobi equation can be approximated to allow for the nucleation of holes, as demonstrated by \cite{wang2007extended}.
Alternatively, as shown by \cite{dunning2013new}, a second LSF can be used to construct a pseudo third dimension to nucleate holes in 2D problems.
The class of approaches explored in this paper uses density methods (\cite{bendsoe2004topology}) to nucleate holes in an informed manner.
Since these methods can start from an unbiased design (i.e., homogeneous density distribution) and quickly generate the conceptual layout of an optimal design (\cite{sigmund2013topology}), shortcomings associated with initial hole seeding are avoided.
In these approaches, regions of low density indicate that material is no longer needed and can be used to nucleate holes. Furthermore, sensitivities in the entire design domain characteristic of density-based TO are computed in addition to the shape sensitivities of the LS TO problem, achieving an improved efficiency compared to classical LS TO approaches.
Early attempts to use density methods to advance a well-defined material interface can be found in the context of (concurrent) shape and topology optimization methods. In \cite{kumar1996synthesis}, a ``shape density" field was used to remove parts of the design domain for which densities were under a prescribed threshold.
\cite{maute1995adaptive,bletzinger1997towards} extensively explored sequentially alternating between shape and topology optimization using separate design and analysis meshes. In their work, post-processed densities define the material interface, which is described by splines (see also \cite{maute1997adaptive,maute1998adaptive}). Smoothing algorithms to realize a crisp material interface from intermediate densities, however, introduces inaccuracies in the description of the geometry.
More recently, density-based and LS-based TO methods have been combined for purposes other than hole nucleation. In \cite{kang2013integrated}, a classical solid isotropic material with penalization (SIMP) approach is used for material interpolation while a LS approach excludes void domains from the TO process. However, the LSF remains fixed during the design process.
In an explicit LS TO setting developed by \cite{jansen2019explicit}, feature size control is achieved via geometric constraints on a density field.
The combined LS-density approach in \cite{geiss2018topology,geiss2019combined} couples the LS and density fields to optimize the material distribution within the solid phase. However, the density field is not used for hole nucleation.
In this paper, two LS TO approaches that nucleate holes informed by a density field are proposed.
The goal of these two approaches is to seed holes continuously in the optimization process. The location, shape and size of the holes evolve for the specific optimization problem at hand.
In the first approach, a single abstract design variable field governs both the LS and density variables.
In the second approach, two independent design variable fields are introduced to define the LS and density fields, respectively.
The LSF is one-way coupled with the density field.
Although feature size control based on the density field could be achieved, as demonstrated in \cite{geiss2019level,Barrera2019}, this paper focuses on hole nucleation only.
Note that, similar to the topological derivatives field approach developed by \cite{suresh2010199,suresh2013efficient,suresh2013stress,deng2015multi,deng2016multi}, here an isocontour of a field indicates where a hole needs to be created.
However, among other differences, in this paper this indicator density field evolves during the optimization process.
In the material-void problems considered in this stu{\-}dy, a LSF is used to distinguish between phases through crisp, well-defined interfaces.
This LSF is parametrized by an explicit LS method (\cite{van2013level,sigmund2013topology}).
In addition, the density field interpolates the material properties within the material phase using the SIMP scheme (\cite{bendsoe2004topology}).
The weak form of the governing equations are discretized by the extended finite element method (XFEM, \cite{belytschko2009review}).
Both approaches are studied for linear elastic problems in 2D and 3D, and considering different optimization formulations.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section \ref{sec:LSTO} presents the basic components of the LS TO framework employed. Section \ref{sec:HoleNucleationSchemes} explains the two coupling schemes adopted. Section \ref{sec:XFEMFramework} summarizes the discretization/analysis method and describes the general optimization problem formulation. Numerical examples are provided in Section \ref{sec:NumEx}; and Section \ref{sec:Concl} concludes this paper with directions for future work.
\section{Level Set-based Topology Optimization} \label{sec:LSTO}
\subsection{Geometry description} \label{subsec:geomDesc}
The material layout composed of two phases in a design domain, $\Omega_D$, is described by the LSF:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LSDescription}
\begin{aligned}
\phi(\boldsymbol X)
\begin{cases}
> 0, ~~~~~& \forall~\boldsymbol X \in \Omega_I, \\
< 0, ~~~~~& \forall~\boldsymbol X \in \Omega_{II}, \\
= 0, ~~~~~& \forall~\boldsymbol X \in \Gamma_{I,II},
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_I$ and $\Omega_{II}$ are the material domains of phases $I$ and $II$, respectively, such that $\Omega_D = \Omega_I \cup \Omega_{II}$. The interface, denoted by $\Gamma_{I,II}$, corresponds to the zero LS isocontour, $\phi(\mathbf{X}) = 0$. The problems studied in this work consider solid-void domains where solid is assigned to phase I and void to phase II.
The LSF, bounded between lower, $\phi_{low}$, and upper, $\phi_{up}$, bounds, is a function of a filtered LS design variables field, $\mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi} (\mathbf{X})$, introduced below.
\subsection{LS design variables} \label{subsec:LsDesVars}
In the LS TO framework employed here, the geometry of the solid-void interface is defined by a vector of LS optimization variables,
${\boldsymbol s}^\phi := \{ {\boldsymbol s}^\phi \in \rm I\!R^{N_s} |~ \phi_{low} \leq {s}^\phi_i \leq \phi_{up}, i=1,...,N_s \}$.
Here, an LS optimization variable is assigned to each node of a structured mesh, and $N_s$ represents the number of nodes in such mesh.
To increase numerical stability and enhance convergence of the optimization problem, the linear filter presented in \cite{kreissl2012levelset} is applied to ${\boldsymbol{s}}^\phi$ to obtain a vector of filtered LS coefficients,
$\boldsymbol{\hat{s}}^\phi := \{ \boldsymbol{\hat{s}}^\phi \in \rm I\!R^{N_s} |~\phi_{low} \leq \hat{s}^\phi_i \leq \phi_{up}, i=1,...,N_s \}$.
In this distance-based filter, a filtered LS coefficient, $\hat{s}^\phi_i$, at node $i$, is defined as a function of its neighboring LS optimization variables, ${s}^\phi_j$, at nodes $j$, using the following expression:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LSlinearFilter}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{s}^\phi_i
= \frac
{
\displaystyle\sum_{j=1}^{N_{rf}} w_{ij} {s}_j^\phi
}{
\displaystyle\sum_{j=1}^{N_{rf}} w_{ij}
},
~
w_{ij} = \max(0,r_f-|\mathbf{X}_i-\mathbf{X}_j|).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The number of nodes within the filter radius, $r_f$ is denoted by $N_{rf}$; and $|\mathbf{X}_i-\mathbf{X}_j|$ is the Euclidean distance between nodes i and j.
The filtered LS coefficients, $\boldsymbol{\hat{s}}^\phi$, are used to parametrize the LS design variable field, $\mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi} ( \mathbf{X})$, following the expression:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:discrLsField}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi} ( \mathbf{X})
=
\displaystyle\sum_{i=1}^{N^e} \mathcal{N}_i ( \mathbf{X}) ~ \hat{s}_i^\phi,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where
$\mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi} ( \mathbf{X}):=\{ \mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi} ( \mathbf{X}) \in H^1(\Omega_D) |~ \phi_{low} \leq a^\phi \leq \phi_{up}: a^\phi \in \mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi} ( \mathbf{X}) \}$,
with the Sobolev space denoted by $H^1$.
The field is interpolated by bi-linear and tri-linear shape functions, $\mathcal{N}( \mathbf{X})$, on quadrilateral and hexahedral meshes in 2D and 3D, respectively.
The LSF, $\phi (\mathbf{X})$, is defined as a function of the design variable field, $\mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi} ( \mathbf{X})$, as formulated in Section \ref{sec:HoleNucleationSchemes} separately for each of the hole seeding approaches considered in this paper.
Unlike implicit approaches where a Hamilton-Jacobi-type equation needs to be solved, the LSF is defined as an explicit function of the LS design variables, ${\boldsymbol s}^\phi$.
This provides the advantage of solving the optimization problem via a mathematical programming technique.
The reader is referred to \cite{sigmund2013topology} and \cite{van2013level} for more details.
\subsection{LS regularization} \label{subsec:LsReg}
To avoid spurious oscillations in the LSF, the regularization scheme of \cite{geiss2019regularization} is adopted. This approach promotes a uniform spatial gradient of the LSF near the solid-void interface while converging to either a positive or negative target value away from the interface.
A truncated signed distance field used as target field, $\tilde\phi$, is constructed via the heat method (\cite{crane2017heat}). This entails solving two linear finite element problems (i.e., a heat conduction problem and a Poisson's problem) on the entire design domain.
The target field is enforced through a penalty in the objective, $P_{Reg}$, of the following form:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LsRegEq}
\begin{aligned}
P_{Reg} =
w_{\phi} \frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_D} (\phi-\tilde\phi)^2 dV}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_D} \tilde\phi_{Bnd}^2 dV} +
w_{\nabla\phi} \frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_D} | \nabla \phi- \nabla\tilde\phi|^2 dV}{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_D} dV},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde\phi_{Bnd}$ is the difference between the upper, $\tilde\phi_{up}$, and lower, $\tilde\phi_{low}$, bounds in the target LSF.
In \cite{geiss2019regularization}, the weights $w_{\phi}$ and $w_{\nabla\phi}$ were kept constant in the entire design domain. In the current work, to balance the influence of the regularization components in the vicinity and away from the material interface, these weights are defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LsRegWeights}
\begin{aligned}
& w_{\phi} =
w_{\phi_1} \alpha + w_{\phi_2} (1-\alpha), \\
& w_{\nabla\phi} =
w_{\nabla\phi_1} \alpha + w_{\nabla\phi_2}(1-\alpha).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The weights $w_{\phi_1},w_{\phi_2}$ control the mismatch between design and target LSF near and far from the material interface, respectively. The weights $w_{\nabla\phi_1},w_{\nabla\phi_2}$ do the same for the LS spatial gradient component in Eq. \ref{eq:LsRegEq}. The parameter $\alpha$, defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:alphaLsReg}
\begin{aligned}
\alpha(\tilde\phi) &=
e^{-\gamma_{P_{Reg}} (\tilde\phi/\phi_{Bnd})^2},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
controls the region of influence of the regularization through $\gamma_{\phi Reg}$, as seen in Fig. \ref{fig:LsRegAlphaParam}.
Larger $\gamma_{\phi Reg}$ values decrease $\alpha$ and thus, the weight of the regularization in the vicinity of the interface.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/LsRegAlphaParam}
\caption{LS regularization penalty as function of the $\alpha$ parameter in the vicinity of the interface $\Gamma_{I,II}$ for a mesh with element length $h$.}
\label{fig:LsRegAlphaParam}
\end{figure}
\section{Hole Nucleation via Density Methods} \label{sec:HoleNucleationSchemes}
Density methods start typically from an unbiased, i.e., homogeneous, density distribution and quickly converge to the conceptual layout of the optimized design. This attractive feature is used here to instruct the LS optimization problem to remove material where it is not needed.
To this end, we introduce a nodal fictitious density field, $\rho(\mathbf{X})$ bounded between 0 and 1 in the LS TO problem to nucleate holes in a mechanically-informed manner.
Following the same scheme presented in the previous section for the LSF, $\rho(\mathbf{X})$ is defined as an explicit function of a filtered density design variables field,
$\mathcal{\hat{S}^\rho} ( \mathbf{X}):=\{ \mathcal{\hat{S}^\rho} ( \mathbf{X}) \in H^1(\Omega_D) |~ 0 \leq a^\rho \leq 1: a^\rho \in \mathcal{\hat{S}^\rho} ( \mathbf{X}) \}$;
i.e., $\rho(\mathbf{X}):= \rho ( \mathcal{\hat{S}}^\rho(\mathbf{X}) )$.
The field $\mathcal{\hat{S}}^\rho(\mathbf{X})$ is discretized using Eq. \ref{eq:discrLsField} and a vector of filtered density coefficients,
${\boldsymbol{\hat{s}}}^\rho := \{ {\boldsymbol{\hat{s}}}^\rho \in \rm I\!R^{N_s} |~ 0 \leq \hat{s}^\rho_i \leq 1, i=1,...,{N_s} \}$.
Similarly, the linear filter in Eq. \ref{eq:LSlinearFilter} is employed to define $\boldsymbol{\hat{s}}^\rho$ in terms of a vector of nodal density optimization variables,
${\boldsymbol s}^\rho := \{ {\boldsymbol s}^\rho \in \rm I\!R^{N_s} |~ 0 \leq {s}^\rho_i \leq 1, i=1,...,{N_s} \}$.
In this section we present two approaches to couple the LS and density design variables.
In both cases, the couplings of the LS and density fields are constructed to achieve that (i) a positive LSF is associated with high densities to represent material, i.e., $\rho(\mathbf{X}) \rightarrow 1 \implies \phi(\mathbf{X}) > 0$; and (ii) a negative LSF is linked to densities close to zero to identify void, i.e., $\rho(\mathbf{X}) \rightarrow 0 \implies \phi(\mathbf{X}) < 0$.
In the first approach, both the LS and density fields, $\phi(\mathbf{X})$ and $\rho(\mathbf{X})$, are both functions of a single set of optimization variables; i.e., ${\boldsymbol s}^\phi={\boldsymbol s}^\rho$. We identify this approach as Single-Field Coupling (SFC).
The second approach interpolates $\phi(\mathbf{X})$ and $\rho(\mathbf{X})$ using two independent sets of optimization variables. This approach is termed Two-Field Coupling (TFC).
\subsection{Single-field coupling strategy} \label{subsec:SingleFieldCoupling}
In the first proposed, we assume a single vector of ${N_s}$ abstract design variables, $\boldsymbol{s}=\boldsymbol{s^\phi}=\boldsymbol{s^\rho}$, to compute the vectors of filtered coefficients, $\boldsymbol{\hat{s}}=\boldsymbol{\hat{s}^\phi}=\boldsymbol{\hat{s}^\rho}$, using Eq. \ref{eq:LSlinearFilter}, and interpolate $\mathcal{\hat{S}}(\mathbf{X}) =\mathcal{\hat{S}^\phi}(\mathbf{X}) = \mathcal{\hat{S}^\rho}(\mathbf{X})$ using Eq. \ref{eq:discrLsField}.
Here, the LSF is defined by the following linear relation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SFC_AdvToLsVars}
\begin{aligned}
\phi(\mathbf{X})= \phi_{rt} (\phi_{sh} - \mathcal{\hat{S}}(\mathbf{X})).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Similarly, the density field is obtained by using:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SFC_AdvToDensVars}
\begin{aligned}
\rho(\mathbf{X}) =
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle\frac{\mathcal{\hat{S}}(\mathbf{X}) -\phi_{sh}}{1-\phi_{sh}}, & \forall~\mathbf{X}:\phi(\mathbf{X})\geq 0, \\
not~defined, & \forall~\mathbf{X}:\phi(\mathbf{X})<0.
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In both Eqs. \ref{eq:SFC_AdvToLsVars} and \ref{eq:SFC_AdvToDensVars}, $\phi_{sh}$ is a threshold that alters the LS value used to differentiate between solid and void. In this work, $\phi_{sh}$ is kept constant, i.e., $\phi_{sh} = 0.5$.
The scaling parameter $\phi_{rt}$ in Eq. \ref{eq:SFC_AdvToLsVars} takes into account the mesh size, and is set to $\phi_{rt}\approx [3h, 5h]$, where $h$ is the element length.
The density field described by Eq. \ref{eq:SFC_AdvToDensVars} is only defined in the material subdomain, $\Omega_{I}$.
\subsection{Two-field coupling strategy} \label{subsec:TwoFieldCoupling}
The second coupling strategy uses two sets of independent LS and density optimization variables, $\boldsymbol{s^\phi}$ and $\boldsymbol{s^\rho}$.
Consequently, the optimization process in this case operates on $2N_s$ optimization variables; i.e.,
$\boldsymbol{s}=[\boldsymbol{s^\phi}, \boldsymbol{s^\rho}]$.
Here, the LS and density fields are assumed to be identical to the LS and density design variable fields, respectively; i.e., $\phi(\mathbf{X})= \mathcal{\hat{S}}^\phi(\mathbf{X})$ and $\rho(\mathbf{X}) = \mathcal{\hat{S}}^{\rho}(\mathbf{X})$.
In this scheme, holes are seeded in the course of the optimization process by promoting a negative LSF in regions of low density through a penalty term, $\bar{p}_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X})$, defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TFCNonSmoothForm}
\begin{aligned}
\bar{p}_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X}) &=
\begin{cases}
0, & \forall~\rho\geq\rho_{th} \\
\max \left( 0, \displaystyle\frac{\phi -\phi_{th}}{\phi_{up}-\phi_{th} } \right), & \forall~\rho<\rho_{th}.
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This coupling penalty is active in a region bounded by the $\phi_{th}$ and $\rho_{th}$ thresholds, described below.
High LS values in regions of low densities are penalized in a decreasing manner from 1 at $\phi=\phi_{up}$ to 0 for $\phi \leq \phi_{th}$.
To serve as a hole nucleation mechanism, it is intentionally formulated by a discontinuous function that has zero gradients with respect to the density optimization variables and exhibits non-zero gradients with respect to the LS optimization variables only below $\rho_{th}$.
\subsubsection{LS and density thresholds} \label{subsubsec:TFCThs}
The LS threshold, $\phi_{th}$, deactivates the penalization for $\phi(\mathbf{X})<\phi_{th}$.
This threshold is set to a value below zero, i.e., $ [0.10,0.25] \phi_{low}$.
Setting $\phi_{th} \geq 0$ would result in issues associated with the robustness of the hole nucleation process.
An explanation of these issues is provided in Section \ref{subsubsec:holeNucProc}.
The $\rho_{th}$ threshold is a parameter that decreases from an initial value, $\rho^0_{th}$, to zero during the optimization process.
A decreasing $\rho_{th}$ is desired since intermediate densities at a later stage of the design process could promote the creation of spurious holes, see Section \ref{subsubsec:densShift}.
Note that $\rho_{th}^0$ should be lower than the prescribed initial density, $\rho_0$, in the first optimization iteration.
Setting $\rho^0_{th}>\rho_0$ would activate the penalty in the entire domain and could result in moving the entire LSF from material to void.
Through a continuation scheme active in the first $\mathcal{D}_{c}$ design iterations, the density threshold, $\rho_{th}$, is computed at every continuation step using:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:expFuncContDec}
\begin{aligned}
\rho_{th} = \rho_{th}^0
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle 1 - \left( \frac{\mathcal{D}_{it}}{\mathcal{D}_{c}}\right)^{\eta_{\rho_{th}}}, & \forall~\mathcal{D}_{it} \leq \mathcal{D}_{c} \\
0, & \forall~\mathcal{D}_{it} > \mathcal{D}_{c},
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{D}_{it}$ is the design iteration index.
As seen in Fig. \ref{fig:DensThresholdScheme}, $\rho_{th}$ decreases to gradually inhibit the nucleation of holes.
The coupling is inactive for $\mathcal{D}_{c}<\mathcal{D}_{it}$.
The continuation step size, $\mathcal{D}_{st}$, is assumed to be constant.
The exponent $\eta_{\rho_{sh}}$ controls the rate at which the shift increases in each continuation step, and is set to $\eta_{\rho_{th}}\approx [1.5-2.0]$ to attenuate changes in this threshold at early stages of the continuation scheme.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/DensThresholdScheme}
\caption{Continuation scheme in Eq. \ref{eq:expFuncContDec} for the density threshold of the TFC approach.}
\label{fig:DensThresholdScheme}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Smooth coupling formulation}
To obtain a differentiable penalty formulation with respect to the LSF, the expression in Eq. \ref{eq:TFCNonSmoothForm} is approximated by a smooth function as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TFCFomAllDomain}
\begin{aligned}
{p}_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X}) &=
\begin{cases}
0, ~
\forall~\rho\geq\rho_{th}
\\
\displaystyle\frac{
\left\{ \left[ \max \left( 0, \displaystyle\frac{\phi -\phi_{th}}{\phi_{up}-\phi_{th} } \right) \right]^2
+ \xi^2 \right\}^{\frac{1}{2}} - \xi
}{
\left( 1 + \xi^2 \right)^{\frac{1}{2}} - \xi
}, &
\\
\forall~\rho<\rho_{th}.
\end{cases} \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The nondimensional parameter $\xi$ smoothes the transition of the penalty, and is typically between $\xi\approx [0.1-1.0]$.
An illustration of this smooth two-field density-LS coupling scheme is presented in Fig. \ref{fig:TFCScheme}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/TFCTheory}
\caption{Landscape of the smooth coupling penalization in Eq. \ref{eq:TFCFomAllDomain} for the TFC approach.}
\label{fig:TFCScheme}
\end{figure}
The TFC strategy introduced here represents an improvement over the definition of the coupling penalty in \cite{geiss2019level}. Numerical studies showed that the approach in \cite{geiss2019level} is prone to oscillations of the LSF in low density regions. The spurious interaction between density and LS fields is avoided by the discontinuous formulation of the penalty term in Eq. \ref{eq:TFCFomAllDomain}.
Since the gradients of the penalty term with respect to the density optimization variables are zero, this formulation does not provide information that would promote the removal of a hole through increasing the local densities.
However, a hole can still be removed through shape changes. Thus, the coupling penalty formulation in Eq. \ref{eq:TFCFomAllDomain} should be considered a hole nucleation scheme.
Note that the choice of variables in this coupling strategy is not unique. Either the sets of LS and density optimization variables, or any choice of filtered and/or projected quantities derived from them could be discretized and coupled. Our choice of using $\mathcal{\hat{S}}^{\phi}(\mathbf{X})$ and $\mathcal{\hat{S}}^{\rho}(\mathbf{X})$ is motivated by an increased in resolution and design freedom (compared to elemental variables), as well as smoothness in the optimization problem.
\subsubsection{Hole nucleation process} \label{subsubsec:holeNucProc}
Figure \ref{fig:TFC1DExample} depicts the effect of the TFC penalty in a simple 1D example.
The density, LS, and coupling penalty fields, i.e., $\rho(\mathbf{X})$, $\phi(\mathbf{X})$, and ${p}_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X})$, are plotted over $\mathbf{X}$ at different stages of the nucleation process of a hole.
Initially, in Fig. \ref{fig:TFC1DExample}(a), the coupling penalty is inactive in the material domain, i.e., $\phi(\mathbf{X})>0$ and $\rho(\mathbf{X})>\rho_{th}$ everywhere.
As the local density value decreases, the coupling penalty is activated along $\Delta x^{\rho}$ defined by the region of the density field smaller than $\rho_{th}$. As a result, the LSF in $\Delta x^{\rho}$ is lowered as seen in Fig. \ref{fig:TFC1DExample}(b).
The nonlinear distribution of the penalty (see Eq. \ref{eq:TFCFomAllDomain}) is maximum at $\phi(\mathbf{X})=\phi_{up}$, and its effect diminishes as the LSF approaches $\phi_{th}$.
Eventually, in Fig. \ref{fig:TFC1DExample}(c), a hole is nucleated by the coupling penalty, which continues decreasing the LSF (to a lesser extent) while it is above $\phi_{th}$.
Note that, as mentioned in Section \ref{subsubsec:TFCThs}, using $\phi_{th} \geq 0$ can compromise the hole nucleation process.
Setting $\phi_{th}=0$ may introduce a robustness issue since the LSF could oscillate between positive and negative values, nucleating and removing small holes intermittently.
If $\phi_{th}>0$, the coupling terminates prematurely and the LSF is pushed back into the material domain before crossing the zero isocontour, preventing a hole from being nucleated.
This is a consequence of the LS regularization scheme detailed in Section \ref{subsec:LsReg}.
Hence, $\phi_{th}<0$ sufficiently away from the zero isocontour is used in this work.
In Fig. \ref{fig:TFC1DExample}(d), the LSF below $\phi_{th}$ along $\Delta x^{\phi}$ is no longer affected by the penalty, but continues decreasing until it reaches $\phi_{low}$ due to the effect of the LS regularization. At this stage, the density field is converged and the penalty is acting only in a small portion of the domain contained under $\rho_{th}$ and above $\phi_{th}$ (i.e., $p_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X})>0$ in $\Delta x^{\rho} \cap \Delta x^{\phi}$).
Finally, Fig. \ref{fig:TFC1DExample}(e) shows the regularized LSF with a hole nucleated in a region of low density. The penalization is no longer active since the process has been completed.
A study of the influence of the two thresholds, $\rho_{th}$ and $\phi_{th}$ is presented in Section \ref{subsubsec:SupportStruc2DObjAndSensTFC}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/TFC1DExample}
\caption{Evolution of the density, LS, and penalty fields at all stages of the nucleation process via the TFC approach.}
\label{fig:TFC1DExample}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Single versus two-field coupling} \label{subsec:SFCvTFC}
The two coupling strategies presented above enable hole seeding during the optimization process.
In both cases, the design process consists of a handover from a pure density problem that does not need hole seeding but can produce intermediate density at convergence to a pure LS problem that relies on hole nucleation but features a crisply defined material interface.
In terms of the gradients, only design sensitivities with respect to the density variables exist everywhere within the solid domain until holes are nucleated. Once that happens, non-zero LS shape sensitivities are also present in the vicinity of the material interface.
Non-zero density sensitivities in an LS TO approach not only accelerate convergence, but also facilitate convergence to (local) minima with satisfactory performance and mitigate issues associated with initial seeding (see Fig. \ref{fig:holesArrangementDependency}).
Note that non-zero sensitivities in the entire design domain can also exist as a result of the LS regularization method used. The method adopted here is one of such cases (see Section \ref{subsec:LsReg}).
In both hole nucleation schemes, the computational costs associated with physical analyses are reduced. The mesh resolution is no longer dominated by the need to resolve an initial hole seeding. Hence, the proposed method might allow using coarser meshes depending on the feature sizes in the optimized design. In the early stages of the optimization process, complex intersection configurations due to user-defined initial hole seeding are avoided. This reduces the number of intersected elements and thus, the computational cost when using immersed boundary techniques for the physical analyses.
Furthermore, the number of total design iterations might decrease due to faster convergence.
However, in contrast to evaluating LS shape sensitivities by only considering intersected elements, the contributions of all elements to the sensitivity equations within the solid domain need to be computed.
The increased cost of the TFC approach over the SFC formulation associated with the increased number of optimization variables is insignificant because of the class of optimization algorithms and the type of sensitivity analysis used in this manuscript; see Section \ref{sec:NumEx}.
\subsection{Material interpolation via augmented SIMP} \label{subsec:DensTO}
Transition regions between high and low density material are commonly found in density-based methods. For example, SIMP-like approaches typically require a suitable formulation of the optimization problem and large penalties to converge to [0-1] material distributions. However, a penalization effect on intermediate densities, and thus their complete removal from the design domain, cannot be guaranteed (\cite{sigmund2013topology}).
\subsubsection{Shifted density field} \label{subsubsec:densShift}
To avoid intermediate densities, we introduce a density shift, $\rho_{sh}$, to compute a shifted density field, $\tilde\rho(\mathbf{X})$, using the following expression:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:densShift}
\begin{aligned}
\tilde\rho(\mathbf{X})
=
\rho_{sh}
+
(1-\rho_{sh}) \rho(\mathbf{X}).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The parameter $\rho_{sh}$ increases from an initial value, $\rho^0_{sh}$, to 1 during the optimization process.
It has the effect of shifting the minimum density in the material domain, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:SFCScheme} for the SFC approach. The larger $\rho_{sh}$, the more restricted the density distribution becomes. If $\rho_{sh}=1$, a uniform density field is obtained.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/SFCTheory}
\caption{Effect of density shift, $\rho_{sh}$, in the SFC approach.}
\label{fig:SFCScheme}
\end{figure}
By shifting the densities, not only a constant density field is achieved in the final design, but ill-conditioning of the discretized governing equations due to large differences in material properties is alleviated.
The latter is achieved because areas/volumes of low density and low material stiffness are removed by controlling the minimum density in the solid domain.
To attain well-conditioned systems, $\rho^0_{sh} \approx [0.1-0.2]$ unless a smaller value is required to satisfy a mass or volume constraint.
Moreover, the density shift boosts the LS sensitivities of new holes since, by
advancing the shift, the problem transitions from a pure SIMP to a pure LS formulation. Thus, the density sensitivities decrease, and the LS shape sensitivities increase.
A continuation scheme similar to the one used for the density threshold (see Eq. \ref{eq:expFuncContDec}), is employed to update the density shift:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:expFuncContInc}
\begin{aligned}
\rho_{sh} =
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \rho_{sh}^0 + ( 1 - \rho_{sh}^0 ) \left( \frac{\mathcal{D}_{it}}{\mathcal{D}_{c}}\right)^{\eta_{\rho_{sh}}}, & \forall~\mathcal{D}_{it} \leq \mathcal{D}_{c} \\
1, & \forall~\mathcal{D}_{it} > \mathcal{D}_{c}.
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Eq. \ref{eq:expFuncContInc} ensures the elimination of intermediate densities for $\mathcal{D}_{it} > \mathcal{D}_{c}$, see Fig. \ref{fig:DensShiftScheme}.
Every $\mathcal{D}_{st}$ iterations, the density shift is updated from an initial value, $\rho^0_{sh}$, to 1.
Numerical studies suggest that setting the exponent $\eta_{\rho_{sh}}\approx [1.5-2.0]$, together with an appropriate number of continuations steps (i.e., $\mathcal{D}_{st}/\mathcal{D}_{c}\approx[5-10]$) sufficiently mitigate the effect of jumps in the densities and promote a smooth evolution of the optimization problem.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/DensShiftScheme}
\caption{Continuation scheme for density shift, $\rho_{sh}$.}
\label{fig:DensShiftScheme}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Material interpolation} \label{subsubsec:matInterp}
The classical SIMP approach, as presented by \cite{bendsoe2004topology}, is employed to relate the shifted fictitious density field, $\tilde\rho(\mathbf{X})$, to physical material properties. However, alternatives such as the Rational Approximation of Material Properties (RAMP) method (\cite{stolpe2001alternative}) are equally suitable.
The material density, $\theta(\mathbf{X})$, is interpolated using:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:varyingMatDensForm}
\begin{aligned}
\theta(\mathbf{X}) = \theta_0 ~ \tilde\rho(\mathbf{X});
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and the Young's modulus, $E(\mathbf{X})$, is computed using the following power law:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:varyingMatPropForm}
\begin{aligned}
E(\mathbf{X}) = E_0 \left(\tilde\rho(\mathbf{X}) \right)^{\beta_{\rho}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The properties of the bulk material density and Young's modulus are denoted by $\theta_0$ and $E_0$. The Young's modulus is penalized by the SIMP exponent, denoted by $\beta_{\rho}$.
A constant density within an element is interpolated by averaging the shifted nodal densities in such element.
While material properties are interpolated using a shifted filtered density field, $\tilde\rho(\mathbf{X})$, the hole seeding strategies presented earlier in this section couple the unshifted filtered density field, $\rho(\mathbf{X})$, to the LSF, $\phi(\mathbf{X})$.
In the TFC approach, using the shifted densities in the formulation of the penalty term would terminate the coupling too early since hole nucleation capabilities are lost once the density shift exceeds the density threshold, i.e., $\rho_{sh} > \rho_{th} \implies p_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X})=0$.
Also, later in the optimization process, $\tilde\rho(\mathbf{X}) \to 1$ does not imply $\rho(\mathbf{X}) \to 1$. Hence, intermediate densities might still be present in $\rho(\mathbf{X})$, without affecting the interpolation of the material properties and thus, the optimization problem.
For this reason, the density threshold is decreased gradually approaching zero (see Section \ref{subsubsec:TFCThs}).
Otherwise, spurious holes might be nucleated in regions of high shifted densities in designs that are almost converged.
A motivation for using the augmented material interpolation scheme presented in this section, together with an analysis of its influence, is discussed in Section \ref{subsubsec:SupportStruc2DIntermediateDens}.
\section{Optimization Framework} \label{sec:XFEMFramework}
The physical responses of the systems are predicted by the XFEM in this paper.
Since LS TO is not restricted to a particular immersed boundary technique, alternative approaches such as CutFEM (\cite{burman2015cutfem,burman2019cut}) or HIFEM (\cite{soghrati2016application}) could also be used for physical and sensitivity analyses.
A generalized Heaviside enrichment strategy (\cite{makhija2014numerical,terada2003finite,tran2011multiple}) is employed to avoid artificial coupling of disconnected material. The response is consistently interpolated in elemental subdomains with the same phase.
The discretized state variable field, $\mathbf{\hat{u}}_i(\mathbf{X})$, at node $i$ of a two material problem ($\Omega_I$, $\Omega_{II}$) is approximated as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HeavisideEnrich}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{\hat{u}}_i(\mathbf{X})
=
\sum^{L}_{l=1}
\bigg(
H(-\phi(\mathbf{X}))\sum^{N_N^e}_{k=1} \mathcal{N}_k(\mathbf{X})\delta_{lq}^{k}\mathbf{{u}}_{il}^{k,\Omega_{I}} \\
+
H(\phi(\mathbf{X}))\sum^{N_N^e}_{k=1} \mathcal{N}_k(\mathbf{X})\delta_{lq}^{k}\mathbf{{u}}_{il}^{k,\Omega_{II}}
\bigg),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where the Heaviside function, $H$, is determined by the LSF as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:HeavisideFunc}
\begin{aligned}
H(\phi) =
\begin{cases}
1, & \forall ~\phi(\mathbf{X}) > 0 \\
0, & \forall ~\phi(\mathbf{X}) < 0.
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The maximum number of enrichment levels is denoted by $L$, $\mathcal{N}_k(\mathbf{X})$ is the nodal shape function and $\delta_{lq}^{k}$ is the Kronecker delta which selects the active enrichment level $q$ for node $k$. $\delta_{lq}^{k}$ ensures that displacements at node $k$ are only interpolated by a single set of degrees of freedom (DOFs), $\mathbf{{u}}_{il}^{k}$, such that the partition of unity principle is satisfied (\cite{babuvska1997partition}). The number of nodes per element is denoted by $N_N^e$. For more details about the generalized Heaviside enrichment strategy used in this work, the reader is referred to \cite{makhija2014numerical}. The described XFEM framework has been successfully applied to various TO multiphysics problems (e.g., in \cite{maute2015level,coffin2016level,villanueva2017cutfem,behrou2017level,pizzolato2017design}).
\subsection{Governing equations} \label{subsec:GovEqs}
The following augmented residual equation with stabilization terms is considered in this work:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:resStrucGovEq}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{R}
=
\mathbf{R}^U +
\mathbf{R}_\Gamma^N +
\mathbf{R}_\Gamma^G +
\mathbf{R}^S,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
in which the weak form of the linear elastic governing equation, $\mathbf{R}^{U}$, is defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ResEq}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{R}^U =
\int_{\Omega_{I}} \delta \boldsymbol{\epsilon} : \boldsymbol{\sigma}~ dV -
\int_{\Gamma_N^{\Omega_I}} \delta \mathbf{u}~\mathbf{T}_N dA.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The displacement field and the test function are denoted by $\mathbf{u}$ and $\delta\mathbf{u}$, respectively. Traction forces, $\mathbf{T}_N$, are applied along the boundary $\Gamma_N^{\Omega_I}$.
The material tensor for isotropic linear elasticity, $\mathbf{D}$, together with the infinitesimal strain tensor, $\boldsymbol{\epsilon}=\frac{1}{2}(\nabla\mathbf{u} + \nabla\mathbf{u}^T)$, define the Cauchy stress $\boldsymbol{\sigma} = \mathbf{D}: \boldsymbol{\epsilon}$.
The $\mathbf{R}_\Gamma^N$, $\mathbf{R}_\Gamma^G$, and $\mathbf{R}^S$ terms correspond to the weakly enforced essential boundary and interface conditions, face-oriented ghost stabilization, and selective structural springs, respectively.
\subsubsection{Weak enforcement of boundary and interface conditions}
\label{sec:Nitsche}
The unsymmetric version of Nitsche's method (\cite{nitsche1971variationsprinzip}) is employed to weakly enforce Dirichlet boundary and interface conditions (\cite{burman2012fictitious}). These conditions are applied using:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:NitscheFrom}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{R}_\Gamma^N
= &
- \int_{\Gamma}
\llbracket \delta \mathbf{u} \rrbracket ~ \boldsymbol\sigma \cdot \mathbf{N} dA
+ \int_{\Gamma}
\delta ( \boldsymbol\sigma \cdot \mathbf{N} ) \llbracket \mathbf{u} \rrbracket dA
\\
& + \gamma_N~E / h\int_{\Gamma}
\llbracket \delta \mathbf{u} \rrbracket \llbracket \mathbf{u} \rrbracket dA.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The outward normal vector on a domain or interface boundary is denoted by $\mathbf{N}$.
The jump operator $\llbracket \boldsymbol{\cdot} \rrbracket$ with respect to a target state variable $\bar{\mathbf{u}}$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jumpOp}
\begin{aligned}
\llbracket \mathbf{u} \rrbracket = \mathbf{u} - \bar{\mathbf{u}}, ~~~~~
\llbracket \delta \mathbf{u} \rrbracket = \delta \mathbf{u} - \delta \bar{\mathbf{u}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The integrals in (\ref{eq:NitscheFrom}) correspond to the standard consistency, adjoint consistency, and the Nitsche penalty terms, respectively. The third term is scaled by the Young's modulus, $E$, the element size, $h$, and the penalty factor $\gamma_N$. The latter provides additional control over the accuracy at which a boundary condition (BC) is enforced.
\subsubsection{Face-oriented ghost stabilization}
\label{sec:Ghost}
Face-oriented ghost penalization, as proposed by \cite{schott2014new} and \cite{burman2015cutfem}, is used in the vicinity of the interface. This stabilization technique prevents numerical instabilities due to vanishing zones of influence of certain DOFs occurring when the material interface moves too close to a node.
Independent of the intersection configuration, ill-conditioning is mitigated by applying the following virtual work-based formulation (\cite{geiss2018topology,geiss2019level}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:GhostPenForm}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{R}_\Gamma^G
=
h \gamma_G
\underbrace{\sum}_{\mathcal{F} \in \mathcal{F}_{cut}}
\int_{\mathcal{F}}
\llbracket \delta \nabla \mathbf{u} \mathbf{N_e} \rrbracket
\llbracket \boldsymbol{\sigma}(\mathbf{u}) \mathbf{N_e} \rrbracket
dA.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Element faces in the vicinity of the material interface for which at least one of the two adjacent elements is intersected are included in $\mathcal{F}_{cut}$ (\cite{villanueva2017cutfem}).
Outward facing normals of these shared element faces are denoted by $\mathbf{N_e}$.
The influence of the ghost penalty term presented above is controlled by the penalty factor $\gamma_G$.
The virtual work-based formulation is adopted instead of the one proposed by \cite{burman2014fictitious} since it allows for different material properties in adjacent intersected elements.
In this work, the ghost penalty term is computed based on elementally constant material properties that are evaluated at element centroids (un-intersected elements) or sub-phase centroids (intersected elements).
\subsubsection{Selective structural springs}
To suppress rigid body motion associated with disconnected material domains that may emerge and develop, selective structural springs as proposed in \cite{villanueva2017cutfem} are added to the governing equations. An additional stiffness is applied only to solid disconnected subdomains via the following residual component:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SelecSprEq}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{R}^S = \gamma_S ~ E / h^2 \int_{\Gamma_{D}} \delta \mathbf{u} \cdot \mathbf{u} dV.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The parameter $\gamma_S$ denotes the spring stiffness scaling and is non-zero only for the free-floating pieces of material. An auxiliary indicator field obtained by solving a diffusion problem is employed to identify such disconnected subdomains.
More details of the application of this approach to structural problems can be found in \cite{geiss2018topology,geiss2019combined}.
\subsubsection{Evaluation of stresses}
In the final example in Section \ref{sec:NumEx}, a gradient stabilized scalar stress field, $\tau(\mathbf{X})$, is post-processed via the XFEM informed smoothing procedure described in \cite{sharma2018stress}. The additional set of state variables is computed by solving the residual equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stressProj}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbf{R} =
\mathbf{R}^{\tau}
&=
\int_{\Omega_{I}} ~ \delta \tau ~ (\tau - \sigma_{VM}) dV \\
&+
h^2 \gamma_\tau
\underbrace{\sum}_{\mathcal{F} \in \mathcal{F}_{cut}}
\int_{\mathcal{F}}
\llbracket \delta \nabla \tau \rrbracket
\llbracket \nabla \tau \rrbracket
dA.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The field $\sigma_{VM}(\mathbf{X})$ and the parameter $\gamma_\tau$ represent the von Mises stress and the ghost penalty weight, respectively.
Overestimation of stresses is prevented by penalizing the jump in spatial stress gradients across elemental faces (second term in Eq. \ref{eq:stressProj}).
\subsection{General optimization problem formulation} \label{subsec:TFCOptProbForm}
In this paper the following formulation of the optimization problem is considered:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:TFCOptProbSetup}
\begin{aligned}
\underset{s}{\min}~z(\mathbf{s}, \mathbf{u (\mathbf{s})})
& =
w_1 ~ \mathcal{F}(\mathbf{s}, \mathbf{u(\mathbf{s})})
+
w_2 ~ P_{Per}(\mathbf{s})
\\
&
+
w_3 ~ P_{Reg}(\mathbf{s})
+
w_4 ~ P_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{s})
\\
s.t.: ~~~
&~g_i(\mathbf{s},\mathbf{u(\mathbf{s})}) \leq 0, i=1,...,N_g.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The objective $z$ is minimized over the vector of admissible optimization variables, $\mathbf{s}$, defined in Sections \ref{subsec:SingleFieldCoupling} and \ref{subsec:TwoFieldCoupling} for the SFC and TFC, respectively; and the vector of state variables, $\mathbf{u}$, with $\mathbf{u} \in \rm I\!R^{N_{u}}$, and $N_u$ being the number of state variables.
The first component of the objective represents the quantity of interest to be minimized, $\mathcal{F}$ (e.g., strain energy, mass).
The second term is the normalized perimeter control penalty,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:PerPenForm}
\begin{aligned}
P_{Per}
=
\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Gamma_{I,II}} dA}{\displaystyle\int_{\Gamma_{D}} dA},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
which prevents the emergence of irregular geometric features. $\Gamma_{D}$ corresponds to the perimeter of the design domain $\Omega_{D}$.
The LS regularization penalty, $P_{Reg}$, is included in the objective to avoid spurious oscillations in the LSF (see Section \ref{subsec:LsReg}).
Note that $P_{Reg}$ promotes a positive LSF while the coupling penalty attempts to lower it to a negative value to nucleate a hole.
By reducing the weights $w_{\phi_2}$ and $w_{\phi\nabla2}$ in Eq. \ref{eq:LsRegWeights}, these competing effects are mitigated. This flexibility is exploited in the third example in Section \ref{sec:NumEx}.
The final component denotes the normalized two-field coupling penalty,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:couplingPenNormForm}
\begin{aligned}
P_{\rho\phi}
=
\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_D^0} {p}_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X}) dV}{\displaystyle\int_{\Gamma_{D}} dA},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with ${p}_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{X})$, as formulated in Eq. \ref{eq:TFCFomAllDomain}.
This coupling penalty can also be defined as a constraint. We choose to add it to the objective as it favors a looser coupling of the density and LS fields. In our experience, this approach is sufficient to nucleate holes and prevents over-constraining the design.
The weights $w_1$, $w_2$, $w_3$, and $w_4$ are chosen such that all the penalty contributions in the objective are significantly lower ($\approx 1-5\%$) than $\mathcal{F}$.
Since a strong perimeter control penalty might prevent the nucleation of small holes (\cite{wang2007hole}), its contribution is kept below $1\%$ by manipulating the $w_2$ weight. Both, a constant low weight and gradual increase of the perimeter contribution within the continuation scheme (i.e., $\mathcal{D}_{it} \leq \mathcal{D}_{c}$), are considered in the numerical examples.
In addition, for the remainder of the optimization process (i.e., $\mathcal{D}_{it}>\mathcal{D}_{c}$), the perimeter penalty weight is increased to promote a smooth geometry in the final design.
For the SFC approach, $w_4$ is set to 0.0 since a coupling penalty is not required.
The design needs to satisfy a set of $N_g$ problem dependent inequality constraints, $[g_1,...,g_{N_g}]$ (e.g., target mass, maximum allowable stress, maximum eigenvalue).
The constraints are defined for each problem studied in Section \ref{sec:NumEx}.
\section{Numerical Examples}\label{sec:NumEx}
The proposed SFC and TFC approaches are studied in this section using single material, solid-void linear elastic problems in 2D and 3D.
Algorithmic parameter dependencies and performance are investigated with a 2D structural plane stress problem under uniform pressure. A beam problem in 3D is used to assess the influence of the SIMP penalization on the robustness of the coupling strategies. And finally, the overall behavior of these approaches is examined with a geometrically complex engineering problem considering stress constraints.
The optimization problems are solved using the Globally Convergent Method of Moving Asymptotes (GCMMA, \cite{svanberg2002class}) with no inner iterations. The adjoint method, as detailed in \cite{sharma2017shape}, is used for the sensitivity analysis.
The relative change in objective between two consecutive design iterations is less or equal to $1\times10^{-3}$ at the end of all the problems shown in this section.
Relevant optimization parameters common to all problems presented in this work are summarized in Table \ref{tab:commonOptProbParams}.
The weights for the LS regularization penalty in Examples 1 and 2 are $w_{\nabla\phi_1}=w_{\phi_1}=w_{\phi_2}=w_{\nabla\phi_2}=1$, and for the third problem, $w_{\nabla\phi_1}=0$, $w_{\phi_1}=w_{\phi_2}=w_{\nabla\phi_2}=0.5$.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{\label{tab:commonOptProbParams}Parameters common to all numerical examples function of the element size $h$.}
\center
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline
Parameter & Value\\\hline
LSF upper bound & $\phi_{up} = 2.5h$ \\
LSF lower bound & $\phi_{low} = -2.5h$ \\
Initial constant LSF & $\phi_{0} = 0.5\phi_{up}$ \\
LSF regularization control & $\gamma_{P_{Reg}} = 36.8$ \\
Filter radius in 2D & $f_r = 1.6h $ \\
Filter radius in 3D & $f_r = 1.8h $ \\
Nitsche penalty factor & $\gamma_N = 100.0 $ \\
Ghost penalty factor & $\gamma_G = 0.001 $ \\
Spring stiffness factor & $\gamma_S = 1\text{x}10^{-6} $ \\
Stress ghost penalty factor (Ex. 3) & $\gamma_\tau = 0.01 $ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
At the beginning of the optimization process, for both the SFC and TFC approaches, a uniform LSF of $\phi(\mathbf{X})=\phi_0$ $(\phi_0>0)$ is prescribed such that the entire design domain is filled with homogeneous porous material.
In all examples, the continuation scheme described in Section \ref{subsec:DensTO} is used to update the shift in the densities unless specified otherwise; see Fig. \ref{fig:DensShiftScheme}. Furthermore, when using the TFC approach, the density threshold is decreased using the continuation scheme detailed in Section \ref{subsec:TwoFieldCoupling}; see Fig. \ref{fig:DensThresholdScheme}.
The governing equations are discretized using the XFEM approach outlined in Section \ref{sec:XFEMFramework}.
The parameters used for interpolation of material properties in Examples 1 and 2 are shown in Table \ref{tab:LsDensCombProp} in self-consistent units, and for the last example in Table \ref{tab:ex3BracketMatProps} in SI units.
The example problems consist of a one-way coupled set of governing equations; i.e., the diffusion problem describing the auxiliary indicator field, the stabilized linear elasticity equations (Eq. \ref{eq:resStrucGovEq}), the stabilized stress projection (Eq. \ref{eq:stressProj}), and the heat method equations.
Taking advantage of this simple coupling scheme, a Block Gauss-Seidel approach (\cite{elfving1980block}) is employed for both the physical and the adjoint sensitivity analyses.
The systems of equations of the first and second examples were solved using the Multifrontal Massively Parallel Solver (MUMPS, \cite{amestoy2006hybrid}).
The third example was solved iteratively via Trilinos algebraic multigrid solver (\cite{heroux2005overview}) for the selective springs heat problem, the structural response, and the stresses; and ILU preconditioner for the LS regularization heat method problem.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{\label{tab:LsDensCombProp}Material properties interpolation parameters for numerical examples 1 and 2.}
\center
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline
Property & Value\\\hline
Initial fictitious density ($\Omega_{I}$) & $\rho_0=0.4$ \\
SIMP exponent & $\beta_{\rho} $ = 2.0 \\
Young's Modulus ($\Omega_{I}$) & $E_S = 2.0$x$10^3$ \\
Young's Modulus ($\Omega_{II}$) & $E_V = 1$x$10^{-8}$ \\
Poisson Ratio ($\Omega_{I}$ and $\Omega_{II}$) & $\nu_S = \nu_V$ = 0.4 \\
Material Density ($\Omega_{I}$) & $\theta_S = 1.0$ \\
Material Density ($\Omega_{II}$) & $\theta_V = 0.0$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Example 1: structure subject to uniform pressure} \label{sec:SupportStruc2D}
A 2D structure subject to uniform pressure load is studied to demonstrate the hole nucleation capabilities of the proposed approaches. The problem setup with loads and BCs is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:supportStruc2DProbSetup}.
A vertical traction load of $T_{X_2} = -10.0$ is applied over the top boundary of the design domain.
The bottom left corner is clamped by prescribing weakly zero displacement in the $X_1$ and $X_2$ directions.
Design symmetry about the $X_2$ axis is assumed in the middle of the design domain (i.e., zero displacement in the $X_1$ direction along symmetry plane).
Solid material is prescribed and excluded from the design domain in the vicinity of the Dirichlet BCs and where the traction load is applied, as highlighted in dark grey color in Fig. \ref{fig:supportStruc2DProbSetup}.
The domain of size $60\times40$ is discretized by a structured mesh with uniform element size $h=0.5$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/supportStruc2DProbSetup}
\caption{Problem setup of the 2D structural design problem. Due to symmetry, only half of the domain is simulated.}
\label{fig:supportStruc2DProbSetup}
\end{figure}
The compliance minimization with mass constraint optimization problem reads:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Ex1OptProbSetup}
\begin{aligned}
\underset{s}{\min}~z(\mathbf{s}) & =
w_1~ \Psi (\mathbf{s},\mathbf{u(\mathbf{s})}) /\Psi_0
+
w_2 ~ P_{Per}(\mathbf{s})
\\
&
+
w_3 ~ P_{Reg}(\mathbf{s})
+
w_4 ~ P_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{s})
\\
s.t.: g_1 & = \frac{\mathcal{M(\mathbf{s})}}{\Omega_{I}+\Omega_{II}} - \gamma_m \leq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The strain energy of the initial design is denoted by $\Psi_0$, and the objective weights for the TFC setup are $w_i$ =[ 0.93, 0.01, 0.05, 0.01]. In the SFC setup, $w_4=0$.
A mass constraint of $\gamma_m = 0.40$ is enforced.
The default continuation parameters for updating the density shift (in both approaches) and the density threshold (in the TFC approach) are summarized in Table \ref{tab:Ex1DefContParams}, and used for all example configurations unless specified otherwise.
Both $\rho_{sh}$ and $\rho_{th}$ are updated every $50$ optimization iterations in a total of eight continuation steps.
No density shift is applied at the beginning of the optimization process. All simulations start with a uniform density of $\rho_{0}=0.40$, except the portions excluded from the design domain, which are prescribed a fixed density of 1.0.
Note that the SIMP exponent $\beta_\rho$ is set to 2.0 to mitigate mesh dependency, avoid premature convergence, and allow for nucleating many holes. An analysis of the influence of this parameter is provided in Example 2.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{\label{tab:Ex1DefContParams}Default continuation parameters for the 2D structural problem.}
\center
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline
Parameter & Value\\\hline
Continuation step size& $\mathcal{D}_{st}=50$ \\
Number of design iterations in continuation & $\mathcal{D}_{c}=400$ \\
Maximum number of design iterations & $\mathcal{D}_{max}=500$ \\
Initial density shift & $\rho^0_{sh}=0.0$ \\
Initial density threshold & $\rho^0_{th}=0.7 \rho_0$ \\
Continuation density shift exponent & $\eta_{\rho_{sh}}=2.0$ \\
Continuation density threshold exponent & $\eta_{\rho_{th}}=2.0$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Influence of density shift} \label{subsubsec:SupportStruc2DIntermediateDens}
In this first study, the effect of the density shift described in Section \ref{subsec:DensTO} is investigated.
The final designs for both the single and two-field coupling approaches with and without density shift are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:supportStructShiftAndNoShiftResults}.
Only the material phase, $\Omega_{I}$, is visible; and it is colored by the shifted filtered densities, $\tilde\rho(\mathbf{X})$. The void regions are identified by dotted patterns with white background.
The SFC and TFC results are shown in rows one and two, respectively, without and with a density shift (left and right columns).
The insets highlight regions of the final designs where significant changes in the density distributions are observed.
On the left side of Fig. \ref{fig:supportStructShiftAndNoShiftResults} it can be seen that both methods are unable to fully remove intermediate densities in absence of a density shift. In the SFC approach, since both the LSFs and fictitious densities are function of the same abstract design variables (Eqs. \ref{eq:SFC_AdvToLsVars} and \ref{eq:SFC_AdvToDensVars}), intermediate densities exist in the vicinity of the material interface by construction. In the TFC, despite the density field can evolve independently of the LSF, grey areas are also observed.
The results in the right column of Fig. \ref{fig:supportStructShiftAndNoShiftResults} show that the gradual shift scheme adopted guarantees a uniform density distribution of 1 in the material subdomain.
Moreover, even though the topologies being noticeably different, the performance of the final design is not compromised by shifting the densities. On the contrary, a considerable improvement is observed in the SFC results.
Note that as an alternative to improve the convergence to [0-1] designs, the SIMP penalization could be increased and combined with a projection scheme (e.g., see \cite{wang2011projection}). However, those approaches do not guarantee that the solid phase consists only of bulk material in the optimized design. See Example 2 for a more detailed discussion on this matter.
\begin{figure}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/shiftAndNoShiftResults}
\caption{Final designs of the 2D structural problem for both SFC and TFC approaches with and without the augmented SIMP material interpolation.}
\label{fig:supportStructShiftAndNoShiftResults}
\end{figure}
~\\
\textit{Initial density shift}
To better understand the influence of an initial density shift in the hole nucleation process, a comparison of the design evolutions with $\rho^0_{sh}>0.0$ is presented. All parameters but the initial density shift are the same as before. Given that the numerical examples in this study show similar findings for both the SFC and TFC approaches, we only show results for the SFC approach.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figs/influenceOfShiftSFC}
\caption{Snapshots of the evolution of the 2D structural design using the SFC approach from left to right are shown with different initial density shift per row.}
\label{fig:influenceOfShiftSFC}
\end{figure*}
Snapshots of the optimization process at $\mathcal{D}_{it}$ = [50, 100, 150, 500] for $\rho_{sh}^0$ = [0.1, 0.2, 0.3] are provided in Fig. \ref{fig:influenceOfShiftSFC}. A fast and clean hole nucleation process is observed in all cases.
Note that densities in the void phase do not contribute to neither the stiffness nor the mass of the design. Therefore, sensitivities associated with these variables only exist in the material domain ($\Omega_{I}$).
Material is removed from the design domain by either nucleating a hole due to low densities or shrinking/expanding the material interface front.
A larger initial density shift promotes the generation of more holes at an early stage, as seen in the first column of Fig. \ref{fig:influenceOfShiftSFC}. Nucleating less holes initially (guided by the density sensitivities) is, however, balanced by the moving material interface (result of shape sensitivities of the LS problem). Eventually, similar topologies at a later stage of the optimization process are observed. Although most holes are nucleated within the first third of the optimization process, the hole nucleation process is active, and holes are nucleated until the density shift enforces the maximum density at $\mathcal{D}_{it}=\mathcal{D}_{c}$.
The performance of the final design is not compromised by introducing a density shift. As is reported on the last column of Fig. \ref{fig:influenceOfShiftSFC}, the variation of the final strain energy is less than 1\%. Considering the results of the previous subsection where $\rho^0_{sh}=0.0$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:supportStructShiftAndNoShiftResults}), there is a small improvement on performance with an increasing shift.
\subsubsection{Influence of continuation strategy} \label{subsec:SupportStruc2DDensShift}
The final designs of different continuation settings for the density shift using the SFC approach are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:influenceOfContStepSizeAndSpam}.
A total of six (left) and eight (right) continuation steps are used in optimization problems with (a) 400, (b) 300, and (c) 200 design iterations.
The continuation scheme parameters for each case are provided on top of the final designs.
These converged designs demonstrate that the proposed approaches provide the flexibility of choosing different continuation step sizes, $\mathcal{D}_{st}$, and total number of continuation iterations, $\mathcal{D}_{c}$, to accelerate the design process. Similar performances are achieved for all configurations.
However, reducing the continuation step size decreases the number of holes nucleated. An excessively small continuation step size may cause the optimization process to prematurely converge to a suboptimal design.
Fig.\ref{fig:SFC_ObjAndConstEvol_contStepAndRange} shows the evolution of the objective and constraints of the designs in Fig. \ref{fig:influenceOfContStepSizeAndSpam}, separated by total number of design iterations.
Here, $\mathcal{D}_{max}$ represent the maximum number of design iterations allowed.
It can be seen that a larger number of continuation steps smoothes the transition of the density shift at the cost of more frequent modifications to the optimization problem.
Numerical experiments with the problems studied in this paper suggest that using five or more continuation steps of $\mathcal{D}_{st}\approx[15,25]$ provides an adequate seeding capabilities and circumvents large jumps in the densities updates.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/influenceOfContStepSizeAndSpam}
\caption{Final designs of 2D structural problem for multiple continuation step sizes and number of design iterations with a continuation strategy.}
\label{fig:influenceOfContStepSizeAndSpam}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/SFC_ObjAndConstEvol_contStepAndRange}
\caption{Evolution of objective and constraint of the 2D structural problem for two continuation step sizes and multiple total number of design iterations.}
\label{fig:SFC_ObjAndConstEvol_contStepAndRange}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{TFC optimization problem characteristics} \label{subsubsec:SupportStruc2DObjAndSensTFC}
Fig. \ref{fig:TFCObjAndConst_CompContr_SensContr} shows (a) the evolution of the objective and mass constraint, (b) the objective components contributions, and (c) the LS and density sensitivity contributions to the optimization problem for the TFC results with density shift of the 2D structural problem in Fig. \ref{fig:supportStructShiftAndNoShiftResults}.
Small oscillations are observed early on in the design process due to holes being nucleated; see Fig. \ref{fig:TFCObjAndConst_CompContr_SensContr}(a).
Since this occurs in low density regions, the nucleation process has a reduced effect on the objective and thus, the observed oscillations are small and quickly vanish.
A smooth design evolution is achieved in a later stage. This is in contrast to using alternatives like topological derivatives for which, in our experience, the size and number of holes nucleated may produce large jumps in the optimization process.
A slight increase in the objective at $\mathcal{D}_{c}=400$ originates from increasing the weight of the perimeter control penalty. However, its impact on the strain energy convergence is negligible.
Small jumps in the mass constraint, $g_1$, at every continuation step update are consequence of sudden increments in mass due to the density shift.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/TFCObjAndConst_CompContr_SensContr}
\caption{Evolution of (a) objective and mass constraint, (b) logarithm of contributions of the components of the objectives; and (b) implicit sensitivities contributions (logarithms of norms) of the density and LS design variables for the 2D structural problem using the TFC approach.}
\label{fig:TFCObjAndConst_CompContr_SensContr}
\end{figure}
~\\
\textit{Objective components contributions}
The logarithm of the contributions of each objective component (i.e., $\Psi$, $P_{Per}$, $P_{Reg}$, and $P_{\rho\phi}$; see Eq. \ref{eq:Ex1OptProbSetup}), are provided in Fig. \ref{fig:TFCObjAndConst_CompContr_SensContr}(b).
The optimization problem is at all times completely dominated by the strain energy.
The coupling, LS regularization and perimeter control penalties are on average two orders of magnitude lower.
As a result, the evolution of the objective is predominantly smooth despite considerable oscillations and periods of inactivity of $P_{\rho\phi}$; see Fig. \ref{fig:TFCObjAndConst_CompContr_SensContr}(b).
The intermittent non-zero TFC penalty contribution is a direct consequence of its definition in Eq. \ref{eq:TFCFomAllDomain}. Intermediate densities larger than $\rho_{th}$ may shift up or down, when a hole is nucleated or due to the moving interface front.
Sudden increments in the coupling penalty represent an intermediate density dropping below $\phi_{th}$.
~\\
\textit{LS and Density sensitivities}
The interplay of the LS and density variables in the TFC approach is examined with Fig. \ref{fig:TFCObjAndConst_CompContr_SensContr}(c). The logarithm of the norms of the sensitivities with respect to the LS and density variables show that initially the density field drives the optimization process. Then, gradually with the introduction of holes, the shape sensitivities take over. The influence of the density sensitivities vanishes once the shifted densities have reached the maximum density at $\mathcal{D}_{c} = 400$.
A pure LS problem with shape sensitivities only is recovered for $\mathcal{D}_{it} > \mathcal{D}_{c}$.
\subsubsection{TFC thresholds}
As explained in Section \ref{subsec:TwoFieldCoupling}, the TFC coupling penalty is bounded by the LS ($\phi_{th}$) and the density ($\rho_{th}$) thresholds.
To avoid robustness issues in the hole nucleation process, $\phi_{th}$ is set to a number below the zero isocontour ($\phi_{th}= 0.25\phi_{low}$ in this example). As long as this condition is satisfied, no significant changes are observed in the hole nucleation process.
Similarly, the density threshold is constrained by the uniform density field $\rho(\mathbf{X})=\rho_0$ used at the beginning of the optimization process.
However, unlike the LS threshold, different settings of the density threshold can have a considerable impact in the initial stages of the hole nucleation process, as is demonstrated below.
Snapshots of the evolution of the 2D structural design problem are presented in Fig. \ref{fig:influenceOfDensThTFC} to assess the influence of setting the initial density threshold closer to the initial constant density field.
The designs at $\mathcal{D}_{it}$=[50, 100, 150, 500] for $\rho_{th}^0$=[$0.1\rho_0$, $0.3\rho_0$, $0.5\rho_0$] separated by rows, show significant variations in the hole nucleation process.
As expected, setting $\rho^0_{th}$ closer to $\rho_0$ promotes the nucleation of holes earlier given that the penalty is active earlier in the design process.
The final designs for different $\rho_{th}^0$ values exhibit slightly different topologies but similar performances.
Also, as seen for the SFC approach previously, there is an interplay between the densities and the LS interface front until the density shift removes all intermediate densities. As long as intermediate densities exist, a hole can be nucleated if it is advantageous.
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figs/influenceOfDensThTFC}
\caption{Snapshots of the evolution of the 2D structural problem using the TFC approach from left to right are shown using different initial density threshold per row.}
\label{fig:influenceOfDensThTFC}
\end{figure*}
Overall, similar performances are achieved using a wide range of choices for parameters in both the single- and two-field strategies, demonstrating the robustness of these approaches with respect to algorithmic parameters.
\subsection{Example 2: beam} \label{sec:MbbBeam3D}
A 3D beam problem is used to investigate the effect of the SIMP penalizations in the density field, as well as the behavior of both approaches compared to LS-based with initial hole seeding and density-based TO.
The design domain of size $240\times40\times40$ is simply supported weakly at all four corners at the bottom face.
A traction load $T_{X_2} = -10.0$ is applied over the center of the top face.
Due to symmetry, only one quarter of the full domain is analyzed and optimized.
The problem setup is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3dMbbBeamProbSetup}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/mbbBeam3DProbSetup}
\caption{Problem setup for the classical Beam problem in 3D. Due to symmetry, only one quarter of the domain is simulated.}
\label{fig:3dMbbBeamProbSetup}
\end{figure}
The optimization problem formulation remains the same as in the previous example (see Eq. \ref{eq:Ex1OptProbSetup}). The initial objective weights are $w_i$ = [0.92, 0.001, 0.01, 0.05]. The perimeter weight, $w_2$, is updated at every continuation step from 0.001 to 0.01, using Eq. \ref{eq:expFuncContInc} with an exponent of 3.0. A mass constraint of $\gamma_m = 0.20$ is enforced.
The density field is shifted using the augmented SIMP continuation scheme discussed in Section \ref{subsec:DensTO}; and the density threshold for the TFC approach is gradually reduced to zero using Eq. \ref{eq:expFuncContDec}.
The continuation parameters are listed in Table \ref{tab:Ex2DefContParams}. The design domain is initialized with a uniform density of $\rho_0=0.2$ everywhere but along the prescribed BCs, where the density is set to 1.0 for the duration of the optimization process.
\begin{table}[hb!]
\caption{\label{tab:Ex2DefContParams}Continuation parameters for the beam problem.}
\center
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline
Parameter & Value\\\hline
Continuation step size& $\mathcal{D}_{st}=20$ \\
Number of design iterations in continuation & $\mathcal{D}_{c}=120$ \\
Maximum number of design iterations & $\mathcal{D}_{max}=150$ \\
Continuation density threshold exponent & $\eta_{\rho_{th}}=2.0$ \\
Continuation density shift exponent & $\eta_{\rho_{sh}}=2.0$ \\
Initial density threshold & $\rho^0_{th}=0.75 \rho_0$ \\
Initial density shift & $\rho^0_{sh}=0.2$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{SIMP density penalization}
Large exponents (i.e., $\beta_{\rho} \geq 3.0$) reduce intermediate densities at the cost of more nonlinear optimization problems and poorer conditioned finite element problems.
Contrary to these methods, to converge to a [0-1] density field we employ the density shift scheme presented in Section \ref{subsec:DensTO}.
To examine the reliance of the proposed approaches on the penalization of the densities for the material description (see Eq. \ref{eq:varyingMatPropForm}), different exponents in the power law are considered.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/mbbBeamFinalCombinedDesigns}
\caption{Final designs for both the SFC (left), and TFC (right) approaches using SIMP exponents of $\beta_{\rho}=[1.0, 2.0, 3.0]$.}
\label{fig:mbbBeamFinalCombinedDesigns}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figs/mbbBeamSimpExpEvolSFCAndTFC}
\caption{Evolution of the strain energy in the 3D beam problem using the (a) SFC and (b) TFC approaches. Snapshots of designs before and after updating continuation parameters are colored by the Young's modulus.}
\label{fig:mbbBeamSimpExpEvolSFCAndTFC}
\end{figure*}
The final designs of the beam problem using the single and two-field strategies with penalizations of $\beta_{\rho}$=[1.0, 2.0, 3.0] are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamFinalCombinedDesigns}. Their strain energy is also reported to evaluate structural performance.
All designs converge to a [0-1] density distribution as a consequence of the density shift.
Note that, although not shown, intermediate densities were also observed without the shifting scheme, in accordance with the findings in Example 1 for the 2D problem.
For all $\beta_{\rho}$ values, similar truss-like structures with partial shear-webs are obtained. When using the TFC approach, the performances for the designs does not differ significantly with changing $\beta_{\rho}$. For the SFC approach, however, the strain energy of the optimized design increases noticeably with increasing $\beta_{\rho}$ value. Due to the tight coupling for density and LS fields, and the penalizations of intermediate densities, a more truss-like structure with inferior performance is developed as the density penalization is increased.
Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamSimpExpEvolSFCAndTFC} contains the objective evolution using both approaches together with snapshots of the quarter design domain colored by the Young's modulus to visualize the effect of the penalization. Designs before and after updating the shifted density field with a continuation scheme are presented for all $\beta_{\rho}$. A considerable initial increase in the strain energy, $\Psi$, is observed in all cases at early stages of the optimization process. The magnitude of the peaks depends on the strength of the density penalization since more material with intermediate densities is removed as $\beta_{\rho}$ increases.
A small penalization slows the hole nucleation process.
In the TFC approach, a low initial density threshold $\rho_{th}^0$ further delays hole nucleation; see also Section \ref{subsubsec:SupportStruc2DObjAndSensTFC}.
We found that increasing the density shift parameter, $\rho_{sh}$, in the continuation strategy can compromise robustness if a small $\beta_{\rho}$ is employed, as seen in Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamSimpExpEvolSFCAndTFC}(a) for the SFC approach.
The evolution of the strain energy is mostly smooth with small influences of the $\beta_{\rho}$ parameter for $\beta_{\rho}$ = [2.0, 3.0].
However, due to a more diffuse density field with intermediate densities, applying the density shift can result in abrupt design changes, as seen for $\beta_{\rho}=1.0$.
Since the shift increments become larger with every continuation step if $\eta_{\rho_{sh}}>1$ (see Fig. \ref{fig:DensShiftScheme}), this effect is more pronounced later in the optimization process. This can be especially detrimental in designs that favor thin features and for the SFC approach where intermediate densities are found in the vicinity of the interface by construction. The snapshots of the designs at $\mathcal{D}_{it}=100$ and $\mathcal{D}_{it}=101$ for $\beta_{\rho}=1.0$ in Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamSimpExpEvolSFCAndTFC}(a) illustrate this scenario.
In contrast, a less noticeable impact of updating the density shift on the design evolution is observed in the TFC approach, as seen in Fig.\ref{fig:mbbBeamSimpExpEvolSFCAndTFC}(b). In this case the densities transition to 1.0 faster, especially near the interface.
Overall, the stability and robustness of both coupling methods rely to a certain extent on penalizing the intermediate densities. For the problems studied in this paper, values for SIMP penalization in the range of $\beta_{\rho}$=[2.0-3.0] allow for the formation of fine geometric features and a smoother optimization process while avoiding ill-conditioning.
For other problems where a SIMP penalization is insufficient, alternative techniques for removing intermediate densities might need to be considered.
\subsubsection{Comparing TO approaches}
The mesh dependency and performance of the SFC and TFC in comparison to LS TO with initial hole seeding, LSO (LS only), and standard SIMP are investigated.
Final designs obtained by all four TO approaches are shown Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamLsAndDensOnlyAndCombAppMeshRef} for three levels of refinement, i.e., element lengths of $h=[4.0, 2.0, 1.0]$. In the LSO setups, 12 holes were initially seeded and a total of 300 design iterations without continuation were employed.
The final SIMP designs are post-processed by applying an isovolume filter on the density field such that a total volume of 1.2$\times10^4$ is preserved in all designs.
Filtered densities are penalized by an exponent of 2.0 in the standard SIMP, SFC and TFC results.
The same filter radius is used in all cases; see Table \ref{tab:commonOptProbParams}.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figs/mbbBeamLsAndDensOnlyAndCombAppMeshRef}
\caption{Final designs using meshes with element sizes $h$=[4.0, 2.0,1.0] of classical SIMP, LS-XFEM only (LSO) with initial hole seeding, and using the SFC and TFC approaches.}
\label{fig:mbbBeamLsAndDensOnlyAndCombAppMeshRef}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figs/mbbBeamLsApproachesVoidEvolComparison}
\caption{Snapshots of void domain for LSO with initial hole seeding, and using the SFC and TFC approaches for $h=1.0$.}
\label{fig:mbbBeamLsApproachesVoidEvolComparison}
\end{figure*}
The SIMP results transition from a truss-like design to a shear-web structure as the mesh is refined (see first row of Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamLsAndDensOnlyAndCombAppMeshRef}). Suboptimal performances are attained in these designs due to intermediate densities not completely removed with a constant SIMP exponent of 2.0. The coarser the mesh, the more noticeable is this effect.
A SIMP approach that projects the density field (e.g., see \cite{wang2011projection}) could have been used instead to mitigate the intermediate densities issue. However, to keep consistency in the comparison and assess the resemblance of the density problem and the coupling approaches in terms of their topologies, the same density penalization scheme is used in all cases.
The LSO final designs are continuous walls connecting the two flanges at the top and bottom of the beam with a thickness of about the element edge length.
Wrinkles are observed in all three levels of refinement.
However, they are reduced as the mesh is refined.
These spatial oscillations in the topology are typically mitigated by using either a larger filter radius or higher order interpolation functions.
Nevertheless, in order to keep consistency in the comparison with the proposed approaches, the same filter radius and linearly interpolated fields are used in all runs.
As reported in the last two rows of Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamLsAndDensOnlyAndCombAppMeshRef}, the SFC and TFC approaches experience smaller variations in final topologies and performance with mesh refinement.
In both cases, the density field promotes final designs with shear-webs that are typically seen for LS-XFEM results with initial hole seeding.
Despite using a density field, they retain the desired LS-XFEM feature of having an increased geometrical resolution in design with coarser meshes. Furthermore, the TFC approach seems to provide more consistent results with mesh refinement.
Note also that the SFC and TFC strategies have an inherent tendency to form bulkier features due to the SIMP penalization.
In settings where the initial hole pattern avoids triggering suboptimal final designs, like the one shown in this example, pure LS results are marginally better than using the SFC and TFC strategies. However, this is might not the case in general.
Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamLsApproachesVoidEvolComparison} shows snapshots of the void domain to highlight the hole nucleation process of the LSO, SFC, and TFC beam designs in Fig. \ref{fig:mbbBeamLsAndDensOnlyAndCombAppMeshRef} using a mesh of size $h=1.0$.
The evolution of the material removed by each approach is shown at $\mathcal{D}_{it}$=[5, 25, 50, 100].
The initial hole pattern in the LSO approach favors the removal of material along the external boundaries of the domain, which eventually results in a structure with internal shear-webs. In contrast, the holes nucleated in both the SFC and TFC are concentrated inside the design domain. Thus, in this particular case, the hole seeding promotes the formation of the shear-webs along the external boundaries.
\subsection{Example 3: bracket} \label{sec:Bracket3D}
Finally, the proposed hole nucleation approaches are applied to a complex engineering design problem.
The complexity of this design problem stems from the 3D geometry of the design domain and the multiple objective components and constraints.
The goal of this design problem is to find a structure that supports a payload given a set of supports and bolts for attaching the structure to the payload.
Fig. \ref{fig:bracket3DProbSetup} shows the design domain ($\Omega_{I}^{d}$) colored in light grey, while part of the non-design domains for the payload box ($\Omega_{II}^{p}$), the supports ($\Omega_{II}^{s}$), and bolts ($\Omega_{II}^{b}$) colored in dark grey. Bolts and supports are modeled via hollow cylinders.
Side and bottom views are provided in addition to a 3D view to better visualize the constrained subdomains.
A uniform pressure load acts on the top surface of the payload box. The entire structure is subject to a body force in $X_2$ direction, representing an equivalent shock loading.
The material properties and load conditions for this static problem can be found in Table \ref{tab:ex3BracketMatProps}.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{\label{tab:ex3BracketMatProps}Material properties and load conditions employed in bracket problem.}
\center
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline
Property & Value\\\hline
Young's Modulus ($\Omega_{I}$, solid) & $E_S = 1.138$x$10^7$ [N/$cm^2$]\\
Young's Modulus ($\Omega_{II}$, void) & $E_V = 1.138$x$10^{-1}$ [N/$cm^2$] \\
Material Density ($\Omega_{I}$, solid) & $\theta_S = 4.43$x$10^{-5}$ [kg/$cm^3$]\\
Material Density ($\Omega_{II}$, void) & $\theta_V = 0.0$ [kg/$cm^3$]\\
Poisson Ratio ($\Omega_{I}$ and $\Omega_{II}$) & $\nu_S = \nu_V$ = 0.342 [-] \\
Pressure load ($T_{X_2}$) & 1.2x$10^4$ [N/$cm^2$] \\
Maximum stress ($\boldsymbol{\sigma}_{max}$) & 398.7 [N/$cm^2$] \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{\label{tab:Ex3DefContParams}Continuation parameters for the bracket problem.}
\center
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
\hline
Parameter & Value\\\hline
Continuation step size& $\mathcal{D}_{st}=25$ \\
Number of design iterations in continuation & $\mathcal{D}_{c}=125$ \\
Maximum number of design iterations & $\mathcal{D}_{max}=185$ \\
Continuation density threshold exponent & $\eta_{\rho_{th}}=2.0$ \\
Continuation density shift exponent & $\eta_{\rho_{sh}}=2.0$ \\
Initial density threshold & $\rho^0_{th}=0.85 \rho_0$ \\
Initial density shift & $\rho^0_{sh}=0.1$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.4\linewidth]{figs/bracket3DProbSetup}
\caption{Bracket problem design and non-design domains in multiple views.}
\label{fig:bracket3DProbSetup}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/bracketMeshViews}
\caption{3D and plane views of the locally refined mesh used in the bracket problem.}
\label{fig:bracketMeshViews}
\end{figure}
The objective of this optimization problem is to minimize the mass, $\mathcal{M}$, of the structure that supports the payload box.
The optimization problem formulation is the following:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Ex3OptProbSetup}
\begin{aligned}
\underset{s}{\min}~z(\mathbf{s}) & =
z_{sc} \bigg(
w_1~\mathcal{M} (\mathbf{s})
+
w_2~\Psi (\mathbf{s},\mathbf{u(\mathbf{s})})/\Psi_0
+
w_3~P_{\hat\phi}(\mathbf{s}) \\
& +
w_4~P_{Per}(\mathbf{s})
+
w_5~ P_{Reg}(\mathbf{s})
+
w_6~P_{\rho\phi}(\mathbf{s})
\bigg)
\\
s.t.:
g_1 & = \frac{\mathcal{M} (\mathbf{s}) }{\Omega_{I}+\Omega_{II}} - \gamma_m\leq 0.
\\
g_2 & = w_{P_{\hat\phi}} ~ P_{\hat\phi}(\mathbf{s}) \leq 0.
\\
g_3 & = w_{P_{\tau}} ~ P_{\tau}({\mathbf{s},\mathbf{u(\mathbf{s})}}) \leq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The first term in the objective is the mass of the design domain to be minimized.
The second term is a strain energy component added to prevent an overly aggressive removal of mass early in the optimization process and promote a sufficiently stiff structure.
The penalty term, $P_{\hat\phi}$, is formulated as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:LsBracketNonDomPen}
\begin{aligned}
P_{\hat\phi} & =
\frac{\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_D} ( \phi(\mathbf{X}) - \hat\phi(\mathbf{X}) )^2 dV }{\displaystyle\int_{\Gamma_D} dA},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with the field $\hat\phi(\mathbf{X})$ defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:tildeLsFuncBracket}
\begin{aligned}
\hat\phi(\mathbf{X}) & =
\begin{cases}
\phi_{low}, & \forall~\boldsymbol X \in \Omega_D / (\Omega^{d}_{I} \cup \Omega^{p}_{II} \cup \Omega^{s}_{II} \cup \Omega^{b}_{II}), \\
\phi_{low}, & \forall~\boldsymbol X \in \Gamma_{(\Omega^{d}_{I} \cap \Omega^{p}_{II}) / \Omega^{b}_{II} }, \\
\phi_{up}, & \forall~\boldsymbol X \in (\Omega^{p}_{II} \cup \Omega^{s}_{II} \cup \Omega^{b}_{II}), \\
\phi(\mathbf{X}), & otherwise;
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
based on the previously defined subdomains highlighted in Fig. \ref{fig:bracket3DProbSetup}.
Through the field defined in Eq. \ref{eq:tildeLsFuncBracket}, the LS penalization in Eq. \ref{eq:LsBracketNonDomPen} (i) forces the support structure to stay within the design domain, (ii) prevents contact between the payload box and the support structure except for the bolts, and (iii) avoids altering the LSF in the payload box, attachment bolts and the supports.
The remaining penalty terms in the objective ($P_{Per}$, $P_{Reg}$, and $P_{\rho\phi}$) are defined in Section \ref{subsec:TFCOptProbForm}.
Similar to the beam example, the perimeter weight, $w_4$, is updated at every continuation step from 0.0001 to 0.01, using Eq. \ref{eq:expFuncContInc} with an exponent of 3.0.
In addition to considering the mass in the objective, a mass constraint ($g_1$, with $\gamma_m=0.30$) is imposed to represent an upper limit on the mass.
The stress constraint, $g_3$, enforces the volume of solid in which the stress exceeds the maximum von Mises stress, $\sigma_{VM}^{max}$, to zero. The stress penalty,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stressConstForm}
\begin{aligned}
P_{\tau}
=
\int_{\Gamma_{D}} \hat\tau(\mathbf{X}) dV,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
is an integral over the volume of the scalar stress field, $\hat\tau(\mathbf{X})$, defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stressFuncForm}
\begin{aligned}
\hat\tau(\mathbf{X})
=
\begin{cases}
\left[ (\tau- \sigma_{VM}^{max})^2 + \xi^2_{\tau} \right]^{1/2} - \xi_{\tau}, & \forall~\tau- \sigma_{VM}^{max}>0,\\
0, & \forall~\tau- \sigma_{VM}^{max} \leq 0.
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The parameter $ \xi_{\tau}$ is set to 0.1, and $\sigma_{VM}^{max}$ is given by the yield stress of Ti-6Al-4V, reduced by a safety factor of 2.0 (see Table \ref{tab:ex3BracketMatProps}).
This last constraint remains inactive initially but controls the mass removal effect towards the final stages of the optimization process.
The weights employed in this problem in the objective components and constraints are $w_1=5.0$, $w2 = 0.005$, $w_3=w_{P_{\hat\phi}}=5000.0$, $w_4=0.0001$, $w_5=0.01$, $w_6=10.0$, and $w_{P_{\tau}}=1.0\times10^4$.
The objective scaling parameter is set to $z_{sc} = 10.0$.
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figs/bracketEvolStrEnAngMassWithDesigns}
\caption{Snapshots of the bracket design problem at iterations $\mathcal{D}_{it}$= [10, 15, 25, 50, 100].}
\label{fig:bracketEvolStrEnAngMassWithDesigns}
\end{figure*}
The design optimization problem is embedded in a computational domain of 15.24$\times$10.16$\times$10.16 $cm^3$, and solved using the box mesh in Fig. \ref{fig:bracketMeshViews}.
The mesh is locally refined within the design domain to reduce the computational cost.
A 3D view of the entire mesh and two plane views at the center of the mesh in the $X_1-X_2$ and $X_2-X_3$ planes are shown on the top right and bottom right sides, respectively.
The design domain, supports and bolts are immersed into this mesh.
Note that the mesh transitions occur outside the design domain $\Omega_I^d$; hence, no special treatment of hanging nodes is needed in the optimization framework employed.
The initial density and the SIMP exponent are set to $\rho_0=0.2$ and $\beta{\rho}=2.0$, respectively. The continuation parameters for the density shift and density threshold can be found in Table \ref{tab:Ex3DefContParams}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{figs/bracket3DFinalDesigns}
\caption{Final bracket designs for both the SFC (top) and TFC (bottom) approaches.}
\label{fig:bracket3DFinalDesigns}
\end{figure}
Snapshots of the designs for both coupling strategies are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:bracketEvolStrEnAngMassWithDesigns}. The structure colored in light grey evolves during the optimization process while the non-design domains in dark grey remain fixed.
The TFC approach favors removing material internally, while the SFC approach nucleates less holes and evolves the design along the solid-void interface instead. This is observed predominantly for $\mathcal{D}_{it} = [15,25]$ in Fig. \ref{fig:bracketEvolStrEnAngMassWithDesigns}.
In both cases, most of the topological changes occur within the first 30 design iterations consequence of nearly all holes being nucleated early in the optimization process.
Well-defined geometries that satisfy the geometric and stress constraints are attained in the final designs, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:bracket3DFinalDesigns}.
The SFC scheme converges to a design with more thin-walled features in the front section of the domain, while the TFC final design shows more truss-like features.
Despite the topological differences, both approaches converge to final designs with similar performances.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figs/bracket3DVertCutsWithDensFieldAndHist}
\caption{Snapshots of bracket problem at $\mathcal{D}_{it}$=[10, 15, 25, 35, 50, 100] together with histograms of their density distributions using SFC (left) and TFC (right) schemes are shown.}
\label{fig:bracket3DVertCutsWithDensFieldAndHist}
\end{figure*}
Cuts of the design domains of the bracket at $\mathcal{D}_{it}$=[10, 15, 25, 35, 50, 100] are shown for both approaches in Fig. \ref{fig:bracket3DVertCutsWithDensFieldAndHist}. The $X_3-X_2$ plane views at [4.24, 6.73, 9.22, 11.73, 14.73] $cm$ away from the front boundary are colored by the shifted density field.
Each design is accompanied by a histogram of the density distribution.
The histograms were constructed by computing a volume ratio, $V_{rt}$, in seven density intervals.
The parameter $V_{rt}$ is defined as the ratio between the volume of material contained on each density interval and the total material volume of the design domain.
Despite starting from the same unbiased initial shifted density distribution, clear differences in their evolution are observed between the single and two-field approaches.
The histograms illustrate more disperse shifted density distributions for the SFC throughout the hole nucleation process. As a consequence, the SFC approach shows less pronounced topological changes at early stages of the optimization process.
Although in both cases a [0-1] density distribution is achieved due to the density shift, defining the density field in TFC approach by an independent set of variables allows for faster convergence.
Intermediate densities present in the vicinity of the material interface by construction in the SFC approach partially restrict, and thus decelerate, the evolution of the design.
Overall, the results show that the proposed SFC and TFC LS TO approaches are well suited to tackle complex structural optimization problems with stress constraints.
\section{Conclusions and Future Work} \label{sec:Concl}
Two LS TO approaches that use a density field to nucleate holes during the optimization process and accelerate convergence were developed and studied.
LS and density fields were coupled via (i) a single vector of abstract optimization variables (SFC); and (ii) two vectors of optimization variables that govern them independently through a penalty term in the objective (TFC).
In both cases no initial seeding is required, and the LS and density fields are optimized simultaneously.
Contrary to classical density-based methods, which require sufficient penalization of intermediate densities to converge to a [0-1] material distribution, here intermediate densities are eliminated by introducing a density shift. A full material density distribution is achieved by gradually shifting the densities through a continuation scheme.
Benchmark numerical examples in 2D and 3D, as well as a geometrically complex engineering application demonstrated that the proposed approaches are overall robust with respect to various algorithmic parameters.
We also observed some influence of the density penalization on the optimized design.
These coupling strategies can be extended to incorporate both multiple LSs and density interpolation schemes using either explicit or implicit LS TO approaches.
In future work, the proposed approach should be studied for problems with different objectives and constraints, and for problems involving different physics models.
Future work could also investigate enhanced formulation of the SFC and TFC approaches to gain feature size control and robustness against shape imperfections.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
All authors acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation (CMMI-1463287). The third author acknowledges the support of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) under the TRADES program (agreement HR0011-17-2-0022). The opinions and conclusions presented in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsoring organizations.
|
\section{{\bf Introduction}}\label{intro}
Throughout this paper, we denote by $G$ the modular group $\mbox{PSL}(2, \Z)$, whose elements are all the M\"{o}bius transformations $z\mapsto (az+b)/(cz+d)$, $a,b,c,d\in\Z$, $ad-bc=1$. It is known (\cite{HM}) that $G$ has the finite presentation $<x,y : x^2=y^3=1>$, where $x$ and $y$ are, respectively, the transformations $z\mapsto -1/z$ and $z \mapsto (z-1)/z$. The modular group belongs to a more general family of groups called Hecke groups. A Hecke group $H_n$, $3\leq n \in \N$, is the group generated by the two M\"{o}bius transformations $z\mapsto -1/z$ and $z\mapsto z+\lambda_n$, where $\lambda_n=2\cos(\pi/n)$. It can be shown that $G \cong H_3$. Actions of the modular group, and Hecke groups in general, on many discrete and non-discrete structures have played significant roles in different branches of mathematics (see \cite{CD} for example).
Among the important discrete structures upon which the modular group acts are quadratic number fields. For a {\it real} quadratic number field $L=\Q(\sqrt{m})$, Q. Mushtaq (in \cite{Mush1}) studied the action of $G$ on the following subset of $L$:
$$\{\,\frac{a+\sqrt{m}}{c}\in L \; | \; a,\frac{a^2-m}{c},c \in \Z \,\}.$$
Subsequent works by several authors considered properties emerging from this action (see for instance \cite{MR}, \cite{MZ}, and \cite{Mush2}).
We shift the emphasis in this work towards studying the action of the modular group on {\it imaginary} quadratic number fields. Throughout this paper, $n$ denotes a square-free positive integer. Let $K_{-n}$ be the imaginary quadratic number field $\Q(\sqrt{-n})$, and consider the following subset of $K_{-n}$:
$$M_{-n}:=\{\,\frac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c}\in K_{-n}\; | \; a,b=\frac{a^2+n}{c},c \in \Z \,\}. $$
It can be checked that $M_{-n}$ is the collection of the complex roots of all quadratic polynomials of the form $cx^2-2ax+b$ of the fixed discriminant $-4n$, with $a,b,c\in \Z$ and $0\leq a^2 < bc$.
It is not hard to see that there is a natural action of $G$ on $K_{-n}$ (inherited from the action of $G$ on $\mathbb{C}$). M. Ashiq and Q. Mushtaq in \cite{Ash-Mush} studied the action of a certain {\it subgroup} of $G$ on $M_{-n}$.
The aim of this paper is to study the action of $G$ itself on $M_{-n}$ and, in particular, count the number of orbits in $M_{-n}$ emerging from this action and present an interesting congruence property of this number (Theorems \ref{orbits 1} and \ref{orbits 2}).
\section{{\bf The action of $G$ on $M_{-n}$}}\label{properties}
For $\alpha=\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c} \in M_{-n}$, we use the notation $a_\alpha:=a$, $b_\alpha:=b$, and $c_\alpha:=c$, and we call the ordered triple $(a_\al, b_\al, c_\al)$ {\it the signature of $\al$}.
\begin{prop}
$M_{-n}$ is a $G$-set.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
As $G$ acts on $K_{-n}$, it remains only to show that $M_{-n}$ is invariant under this action. Let $\alpha=\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c} \in M_{-n}$. To show that $t(\alpha) \in M_{-n}$ for every $t \in G$, it suffices to show that $x(\alpha), y(\alpha) \in M_{-n}$ since $\{x, y\}$ is a complete set of generators of $G$. We see, first, that
$$x(\alpha)=-1/\alpha = \frac{-c}{a+\sqrt{-n}}=\frac{-c(a-\sqrt{-n})}{a^2+n}=\frac{-a+\sqrt{-n}}{b}.$$ Noticing that $a_{x(\alpha)}=-a \in \Z$, $c_{x(\alpha)}=b \in \Z$, and $b_{x(\alpha)}=\cfrac{a_{x(\alpha)}^2+n}{c_{x(\alpha)}}=\cfrac{a^2 +n}{b}=c\in\Z$, we get that $x(\alpha)\in M_{-n}$.
Similarly, we see that
$$y(\alpha)=1-\frac{1}{\al}=1+x(\al)=1+\frac{-a+\sqrt{-n}}{b}=\frac{(-a+b)+\sqrt{-n}}{b}.$$
As $a_{y(\alpha)}=-a+b \in \Z$, $c_{y(\alpha)}=b \in \Z$, and $$b_{y(\alpha)}=\frac{a_{y(\alpha)}^2+n}{c_{y(\alpha)}}=\frac{(-a+b)^2+n}{b}=\frac{a^2-2ab+b^2+n}{b}=-2a+b+\frac{a^2+n}{b}=-2a+b+c \in\Z,$$
we get that $y(\alpha)\in M_{-n}$ as well.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark 1}
For some use in the sequel, the following table summarizes the action of each $t\in \{x, y, y^2\}$ on an arbitrary element $\alpha=\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c} \in M_{-n}$. The first two lines of the table were verified in the above proof, while the third line can be checked in a similar manner.\\
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c| c c c c c}
\hline
$t(\al)$ & $a_{t(\al)}$ & \quad & $b_{t(\al)}$ & \quad & $c_{t(\al)}$\\
\hline
$x(\al)$ & $-a$ & $\quad$ & $c$ & $\quad$ & $b$\\
$y(\al)$ & $b-a$ & $\quad$ & $-2a+b+c$ & $\quad$ & $b$\\
$y^2(\al)$ & $c-a$ & $\quad$ & $c$ & $\quad$ & $-2a+b+c$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{center} \tablename{$\;$1}: Signatures of $x(\al), y(\al),$ and $y^2(\al)$ \end{center}
\end{remark}
We recall and introduce here some needed terminology.
\begin{dfn}(see \cite{Aslam})\hfill
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.] An element $\alpha \in M_{-n}$ is said to be {\it totally positive} (resp. {\it totally negative}) if $a_\alpha c_\alpha >0$ (resp. $a_\alpha c_\alpha <0$).
\item[2.] Define the map $\| . \|:M_{-n} \to \N\cup\{0\}$ by $\|\al\|=|a_\al|$. We call $\|\al\|$ {\it the norm of $\al$} (not to be confused with the classical notion of norm).
\end{enumerate}
\end{dfn}
\begin{dfn} For $\al\in M_{-n}$, we call the set $\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\}$ a {\it totally positive triple in $M_{-n}$} if $\al, y(\al),$ and $y^2(\al)$ are all totally positive. Denote the set of totally positive triples in $M_{-n}$ by $T^+(-n)$.
\end{dfn}
\begin{remark}\label{remark 2} For $\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c} \in M_{-n}$ and $b=\cfrac{a^2+n}{c}$, $bc$ is obviously always positive. Thus, $b$ and $c$ always have the same sign. So, an equivalent useful definition to the one given above can go like this: $\alpha \in M_{-n}$ is said to be totally positive if either $a_\alpha , b_\alpha, c_\alpha >0$ or $a_\al, b_\al, c_\al <0$; and $\alpha$ is said to be totally negative if either ($a_\al<0$ and $b_\al, c_\al >0$) or ($a_\al >0$ and $b_\al, c_\al <0$). Note that any $\al \in M_{-n}$ is either totally positive, totally negative, or has norm zero.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
For $n=5$, $\al=(1+\sqrt{-5})/2\in M_{-5}$ is obviously totally positive. From Table 1, we have $y(\al)=(2+\sqrt{-5})/3$ and $y^2(\al)=(1+\sqrt{-5})/3$. It is clear that $y(\al)$ and $y^2(\al)$ are both totally positive as well. So, $\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\}\in T^+(-5)$. Note, similarly, that $\al'=(-1+\sqrt{-5})/(-2)$, $y(\al')=(-2+\sqrt{-5})/(-3)$, and $y^2(\al')=(-1+\sqrt{-5})/(-3)$ are all totally positive and, thus, $\{\al', y(\al'), y^2(\al')\}\in T^+(-5)$.
\end{example}
As a matter of notation, for $\al\in M_{-n}$, we denote the orbit containing $\al$ in $M_{-n}$ under the action of $G$ by $\al^G$; that is $\al^G=\{\beta\in M_{-n}\;|\; \beta=t(\al) \; \mbox{for some $t\in G$}\}$. As the action of $G$ on every orbit is transitive, any element of the orbit can equally represent the orbit. This justifies the notation $\al^G$ for an orbit in $M_{-n}$ under the action of $G$. Denote the set of orbits in $M_{-n}$ under the action of $G$ by $\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})$; so $\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n}):=\{\al^G\;|\; \al\in M_{-n}\}$. We adopt the standard notation $d(n)$ for the number of positive divisors of $n$.
Now we state below our two main results, which give formulas that count the number of orbits $\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})$ as well as an interesting congruence property of such a number.
\begin{thm} \label{orbits 1}
Let $n$ be a square-free positive integer. Then the number of orbits in $M_{-n}$ under the action of $G$ is:
\begin{align*}
|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|&= \left \{ \begin{array} {c@{\quad;\quad}l} 2 & \mbox{if $n=1$} \\
d(n)+|T^+(-n)| & \mbox{otherwise}.
\end{array} \right. \\
&= \left \{ \begin{array} {c@{\quad;\quad}l} 2 & \mbox{if $n=1$}\\
4 & \mbox{if $n=3$} \\
d(n)+(2/3)|A^+(-n)| & \mbox{otherwise,}
\end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
where $A^+(-n)$ denotes the set of signatures $$\{(a,b,c)\in \N^3\;|\; \cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c}\in M_{-n},\; b=\cfrac{a^2+n}{c}, \; b>a, \; c>a\}.$$ Moreover, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})| \equiv 0\;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$ for $n\neq 1$ or $2$.
\end{thm}
For two positive integers $k\leq m$, denote by $d_{\leq k} (m)$ the number of positive divisors of $m$ which are less than or equal to $k$. For instance, $d_{\leq 4}(10)=2$ and $d_{\leq 10}(10)=d(10)=4$.
\begin{thm}\label{orbits 2}
Let $n > 3$ be a square-free integer. Then the number of orbits in $M_{-n}$ under the action of $G$ is:
$$|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|=d(n)+ \cfrac{2}{3}\;\sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}[ d(i^2+n)-2d_{\leq i} (i^2+n)].$$
\end{thm}
\section{{\bf Lemmas and Proofs of Theorems \ref{orbits 1} and \ref{orbits 2}}}
\subsection{{\bf Lemmas}}\hfill
Preparing for the proof of Theorems \ref{orbits 1} and \ref{orbits 2}, we consider some lemmas, some of which are interesting in their own right.
The following lemma shows that the sign of the denominators of elements in any given orbit is the same.
\begin{lem}\label{sign}
For $\al \in M_{-n}$, $\mbox{sign}(c_\beta)=\mbox{sign}(c_\al)$ for any $\beta \in \al^G$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It is sufficient to show that $c_{x(\al)}$, $c_{y(\al)}$, and $c_{y^2(\al)}$ have the same sign as $c_\al$. By Remark \ref{remark 2}, $b_\al$ and $c_\al$ have the same sign. Since $c_{x(\al)}=c_{y(\al)}=b_\al$ (Table 1), $c_{x(\al)}$ and $c_{y(\al)}$ have the same sign as $c_\al$. Since $b_{y^2(\al)}=c_\al$, $c_{y^2(\al)}$ have the same sign as $c_\al$ as well (because $c_{y^2(\al)}$ and $b_{y^2(\al)}$ have the same sign).
\end{proof}
The effect of the action of $x$ on elements of $M_{-n}$ and their norms is given below.
\begin{lem}\label{x}
Let $\al=\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c}\in M_{-n}$. Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.] $\al$ is totally negative if and only if $x(\al)$ is totally positive.
\item[2.] $\|\al\|=\|x(\al)\|$.
\item[3.] $\al$ has norm zero if and only if $x(\al)$ has norm zero.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}\hfill
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] From Table 1, notice that $a_{x(\al)}=-a$, $b_{x(\al)}=c$, and $c_{x(\al)}=b$. Suppose that $\al$ is totally negative. If $a<0$ and $b,c>0$, then it is clear that $a_{x(\al)}>0$ and $b_{x(\al)}, c_{x(\al)} >0$, which implies that $x(\al)$ is totally positive. The case $a>0$ and $b,c<0$ is similar. For the converse, suppose that $x(\al)$ is totally positive. If $a_{x(\al)}, b_{x(\al)}, c_{x(\al)}>0$, then $a<0$ and $b,c >0$, which implies that $\al$ is totally negative. The case $a_{x(\al)}, b_{x(\al)}, c_{x(\al)}<0$ is similar.
\item[2.] As $a_{x(\al)}=-a$, the claim follows immediately.
\item[3.] Follows from 2.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
Some aspects of the actions of $y$ and $y^2$ on elements of $M_{-n}$ and their norms are given below.
\begin{lem}\label{positive} Let $\al=\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c}\in M_{-n}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.] If $\al$ has norm zero, then $y(\al)$ and $y^2(\al)$ are both totally positive.
\item[2.] If $\al$ is totally negative, then $y(\al)$ and $y^2(\al)$ are both totally positive with $\|\al\|<\|y(\al)\|$ and $\|\al\|< \|y^2(\al)\|$.
\item[3.] The three elements $\al$, $y(\al)$, and $y^2(\al)$ are all totally positive if and only if either ($0<a$, $a<b$, and $a<c$) or ($0>a$, $a>b$, and $a>c$).
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}\hfill
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] Assume that $\|\al\|=0$ (i.e. $\al=\sqrt{-n}/c$). If $c>0$, it follows from Table 1 and Remark \ref{remark 2} that $a_{y(\al)}=b>0$ and $c_{y(\al)}=b>0$ and, thus, $y(\al)$ is totally positive. Similarly, $y^2(\al)$ is totally positive. If $c<0$, a similar argument shows that $y(\al)$ and $y^2(\al)$ are both totally positive in this case as well.
\item[2.] From Table 1, notice that $a_{y(\al)}=b-a$, $b_{y(\al)}=-2a+b+c$, $c_{y(\al)}=b$, $a_{y^2(\al)}=c-a$, $b_{y^2(\al)}=c$, and $c_{y^2(\al)}=-2a+b+c$. If $a<0$ and $b,c>0$, then it is clear that all the values $a_{y(\al)}, b_{y(\al)}, c_{y(\al)}, a_{y^2(\al)}, b_{y^2(\al)}, c_{y^2(\al)}$ are positive and, therefore, both $y(\al)$ and $y^2(\al)$ are totally positive. As for the norms in this case, we have
\begin{center}
$\|y(\al)\|=|b-a|=b-a>-a=\|\al\|\;\; \mbox{and}\;\; \|y^2(\al)\|=|c-a|=c-a> -a=\|\al\|.$\end{center}
The case $a>0$ and $b,c<0$ is dealt with in a similar manner.
\item[3.] Suppose that $\al$, $y(\al)$, and $y^2(\al)$ are all totally positive. Since $\al$ is totally positive, $a,b,c>0$ or $a,b,c<0$. Assume that $a,b,c>0$. Since $c_{y(\al)}=b>0$ and $y(\al)$ is totally positive, $a_{y(\al)}=b-a>0$. So $b>a$ as desired. On the other hand, since $b_{y^2(\al)}=c>0$ (and, hence, $c_{y^2(\al)}>0$) and $y^2(\al)$ is totally positive, $a_{y^2(\al)}=c-a>0$. So $c>a$ as desired. Similarly, if $a,b,c<0$, it follows that $a>b$ and $a>c$.
Conversely, suppose that $0<a$, $a<b$, and $a<c$. Since $ac>0$, $\al$ is totally positive. As $a_{y(\al)}=b-a>0$ and $c_{y(\al)}=b>0$, $y(\al)$ is totally positive too. Also, as $a_{y^2(\al)}=c-a>0$ and $b_{y^2(\al)}=c>0$ (and, hence, $c_{y^2(\al)}>0$), $y^2(\al)$ is totally positive as well. A similar argument works if $0>a$, $a>b$, and $a>c$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark 3}
It is apparent from the above lemma that for any triple $\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)$ of elements of $M_{-n}$, either all three elements are totally positive, one is totally negative and the other two are totally positive, or one is of norm zero and the other two are totally positive. This remark shall show to be useful shortly. In the terminology of coset diagrams (see \cite{MZ}, \cite{Mush1}, or \cite{T} for example), the triangle whose vertices are $\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)$ always has one of three properties: either all vertices are totally positive, one vertex is totally negative and the other two are totally positive, or one vertex is of norm zero and the other two are totally positive. We chose, however, to not use the machinery of coset diagrams in this paper as things could be handled using some combinatorial arguments.
\end{remark}
\begin{lem}\label{negative}
Every orbit in $M_{-n}$ under the action of $G$ contains a totally negative element.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Consider an orbit $\al^G$ for some $\al=\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c}\in M_{-n}$. By Remark \ref{remark 2}, $\al$ is either totally negative, totally positive, or has norm zero. If $\al$ is totally negative, then there is nothing to prove. If $\al$ is totally positive, then by Lemma \ref{x}, $x(\al)\in \al^G$ is totally negative. Finally, if $\|\al\|=0$, then it follows from Lemma \ref{positive} that $y(\al)$, for instance, is totally positive and, hence from Lemma \ref{x}, $xy(\al)\in \al^G$ is totally negative.
\end{proof}
The following lemma specifies the elements of $\C$ fixed by $x$ or $y$.
\begin{lem}\label{fixed}
Upon the action of $G$ on the complex numbers $\mathbb{C}$, the only numbers fixed by $x$ are $i, i/(-1)\in M_{-1}$ and the only numbers fixed by $y$ are $(1+\sqrt{-3})/2, (-1+\sqrt{-3})/(-2)\in M_{-3}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $z\in \C$ be such that $x(z)=z$. Then $z^2=-1$, which implies that $z=\pm i$. On the other hand, if $y(z)=z$, then $z^2-z+1=0$, which implies that $z=\cfrac{1\pm \sqrt{-3}}{2}$.
\end{proof}
Recall that $$T^+(-n):=\{\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\}\; |\; \mbox{$\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\in M_{-n}$ are all totally positive}\},$$
and consider the two sets of signatures of totally positive elements of $M_{-n}$ (by Lemma \ref{positive}):
$$A^+(-n):=\{(a,b,c)\in \N^3\;|\; \cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c}\in M_{-n},\; b=\cfrac{a^2+n}{c}, \; b>a, \; c>a\}$$
and
$$A^-(-n):=\{(-a,-b,-c)\in \N^3\;|\; \cfrac{a+\sqrt{-n}}{c}\in M_{-n},\; b=\cfrac{a^2+n}{c}, \; b<a, \; c<a\}.$$
We use, next, the action of the cyclic subgroup $G_y$ generated by $y$ on $M_{-n}$ induced from the action of $G$ to define an action of $G_y$ on both $A^+(-n)$ and $A^-(-n)$.
\begin{lem}\label{G_y}
Let $G_y$ be the cyclic subgroup of $G$ generated by $y$ and $A^+(-n)\neq \varnothing$. Then, $A^+(-n)$ and $A^-(-n)$ are $G_y$-sets.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For an element $(a,b,c)\in A^+(-n)$, there corresponds the unique (totally positive) element $\al$ of $M_{-n}$ whose signature is $(a,b,c)$. Using this correspondence, the action of $G_y$ on $M_{-n}$ induced from the action of $G$ on $M_{-n}$ can be used to define an action of $G_y$ on $A^+(-n)$ by letting the action of $y$ takes the signature of $\al$ to the signature of $y(\al)$ (according to Table 1); that is, $y\cdot (a,b,c)=(b-a, -2a+b+c, b)$. Note that $(b-a, -2a+b+c, b)$ is an element of $A^+(-n)$ too because $0<a_{y(\al)}=b-a$, $a_{y(\al)}=b-a<b-a+c-a=-2a+b+c=b_{y(\al)}$, and $a_{y(\al)}=b-a<b=c_{y(\al)}$. Verifying that this proposed action of $G_y$ on $A^+(-n)$ is really so is a straightforward matter. A similar proof works for $A^-(-n)$.
\end{proof}
The following two lemmas show, in particular, that the sets $A^+(-n)$ and $T^+(-n)$ are finite and give a formula that compares their respective cardinalities for $n\neq 3$.
\begin{lem}\label{a,b,c}
If $(a,b,c) \in A^+(-n)$, then $a\leq n/2$ and $b,c \leq (n+1)/2$. Furthermore, $|A^+(-n)| \leq n(n+1)/4$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $(a,b,c)\in A^+(-n)$. For the claimed bound on $a$, suppose to the contrary that $a>n/2$. So, $a=n/2 + t $ for some $t\geq 1/2$. Assume that $b\geq c$ (the case $b\leq c$ is treated similarly). Since $c>a$, set $c=a+s$ for some $s\in \N$. Now, $a^2+n = bc \geq c^2$ gives $(n/2+t)^2+n \geq (n/2+t+s)^2$, which implies the absurd inequality $n\geq s^2+ns +2ts\geq 1+n+2t\geq n+3$. Thus, $a\leq n/2$.
Due to the symmetry between $b$ and $c$, it suffices to prove the claimed bound for one of them, say $b$. Since $0<a<c$, $a+1\leq c $. So, $b=(a^2+n)/c \leq (a^2+n)/(a+1)$. If $a=1$, then $b\leq (n+1)/2$ and we are done in this case. Assume that $a>1$. We show first that $b< (n+2)/2$. We have the following string of implications:
\begin{align*}
a\leq n/2 &\Rightarrow 2a \leq n\\ &\Rightarrow 2a < n+2/(a-1)\\ &\Rightarrow 2a+1 < n+1 +2/(a-1)=n+(a+1)/(a-1)\\ &\Rightarrow (2a+1)(a-1)-(a+1) < n(a-1)\\ &\Rightarrow 2a^2-2a-2 < na-n\\ &\Rightarrow 2a^2+2n < na+2a +n +2\\ &\Rightarrow 2(a^2+n) < (n+2)(a+1)\\ &\Rightarrow b\leq (a^2+n)/(a+1)< (n+2)/2.
\end{align*}
Now, if $n$ is odd, then $(n+2)/2\in (1/2)+\Z$ and, so, $b\leq (n+2)/2 -1/2 =(n+1)/2$. If $n$ is even, then $(n+2)/2\in\Z$ and, so, $b \leq (n+2)/2 -1 =n/2 < (n+1)/2$. This proves the claimed upper bound of $b$ (and of $c$, by symmetry).
As for the bound on $|A^+(-n)|$, to determine any element $(a,b,c)\in A^+(-n)$ it suffices to be given $a$ and $b$ (as $c$ would then be determined by $c=(a^2+n)/b$) or to be given $a$ and $c$ (as $b$ would then be determined by $b=(a^2+n)/c$). So, the number of possible choices for $a$ and $b$ (or for $a$ and $c$) determines the possible cardinality of $A^+(-n)$. Thus, $|A^+(n)| \leq (n/2)\,((n+1)/2)=n(n+1)/4$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{triples}\hfill
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] $|A^+(-n)|=1$ if and only if $n=3$.
\item[2.]$|A^+(-n)| \equiv 0 \;(\mbox{mod} \;3)$ for $n\neq 3$.
\item[3.] $|T^+(-n)|=(2/3)\,|A^+(-n)|$ for $n\neq 3$
\end{itemize}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
\begin{itemize}
\item[1.] Let $n=3$. Since $(1,2,2)\in A^+(-3)$, $A^+(-3) \neq \varnothing$. Let $(a,b,c)\in A^+(-3)$. As $0<a\leq 3/2$ (Lemma \ref{a,b,c}), $a=1$. Since $c|(1^2+3)$ and $a<c$, $c=2$ or $4$. But $c\leq (3+1)/2$ (Lemma \ref{a,b,c}). So, $c=2$. Similarly, $b=2$. Thus, $A^+(-3)=\{(1,2,2)\}$. Conversely, assume that $A^+(-n)=\{(a,b,c)\}$. Let $\al$ be the element of $M_{-n}$ whose signature is $(a,b,c)$. By the proof of Lemma \ref{G_y}, the signature of $y(\al)$ is also in $A^+(-n)$. So, by the assumption on $A^+(-n)$, the signatures of $\al$ and $y(\al)$ are equal. This means that $\al$ is fixed by $y$. It, thus, follows from Lemma \ref{fixed} that $n=3$.
\item[2.]
Let $n\neq 3$. If $A^+(-n)=\varnothing$, then $|A^+(-n)|=0$ and we are done. Suppose that $A^+(-n)\neq \varnothing$. Let $(a,b,c)\in A^+(-n)$ and $\al$ the element of $M_{-n}$ whose signature is $(a,b,c)$. By Lemma \ref{G_y}, $G_y$ acts on $A^+(-n)$. Since the set $A^+(-n)$ is finite (by Lemma \ref{a,b,c}), the number of orbits in $A^+(-n)$ under the action of $G_y$ is finite as well. Since the totally positive triple $\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\}$ in $M_{-n}$ is invariant under the action of $G_y$, so is the corresponding triple $\{(a,b,c), (b-a, -2a+b+c, b), (c-a, c, -2a+b+c)\}$ in $A^+(-n)$ under the action of $G_y$. Since $n\neq 3$, the elements of the triple $\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\}$ are distinct and, thus, so are the elements of the corresponding triple $\{(a,b,c), (b-a, -2a+b+c, b), (c-a, c, -2a+b+c)\}$. This means that each orbit in $A^+(-n)$ consists precisely of three elements and, hence, $|A^+(-n)|$ is divisible by 3 as claimed.
\item[3.] Let $n\neq 3$. It is clear that the two sets $A^+(-n)$ and $A^-(-n)$ are disjoint and that there is a bijection between them. It can also be easily seen that the same arguments in parts 1 and 2 above apply also to $A^-(n)$. Let $\mathcal{O}^{G_y}(A^+(-n))$ and $\mathcal{O}^{G_y}(A^-(-n))$ be the sets of orbits in $A^+(-n)$ and $A^-(-n)$, respectively, under the action of $G_y$. It follows from the argument in the proof of Lemma \ref{G_y} and part 2 above that there is the bijection between $T^+(-n)$ and the disjoint union $\mathcal{O}^{G_y}(A^+(-n))\cup \mathcal{O}^{G_y}(A^-(-n))$ given by
$$\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\} \mapsto \{(a,b,c), (b-a, -2a+b+c, b), (c-a, c, -2a+b+c)\}.$$
Since $|\mathcal{O}^{G_y}(A^+(-n))|=(1/3)\,|A^+(-n)|=(1/3)\,|A^-(-n)|=|\mathcal{O}^{G_y}(A^-(-n))|$ and the two sets of orbits are disjoint, $|T^+(-n)|=(2/3)\,|A^+(-n)|$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark 4} By making use of a C$^{++}$ code that computes $A^+(-n)$ for all $1\leq n \leq 100$ with $n$ square-free, we display in Table 2 (see the Appendix) the values $d(n),|T^+(-n)|$, and $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|$ for all such $n$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lem}\label{divisors}
For each $n\in \mathbb{N}$, the cardinality of the set $M^0_{-n}:=\{\al\in M_{-n}\,|\, \|\al\|=0\}$ is $2d(n)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For an element $\al$ of $M_{-n}^0$, $b_\al=n/c_\al$. For $b_\al$ to be an integer, $c_\al$ must be a divisor of $n$. So,
$M_{-n}^0=\{\sqrt{-n}/c\,|\, c \; \mbox{divides}\; n\}$, which has cardinality $2d(n)$ (considering positive and negative divisors of $n$).
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{norm}
For $n\neq 1$, every orbit in $M_{-n}$ must contain either a unique pair of elements of norm zero or a unique totally positive triple; while for $n=1$, every orbit in $M_{-1}$ must contain a unique element of norm zero.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We deal with the uniqueness claims at the end of the proof. In an arbitrary orbit in $M_{-n}$, let $\al_1$ be a totally negative element (by Lemma \ref{negative}). By Lemma \ref{x}, $x(\al_1)$ is totally positive. If $yx(\al_1)$ and $y^2x(\al_1)$ are both totally positive, then we have reached at the totally positive triple $(x(\al_1), yx(\al_1), y^2x(\al_1))$, and we stop. Otherwise, one (and only one, by Lemma \ref{positive}) of $yx(\al_1)$ and $y^2x(\al_1)$ is totally negative. We set such a totally negative element as $\al_2$. We claim that $\|\al_2\|<\|\al_1\|$. If $\al_2=yx(\al_1)$, then (as $y^2(\al_2)=x(\al_1)$), it follows from Lemma \ref{positive} that $$\|\al_2\|< \|y^2(\al_2)\| = \|x(\al_1)\|=\|\al_1\|.$$
If, on the other hand, $\al_2=y^2x(\al_1)$, then (as $y(\al_2)=x(\al_1)$, it follows from Lemma \ref{positive} again that
$$\|\al_2\|< \|y(\al_2)\| = \|x(\al_1)\|=\|\al_1\|.$$ Repeating this process starting at $\al_2$ this time and proceeding in this manner, we either reach a totally positive triple at some point or, else, we keep obtaining totally negative elements $\al_1, \al_2, \al_3, \dots$ in the same orbit with $$\|\al_1\|>\|\al_2\| > \|\al_3\|> \dots$$ As the sequence $\|\al_1\|, \|\al_2\| , \|\al_3\|, \dots$ is a decreasing sequence of positive integers, the sequence must terminate. That is, if we never reach a totally positive triple, then there must exist a list of elements $\al_1, \al_2, \dots, \al_m, \al_{m+1}$ in the orbit, with $m\geq 1$, such that $\al_1, \al_2, \dots, \al_m$ are totally negative and $\al_{m+1}$ has norm zero. Now, by Lemma \ref{x}, $x(\al_{m+1})$ is also of norm zero.
What we have shown so far is that in any given orbit in $M_{-n}$, there has to be either a totally positive triple or a pair of elements of norm zero. However, their is something to clarify in the case $n=1$. First, note in this case that the element $\al_{m+1}$ of norm zero must either be $i$ or $i/(-1)$ as these are the only elements of norm zero in $M_{-1}$ (Lemma \ref{divisors}). Moreover, $i$ and $i/(-1)$ are fixed by $x$ (Lemma \ref{fixed}) and, thus, $\al_{m+1}=x(\al_{m+1})$. As $i$ and $i/(-1)$ are in distinct orbits (Lemma \ref{sign}), the element $\al_{m+1}$ of norm zero we have reached at is unique in this case. Secondly, we show that no orbit in $M_{-1}$ contains a totally positive triple, i.e. $T^+(-1)$ is empty. Suppose, on the contrary that $\al=\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-1}}{c}\in T^+(-1)$ with $0<a$, $a<b$, and $a<c$ (the other case is handled similarly). As $a<b$ and $b=(a^2+1)/c$, $ac<a^2+1$. So $a(c-a)<1$, a contradiction, because $a\geq 1$ and $c-a\geq 1$. Thus, $T^+(-1)$ is empty.
As for the uniqueness of the totally positive triple in an orbit in case $n\neq 1$ (if the orbit contains one), suppose that $\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\}$ is such a triple. Then, the only way we can get out of the triple is by the action of $x$, which sends each of these three elements to a totally negative element (Lemma \ref{x}). Without loss of generality, consider the totally negative element $x(\al)$. By Lemma \ref{positive}, $yx(\al)$ and $y^2x(\al)$ are both totally positive. Again the only way to get out of the triple $\{x(\al), yx(\al), y^2x(\al)\}$ is by the action of $x$. But $xx(\al)=\al$ takes us back to $\al$ and hence back to the given totally positive triple. On the other hand, $xyx(\al)$ is totally negative and, by Lemma \ref{positive}, $yxyx(\al)$ and $y^2xyx(\al)$ are both totally positive. Similarly, $xy^2x(\al)$ is totally negative and, by Lemma \ref{positive}, $yxy^2x(\al)$ and $y^2xy^2x(\al)$ are both totally positive. If we keep repeating this process, we keep reaching endlessly at triples, one of whose entries is totally negative and the other two entries are totally positive. Since the action of $G$ on the orbit is transitive, it is certain that we will never reach at any other totally positive triple other than $\{\al, y(\al), y^2(\al)\}$.
In a similar manner, we can show that if the orbit contains an element $\al$ of norm zero, then (using Lemma \ref{positive}) $\al$ and $x(\al)$ are the only elements of norm zero in the orbit.
\end{proof}
\subsection{{\bf Proofs of Theorems \ref{orbits 1} and \ref{orbits 2}}}
\begin{proof} ({\bf Theorem \ref{orbits 1}})\hfill
For $n=1$, it follows from Lemma \ref{norm} and its proof that an orbit in $M_{-1}$ must contain either $i$ or $i/(-1)$ and not both. Thus, $M_{-1}$ contains precisely two orbits. As for $n\neq 1$, Lemma \ref{norm} shows that an arbitrary orbit contains uniquely either a pair of elements of norm zero or a totally positive triple and not both. By this and Lemma \ref{divisors}, we have as claimed:
$$|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|=\frac{1}{2}|M_{-n}^0|+|T^+(-n)|=d(n) + |T^+(-n)|.$$
For $n=3$, it follows from the argument in the proof of Lemma \ref{triples} (part 1) that $$T^+(-3)=\{\cfrac{1+\sqrt{-3}}{2}, \cfrac{-1+\sqrt{-3}}{-2}\}.$$ Thus, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-3})|=d(3) + |T^+(-3)|=2+2=4$.
Finally, for $n\neq 1$ or $3$, it follows from Lemma \ref{triples} (part 3) that $$|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|=d(n) + |T^+(-n)|=d(n)+(2/3)|A^+(-n)|.$$
We now prove that $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|\equiv 0 \;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$ for $n\neq 1$ or $2$. Note that we excluded the case $n=1$ since $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-1})|=2$ from above, and we exclude the case $n=2$ because $T^+(-2)=\varnothing$ and, thus, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-2})|=d(2)+0=2$ (if $\cfrac{a+\sqrt{-2}}{c}\in T^+(-2)$, then as $a\leq 2/2$, a=1; but then $c\leq 3/2$ and, so, $c=1$; we reject this because $a<c$; hence, $T^+(-2)=\varnothing$). Since $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-3})|=4$, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-3})|\equiv 0 \;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$. Now, let $n>3$. By the paragraph above, we have $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|=d(n) +(2/3)|A^+(-n)|$. It thus follows that $$|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|\equiv d(n) + 2\,|A^+(-n)|\;(\mbox{mod}\,4).$$ We write the set $A^+(-n)$ as the disjoint union of subsets in the form $$A^+(-n)=A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)\cup A_{b=c}^+(-n),$$ where
$$\mbox{$A_{b\neq c}^+(-n):=\{(a,b,c)\in A^+(-n)\;|\; b\neq c\}$ and $A_{b=c}^+(-n):=\{(a,b,c)\in A^+(-n)\;|\; b=c\}$.}$$
By Lemma \ref{a,b,c}, the two sets $A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)$, and $A_{b=c}^+(-n)$ are finite. As a general observation, we can see that $(a,b,c)\in A^+(-n)$ if and only if $(a,c,b)\in A^+(-n)$, which implies that elements in the set $A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)$ occur in pairs. Thus, $|A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)|$ is always even.
For the rest of the proof, we deal with three cases separately: when $n$ is an even composite integer, when $n$ is an odd prime, and when $n$ is an odd composite integer.
\begin{itemize}
\item[Case 1:] Let $n$ be an even composite integer with $n=2m$ for some $m>1$ with $m$ odd (as $n$ is square-free). Since $d(n)=d(2)d(m)=2d(m)$ and $2|d(m)$, $d(n)\equiv 0\; (\mbox{mod}\,4)$. So, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|\equiv 2|A^+(-n)|\;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$. Since $|A^+(-n)|=|A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)|+|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|$ and $|A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)|$ is even, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|\equiv 2|A_{b=c}^+(-n)| \;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$ in this case. Let $(a,b,b)\in A_{b=c}^+(-n)$. Then $b^2=a^2+n$, which implies that $(b+a)(b-a)=n=2m$. If $2|(b+a)$, then $b-a=m/k$, where $b+a=2k$ and $k$ is odd (as $m$ is odd). Thus, $2b=2k+m/k$ is odd, which is impossible. A similar contradiction occurs if $2|(b-a)$. We thus conclude that $A_{b=c}^+(-n) =\varnothing$ in this case and, hence, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|\equiv 0 \;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$.
\item[Case 2:] Let $n$ be an odd prime. So, $d(n)=2 \equiv 2 \;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$. Then, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|\equiv 2 + 2\,|A^+(-n)|\;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$ and, therefore, it suffices to show that $|A^+(-n)|$ is odd in this case. Since $|A^+(-n)|=|A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)|+|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|$ and $|A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)|$ is even, we show that $|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|$ is odd. We, in fact, show that $|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|=1$. For $(a,b,b)\in A_{b=c}^+(-n)$, $b^2=a^2+n$ and, thus, $(b+a)(b-a)=n$. Since $b+a>b-a$ and $n$ is prime, we must have $b+a=n$ and $b-a=1$. Thus, $b=(n+1)/2$ and $a=(n-1)/2$. That is, $((n-1)/2, (n+1)/2, (n+1)/2)$ is the only element in $A_{b=c}^+(-n)$. Hence, the claimed congruence is settled in this case too.
\item[Case 3:] Let $n$ be an odd composite integer with $n=p_1 p_2 \dots p_r$, $r\geq 2$, where the $p_i$ are distinct primes (as $n$ is square-free). Then $d(n)=d(p_1)d(p_2)\dots d(p_r)=2^r \equiv 0 \;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$. So, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|\equiv 2\,|A^+(-n)|\;(\mbox{mod}\,4)$ and, therefore, it suffices to show that $|A^+(-n)|$ is even in this case. Since $|A^+(-n)|=|A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)|+|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|$ and $|A_{b\neq c}^+(-n)|$ is even,, we show that $|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|$ is even as well. In fact, we prove the following stronger claim:
$$|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|= \left \{ \begin{array} {l@{\quad;\quad}l} C^0_r + C^1_r +\dots + C^{\frac{r}{2}-1}_r+\frac{1}{2}C^{\frac{r}{2}}_r & \mbox{if $r$ is even} \\
C^0_r + C^1_r + \dots + C^{\frac{r-1}{2}-1}_r + C^{\frac{r-1}{2}}_r & \mbox{if $r$ is odd}.
\end{array} \right. $$
For $(a,b,b)\in A_{b=c}^+(-n)$, $b^2=a^2+n$ and, thus, $(b+a)(b-a)=n=p_1p_2\dots p_r$. We notice that $b+a>b-a$ and investigate all the possible ways of factoring $b+a$ and $b-a$. Suppose that $r$ is even. Then, there is $C^0_r$ possibility that $b+a$ is the product of $r$ primes (i.e. $a+b=n$) and $b-a$ is the product of no primes (i.e. $b-a=1$), and there is $C^1_r$ possibilities that $b+a$ is the product of $r-1$ primes and $b-a$ is the product of one prime. We continue in this manner until we get to the final scenario which is having $\frac{1}{2}C^{\frac{r}{2}}_r$ possibilities of writing both of $b+a$ and $b-a$ as a product of $r/2$ primes each. Seeing obviously that each single possibility among the above ways of factorizations of $b+a$ and $b-a$ corresponds uniquely to a single point of $A_{b=c}^+(-n)$, the conclusion of the claim when $r$ is even follows immediately. The case when $r$ is odd is handled similarly. From elementary combinatorics (see \cite{Ros} for instance), we know that $\sum_{k=0}^r C^k_r=2^r$ and $C^k_r=C^{r-k}_r$ for $k=0, \dots, r$. So, if $r$ is even, then $C^0_r + C^1_r +\dots + C^{\frac{r}{2}-1}_r+\frac{1}{2}C^{\frac{r}{2}}_r=\frac{1}{2}C^{\frac{r}{2}}_r+C^{\frac{r}{2}+1}_r +\dots + C^r_r$. Thus, $2^r=\sum_{k=0}^r C^k_r = 2\left(C^0_r + C^1_r +\dots + C^{\frac{r}{2}-1}_r+\frac{1}{2}C^{\frac{r}{2}}_r\right)=2|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|$. Hence, $|A_{b=c}^+(-n)|=2^{r-1}$ which is even as desired. The same conclusion is reached similarly if $r$ is odd. This concludes the proof.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\newpage
\begin{proof} ({\bf Theorem \ref{orbits 2}})\hfill
By Theorem \ref{orbits 1}, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|=d(n)+2/3 |A^+(-n)|$. So the desired claim of the current theorem holds if and only if $$|A^+(-n)|=\sum_{i=1}^{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}[ d(i^2+n)-2d_{_{\leq i}} (i^2+n)].$$ We seek now to prove this last equality. Making use of Lemma \ref{a,b,c}, we first write the set $A^+(-n)$ as a disjoint union of subsets in the form $$A^+(-n)=A_1^+(-n)\cup A_2^+(-n) \cup \dots \cup A_{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}^+(-n),$$ where, for each $i=1,2, \dots, \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$, $$A_i^+(-n):=\{(i,b,c)\in \N^3\;|\; i<b, i<c, \;\mbox{and}\; b=(i^2+n)/c\}.$$ For a fixed such $i$, we can see that $A_i^+(-n)=A_{i,d_1}^+(-n)-\left\{A_{i, d_2}^+(-n)\cup A_{i,d_3}^+(-n)\right\}$, where
\begin{align*}
A_{i,d_1}^+(-n)&:= \{(i,d_1, (i^2+n)/d_1)\in A_i^+(-n)\;|\; d_1\in \N \; \mbox{and}\; d_1 |(i^2+n)\},\\
A_{i,d_2}^+(-n)&:= \{ (i,d_2, (i^2+n)/d_2)\in A_i^+(-n)\;|\; d_2\in \N, d_2\leq i, \;\mbox{and}\; d_2|(i^2+n)\},\\
A_{i,d_3}^+(-n)&:= \{(i, (i^2+n)/d_3, d_3) \in A_i^+(-n) \;|\: d_3\in \N, d_3\leq i, \; \mbox{and}\; d_3|(i^2+n)\}.
\end{align*}
Note that $|A_{i,d_1}^+(-n)|=d(i^2+n)$ and $|A_{i,d_2}^+(-n)|=|A_{i,d_3}^+(-n)|=d_{_{\leq i}}(i^2+n)$. If the latter two sets have a point in common, then for some $d_2\leq i$ and $d_3\leq i$ we would have $d_2d_3=i^2+n \leq i^2$, which is absurd. So, these two sets are disjoint and, hence, $$|A_i^+(-n)|=|A_{i,d_1}^+(-n)|-|A_{i,d_2}^+(-n)|-|A_{i,d_3}^+(-n)|=d(i^2+n)-2d_{_{\leq i}}(i^2+n).$$
As $|A^+(-n)|=|A_1^+(-n)|+ |A_2^+(-n)| + \dots + |A_{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}^+(-n)|$, the desired equality follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
The action of $G$ on $M_{-n}$ is intransitive for any square-free $n\in \N$.
\end{cor}
\begin{example}\label{example 2}
As an illustration, we compute in this example the value $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|$ for $n=11$ in such a way that verifies both Theorem \ref{orbits 1} and Theorem \ref{orbits 2} in this case.
By Theorem \ref{orbits 1} and its proof, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-11})|=d(11)+|T^+(-11)|=d(11)+(2/3)\,|A^+(-11)|$.
Of course, $d(11)=2$. So, it remains to find $|A^+(-11)|$. By Lemma \ref{a,b,c}, for $(a,b,c)\in A^+(-11)$, $a\leq 5$ and $c\leq 6$. We try these values one by one. For $a=1$, $(1^2+11)/c\in \N$ if and only if $c|12$. So, by Lemma \ref{a,b,c} again, the possible candidate values of $c$ are $1, 2, 3, 4$, and $6$. Since $a<c$, we discard the value $c=1$. For $c=2$, we have $b=6$ and we get that $(1,2,6)\in A^+(-11)$. For $c=3$, we have $b=4$ and we get that $(1, 3, 4)\in A^+(-11)$. For $c=4$, we have $b=3$ and we get that $(1, 4,3)\in A^+(-11)$. For $c=6$, we have $b=2$ and we get that $(1, 6, 2)\in A^+(-11)$. For $a=2$, $(2^2+11)/c\in \N$ if and only if $c|15$. By an argument similar to the above, we get in this case only two elements $(2, 3,5), (2,5,3)\in A^+(-11)$. For $a=3$, $(3^2+11)/c\in \N$ if and only if $c|20$. We also get in this case only two elements $(3,4,5), (3,5,4)\in A^+(-11)$. For $a=4$, $(4^2+11)/c\in \N$ if and only if $c|27$. The values $c=1$ and $3$ are discarded as $a<c$. Thus, for $a=4$ we get no element in $A^+(-11)$. For $a=5$, it can be checked similarly that we only get only the element $(5,6,6)\in A^+(-11)$. In summary, we have $|A^+(-11)|=9$ and, thus, $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-11})|=d(11)+(2/3)(9)=8$.
On the other hand, by Theorem \ref{orbits 2}, we have
\begin{align*}
|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-11})|&=d(11)+ \cfrac{2}{3}\,\sum_{i=1}^5[ d(i^2+11)-2d_{\leq i} (i^2+11)]\\
& =2+(2/3)\, \{\,[d(12)+d(15)+d(20)+d(27)+d(36)]\\
& \quad -2\,[d_{\leq 1}(12)+d_{\leq 2}(15)+d_{\leq 3}(20)+d_{\leq 4}(27)+d_{\leq 5}(36)]\,\}\\
& =2+(2/3)\left\{[6+4+6+4+9]-2\,[1+1+2+2+4]\right\}\\
& =2+(2/3)(29-20)\\
& =8.
\end{align*}
\end{example}
\section*{Acknowledgement}
The authors would like to express their gratitude to King Khalid University for providing administrative and technical support. The second author would also like to thank the University Council and the Scientific Council of King Khalid University for approving a sabbatical leave request for the academic year 2018-2019, during which this article was prepared and submitted.
\section*{Appendix}
Using a C$^{++}$ code to compute the sets $A^+(-n)$ for all $1\leq n \leq 100$ with $n$ square-free, the following table gives the values of $|T^+(-n)|, d(n)$, and $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|$ for all such $n$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c| c c c | c| c c c|c| c c c| }
\hline
n & $|T^+(-n)|$ & $d(n)$ & $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|$ & n & $|T^+(-n)|$ & $d(n)$ & $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|$ & n & $|T^+(-n)|$ & $d(n)$ & $|\mathcal{O}^G(M_{-n})|$\\
\hline
1 & 0 & 2 & 2 & 33 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 67 & 6 & 2 & 8 \\
2 & 0 & 2 & 2 & 34 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 69 & 12 & 4 & 16\\
3 & 2 & 2 & 4 & 35 & 12 & 4 & 16 & 70 & 0 & 8 & 8\\
5 & 2 & 2 & 4 & 37 & 2 & 2 & 4 & 71 & 26 & 2 & 28\\
6 & 0 & 4 & 4 & 38 & 8 & 4 & 12 & 73 & 6 & 2 & 8\\
7 & 2 & 2 & 4 & 39 & 12 & 4 & 16 & 74 & 16 & 4 & 20\\
10 & 0 & 4 & 4 & 41 & 14 & 2 & 16 & 77 & 12 & 4 & 16 \\
11 & 6 & 2 & 8 & 42 & 0 & 8 & 8 & 78 & 0 & 8 & 8 \\
13 & 2 & 2 & 4 & 43 & 6 & 2 & 8 & 79 & 18 & 2 & 20 \\
14 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 46 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 82 & 4 & 4 & 8 \\
15 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 47 & 18 & 2 & 20 & 83 & 22 & 2 & 24 \\
17 & 6 & 2 & 8 & 51 & 12 & 4 & 16 & 85 & 4 & 4 & 8 \\
19 & 6 & 2 & 8 & 53 & 10 & 2 & 12 & 86 & 16 & 4 & 20 \\
21 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 55 & 12 & 4 & 16 & 87 & 20 & 4 & 24 \\
22 & 0 & 4 & 4 & 57 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 89 & 22 & 2 & 24 \\
23 & 10 & 2 & 12 & 59 & 22 & 2 & 24 & 91 & 12 & 4 & 16 \\
26 & 8 & 4 & 12 & 61 & 10 & 2 & 12 & 93 & 4 & 4 & 8 \\
29 & 10 & 2 & 12 & 62 & 12 & 4 & 16 & 94 & 12 & 4 & 16 \\
30 & 0 & 8 & 8 & 65 & 12 & 4 & 16 & 95 & 28 & 4 & 32 \\
31 & 10 & 2 & 12 & 66 & 8 & 8 & 16 & 97 & 6 & 2 & 8 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{center} \tablename{ 2}: The number of orbits in $M_{-n}$ for square-free $1\leq n \leq 100$ \end{center}$\\$
Below is the C$^{++}$ code used to compute the sets $A^+(-n)$ for $1\leq n\leq 100$. \\
\fontsize{10}{10}\selectfont
{\tt
$\#$include<iostream> using namespace std;
\indent\indent int main $()\{$
\indent\indent\indent int $n, a, b,c,$count $=0$,check $=0$;
\indent\indent\indent for $(n=1; n<101; n^{++})\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent if $((n\% 4!=0)\&\&(n\%9!=0)\&\&(n\%25!=0)\&\&(n\%49!=0))\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent for $(a=1; a<100; a^{++})\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent for $(b=2; b<100; b^{++})\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent for $(c=2; c<100; c^{++})\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent if $((b>a) \&\& (c>a))\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent if $((b^*c-a^*a)==n)\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent cout$<<$"when $n=$"$<<n<<$"$,a=$"$<<a<<$"$,b=$"
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent $<<b<<$"$,c=$"$<<c<<$endl;
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent count++;
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent check$=1$;
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent if (check$==1$)$\{$
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent cout$<<$"Possibilities for"$<<n<<$":"$<<$count$<<$endl$<<$endl;
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent count $=0$;
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent check $=0$;
\indent\indent\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent $\}$
\indent\indent\indent return $0$;
\indent\indent $\}$
}
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
Swarm robotics is a field of engineering studying the use of large
groups of simple robots to perform complex
tasks~\cite{Brambilla2013}. Ideally, a single robot failure in a swarm
should not compromise the overall mission because of the inherent
redundancy of the swarm~\cite{Brambilla2013}. With robustness and
scalability, robotic swarms are foreseen as cost effective solution
for spatially distributed tasks.
In many such applications, the ability of the swarm to coordinate
depends largely on its ability to communicate. A reliable
communication infrastructure allows the robots to exchange information
at any time. However, real deployments include many potential
sources of failures (environmental factors, mobility, wear and tear,
etc) that can break connectivity and compromise the mission. In this
work, we address complete robot failures caused by a robot's inability
to communicate or to be detected by its neighbors. In addition, most
realistic applications require the robots to remain connected with an
operator at a ground station, to either provide information (e.g. in a
disaster response scenario) or to receive new commands (e.g. planetary
exploration).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\def0.8\linewidth{\linewidth}
\input{figures/chain_formation_illustaration_good.pdf_tex}
\caption{Progressive formation of a chain to complete a task.}
\label{fig:chain_formation_illustration}
\end{figure}
To maintain connectivity, we propose to progressively use the
available robots of a swarm to form a self-healing communication chain
from a ground station to a target (illustrated in
Fig.~\ref{fig:chain_formation_illustration}). The operator sets the
target and the desired number of redundant links. We target
application scenarios including video relay and tele-operation for
exploration tasks, where a consistent end-to-end link is required. Our
algorithm uses a common path planner to generate a viable path, and
builds a chain of robots towards the target. This work
extends~\cite{varadharajan2019unbroken}, which briefly presented the
self healing aspects of this work without modeling and most
experiments. The contributions of this work are:
\begin{inparaenum}
\item a mathematical formulation of our self-healing chain formation
algorithm with configurable redundancy;
\item the performance evaluation of our algorithm in simulated
environments of various complexity and integrating robot failures;
\item the validation of the algorithm with a physical swarm of 7 wheeled
robots and 6 flying robots, in homogeneous and heterogeneous configurations.
\end{inparaenum}
\section{Related work\label{sec:literature}}
There are two general approaches to connectivity maintenance in
multi-robot systems: strict end-to-end
connectivity~\cite{Stephan2017,majcherczyk2018decentralized},
or relaxed intermittent
connectivity~\cite{Kantaros2019,Guo2017,Hollinger2010}. While the
first demands to maintain a link from the source to the sinks (the
ends of each branch of the network graph), the latter allows for
momentary local breaks in the communication topology.
When the mission requires to continuously relay information, like
video, operators commands or offloaded computation, strict end-to-end
connectivity might be preferred; this is the approach we use in this work.
\noindent \textbf{Algebraic Connectivity}
The problem of preserving
end-to-end connectivity is widely discussed in recent
literature~\cite{Stephan2017,majcherczyk2018decentralized,panerati2018robust}.
Some works use continuous control models with algebraic
connectivity~\cite{sabattini2011decentralized} and implement
mission-related control laws~\cite{Siligardi2019}, considering robot
failures. De Gennaro et al.~\cite{de2006decentralized} derive a
gradient-based control law from Laplacian matrices' features such as
the Fiedler vector to maximize connectivity. Stump et
al.~\cite{Stump2008} also use Fiedler value and k-connectivity to
create a bridge between a station and a robot moving
towards a target in walled environments.
However, the centralized computation of the Laplacian is hardly
scalable, and distributed estimations require significant communication
bandwidth and are sensitive to noise~\cite{jacoicra2018}.
\noindent \textbf{Hybrid approaches}
Connectivity can also be maintained by merging continuous motion
controllers and discrete optimization for packet
routing~\cite{Zavlanos2013}. INSPIRE~\cite{Williams2014} uses a two
layer control to preserve connectivity: the first layer applies a
potential field local controller to maintain a connected configuration
and the second layer optimizes the routing. These methods have long
convergence time, and are generally not suitable for large robot
groups. Ji and Egerstedt~\cite{ji2007distributed} integrate connectivity
preservation in two control laws for rendezvous and pattern
formation. Their controller does not explicitly take into account
obstacles and hence cannot easily be adapted to cluttered
environments.
\noindent \textbf{Tree-based approaches}
Majcherczyk et al.~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized} deploy multiple robots
towards different targets while preserving connectivity in a decentralized
method based on tree construction.
However, they carry all available robots along the path using a
virtual communication force field. This approach can lead to unwanted
redundant sub-structures and recurrent reconfiguration. Hung et
al.~\cite{Hung2019} propose a decentralized global network integrity
preservation strategy that performs strategic edge addition and
removal to the network to maintain connectivity while reaching its
targets. This approach considers coverage missions and decomposes the
space into cells from which to select targets. However, distant
and sparse targets increase convergence time significantly.
\noindent \textbf{Planner Based Approaches} Approaches leveraging a
common path planner (centralized~\cite{Fink2013} or
hybrid~\cite{Stephan2017}) determine the optimal communication points
for reliable connectivity. These works use a variant of
RRT~\cite{Karaman2011} that integrates a communication model to
estimate connectivity levels. These methods have realistic
communication models but they rely on a centralized solution (a
mission planner) and are computationally heavy (they solve a
second-order cone program -- SOCP).
Our approach is fully distributed: we estimate a path using an elected
robot whenever a new target becomes available, and navigate while preserving
connectivity (similar to~\cite{Zavlanos2007}).
Our method also allows for intermediate robot failures and changes in
the environment, which are not considered in the above solutions.
\noindent \textbf{Robustness to Failure} Connectivity maintenance for
multi-robot systems is a widely covered domain but very few works
address robot failures. Some approaches~\cite{panerati2018robust} take
into account a robustness factor to tackle robot failures but cannot
recover a completely disconnected network. A few other approaches
consider disconnection and recovery due to environmental
mismatches~\cite{marchukov2019multi} but do not consider complete
robot failures. The Wireless Actor Networks domain has several works
that address failure recovery~\cite{abbasi2007distributed}, e.g. using
dynamic programming~\cite{akkaya2009distributed} to reconnect a
disjoint graph. These approaches disregard motion planning and have
limited applicability in cluttered environments.
\noindent \textbf{Task allocation}
Allocation of a fixed number of
tasks to a set of robots is a well know combinatorial problem and
requires heuristics~\cite{pillac2013review} to approximate to a
polynomial solution. Decentralized methods use local planners along
with consensus algorithms to agree on the context of the task
plan~\cite{Shima2007}. Other approaches compute a plan on each robot
and use consensus algorithms to agree on the global
assignment~\cite{Choi2009}. We use an approach similar to the latter
to assign roles: a local bid on each robot serves to achieve consensus
on the assignments.
Our work leverages the ideas in~\cite{Hung2019}
and~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized} to dynamically build
structures towards the targets. We sequentially add edges to a tree in
a distributed manner by using the path from a standard path planner,
as in~\cite{Stephan2017}, and reactively enforce connectivity, as
in~\cite{Zavlanos2007}. The final contribution of our approach is the
ability to recover from simultaneous robot failures while navigating
complex environments with obstacles and preserving a network structure
with a configurable number of redundant links.
On top of this, our approach uses minimal computation and
communication load on the robots, a key aspect for the deployment of
other behaviors on top of connectivity maintenance. To the best of the
authors' knowledge, this is the first approach that studies this problem
in a holistic manner: a path planner, a failure recovery mechanism and
a task allocation mechanism to dynamically assign tasks.
\section{Preliminaries\label{sec:model}}
Consider a team of $N_r$ robots with their positions denoted by
$X=\{x_1,x_2, ..., x_n\}, \forall x_i \in \mathbb{R}^3$. The evolving position
of the robots at time $t_i$ can be denoted as $X(t_i) \in
\mathbb{R}^{3N}$. Given a set of target locations
$\mathbb{T} = \{\tau_1, \tau_2, ..., \tau_n\}, \forall \tau_i \in
\mathbb{R}^{3}$, our objective is to drive the robots to a formation that
ensures (a) at least one communication path between any two robots; and (b)
each target is within range of at least one robot
$\norm{x_w - \tau_i} \leq \delta_{tol} \forall \tau_i \in \mathbb{T}$. We
consider a single integrator robot model ($\dot{x}_i(t) = u_i$) and assume
that the robots are fully controllable with $u_i$. Taking into account that
the robots' workspace, $\mathbb{X} \in \mathbb{R}^3$, is divided into
obstacles $\mathbb{X}_{obs}$ and free space $\mathbb{X}_{free}$, we derive the
control inputs $u_i(t)$ for all robots, avoiding obstacles and other robots.
\subsection{Communication model}
We assume the robots are equipped with a wireless communication device
(e.g. 2GHz, 5GHz or 900MHz). The received signal strength is
influenced by three main factors: path-loss, shadowing, and
fading~\cite{mostofi2009characterization}.
We approximate signal strength as a generic function of distance.
Inter-agent communication in a group can be then modeled as a weighted
undirected graph $\mathcal{G} = (\nu,\epsilon,A)$, with the node set
$\nu=\{r_1,..r_N\}$ representing the robots, and the edge set
$\epsilon = \{ e_{ij} \vert i,j \in \nu, i \neq j \}$, representing
communication links. A common approach to working with a communication
graph is to use its adjacency matrix $A$, in which entries $e_{ij}$
represent the probability of robot $i$ decoding $j$'s packets. We aim
at maintaining $e_{ij} > e_{min}, \forall e_{ij} \in \epsilon$, that
is to guarantee a minimum signal quality.
We consider the robots capable of broadcasting and relaying
messages to their neighbors over a limited spherical communication
range $Z$. The robots estimate $e_{ij}$ for their neighbors using
local information, if $d_{ij} > Z$ then $e_{ij} = 0$, whereas if
$d_{ij} < \delta$ then $e_{ij} =1$ and $e^{\frac{-5*d_{ij}}{Z}}$
otherwise. $\delta$ is a small constant, slightly larger than the
radius of the robot. The approximation of connectivity using $e_{ij}$
allows for modeling additive white noise in sensing. The surroundings
of robot $i$ are divided into communication zones:
\begin{itemize}
\item the safe zone $Z_{i}^{s}$, in which neighbors are considered to
have a reliable network link ($e_{ij} > e_{min}$) up to the limit
distance $d_s$ with connectivity $e_{ij} = e_{min}$;
\item the critical zone $Z_{i}^{c}$, in which neighbors are
getting close to the limit of the communication range. In this zone, $e_c$
$\triangleq$ $d_c$ - $d_s > 0$ is defined as the \emph{critical
tolerance}. At the critical distance $d_c$, $e_{ij} < e_{min}$;
\item the break-away zone $Z_{i}^{b}$, in which neighbors are expected to
break their network link. In this zone, $e_b \triangleq d_b - d_c > 0$ is
defined as the \emph{break-away tolerance}. At the break-away distance
$d_b$, $e_{ij}\approx 0$ and at Z, $e_{ij} = 0$ with $e_z \triangleq d_b - Z > 0$.
\end{itemize}
Let \textit{$N_{i}$} be the neighbor set of robot $i$, which is
divided into:
$\textit{N}_{i} = \textit{N}_{i}^{s} \cup \textit{N}_{i}^{c} \cup
\textit{N}_{i}^{b}$. Robot $j$ is called a safe zone robot of robot
$i$ if $x_j \in Z_{i}^{s}$, with $x_j$ its position vector. The set of
all neighbors within the safe communication zone of robot $i$ is:
$\textit{N}_{i}^{s} = \{ j \vert x_j \in Z_{i}^{s}, \forall j \in \textit{N}_i \}$.
From this, we define the \emph{safe connectivity set} as the entries $e_{ij}$ of the
adjacency matrix $\forall j \in \textit{N}_{i}^{s}$. Similarly, we can define
the \emph{critical} and \emph{break-away} connectivity sets with the
corresponding entries of the adjacency matrix.
These sets allow us to derive control inputs that guarantee the
preservation of local connectivity.
\subsection{Local connectivity preservation}
We formulate the constraint for the preservation of connectivity among
the robots using geometric arguments as in~\cite{Hung2019}.
However, our solution continuously adds edges to the local graph until
specific robots with specific roles reach the targets. Our approach
reduces the graph construction time, computational load and
communication rounds required to determine which edges to remove
in~\cite{Hung2019}.
\begin{figure
\vspace*{0.3cm}
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{\input{figures/movement.pdf_tex}}
\caption{Variables related to inter-robot distance and robot
position before and after a time step $\Delta$t (a)
illustration of combined distance of a connectivity chain
before (b) and after (c) the addition of a new robot.}
\label{fig:movement}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:movement}(a) shows the initial position of robot $i$
($x_i(t)$) and robot $j$ ($x_{j}(t)$) with their relative distance
$d_{ij}(t)$, together with their new position and relative distance
after a time $\Delta t$. To guarantee the preservation of the
communication link, the control must ensure:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:theorem1}
(\norm{\Delta x_i} + \norm{\Delta x_j}) \leq d_b-d_{ij} ,
\end{equation}
with $d_b$, the break-away distance where $e_{ij} = 0$, at which the
connectivity breaks. In our implementation we choose to split the
responsibility of respecting the available margin $d_b-d_{ij}$ equally
among the two robots.
\noindent\emph{Proof}: With $d_{ij}(t + \Delta t)$ the distance
between two robots $i$ and $j$ after a time step $\Delta t$ defined as
$d_{ij}(t + \Delta t) = \norm{x_i(t + \Delta t) - x_j(t + \Delta t)} =
d_{ij}(t) + \norm{\Delta x_i + \Delta x_j}$ . When we apply
(\ref{equ:theorem1}) we get:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:proof_need}
d_{ij}(t + \Delta t) \leq d_b.
\end{equation}
proving that robots $i$ and $j$ stay connected.
We can extend the following remarks considering the three neighborhood sets
(safe, critical, break-away):
\begin{enumerate}
\item A robot $j$ can be in $\textit{N}_{i}^{s}$ if and only if, its
position lies within the safe zone $Z_{i}^{s}$ of robot $i$. This
implies that $d_b - d_{ij} \geq e_c + e_b$. If we choose control
inputs that allow $\Delta x_i$ and $\Delta x_j$ to satisfy the
condition of~(\ref{equ:theorem1}), with $d_s$ as the safe limit, the
robots will always stay within the safe communication distance:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:proof_safe}
\Delta x_i \leq \frac{d_s - d_{ij}}{2} \quad and \quad
\Delta x_j \leq \frac{d_s - d_{ij}}{2}
\end{equation}
\item For robots $j \in \textit{N}_{i}^{c}$, located in the critical
communication zone $Z_{i}^{c}$, if we choose control inputs that
allow $\Delta x_i$ and $\Delta x_j$ to satisfy the condition
of~(\ref{equ:theorem1}), with $d_s$ again as the safe limit, the
robots tend to regain safe connectivity:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:proof_critical}
\Delta x_j \leq (d_s - d_{ij}) \quad and \quad \Delta x_i = 0
\end{equation}
\item We can apply an identical reasoning for robots
$j \in \textit{N}_{i}^{b}$ with their position within and break-away
communication zone $Z_{i}^{b}$, have one robot stationary and the
other apply a control input $\Delta x_i$ to satisfy the condition
of~(\ref{equ:theorem1}).
\end{enumerate}
By applying control inputs satisfying the condition of
Equ.~(\ref{equ:proof_safe}) robots in critical/break-away connectivity
move towards each other to regain safe connectivity. We use the
critical tolerance $e_c$ and break-away tolerance $e_b$ to account for
control errors when applying Equ.~\ref{equ:proof_critical}.
\subsection{Global Connectivity Chains}
Given a group of robots, we build a chain from a ground station to a
target location. To build the chain, we assign roles and relationships
to the robots. Robots in the chain are assigned parent-child
relationships, to manage the construction of the chain
towards a target while maintaining connectivity.
\noindent\emph{Definition 1}: A connectivity chain is a tree $C$ represented
as a partially ordered set $(C,<) = \{c_1,c_2,...,c_n\}$ with
$\vert C \vert = n$. All vertices $c_i \in C$, have a parent $c_{i-1}$ and a
child $c_{i+1}$, except for $c_1$, the \emph{root}, that is without parent and
$c_n$, the \emph{worker}, which is without children. All other $c_i$ are
\emph{networkers}. The edge set $\epsilon = \{e_{c_{i},c_{i+1}}\vert \forall c_i \in C\}$.
\noindent\emph{Proposition 1:} Given a connectivity chain $(C,<)$ and the
distance of the worker $c_n$ to a target $d_{i\tau_i}$, the addition of a new
robot between any two robots $c_i$ and $c_{i+1}$ in the chain decreases the
distance $d_{i\tau_i}$. Let $d(t-1)$ denote the sum of the distances between
all the robots in a chain before the addition of robot $c_k$, considering the
distances of the robots $d_{n-1,n}=d_s \forall n \in (C,<)$. The distance
$d$(t) after the addition of $c_k$ into chain is $d(t)=d(t-1)+d_s$,
adding a slack of $d_s$ into the chain, which in turn allows the worker to
move towards the target, decreasing $d_{i\tau_i}$, as shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:movement}(b-c).
The desired network structure from the root robot to a worker robot is
specified as the minimum number of mandatory communication links $C_n$
and the algorithm enforces $C_n$ individual connectivity chains.
\subsection{Task allocation problem}
Let the set of free robots $N_f = \{N_r\}/N_c$, with $N_r$ the set of
all the available robots and $N_c$ the set of robots in a connectivity
chain. The goal of the task allocation algorithm is to assign the set
of tasks $\mathbb{T}$ to robots in $N_f$. The problem of assigning
each robot to a single task is commonly refereed to as Single
Assignment (SA) problem~\cite{Choi2009}. The resulting task allocation
problem takes the following form:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{alignat*}{2}
&\!\min & & \sum_{i=1}^{|N_f|} \sum_{j=1}^{|\mathbb{T}|} c_{ij}(x_i)a_{ij}\\
&\text{subject to} & & \sum_{j=1}^{|\mathbb{T}|} a_{ij} \leq 1, \forall i \in N_f \text{ and } \sum_{i=1}^{|N_f|} a_{ij} \leq 1, \forall j \in \mathbb{T}
\end{alignat*}
\end{subequations}
\noindent where $c_{ij}(x_i) = || x_i - \tau_{j} ||$ denotes the cost
of robot i at position $x_i$ performing task j and
$a_{ij} \in \{0,1\}$ is the assignment variable indicating the
assignment of task j to robot i. The first constraint indicates that
each robot can be assigned at most one task and second indicating no
two robots get the same task. Consensus-based auction algorithm
(CBAA)~\cite{Choi2009} uses an auction to obtain initial bids from
robots and unifies the assignment using a consensus phase. CBAA
guarantees convergence and provides a bound on optimality when the
cost function follows a diminishing marginal gain~\cite{Choi2009}. In
this work, we use Virtual Sigmergy~\cite{Pinciroli:vs:2016} to share
task assignments in a decentralized manner. Virtual Stigmergy is a
decentralized information sharing mechanism: once a value is written
in the Virtual Stigmergy by a robot, it can be accessed from all other
robots.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\centering
\input{figures/method.tex}
\caption{Control architecture used within the chain construction algorithm.}
\label{fig:method}
\end{figure}%
\section{Proposed Method \label{sec:approach}}
Fig.~\ref{fig:method} shows the modules of our controller: mobility,
connectivity and control policy. The mobility module computes a viable
path optimized for path length and stores the result in the Virtual
Stigmergy. The connectivity module continuously estimates the current
connectivity between the assigned parent ($e_p$) and child
($e_c$). The control policy computes the control inputs using
path and connectivity information.
\label{subsec:path_planner}
We consider two types of robots in the swarm:
\emph{ground robots} with state space $\mathbb{X} \in \mathbb{R}^2$,
and \emph{flying robots} with $\mathbb{X} \in \mathbb{R}^3$. We assume the map of the environment is
known.
The mobility module consists of a path finder and an optimal path planner. The
path finder scans for a viable path by splitting the workspace in cells at
a given resolution $R$, and building a graph $\mathcal{G_{PE}} = (N,E)$ of the
cells. It then performs a depth-first-search in this graph to
verify the reachability of target $\tau_{i}$~\cite{Zhang2006}. If it is found reachable, the module raises the \emph{PE} flag. Ground robots and flying robots
can then be used to build a chain on the resulting path $\pi$.
If a path to $\tau_{i}$ is not found, it either means that the target is
unreachable or that the check was done in $\mathbb{R}^2$, but a solution
exists in $\mathbb{R}^3$. The path finder can be set to always check in
$\mathbb{R}^3$, but that would create overhead for simple cases in
$\mathbb{R}^2$. Nevertheless, the resulting path in $\mathbb{R}^3$ has a
portion, $\pi_g \subset \pi$, that can be traveled by ground robots: the projection of the 3D path $\pi$ on the ground
plane.
The path planner module computes an optimized path (continuous vector-valued
function) $\sigma : [0,T] \to \mathbb{X}_{free}$ such that $\sigma(0) = x_{0}$
and $\sigma(T) = \tau_{i}$. Similar path planning problems have led to several
well-studied approaches~\cite{Karaman2011,Li2015}. When optimizing for the
shortest path length, sample-based approaches can quickly get an
approximation that is then optimized.
We selected $RRT^*$ because it was shown to be faster in large environments
and to perform well in cluttered spaces~\cite{Karaman2011}. However, our
control architecture is agnostic to the path planner algorithm, and we have
tested it with several other planners (SST, $BIT^*$ and $PRM^*$) with comparable
results, as discussed in~\ref{sec:experiments}.
The chain construction algorithm is implemented in
Buzz~\cite{PinciroliBuzz2016}, a programming language for robot swarms, which
eases behavior design efforts by providing several swarm programming
primitives. For the planners, we integrated classes of Open Motion Planning
Library (OMPL)~\cite{sucan2012open} in our architecture to be accessible as
Buzz functions.
\begin{figure
\centering
\input{figures/interaction.tex}
\caption{Interplay between Networkers and Workers.}
\label{fig:interplay}
\end{figure}%
We assigned one of three roles to the robots: root, worker(s), and
networkers. A detailed presentation of the task allocation
strategy is given as supplementary material
At launch, the root is either pre-determined (ground station) or
elected using gradient algorithm (detailed in the supplementary
material). Each target also gets a
worker robot elected with the same strategy. The gradient algorithm is
implemented using Virtual Stigmergy~\cite{Pinciroli:vs:2016}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:interplay} shows the interaction of the workers and
networkers in the chain formation. The worker robot checks for the
existence of a path tuple $\langle\pi,PE,\pi_g\rangle$ in the Virtual
Stigmergy; if not available, it computes the path and shares it. The
motivation behind using a single robot to compute the plan is
twofold: \begin{inparaenum}\item if multiple robots are computing a
plan then all plans must be exchanged to reach consensus -- a high
load of messages/bandwidth; \item assigning the task to the worker
robot also leads to more efficient updates, as the worker will be
the first to encounter any obstacles in the
environment\end{inparaenum}. In case of a mismatch between the
computed path and the explored environment, the path can be adapted.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\centering
\resizebox{1.1\linewidth}{!}{\input{figures/failure_tol_illus.pdf_tex}}
\caption{Failure recovery: (a) at the time of failure and (b) after recovery.}
\label{fig:fault_illus}
\end{figure}
The path's tuple includes $\pi$, the path defined as a sequence of
points (states), the \emph{PE} flag and $\pi_g$, the projection of
$\pi$ on the ground plane. Following its locomotion type, the robot
knows which sections of $\pi$ it can reach. If the elected worker
robot does not have the required locomotion type, the swarm elects a
more suitable robot, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:interplay}. The worker
robot determines the number of links $C_n$ required to reach the
target and elects the necessary networkers. If more edges are required
than the number of robots surrounding the worker, the request is
passed down the networkers towards the root, until a free robot
(future edge) is found. An optional module, the Way-Point (WP)
prediction, grants each robot in the chain to autonomously elect
robots to expand the chain without a signal from their child. The
number of robots required in a chain $n = ceil( \frac{d_{path}}{d_s})$
is estimated on each robot using the current plan length $d_{path}$.
\subsection{Motion Control}
The motion commands are computed by networkers and workers (the root is fixed)
using the available path to extend the chain towards the target(s).
The robots that do not belong to any chain are called free robots, and
they wait close to the root until they get elected as a worker or a
networker. The robots compute the preferred
velocity as:
\begin{equation}
u_{i}^{pref}=
\begin{cases}
f_c(d_{i}^{C}) u_{i}^{path}(\pi,F) &\text{if } d_{i}^{P} \leq d_s\\
u_{i}^{path}(\pi,B) &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
f_c(d_{i}^{C})=
\begin{cases}
1 &\text{if } d_{i}^{C} \leq d_s\\
0 &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $u_{i}^{path}(\pi,F)$ computes velocity commands to move the robot
towards the target and $u_{i}^{path}(\pi,B)$ computes velocity commands to
move the robot towards the root, both based on the path
$\pi$. $f_c(d_{i}^{C})$ stops the movement when a child reached the critical
communication distance from its parent. In other words, a chain retracts if a robot is in
the critical communication zone and expands otherwise.
The inputs $u_{i}^{pref}$ are computed from set point control and altered by a
collision avoidance algorithm. Most reactive decentralized collision avoidance
can be used within our architecture. We used the Reciprocal Velocity
Obstacle (RVO) algorithm~\cite{van2008reciprocal}, which selects the best
velocity considering all future potential collisions. The resulting control
law is:
\begin{equation}\label{equ:rvo}
u_{i}=\text{arg }\min_{u_{i}^{\prime}\in Au_{i}} \sum_{j\in N_{i}^{close}} \alpha \frac{1}{tvo_{j}(u_{i}^{\prime})} + \norm{ u_{i}^{pref} - u_{i}^{\prime} }
\end{equation}
\begin{equation*}
Au_{i}=\{u_i^{\prime} \ \lvert \ \norm{u_i^{\prime}} < u_{i}^{conn} \}, \ u_{i}^{conn}=\min_{j \in P \cup C} \frac{(d_s-d_{ij})}{2\Delta t}
\end{equation*}
Equation~\ref{equ:rvo} computes the control input from the velocity within the
admissible set $Au_{i}$ that minimize the risk of collision while maximizing
the fit to the path. The function $tvo_{j}(u_{i}^{\prime})$ computes the
penalty of future collision between $i$ and $j$ while the norm is a penalty
for deviation from the preferred velocity on the path $u_{i}^{pref}$. $\alpha$
is a scaling factor to balance the penalty terms (set to 1 in our
tests).
$N_{i}^{close} =\{ j \ \lvert \ d_{ij} < r_{col} \forall \ j \ \in N_{i}\}$ is
the set of neighbors close enough to be inside the collision radius $r_{col}$.
$u_{i}^{conn}$ is the maximum velocity allowed, a bound to maintain a safe
communication distance according to Equation~\ref{equ:theorem1}.
\begin{figure
\vspace*{0.15cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{figures/time_comp.pdf}
\caption{Middle: comparison of convergence time with~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized},
convergence time of the chain construction algorithm by enabling and
disabling the way-point algorithm that allows the robots in a chain to
predict the number of robots required. Top: convergence time by introducing one "C" shaped obstacle. Bottom: comparison of failure recovery time by failing different
number of consecutive robots in a chain and creating two subgraphs.}
\label{fig:time_comp}
\end{figure}%
\subsection{Self-Healing}
We consider two types of robot failures in our work: due to sensing
errors and complete robot failures. Both cases create two or more
disconnected groups of robots that then need to be
reconnected. Dealing with complete failures is harder than
sensing errors since no information transfer is possible between each
side of the disconnection.
Without any means of communication, it is impossible to agree on the
reconnection strategy between chain segments. In this work, we get the
information required to reconnect the chain in both cases using a periodic
broadcast message (detailed in the the supplementary
material).
Every robot $r_i$ in a chain $C$ uses a common plan $\pi(r_n)$ updated
by worker $r_n$ and shared through Virtual Stigmergy. They are aware
of $k$ local edges of their chain $C$ and its current depth through
the chain link messages (a sequence of IDs obtained through
broadcasts). Every robot can reconstruct the $k*2$ immediate portion
of the chain $C_{local} \subseteq C$ by concatenating parent and child
chain messages. If a robot in the communication path fails, the
communication chain is broken and the chain cannot be completed. In
this case, the parent and the child of the failed robot attempt to
bridge the broken link by navigating toward each other using the
available chain information as illustrated in the
Fig.~\ref{fig:fault_illus}.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth ,scale=0.99]{figures/comb_sim_time_fault.pdf}
\caption{Top: time taken by 25 (arena 1), 60 (arena 2) and 100 (arena
3) robots to reach the target with 1, 2, and, 3 communication
chains. The traveling time on the bottom indicates how fast a robot
can travel the path without considering the chain. Bottom: time
taken to build the communication with different percentage of random
robot failures.}
\label{fig:sim_time}
\end{figure}%
Without loss of generality, we consider an arbitrary robot $r_p$ in a
chain failing with a parent $r_{p-1}$ and child $r_{p+1}$. The result
is two disconnected chains $C_1 = \{r_1,...,r_{p-1}\}$ and
$C_2=\{r_{p+1},...,r_{n}\}$. The robots $r_{p-1}$ and $r_{p+1}$ will
attempt to bridge the gap. The safe connectivity workspace
$S_{i} = \{y \in \mathbb{R}^n | \|y - x_i\| \leq d_s\}$ of robot $i$
contains all the states within the safe communication distance
$d_s$. At the time of failure $\{x_{p-1}\} \cap S_{p+1} = \emptyset$
and $\{x_{p+1}\} \cap S_{p-1} = \emptyset$, formally indicating the
disconnection. Robots $r_{p-1}$ and $r_{p+1}$ already share consensus
on the plan $\pi(r_n)$, when the robot is executing the current
segment of the plan. This allows the robots $p-1$ and $p+1$ to compute
control inputs $u_{p+1}^{pref} = u_{p+1}^{path}( \pi(r_n), B)$ and
$u_{p-1}^{pref} = u_{p-1}^{path}( \pi(r_n), F)$ respectively. When
using an identical plan $\pi(r_n)$ and applying $u_{i}^{path}$, it is
guarantied that the robots will regain safe communication distance
($d_{ij} \leq d_{s}$) with $x_{i} \in S_{j}$. The same reasoning
applies to $n$-consecutive robot failures, with the inter-chain
distance between two disconnected chains being $(n+1)*d_s$ instead of
$2*d_s$. The two bordering robots in the disconnected chain will
compute and apply the control input $u_{i}^{pref}$ based on
$\pi(r_n)$. The boundary robot that lost a child's connection acts as
a temporary worker until the chain is healed or it becomes the worker.
\section{Experimental Evaluation}
\label{sec:experiments}
\noindent\textbf{Performance comparison}
We use ARGoS3~\cite{Pinciroli:SI2012} physics-based simulator to
assess the performance of our method. We compare our results
with~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized}, the closest approach to
ours.
We set up a simple open environment to compare our algorithm
with~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized} in 12 conditions: 2 to 4 targets
uniformly distributed on a circle ($r=10 m$), with and without obstacles
(C-shaped) between the robots and the targets, and with or without the WP
prediction algorithm mentioned in Section~\ref{subsec:path_planner}. Each
conditions was repeated 35 times with random initialization.
We set the algorithm's parameters to: $d_s = 1.4m$, $d_c = 1.6m$,
$d_b = 1.8m$, $v_{max} = 50 cm/s$, $\alpha=1$ and $r_{col}=25cm$, with a fixed
planning time of 2s, a bidding time for the gradient algorithm of 10s, a
forgetting time for status messages to 3s and a link failure declaration time
of 5s.
Fig.~\ref{fig:time_comp} shows the resulting comparison of performance. The
metric is \emph{time factor}, i.e. the time taken by the algorithm divided by
the traversal time~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized}. Our method outperforms
both the inwards and outwards algorithms proposed
in~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized}, particularly when increasing the
number of targets or redundancy factor. This can be attributed to the fact that
all robots are part of the large virtual force field
in~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized}, whereas we form a directed chain with
a near-optimal number of robots.
Unlike~\cite{majcherczyk2018decentralized}, our chain construction scales well
with the number of targets, showing the ability to reach separate targets in
parallel. The time factor decreases by 2\% without obstacles and 5\% with
obstacles when using WP
prediction.
\noindent\textbf{Robustness}
We then run the same configuration as above, but inducing up to 80\%
consecutive robot failures. Fig.~\ref{fig:time_comp} (bottom) shows
the time factor required by the robots to recover from these broken
links. There were in average 6 intermediate networker robots
connecting the root and the worker. The failure factor denotes the
number of consecutive robots disabled after the chain reached the
targets, for instance a factor of $5/6$ denotes failing 5 out of 6
robots in a row. Experiments show an increase in 5\% of the time ratio
for every additional robot failing in the chain. Simultaneously
failing a constant fraction of robots leads to almost constant
recovery time, as reconnections occur in parallel. The supplementary
material provides additional experiments that show
our method's robustness to noise.
To further assess the robustness of our method, we used a motion
planning benchmarking dataset~\cite{sturtevant2012benchmarks}:
\begin{inparaenum}
\item small (dragon age/arena),
\item medium (dragon age/den203d), and,
\item large (dragon age/arena2).
\end{inparaenum}, using the same parameters as above (except for
$d_s = 9.5m$, $d_c = 9.7m$, $d_b = 10m$ to fit the environment) but
injecting random robot failures at every control step with an
occurrence probably of $p=0.0005$ and bounded to a maximum percentage
of robots failures $F$ from the set
$F \in \{0.1,0.2,0.3,0.4,0.5,0.6\}$, with $ 0 \leq F \leq
1$. Fig.~\ref{fig:sim_time} (bottom) shows the resulting time taken to
build the chain. $F \leq 0.3$ does not have significant impact on the
algorithm performance. However, with more failures, completion time
increases as well as the performance variability. As more robots fail,
the links have to be repaired before proceeding to the target,
increasing the convergence time with $F$.
\begin{figure*}[tbp]
\vspace{0.15cm}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth ,scale=0.95]{figures/combined_sim_pos.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.329\linewidth]{figures/kh4_start_end.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.329\linewidth]{figures/3_3_start_end.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.329\linewidth]{figures/cf_start_end.pdf}
\caption{Top: Illustration of simulated maps with each robot starting
position, end position and the safe communication disk region: on the left
the smallest arena with flying robots going over an obstructed zone, in the
middle a medium-sized arena with ground robots only, and on the right our
largest arena, also using only ground robots. Bottom: Real robot
experimental arena with start, end, trajectory and end position: on
the left 7 khepera IV robots in arena1, in the middle 3 khepera IV robots
and 3 CrazyFlie in arena 2 and on the right 6 CrazyFlie in arena 2. }
\label{fig:sim_arena}
\end{figure*}%
\noindent\textbf{Scalability}
We use again the benchmarking dataset~\cite{sturtevant2012benchmarks},
but adding a wall with a small window above the ground to the first
arena to force the use of flying robots (top leftmost map of
Fig.~\ref{fig:sim_arena}). We used 20 ground robots and 5 flying
robots for arena 1, 60 ground robots for arena 2, and 100 ground
robots for arena 3. For each of the arenas, we enforced 1, 2, and, 3
communication links, except for the 100 robot runs (arena 3) covering
only 2 and 3 links. Fig~\ref{fig:sim_arena} (top) shows that the
robots stayed within the safe communication zone even when navigating
in narrow corridors. Fig.~\ref{fig:sim_time} (top) plots the time
taken by the robots to build 1, 2, and, 3 links in each of the arenas,
along with the reference traveling times computed using the path
length and the maximum velocity of the robots (set again to 10
cm/s). As expected, the time taken to build a chain increases with the
size of the arena, but the average time to build different number of
links is similar across different arenas. In particular, when
computing the time factor, the median time
ratio for N=60 is 0.106 and 0.102 for N=100, for all types of
links. This proves our claim that the proposed approach spends on
average equal amount of time reaching multiple targets with single or
multiple links. However, in arena 1 the chain construction time
increases with the number of links: this is due to the need of a
specific type of robot (flying) to cross a section of the arena. On
average, traversal time increases by 2\% for every additional
heterogeneous robot chain.
\noindent\textbf{Real robot experiments}
\label{subsec:robot_exp}
We validated the performance of our implementation using 6
Crazyflie
flying robots and 7
Khepera IV ground robots. We performed experiments
in three different settings with two different arena configurations as shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:sim_arena}:
\begin{inparaenum}
\item 7 ground robots in arena 1,
\item 3 ground robots and 3 flying robots in arena 2;
arena 2 has a wall containing a hole before the target and can be only
reached by a flying robot,
\item 6 flying robots in arena 2).
\end{inparaenum}
The ground robots run an instance of the Buzz Virtual Machine (BVM)
on-board to perform both control and path planning, whereas the flying
robots use PyBuzz, a decentralized infrastructure detailed
in~\cite{cotsakisdecentralized2019}. We use a motion capture camera
system emulating situated communication for state estimation. For
these experiments, we set the design parameters to $d_s = 1.2m$,
$d_c = 1.4m$, $d_b = 1.5m$ and $v_{max} = 1.5 m/s$ to match the size
of our robots and arena.
Fig.~\ref{fig:sim_arena} (bottom) shows one of the 10 test runs we
performed in each of the three different settings. The figure shows the
starting point, the trajectory, and the end position of the robots. On all
runs the robots were able to build a communication chain and reach the target.
Ground robots, heterogeneous team and flying robots on an average took 100s, 50s and 40s respectively to reach the targets (as discussed in the supplementary material).
Finally, we ported the algorithm to our ROS
based infrastructure~\cite{stonge2020} for an outdoor test on a group
of 4 larger quadcopters. The outdoor robots used GPS and communicated
through an Xbee mesh network. This deployment was made to show the
practical use of our algorithm on commercial hardware.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We present a communication chain construction algorithm for a
heterogeneous swarm of robots. Our approach is completely
decentralized: it requires only relative and local information from
neighbors. To tackle with robot failures, we exchange information and
bridge the chain as soon as it is broken. We assess the algorithm
performance with extensive simulations on up to 100 robots in five
different arenas. Real robot experiments with flying and ground robots
demonstrated the usability and robustness of the approach
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Neural networks trained on text alone, without explicit syntactic supervision, have been surprisingly successful in tasks that require sensitivity to sentence structure. The difficulty of interpreting the learned neural representations that underlie this success has motivated a range of analysis techniques, including diagnostic classifiers \cite{giulianelli18, conneau18, shi16}, visualization of individual neuron activations \cite{kadar17, qian16}, ablation of individual neurons or sets of neurons \cite{lakretz19} and behavioral tests of generalization to infrequent or held out syntactic structures \cite{linzen16,weber18,mccoy18}; for reviews, see \citet{belinkov19} and \citet{alishahi19}.
This paper expands the toolkit of neural network analysis techniques by drawing on the \textbf{syntactic priming} paradigm, a central tool in psycholinguistics for analyzing human syntactic representations \cite{bock1986syntactic}. This paradigm is based on the empirical finding that people tend to reuse syntactic structures that they have recently produced or encountered. For example, English provides two roughly equivalent ways to express a transfer event:
\ex.\label{ex:dative}
\a.The boy threw the ball to the dog.\label{ex:dativepo1}
\b.The boy threw the dog the ball.\label{ex:dativedo1}
When readers encounter one of these variants in the text more frequently than the other, they expect that future transfer events will more likely be expressed using the frequent construction than the infrequent one. For example, after reading sentences like \ref{ex:dativepo1} (the \textbf{prime}), readers expect sentences like \ref{ex:dativepo2}, which shares syntactic structure with the prime, to occur with a greater likelihood than the alternative variant like \ref{ex:dativedo2} which does not \cite{wells09}.\footnote{\Citet{wells09} measured priming effects for relative clauses, not dative constructions. For work on priming in production with dative constructions, see \citet{kaschak11}.}
\ex.
\a. The lawyer sent the letter to the client. \label{ex:dativepo2}
\b. The lawyer sent the client the letter. \label{ex:dativedo2}
We use the priming paradigm to analyze neural network language models (LMs), systems that define a probability distribution over the $n$\textsuperscript{th} word of a sentence given its first $n-1$ words. Building on paradigms that determine whether the LM's expectations are consistent with the syntactic structure of the sentence \cite{linzen16}, we measure the extent to which a LM's expectation for a specific syntactic structure is affected by recent experience with related structures. We prime a fully trained model with a structure by adapting it to a small number of sentences containing that structure \citep{vanSchijndel18adaptation}. We then measure the change in surprisal (negative log probability) after adaptation when the LM is tested either on sentences with the same structure or sentences with different but related structures. The degree to which one structure primes another provides a graded similarity metric between the model's representations of those structures (cf. \citealt{branigan2017experimental}), which allows us to investigate how the representations of sentences with these structures are organized.
As a case study, we applied this technique to investigate how recurrent neural network (RNN) LMs represent sentences with relative clauses (RCs). We found that the representations of these sentences are organized in a linguistically interpretable manner: sentences with a particular type of RC were most similar to other sentences with the same type of RC in the LMs' representation space. Furthermore, sentences with different types of RCs were more similar to each other than sentences without RCs. We demonstrate that the similarity between sentences was not driven merely by specific words that appeared in the sentence, suggesting that the LMs tracked abstract properties of the sentence. This ability to track abstract properties decreased as the training corpus size increased. Finally, we tested the hypothesis that LMs' accuracy on agreement prediction \citep{marvin18} would increase with the LMs' ability to track more abstract properties of the sentence, but did not find evidence for this hypothesis.
\begin{table*}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\toprule
\textbf{Abstract structure} & \textbf{Example} \\
\midrule
Unreduced Object RC & The conspiracy that the employee welcomed divided the \textcolor{gray}{beautiful} country. \\
Reduced Object RC & The conspiracy the employee welcomed divided the \textcolor{gray}{beautiful} country. \\
Unreduced Passive RC & The conspiracy that was welcomed by the employee divided the \textcolor{gray}{beautiful} country. \\
Reduced Passive RC & The conspiracy welcomed by the employee divided the \textcolor{gray}{beautiful} country.\\
Active Subject RC & The employee that welcomed the conspiracy \textcolor{gray}{quickly} searched the building\textcolor{gray}{s}. \\
PS/ORC-matched Coordination & The conspiracy welcomed the employee and divided the \textcolor{gray}{beautiful} country. \\
ASRC-matched Coordination & The employee welcomed the conspiracy and \textcolor{gray}{quickly} searched the building\textcolor{gray}{s}.\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\label{tab:ex} Examples of sentences generated using templates containing the seven abstract structures we analyzed (optional elements, which only occur in a subset of the examples, are indicated in grey).}
\end{table*}
\section{Background}
\subsection{Syntactic predictions in neural LMs}
We build on paradigms that use LM probability estimates for words in a given context as a measure of the model's sensitivity to the syntactic structure of the sentence \cite{linzen16, gulordava18, marvin18}. If a language model assigns a higher probability to a verb form that agrees in number with the subject (\textit{the boy... writes}) than a verb form that does not (\textit{the boy... write}), we can infer that the model encodes information about the agreement features of nouns and verbs (that is, the difference between singular and plural) and has correctly identified the subject that corresponds to this verb. This reasoning has been extended beyond subject-verb agreement to study whether the predictions of neural LMs are sensitive to a range of other syntactic dependencies, including negative polarity items \cite{jumelet18}, filler-gap dependencies \cite{wilcox18} and reflexive pronoun binding \cite{futrell19}.
\subsection{Syntactic priming in humans \label{sec:human_priming}}
Syntactic priming has been used to study whether the representations of two sentences have shared structure. For example, \ref{ex:dativepo1} (repeated below as \ref{ex:dativepo_repeat}) shares the structure VP~$\rightarrow$ V NP PP with \ref{ex:dativepo3} but not \ref{ex:dativedo3}.
\ex. \label{ex:dativepo_repeat} The boy threw the ball to the dog.
\ex.
\a. \label{ex:dativepo3} The renowned chef made some wonderful pasta for the guest.
\b. \label{ex:dativedo3} The renowned chef made the guest some wonderful pasta.
If \ref{ex:dativepo_repeat} primes \ref{ex:dativepo3} more than it primes \ref{ex:dativedo3}, we can infer that the representations of \ref{ex:dativepo_repeat} are more similar to that of \ref{ex:dativepo3} than to that of \ref{ex:dativedo3}. Since \ref{ex:dativedo3} and \ref{ex:dativepo3} differ only in their structure, this difference in similarity must be driven by structural information in the representations of the sentences (for reviews, see \citealt{mahowald16} and \citealt{tooley10}).
Although priming studies have traditionally measured the priming effect on the sentence immediately following the prime, more recent studies have demonstrated that the effects of syntactic priming can be cumulative and long-lasting: sentences with a shared structure $S_X$ become progressively easier to process when preceded by $n$ sentences with the same structure $S_X$ than when preceded by $n$ sentences with a different structure $S_Y$ \cite{kaschak11, wells09}.\footnote{In studies looking at non-cumulative priming, $n=1$.} In conjunction with the finding that words that are consistent with a probable syntactic parse are easier to process than words consistent with less probable parses \cite{hale01, levy08}, the increased ease of processing in cumulative priming studies can be interpreted as evidence that, with increased exposure to a structure, participants begin to expect that structure with a greater probability \cite{chang06}.
Cumulative priming allows us to study how sentences are related to each other in the human (or LM) representation space in the same way that non-cumulative priming does: when participants (or LMs) are exposed to sentences with structure $S_X$, if there is a greater decrease in surprisal when they are tested on other sentences with $S_X$ than when they are tested on other sentences with $S_Y$, we can infer that the representations of sentences with $S_X$ are more similar to each other than to the representations of sentences with $S_Y$.
\subsection{LM adaptation as cumulative priming \label{sec:adaptation_as_priming}}
\Citet{vanSchijndel18adaptation} modeled cumulative priming in recurrent neural networks (RNNs) by adapting fully trained RNN LMs to new stimuli --- i.e. taking a fully trained RNN LM and continuing to train it on a small set of sentences (cf.\ \citealt{graveetal17,krauseetal17, chowdhury19}). They demonstrated that when an RNN LM was adapted to a small number of sentences with a shared syntactic structure, the surprisal for novel sentences with that structure decreased, enabling them to infer that the LM's representations of sentences contained information about that structure.
\section{Similarity between syntactic structures in RNN LM representational space} \label{sec:adapt(y|x)}
Following the assumptions in Section~\ref{sec:human_priming}, we define a similarity metric between two structures $S_X$ and $S_Y$ in an LM's representation space by adapting the LM to sentences with $S_X$ and measuring the change in surprisal for sentences with $S_Y$ --- i.e. measuring to what extent sentences with $S_X$ prime sentences with $S_Y$. We use the notation $\mathbb{A}(Y \mid X)$ to refer to this change in surprisal\footnote{ $\mathbb{A}$ is shorthand for adaptation.}, where $X$ and $Y$ are non-lexically-overlapping sets of sentences whose members share the structures $S_X$ and $S_Y$ respectively. If we assume that $S_X$ and $S_Y$ are similar to each other in the LM's representation space, then $\mathbb{A}(Y \mid X) > 0$ --- i.e., encountering sentences with $S_X$ causes the LM to assign a higher probability to sentences with $S_Y$. On the other hand, if we assume that $S_X$ and $S_Y$ are unrelated to each other, then $\mathbb{A}(Y \mid X) = 0$ --- i.e., encountering sentences with $S_X$ does not cause the LM to change its probability for sentences with $S_Y$.
\section{Experimental setup}
\subsection{Syntactic structures}
We analyzed five types of RCs. In an active subject RC, the gap is in the subject position of the embedded clause:\footnote{We illustrate the location of the gap with underscores here, but the underscores were not included in the LM's input.}
\ex. \label{ex:src} My cousin that $\rule{0.17cm}{0.15mm}$ liked the book ...
In a passive subject RC (\textit{passive RCs}), the gap is in the subject position of the embedded clause, and the embedded verb is passive. In English, passive RCs can be unreduced \ref{ex:unreduced_prc} or reduced \ref{ex:reduced_prc}:
\ex.\label{ex:prc}\a.The book that $\rule{0.17cm}{0.15mm}$ was liked by my cousin ...\label{ex:unreduced_prc}
\b.The book $\rule{0.17cm}{0.15mm}$ liked by my cousin ...\label{ex:reduced_prc}
In an object RC the gap is in the object position of the embedded clause. In English, object RCs can be unreduced \ref{ex:unreduced_orc} or reduced \ref{ex:reduced_orc}:
\ex. \label{ex:orc} \a. The book that my cousin liked $\rule{0.17cm}{0.15mm}$ ... \label{ex:unreduced_orc}
\b.The book my cousin liked $\rule{0.17cm}{0.15mm}$ ... \label{ex:reduced_orc}
Finally, we also included two additional conditions with verb coordination: one with nearly identical word order and lexical content as active subject RCs (\ref{ex:scoord}; ASRC-matched Coordination), and another with nearly identical word order and lexical content as passive RCs and object RCs (\ref{ex:ocoord}; PS/ORC-matched Coordination).\footnote{In order to maintain the same word order as in object and passive RCs, the subject of the coordinated verb phrases is an NP that tends to fill the object position in other sentences (e.g, ``the equation"). Therefore, many of the sentences in this condition are implausible (e.g., ``The equation reviewed the physicists and challenged the method.") \label{footnote:coord_semantics}}
\ex. My cousin liked the book and ... \label{ex:scoord}
\ex. The book liked my cousin and ... \label{ex:ocoord}
These conditions enable us to measure whether sentences with different types of RCs are more similar to each other in an LM's representation space than they are to lexically matched sentences without RCs.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.43\textwidth]{exp_schema.png}
\caption{A schematic for calculating the similarity between two structures $S_X$ and $S_Y$ in an LM's representation space. $X_1$, $X_2$ and $Y_1$, $Y_2$ are non-lexically-overlapping sets of sentences with $S_X$ and $S_Y$ respectively. $\textit{Model}_X$ and $\textit{Model}_Y$ refer to versions of a fully trained model that have been adapted to either $X_1$ or $Y_1$ respectively. $\textit{Surp}_X()$ and $\textit{Surp}_Y()$ are functions that return the surprisal of sentences for $\textit{Model}_X$ and $\textit{Model}_Y$.}
\label{fig:exp_schema}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Adaptation and test sets}
We generated sentences from seven templates, one for each of the syntactic structures of interest. The slots were filled with 223 verbs, 164 nouns, 24 adverbs and 78 adjectives such that the semantic plausibility of the combination of nouns, verbs, adverbs and adjectives was ensured. The seven variants of every sentence had nearly identical lexical items (see Table~\ref{tab:ex}).%
\footnote{Since the main verb of the sentence was constrained to be semantically plausible with the subject of the sentence, it often varied between active subject RC and ASRC-matched coordination on the one had and all other conditions on the other.}
We used these templates to generate five experimental lists --- each list comprised of a pair of adaptation and test sets with minimal lexical overlap between them (only function words and some modifiers were shared). Each adaptation set contained 20 sentences and each test set contained 50.%
In order to infer that any decrease in surprisal is caused by adaptation to an abstract syntactic structure, we need to ensure that the models are not adapting to properties of the sentence that are unrelated to the abstract structure of interest. Consider a LM adapted to \ref{ex1} and tested on \ref{ex2}:
\ex. \label{ex1} The conspiracy that the employee welcomed divided the country.
\ex. \label{ex2} The proposal that the receptionist managed shocked the CEO.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{analysis1.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:analysis1}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{analysis2.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:analysis2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{The adaptation effect averaged across all 75 models when (a) they were adapted to each of the structures and tested on either the same structure (blue, bottom) or different structure (pink, top) and (b) they were adapted to RCs and tested on non-RCs or vice versa (pink bars); or when they were adapted to RCs or non-RCs and tested on other RCs or and non-RCs respectively (blue bars). Greater values indicate more similarity between adaptation and test structures. Error bars reflect
95\% CIs. }
\end{figure*}
When the LM is adapted to sentences such as~\ref{ex1}, it could adjust its expectations about several properties of the sentence, some more linguistically interesting than others. For instance, it could learn that there are three determiners in the sentence, that the third word of the sentence is \textit{that}, that sentences have nine words, that every verb is preceded by a noun, and so on and so forth. If there is a decrease in surprisal when a model is adapted to \ref{ex1} and tested on \ref{ex2}, it is unclear if this is because the model learned to expect object relative clauses or if it learned to expect any of the other mentioned properties.
To minimize the likelihood that the adaptation effects are driven by irrelevant properties of the sentence, we introduced several sources of variability to our templates: nouns could either be singular or plural, noun phrases could be optionally modified by an adjective, adjectives were optionally modified with an intensifier and verb phrases were optionally modified with adverbs which could occur either pre-verbally or post-verbally (details in the Supplementary Materials).\footnote{The templates and code for all the analyses along with the data can be found on GitHub: https://github.com/grushaprasad/RNN-Priming}
\subsection{Models}
We used 75 of the LSTM language models trained by \citet{vanschijndel19}; these LMs varied in the number of hidden units per layer (100, 200, 400, 800, 1600) and the number of tokens they were trained on (2 million, 10 million or 20 million). For each training corpus size, \citeauthor{vanSchijndel18adaptation} trained models on five disjoint subsets of the WikiText-103 corpus, to ensure that the results generalized across different training sets.
\subsection{Calculating the adaptation effect (AE)}
For every structure, we computed the similarity between that structure and every other structure (including itself) as described in Section~\ref{sec:adapt(y|x)}. This process is schematized in Figure~\ref{fig:exp_schema}. The surprisal values were averaged across the entire sentence.\footnote{Unknown words were excluded from this average.}
We found that $\mathbb{A}(B\mid A)$ was proportional to the surprisal of $B$ prior to adaptation (see Supplementary Materials). As a consequence, for three structures $X$, $Y$ and $Z$, $\mathbb{A}(Y\mid X)$ could be greater than $\mathbb{A}(Z\mid X)$ merely because $Y$ was a more surprising structure to begin with than $Z$. In order to remove this confound, we first fit a linear regression model predicting $\mathbb{A}(Y\mid X)$ from the surprisal of $Y$ prior to adaptation ($\textit{Surp}(Y)$):
\vspace{-1.8em}
$$\mathbb{A}(Y\mid X) = \beta_0 + \beta_1 Surp(Y) + \epsilon$$
\vspace{-1.8em}
We then regressed out the linear relationship between $\mathbb{A}(Y\mid X)$ and $\textit{Surp}(Y)$ as follows:
\vspace{-0.5em}
\begin{align*}
\textit{AE}{(Y\mid X)} &= \mathbb{A}(Y\mid X) - \beta_1 Surp(Y) \\
& = \beta_0 + \epsilon
\end{align*}
\vspace{-2em}
Since $\textit{Surp}(Y)$ was centered around its mean, $\beta_0$ reflects the mean of $\mathbb{A}(Y\mid X)$ when $\textit{Surp}(Y)$ is equal to the mean surprisal of all sentences prior to adaptation. The term $\epsilon$ reflects any variance in $\mathbb{A}(Y\mid X)$ that is not predicted by $\textit{Surp}(Y)$. By summing these two terms together, $\textit{AE}{(Y\mid X)}$ reflects the change in surprisal for $Y$ after adapting to $X$ that is independent of $\textit{Surp}(Y)$.
\subsection{Statistical analyses}
We used linear mixed effects models \cite{pinheiro2000mixed} to test for statistical significance; all of the results reported below were highly significant. Details about the statistical analyses can be found in the Supplementary Materials.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Validating AE as a similarity metric}
As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:adaptation_as_priming}, under the adaptation-as-priming paradigm, we would expect sentences that share the same specific structure to be more similar to each other than lexically matched sentences that do not share the structure.\footnote{By lexically matched we mean that all content words were shared between sentences.} In other words, if $X_1$ and $X_2$ are non-lexically-overlapping sets of sentences with shared structure $S_X$, and $Y_2$ is a set of sentences with structure $S_Y$, but is lexically matched with $X_2$, then we would expect $AE(X_2 \mid X_1) > AE(Y_2 \mid X_1)$. We found this prediction to be true for all of our seven structures (Figure~\ref{fig:analysis1}), thus validating our similarity metric.
\subsection{Similarity between sentences with different types of VP coordination}
Our two coordination conditions were structurally identical to each other but varied in their semantic plausibility --- the sentences in PS/ORC-matched coordination condition were often semantically implausible whereas sentences in ASRC-matched condition were always semantically plausible (see footnote~\ref{footnote:coord_semantics}). If sentences that were structurally similar were close together irrespective of semantic plausibility, then we expect sentences with coordination to be more similar to each other than lexically matched sentences with RCs. Consistent with this prediction, the adaptation effect for models adapted to one type of coordination was greater when the models were tested on sentences with the other type of coordination than when they were tested on sentences with RCs (top panel of Figure~\ref{fig:analysis2}).
\subsection{\label{section:rc} Similarity between sentences with different types of RCs}
Unlike sentences with coordination, sentences with different types of RCs differ from each other at a surface level (see Table~\ref{tab:ex}). However, at a more abstract level they all share a common property: a gap. If the RNN LMs were keeping track of whether or not a sentence contained a gap, we would expect sentences with different types of RCs to be more similar to each other in the RNN LMs' representation space than lexically matched sentences without a gap. In other words, if $RC_X$ and $RC_Y$ are two different types of RCs and $Coord_Y$ is a sentence with verb coordination lexically matched with $RC_Y$, then we would expect $AE(RC_Y \mid RC_X) > AE(Coord_Y \mid RC_X)$.
Consistent with this prediction, the adaptation effect for models adapted to RCs was greater when they were tested on sentences with other types of RCs than when they were tested on sentences with coordination (bottom panel of Figure~\ref{fig:analysis2}). This suggests that the LMs do keep track of whether or not a sentence contains a gap, even though this property is not overtly indicated by a lexical item that is shared across all types of RCs.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width = 0.4\textwidth]{analysis3_combined.pdf}
\caption{The adaptation effect when models adapted to sentences with reduced and unreduced RCs are tested on sentences that match only in reduction (top right), match only in passivity (bottom right), match in both reduction and passivity (top left) or sentences that match in neither (bottom right).}
\label{fig:analysis3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Similarity between sentences belonging to different sub-classes of RCs}
The different types of RCs we tested can be divided into sub-classes based on at least two linguistically interpretable features: reduction and passivity. Reduction distinguishes reduced passive and object RCs on the one hand from unreduced passive and object RCs on the other. Passivity distinguishes reduced and unreduced passive RCs on the one hand from reduced and unreduced object RCs on the other. The LMs could be tracking either, both or none of these features.
We probed whether the LMs track these features by comparing the similarity between sentences that share one feature but not the other, with the similarity between sentences that share neither feature. If the adaptation effect is greater when there is a match in one feature than when there is a match in neither of the features, we can infer that the LMs track whether sentences have that feature.
We found that the LMs track both of these features (Figure~\ref{fig:analysis3}).
Additionally, we probed which of the features contributes more towards the similarity between sentences by comparing the similarity between sentences that match only in passivity with sentences that match only in reduction. When the adaptation and test sets matched only in passivity, the adaptation effect was slightly (but significantly) greater than when the adaptation and test sets matched only in reduction (Figure~\ref{fig:analysis3}). In other words, in the LMs' representation space, \ref{ex:rorc2} is more similar to \ref{ex:uorc2} than it is to \ref{ex:rprc2}, suggesting that passivity contributes more towards the similarity between sentences than reduction.
\ex. \label{ex:rorc2} The conspiracy the employee welcomed divided the country.
\ex. \label{ex:uorc2} The conspiracy that the employee welcomed divided the country.
\ex. \label{ex:rprc2} The conspiracy welcomed by the employee divided the country.
This result is both intuitive and linguistically interpretable --- the edit distance between reduced and unreduced RCs is smaller than the that between object and passive RCs; the syntax tree for \ref{ex:rorc2} is also more similar to \ref{ex:uorc2} than it is to \ref{ex:rprc2}.
\subsection{\label{section:nhid_csize}What properties of sentences drive the similarity between them?}
Our analyses so far have demonstrated that sentences that belong to linguistically interpretable classes (e.g., sentences that match in reduction) are more similar to each other in the LMs' representation space than they are to sentences that do not belong to those classes (e.g., sentences that do not match in reduction). However, it is unclear what properties of the sentences are driving this similarity between members of the class. For almost all of the linguistically interpretable classes we considered, all sentences belonging to a class shared at least some, if not all, function words. The only exception was the class of all RCs, where the property shared by all sentences in this class (the presence of a gap) was not overtly observable. Therefore, it is possible that the similarity between members of most of the classes we tested was being driven entirely by the presence of these function words.
In order to test whether the similarity between members of classes was indeed being driven by the presence of shared function words, we compared the representation space of the models we tested in the previous sections (henceforth \textit{trained models}) with the representation space of models trained on no data (henceforth \textit{baseline models}). Since the baseline models were only ever exposed to the 20 sentences in the adaptation set and there was no lexical overlap in content words between adaptation and test sets, any similarity between sentences in the representation space of these models would be driven by the presence of function words. If the similarity between sentences in the representation space of the trained models was being driven by factors other than the presence of function words, we would expect this similarity to be greater than the similarity between these sentences in the representation space of the baseline models.
We cannot directly use adaptation effect to compare the similarity between sentences in the representation spaces of trained models and baseline models, however: models trained on more data are likely to have stronger priors and are therefore less likely to drastically change their representations after 20 sentences than models trained on less data. In order to mitigate this issue, we defined a distance measure between sentences that belong to a class and sentences that do not belong to a class $S_X$ as follows (see Figure~\ref{fig:analysis4_schematic} for a schematic):
\vspace{-0.75em}$$\mathbb{D}(S_X, \neg S_X) = \frac{AE(X_2 \mid X_1)}{AE(\neg X_2 \mid X_1)}$$
\vspace{-0.75em}This value would be greater than one if sentences that belonged to a class were more similar to each other than they were to sentences that did not belong to the class. Since the strength of prior belief would affect sentences that belong to the class the same way it would affect sentences that do not belong to the class, the effect would cancel out.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width = 0.45\textwidth]{analysis4_schematic.png}
\caption{A schematic of how $\mathbb{D}(\textit{RC}, \neg \textit{RC})$ is calculated. For any given row, the black square indicates the specific structure the models were adapted to, the blue squares indicate other structures that belong to the same linguistically defined class as the black square and the pink squares indicate the structures that do not belong to this linguistically defined class. In calculating the distance, we first calculated the proportion between the mean adaptation effect for the blue squares and the mean adaptation effect for pink squares for each row. We then averaged across the proportion for each row to arrive at one number.}
\label{fig:analysis4_schematic}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{analysis4_1.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:analysis4}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{analysis5_2.pdf}
\caption{}
\label{fig:accuracy}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{(a) Effect of hidden layer size and corpus size on the distance between sentences with specific RCs and sentences without (left), between sentences that match in reduction and sentences that do not (middle) and between sentences with RCs and sentences without (right). The solid black line indicates the point at which sentences that belong to a particular class are equally similar to other sentences that belong to that class and sentences that do not. (b) Agreement prediction accuracy on reduced object RCs and unreduced object RCs as a function of $\mathbb{D}(RC, \neg RC)$}
\end{figure*}
We measured the distance between members and non-members for three linguistically interpretable classes: sentences which contained the same type of RC, sentences that matched in their reduction or sentences that contained any type of RC. In our baseline models, for all three classes, sentences that belonged to one of these classes were more similar to each other than sentences that did not belong to that class (Figure~\ref{fig:analysis4}). This was surprising for the class of sentences that contained any type of RC because there was no function word that was shared by all sentences in this class. We hypothesize that this is because sentences without RCs always contained the word \textit{and}, whereas sentences with RCs never did.
In cases where members of the class shared at least some function words, the distance between sentences that belonged to the class and sentences that did not for the trained models was greater than that for the baseline models. This suggests that the similarity between sentences in the representation space of trained models was being driven by factors other than the mere presence of function words. However, somewhat surprisingly, as the number of training tokens increased, the distance between members and non-members decreased.
In the case where the members of the class did not share any function words, the distance between sentences that belonged to the class and sentences that did not belong to the class did not differ between the trained models and the baseline models. This suggests that any similarity between sentences in the representation space of trained models was driven purely by the presence (or in this case absence) of lexical items.
\subsection{Does $\mathbb{D}(\textit{RC}, \neg \textit{RC})$ predict agreement prediction accuracy?}
\citet{marvin18} created a dataset that evaluated the grammaticality of the predictions of language models. Using this dataset, they showed that LSTM LMs could not accurately predict the number of the main verb if the main clause subject was modified by an object RCs (either reduced or unreduced). However, the models had better performance if the main clause was modified by an active subject RC. For example, the models were at near chance levels in predicting that \ref{ex:orcagreement_grammatical} should have higher probability than \ref{ex:orcagreement_ungrammatical}, but were slightly better at predicting that \ref{ex:srcagreement_grammatical} should have higher probability than \ref{ex:srcagreement_ungrammatical}:
\ex. \a. \label{ex:orcagreement_grammatical}\ The farmer that the parents love swims.
\b. \label{ex:orcagreement_ungrammatical}\ *The farmer that the parents love swim.
\ex.
\a. \label{ex:srcagreement_grammatical}\ The farmer that loves the parents swims.
\b. \label{ex:srcagreement_ungrammatical} \ *The farmer that loves the parents swim.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.65\textwidth]{abstract_strucs.png}
\caption{A schematic of how sentences belonging to different linguistically defined classes are related to each other in the LMs' representation space. Each colour indicates a different level of hierarchy.}
\label{fig:hierarchy}
\end{figure*}
One possible explanation for this poor performance is that object RCs, either reduced or unreduced, are quite infrequent \cite{roland07}. If the LM treats object RCs as unrelated to other RCs, there are likely very few training examples from which the models can learn about subject-verb agreement when the subject is modified by an object RC. If the LM had instead treated object RCs as belonging to the same class as other RCs, it could learn to generalize from training examples of subject-verb agreement when the subject is modified by other RCs. This suggests the hypothesis that agreement prediction accuracy on object RCs will be higher in LMs in which the representation of object RCs is more similar to the representation of other RCs.
The similarity between object RCs and other RCs was defined as in the previous section (the proportion of blue squares to pink squares of the top two rows in Figure~\ref{fig:analysis4_schematic}). There was an increase in accuracy as the number of hidden units increased (see Figure~\ref{fig:accuracy}). However, the similarity between object RCs and other types of RCs did not significantly correlate with agreement prediction; we therefore did not find any evidence for the hypothesis mentioned above.\footnote{Similar patterns were observed for the other constructions in the dataset. See Supplementary Materials.}
\section{Discussion}
Drawing on the syntactic priming paradigm from psycholinguistics, we proposed a new technique to analyze how the representations of sentences in neural language models (LMs) are organized. Applying this paradigm to sentences with relative clauses (RCs), we found that the representations of these sentences were organized in a linguistically interpretable hierarchical manner (summarized in Figure~\ref{fig:hierarchy}).
We investigated whether this hierarchical organization was driven by function words that are shared among sentences sentences or whether there was evidence that LMs were tracking more abstract properties of the sentence. We found that for at least some linguistically interpretable classes, sentences that belonged to these classes were more similar to each other in the representation space of the LMs we tested than in the representation space of baseline LMs that were not trained on any data. This suggests that the trained LMs were capable of tracking abstract properties of the sentence.
However, for linguistically interpretable classes in which sentences shared a non-lexically observable property (e.g. presence of a gap), sentences were as similar to each other in the representation space of the LMs we tested as in the representation space of baseline LMs. Taken together, these results suggest that LMs might be able to track abstract properties of classes of sentences only if these classes also share a lexically observable property.
Additionally, we found that the sentences belonging to linguistically interpretable classes were more similar to each other in the representation spaces of models trained on 2 million tokens than in the representation spaces for models trained on 20 million tokens. We infer from this that LMs' ability to track abstract properties of sentences decreases with an increase in the training corpus size. This suggests that if we want these LMs to track more abstract linguistic properties, training them on more data from the same distribution is unlikely to help (cf. \citealt{vanschijndel19}). Future work can explore how to bias these models to track linguistically useful properties through architectural biases \cite{dyer16}, training on auxiliary tasks \cite{enguehard17} or data augmentation \cite{perez17}.
We hypothesized that models' accuracy on subject verb agreement when preceded by object RCs would increase as the similarity between object RCs and the other types of RCs increased. However, we did not find evidence for this. This could either be because the similarity between object RCs and the other types of RCs was too weak to be useful (see Figure~\ref{fig:analysis4}) or because the LMs do not use this property when predicting verb agreement. Future work can disambiguate these reasons by testing models that are biased to treat sentences with object RCs and other RCs as being similar.
Finally, our method allows us to generate a similarity matrix in the LMs representation space for any given set of structures. In the future, generating a similar matrix for human representations using priming experiments and comparing these two matrices using analysis methods from cognitive neuroscience \cite{kriegeskorte08} may enable us to gain insight into how human-like the LM representations are and vice versa.
\section{Conclusion}
We proposed a novel technique to analyze how the representations of various syntactic structures are organized in neural language models. As a case study, we applied this technique to gain insight into the representations of sentences with relative clauses in RNN language models and found that the representations of sentences were organized in a linguistically interpretable manner.
\section{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank Sadhwi Srinivas and the members of the CAP lab at JHU for helpful discussions and valuable feedback.
|
\section{Introduction}
The \emph{Master Teapot}, ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$, for the family $\mathcal{F}^{cp}_2$ of continuous, unimodal, critically periodic interval self-maps is the set
\[ {\Upsilon_2^{cp}} := \overline{ \{ (z,\lambda) \in \mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{R} \mid \lambda = e^{h_{top}(f)} \textrm{ for some } f \in \mathcal{F}^{cp}_2,z \textrm{ is a Galois conjugate of } \lambda \}}, \] and the Thurston set, ${\Omega_2^{cp}}$, is its projection to the complex plane, i.e.
\[{\Omega_2^{cp}} := \overline{ \{z \in \mathbb{C} \mid z \textrm{ is a Galois conjugate of } e^{h_{top}(f)} \textrm{ for some } f \in \mathcal{F}^{cp}\} }.\]
A finite approximation of ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$ is shown in Figure \ref{f:teapot}. The Master Teapot and Thurston set have rich geometrical and topological structures that have been investigated in several recent works, including \cite{TiozzoGaloisConjugates, TiozzoTopologicalEntropy, CalegariKochWalker, thurston, thompson, BrayDavisLindseyWu}. The main result of this paper is an explicit characterization of ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$ -- a necessary and sufficient condition for a point to be in ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$. This characterization can be algorithmically tested and establishes a new connection between horizontal slices of the Master Teapot and iterated function system theory. Before stating the results precisely, we introduce some terminology and notation.
\medskip
First, we define words and sequences in the alphabet $\{0, 1\}$:
\begin{definition}\label{def:word_seq} \
\begin{enumerate}
\item A {\em sequence} $w=w_1w_2\ldots $ is an element in $\{0, 1\}^{\mathbb{N}}$. The {\em shift map} $\sigma : \{0,1\}^{\mathbb{N}} \to \{0,1\}^{\mathbb{N}}$ is defined by removing the first element of a sequence, i.e. $\sigma(w_1w_2w_3\dots):=w_2w_3\dots$.
\item A {\em word} $w=w_1w_2\dots w_n$ is an element in $\{0, 1\}^n$ for some positive integer $n$. The number $n$ is called the {\em length} of the word $w$ and is denoted by $|w|$.
\item For $n \in \mathbb{N}$, the {\em reverse function} ${\textrm{Reverse}} : \{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}^n$ is defined as
\[ {\textrm{Reverse}}(w_1w_2\dots w_n):=w_nw_{n-1}\dots w_1\]
\item For $k \in \mathbb{N}$, the \emph{$k$-prefix} of a sequence $w=w_1w_2\dots $ is the word
\[{\textrm{Prefix}}_k(w):=w_1\dots w_k\]
\item For a word $w=w_1 \dots w_n$ of length $n$ and a natural number $k \leq n$, the \emph{$k$-prefix} and \emph{$k$-suffix} of $w$ are the words
\begin{align*}
{\textrm{Prefix}}_k(w) & :=w_1\dots w_k\\
{\textrm{Suffix}}_k(w) &:=w_{n-k+1}w_{n-k+2}\dots w_n \\
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Next, we relate words and sequences with dynamics on $\mathbb{C}$ via the following definitions:
\begin{definition}\label{def:ifs} \
\begin{enumerate}
\item For any $z\in\mathbb{C}$, define maps $f_{0,z},f_{1,z}: \mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$ by
\[f_{0, z}(x):=zx, \quad f_{1, z}(x):=2-zx.\]
\item For any $w=w_1\dots w_n$ and $z \in \mathbb{C}$, set
\[F(w,z):=f_{w_n,z}\circ \dots \circ f_{w_1,z}(1)\]
\item For any sequence $w=w_1w_2\dots$ and any $z \in \mathbb{C}$ with $|z|>1$, set
\begin{align*}
H(w, z) := & \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(-1)^{(\sum_{i=1}^nw_i)}z^{-n} F({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w), z) \\
= &\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}(-1)^{(\sum_{i=1}^nw_i)}z^{-n}f_{w_n,z}\circ\ldots \circ f_{w_1, z}(1)
\end{align*}
\item For any sequence $w=w_1w_2\dots$ and $z \in \mathbb{C}$ with $|z|<1$, set
\begin{align*}
G(w, z):= & \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}F({\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w)), z) \\
= &\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}f_{w_1,z}\circ \ldots \circ f_{w_n, z}(1) \\
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
The following definition contains definitions from \cite{MilnorThurston}:
\begin{definition}\label{def:order} \
\begin{enumerate}
\item The {\em cumulative sign} of a word $w=w_1w_2\dots w_n$ is defined as $s(w):=(-1)^{\sum_iw_i}$.
\item The \emph{twisted lexicographic order} $\le_E$ is a total ordering on the set of sequences, defined as follows: $w<_Ew'$, if and only if there is some $k\in\mathbb{N}$, such that ${\textrm{Prefix}}_{k-1}(w)={\textrm{Prefix}}_{k-1}(w')$, and $s({\textrm{Prefix}}_{k-1}(w))(w'_{k}-w_{k})>0$. In other words, $w <_E w'$ if and only if, denoting by $k$ the index of the first letter where $w$ and $w'$ differ, either $w'_k>w_k$ and the common $(k-1)$-prefix has positive cumulative sign, or $w'_k<w_k$ and the common $(k-1)$-prefix has negative cumulative sign.
\item We define the total order $\le_E$ on the set of words of length $n$ exactly the same way as above.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition} \label{def:lambdaitinerary} \
\begin{enumerate}
\item Let $\lambda\in (1, 2]$. We call the map $f_{\lambda}:[0,1] \to [0,1]$ given by by
\[f_\lambda(x)=\begin{cases} \lambda x & x\leq 1/\lambda \\ 2-\lambda x & x>1/\lambda\end{cases}\]
the \emph{$\lambda$-tent map}.
Let $I_{0, \lambda}=[0, 1/\lambda]$, $I_{1, \lambda}=[1/\lambda, 1]$.
\item The \emph{ $\lambda$-itinerary}, denoted as ${\textrm{It}}_\lambda$, is the minimum (with respect to $\leq_E$) sequence $w$ such that for any $k\geq 0$, $f_\lambda^k(1)\in I_{w_{k+1},\lambda}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
One can easily check that ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ is the itinerary of $1$ under $f_\lambda$ in the convention of Milnor-Thurston kneading theory.
Now we introduce a combinatorial condition on sequences:
\begin{definition} \label{def:improvedlambdasuitability}
For $\lambda \in (1,2]$, a sequence $w$ is called \emph{$\lambda$-suitable} if for every $\lambda'\in (\lambda, 2]$, the following conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item ${\textrm{Reverse}} ( {\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w)) \leq_E {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
\item If ${\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w)) = {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})$, then the cumulative sign $s({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w)) = -1$.
\item If ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'} = 1 \cdot 0^k \cdot 1 \dots$, $k \in \mathbb{N}$, then $w$ does not contain $k+1$ consecutive $0$s. \newline (That is, if ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$ starts with $1$ followed by $k$ $0$s and then $1$, writing $w$ as $w=w_1w_2\ldots,$ there does not exist $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $w_i = 0$ for all $n \leq i \leq n+k$.)
\item If $k \in \mathbb{N}$ satisfies $\sqrt{2}\leq \lambda^{2^k}<2$, then $w=\mathfrak{D'}^k(w')$ for some sequence $w'$, where $\mathfrak{D'}$ is the map that replaces $0$ with $11$ and $1$ with $01$, such that for every $\lambda'>\lambda^{2^k}$, if ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'} = 1 \cdot 0^k \cdot 1 \dots$ then $w'$ does not contain $k+1$ consecutive $0$s.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark} Every sequence is (vacuously) $2$-suitable. \end{remark}
\noindent For $\lambda\in (1, 2)$, let ${\Xi}_\lambda$ be height-$\lambda$ slice of the Master Teapot $\Upsilon_2$:
\[{\Xi}_\lambda:=\{z: (z, \lambda)\in \Upsilon_2\}\]
\noindent We will use the following notation:
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{D} & := \{z \in \mathbb{C} : |z| <1\}, \textup{ the open unit disk} \\
\overline{\mathbb{D}} & := \{z \in \mathbb{C} : |z| \leq 1\}, \textup{ the closed unit disk}\\
S^1 & := \{z \in \mathbb{C} : |z| = 1\}, \textup{ the unit circle} \\
\mathcal{C} & := \overline{\mathbb{D}} \times [1,2], \textup{ the closed ``unit cylinder''} \\
\end{align*}
Our main theorem is:
\begin{mainthm} \label{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}
For any $\lambda \in (1,2]$, the part of the slice ${\Xi}_\lambda$ inside the closed unit disk can be characterized as:
\[{\Xi}_\lambda \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}} = S^1\cup \left \{z\in\mathbb{D}: G(w, z)=1\text{ for some }\lambda\text{-suitable sequence }w \right\}.\]
\end{mainthm}
There is a similar characterization for outside the unit disc, which follows directly from results in in \cite{TiozzoGaloisConjugates}:
\begin{mainthm} \label{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization}
For any $\lambda \in [1,2)$, the part of the slice ${\Xi}_\lambda$ outside the unit disk is:
\[{\Xi}_\lambda \setminus \overline{\mathbb{D}}=\left \{z \in \mathbb{C} \setminus \overline{\mathbb{D}}: H({\textrm{It}}_\lambda, z)=0 \right \}.\]
\end{mainthm}
\begin{remark}
Theorems \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} and \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization} both provide algorithms to certify that a point is in the complement of ${\Xi}_\lambda$. This is useful since the definition of ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$ is constructive and involves taking a closure. Section \ref{sec:membership} describes these algorithms.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} Since the set of $\lambda$-suitable sequences is semicontinuous with $\lambda$ (Lemma \ref{lem:semicont}),
Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} implies that if $1<\lambda<\lambda' \leq 2$, then
\[{\Xi}_\lambda\cap\overline{\mathbb{D}}\subseteq {\Xi}_{\lambda'}\cap\overline{\mathbb{D}},\]
which is the ``Persistence Theorem'' proved in \cite{BrayDavisLindseyWu}. (The Persistence Theorem is used to prove Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}.)
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{rem:holdsfortoplevel}
Tiozzo showed in \cite{TiozzoGaloisConjugates} that
$$\Omega_2^{cp} \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}} = S^1 \cup \{z \in \mathbb{D} : G(w,z) = 1 \textrm{ for some sequence } w\},$$ and the Persistence Theorem (\cite{BrayDavisLindseyWu}) shows that $\Omega_2 \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}} = {\Xi}_2 \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}$. It is also known that the unit cylinder is in the teapot, i.e. $S^1 \times [1,2] \subset \Upsilon_2^{cp}$ (\cite{BrayDavisLindseyWu}). Since every sequence is $2$-suitable, this proves the conclusion of Theorem \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization} for the top level of the teapot, the case $\lambda = 2$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Our first step towards proving Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} is proving Theorem \ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter}, and alternative characterization of slices $\Xi_{\lambda} \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}$. A corollary of Theorem \ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter} is that all roots in $\overline{\mathbb{D}}$ of all Parry polynomials coming from admissible words -- even reducible Parry polynomials -- are in the Thurston set $\Omega_2^{cp}$.
\begin{corollary}
$\Omega_2^{cp} \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}$ is the closure of the set of all roots in $\overline{\mathbb{D}}$ of all Parry polynomials associated to admissible words.
\end{corollary}
\noindent In particular, when using Parry polynomials to plot approximations of $\Omega_2^{cp}$, it is not necessary to check whether the Parry polynomials are irreducible.
\end{remark}
As an application of Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}, we will show that:
\begin{mainthm}\label{t:teapotnotsymmetrical}
The part of the Master Teapot inside the unit cylinder is not symmetrical with respect to reflection across the imaginary axis, i.e. ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}} \cap \mathcal{C}$ is not invariant under the map $(z,\lambda) \mapsto (-z,\lambda)$.
\end{mainthm}
\noindent Since Galois conjugates occur in complex conjugate pairs, it is immediate that $(x+iy,\lambda) \in {\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$ if and only if $(x-iy,\lambda) \in {\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$.
Theorem \ref{t:teapotnotsymmetrical} is suprising because the Thurston set, ${\Omega_2^{cp}}$, which is the projection to $\mathbb{C}$ of ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$, \emph{is} symmetrical under the map $z \mapsto -z$ (Proposition \ref{p:ThurstonSetSymmetrical}). However, this asymmetry in the Master Teapot is confined to the slices of heights $\geq \sqrt{2}$; one can prove, via the renormalization procedure described in Section 2.3, that the unit cylinder part of slices of height $< \sqrt{2}$ are symmetrical under reflection across the imaginary axis.
\begin{remark}
Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} allow us to interpret each slice ${\Xi}_\lambda\cap\mathbb{D}$ as an analogy of the Mandelbrot set. The conclusion of Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} for the top slice (c.f. Remark \ref{rem:holdsfortoplevel}) allows one to characterize ${\Xi}_2$ as the union of $S_1$ and the set of all parameters $z \in \mathbb{D}$ such that the point $1$ is an element of the limit set $\Lambda_z$ associated of the iterated function system generated by $f_{0,z}$ and $f_{1,z}$.
Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} suggests viewing ${\Xi}_\lambda\cap\mathbb{D}$ as the set of parameters $z$ for which the point $1$ is an element of the ``limit set'' associated to the ``restricted iterated function system'' generated by $f_{0,z}$ and $f_{1,z}$ in which only the compositions represented by $\lambda$-suitable sequences are allowed.
\color{black}
\end{remark}
Based on numerical experiments, we propose the following conjectured analogy of the Julia-Mandelbrot correspondence:
\begin{conjecture} \label{conj:asymptoticallysimilar}
For any complex number $|z|<1$, any $\lambda\in (1, 2]$, ${\Xi}_\lambda-z$ is asymptotically similar to the set
\[J_z=\{G(w, z)-1:w\text{ is }\lambda-\text{suitable}\}.\]
\end{conjecture}
\noindent By these two sets being asymptotically similar, we mean there exists a real number $r>0$ and sequences $(t_n), (t'_n) \in \mathbb{C}$ with $t_n, t_n' \to \infty$ such that, denoting Hausdorff distance by $d_{\textrm{Haus}}$,
$$\lim_{n \to \infty} d_{\textrm{Haus}} \left( \overline{B_r(0)} \cap (t_n({\Xi}_\lambda-z)), \overline{B_r(0)} \cap (t_n' J_z) \right) = 0.$$
If the Conjecture \ref{conj:asymptoticallysimilar} is true, or at least true for ``enough'' points $z$, we would also be able to show the following:
\begin{conjecture}\label{conj:disconnected}
There exists $\lambda\in (1, 2)$ such that ${\Xi}_\lambda\cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}$ has infinitely many connected components.
\end{conjecture}
\noindent Figure \ref{f:highresslice} shows a constructive plot (in black) of the slice ${\Xi}_{1.8} \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}$, while Figure \ref{f:highresslice2} shows (in white) points of $\overline{\mathbb{D}} \setminus {\Xi}_{1.8}$.
Comparison of these images suggests the existence of multiple small connected components in the region $\textrm{Re}(z) < 0$ near the inner boundary of the ``ring.''
The Thurston set ${\Omega_2^{cp}}$ is known to be path-connected and locally connected (Theorem 1.3 of \cite{TiozzoGaloisConjugates}). It follows from Theorem \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization} that for many heights $\lambda \in (1,2]$, the part of the slice of height $\lambda$ that is outside the unit cylinder consists of more than one connected component.
Conjecture \ref{conj:disconnected} could be potentially proven by computation via an effective version of Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} similar to Proposition \ref{p:effective}. However, a tighter bound than that obtained in Proposition \ref{p:effective} would probably be needed for the computation to be feasible.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{slice700cropped.png}
\caption{A constructive approximation of the part of ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$ outside the unit cylinder. This plot shows
the 56737 points outside the cylinder $S^1 \times [1,2]$ that are roots of the degree 100 partial sums of the kneading power series for $1000$ different growth rates $\lambda$ in $[1,2]$. The "spout" on the right side of the image consists of points of the form $(\lambda,\lambda)$.}
\label{f:teapot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{detailedslice1point8.png}
\caption{A constructive plot of an approximation of the slice ${\Xi}_{1.8} \cap \mathbb{D}$. The plotted black points are all the roots of modulus $\leq 1$ of all Parry polynomials for superattracting tent maps with growth rate $<1.8$ and critical length at most $29$. }
\label{f:highresslice}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{1_8}
\caption{The upper half of the slice ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}} \cap (\mathbb{D} \times \{1.8\})$ plotted using Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}. Specifically, the plotted white points
were shown to be in the complement of ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$ (by checking the condition of Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} for all $m \leq 18$). }
\label{f:highresslice2}
\end{figure}
The structure of the paper is as follows:
\S \ref{s:preliminaries}: \textbf{Preliminaries} provide definitions and notation for Parry polynomials, admissible and dominant words and sequences, growth rates, and the renormalization/doubling operators.
\S \ref{sec:renormalizationdoubling}: \textbf{Properties of the doubling map} proves some elementary results about the doubling map which we will need in later sections to extend results about the top part of the teapot to the part with height $<\sqrt{2}$.
\S \ref{s:reducibleParrypolys}: \textbf{Roots in $\mathbb{D}$ of reducible Parry polynomials} proves Theorem
\ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter}, which implies that all roots in the unit disk of all Parry polynomials associated to admissible words are in the teapot.
\S \ref{sec:lambdasuitability}: \textbf{$\lambda$-suitability} discusses $\lambda$-suitability and proves Lemma \ref{lem:main}, which is the
key combinatorial result we need to prove Theorem~\ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}.
\S \ref{s:insidecylinder}: \textbf{Characterization inside the unit cylinder} uses Theorem \ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter} and Lemma \ref{lem:main} to prove Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}.
\S \ref{sec:outsidecharacterization}: \textbf{Characterization outside the unit cylinder} proves Theorem \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization}.
\S \ref{sec:membership}: \textbf{Algorithms to test membership of ${\Xi}_\lambda$} presents algorithms, derived from Theorems
\ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} and \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization}, which will detect if a point $(z,\lambda) \in \mathbb{C} \times \mathbb{R}$ belongs to the complement of the height-$\lambda$ slice ${\Xi}_{\lambda}$, and proves lemmas that justify the algorithms.
\S \ref{sec:asymmetry}: \textbf{Asymmetry} proves Theorem \ref{t:teapotnotsymmetrical} by exhibiting a point $(z,\lambda)$ that is in the teapot and using the algorithm from \S \ref{sec:membership} to prove that $(-\bar{z},\lambda)$ is in the complement of the slice ${\Xi}_{\lambda}$.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements} The authors thank Diana Davis for many helpful conversations. Kathryn Lindsey was supported by the National Science Foundation under grant DMS-1901247.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{s:preliminaries}
\subsection{Concatenation} We use $\cdot$ or just adjacency to denote concatenations, i.e. for any word $w=w_1\ldots w_n$ and any word or sequence $v=v_1v_2\ldots$, $$w\cdot v = wv = w_1\ldots w_n v_1 v_2 \ldots.$$ We denote the concatenation of $n$ copies of a word $w$ by $w^n$, for $n \in \mathbb{N} \cup \{\infty\}$.
\subsection{Parry polynomials}
Let $w$ be a word with positive cumulative sign. The {\em Parry polynomial} of $w$, $P_w:\mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}$, is defined as
\[P_w(z):=F(w, z)-1\]
(cf. \cite[Definition 2.7]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}). It is evident that if ${\textrm{It}}_\lambda=w^\infty$, then $\lambda$ is a root of $P_w$, and hence all Galois conjugates of $\lambda$ must be roots of $P_w$.
One can check by simple bookkeeping that for any word $w$ of positive cumulative sign, $P_w(z)$, $G({\textrm{Reverse}}(w)^\infty, z)$ and $H(w^\infty, z)$ satisfy the following relationship:
\begin{lemma}\label{G-H-P}
If $w$ is of length $n$ and has positive cumulative sign, then
\[P_w(z)=(1-z^n)G\left({\textrm{Reverse}}(w)^\infty, z \right)=z^n(1-z^{-n})H(w^\infty,z).\]
\qed
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Admissibility, itineraries and dominance}
The \emph{shift map} $\sigma$ is defined on sequences by
\[\sigma(w_1w_2w_3\ldots) = (w_2w_3\ldots)\ .\]
A sequence $w=w_1w_2\ldots$ is
a generalized symbolic coding of $f_\lambda$ for some $\lambda \in (1,2]$ iff
$$f^k_{\lambda}(1) \in I_{w_{k+1},\lambda}$$ for every integer $k \geq 0$.
\color{black}
Because the point $1/\lambda$ belongs to both intervals $I_{0,\lambda}$ and $I_{1,\lambda}$, there may exist more than one generalized symbolic coding for the itinerary of the point $1$ under $f_{\lambda}$. The {\em $\lambda$-itinerary} ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ is the least (with respect to $\leq_E$) such generalized symbolic coding.
A sequence $w$ starting with $10$ is called {\em admissible} if $$\sigma^k(w)\le_E w$$ for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$. A word $w$ is called {\em admissible} if $w$ has positive cumulative sign and $w^\infty$ is admissible.
We will use the following immediate consequence of Theorem 12.1 of \cite{MilnorThurston} \begin{theorem} \label{th:realizableadmissible}
For every $\lambda \in (1,2]$, ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ is admissible.
\end{theorem}
\color{black}
\begin{proposition}[\cite{BrayDavisLindseyWu}, Proposition 2.10] \label{prop:achievedasitinerary}
Let $w$ be a word with positive cumulative sign. If $w$ is admissible and the associated Parry polynomial, $P_w(z)$, can be written as the product of $(z-1)$ and another irreducible factor, then $w^{\infty} = {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ for some $\lambda \in (1,2]$. \end{proposition}
The following is a straightforward corollary of theorems of Milnor and Thurston (\cite{MilnorThurston}):
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:monotonicity}
If $1 < \lambda < \lambda' \leq 2$, then ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}<_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$.
\end{corollary}
A word $w$ is called {\em dominant} (cf. \cite[Definition 4.1, Lemma 4.2]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}) if it has positive cumulative sign, and for any $1\leq k\leq |w|-1$,
$${\textrm{Suffix}}_k(w)\cdot 1<_E{\textrm{Prefix}}_{k+1}(w.)$$ Every dominant word is admissible, but admissible words may not be dominant. A key property of the dominant words is the following, which is proved in \cite{TiozzoTopologicalEntropy}, and reviewed in \cite[Proposition 4.4]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:dense}
If $\lambda\in (\sqrt{2}, 2)$ and ${\textrm{It}}_\lambda=w^\infty$, then for any $n>0$, there exists a word $w'$ such that $w^nw'$ is dominant.\qed
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Growth rates and critically periodic tent maps}
When a continuous self-map $f$ of an interval is postcritically finite, the exponential of its topological entropy, $e^{h_{top}(f)}$, also called its \emph{growth rate}, is a \emph{weak Perron number} -- a real positive algebraic integer whose modulus is greater than or equal to that of all of its Galois conjugates. This is because cutting the interval at the critical and postcritical sets yields a Markov partition; each of the resulting subintervals is mapped to a finite union of subintervals. The leading eigenvalue of the associated incidence matrix is $e^{h_{top}(f)}$, which the Perron-Frobenius Theorem implies is a weak Perron number.
In the present work, we consider growth rates of critically periodic unimodal interval self-maps. A unimodal map $f$ is said to be \emph{critically periodic} if, denoting the critical point of $f$ by $c$, there exists $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $f^n(c) = c$.
A theorem of Milnor and Thurston (\cite[Theorem 7.4]{MilnorThurston}) tells us that, from the point of view of entropy, instead of considering all critically periodic unimodal maps, we only need to consider critically periodic tent maps. For tent maps, it is easy to see that the growth rate is just the slope $\lambda$.
\subsection{Renormalization and doubling}
As shown in \cite[Section 3]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}, for any $1< \lambda<\sqrt{2}$, the tent map $f_\lambda$ is critically periodic if and only if the tent map $f_{\lambda^2}$ is critically periodic. (This phenomenon is related to renormalization of the Mandelbrot set.) Furthermore, whenever $1<\lambda<\sqrt{2}$, ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ can be obtained from ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda^2}$ by replacing each $1$ in ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ with $10$ and each $0$ in ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ with $11$.
That is, the \emph{doubling map} $\mathfrak{D}:\{0,1\}^n \to \{0,1\}^{2n}$, $n \in \mathbb{N} \cup \{\infty\}$, defined by
\[\mathfrak{D}(w_1 w_2 \ldots ) = 1 \cdot (w_1 + 1 \bmod 2) \cdot 1 \cdot (w_2 + 1 \bmod 2) \cdot \ldots \]
satisfies $\mathfrak{D}({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda^2}) = {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ whenever $f_{\lambda}$ with $1 < \lambda < 2$ is critically periodic.
We say that a sequence $w$ is \emph{renormalizable} if there exists a sequence $w'$ such that $w=\mathfrak{D}(w')$; in this case we say that $w$ is the \emph{doubling} of $w'$ and call $w'$ the \emph{renormalization} of $w$. We define renormalizable, doubling and renormalization for words analogously.
\section{Properties of the doubling map} \label{sec:renormalizationdoubling}
The goal of this section is to prove some elementary properties of renormalizable words and sequences that we will use in later sections to extend results about the part of the teapot above height $\sqrt{2}$ to the lower part.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:DpreservesOrder}
The doubling map $\mathfrak{D}$ preserves the twisted lexicographic ordering $\leq_E$, cumulative signs, and hence also admissibility.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If the number of $1$s in a word $w$ equals $n$, then for any letter $a$, the number of $1$s in ${\textrm{Prefix}}_{2|w|+1}(\mathfrak{D}(w\cdot a))$ equals $2|w|+1-n$. It follows that if $n$ is odd, $w\cdot 1 <_E w \cdot 0$ and $\mathfrak{D}(w\cdot 1) <_E \mathfrak{D}(w\cdot 0)$; if $n$ is even, $w\cdot 0 <_E w\cdot 1$ and $\mathfrak{D}(w\cdot 0) <_E \mathfrak{D}(w\cdot 1)$. Thus $\mathfrak{D}$ preserves $\leq_E$. Furthermore, if a word $w$ has positive cumulative sign, then the number, $n$, of $1$'s in $w$ is even, implying that $\mathfrak{D}(w)$, which contains $2w-n$ $1$s, also has positive cumulative sign.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:DpreservesIter}
The doubling map $\mathfrak{D}$ takes itineraries to itineraries. That is, if $\lambda^{2^k} = \lambda'$, then $\mathfrak{D}^k({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}) = {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} By induction, it is easy to see that we only need to prove it for $k=1$, i.e. $\mathfrak{D}({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda^2})={\textrm{It}}_\lambda$. For any $\lambda\leq \sqrt{2}$, the tent map $f_{\lambda}$ sends the interval $[2/(\lambda+1), 1]$ to $[2-\lambda, 2/(\lambda+1)]$ and vice versa. Hence $f^2_{\lambda}$ is a tent map from $[2/(\lambda+1), 1]$ of slope $\lambda^2$, and any $x=f^{2k}_{\lambda}(1)$ lies on the left hand side of the critical point of $f^2_{\lambda}$ if and only if $x$ and $f_{\lambda}(x)$ are both to the right of $1/\lambda$, while $f^{2k}_{\lambda}(1)$ lies on the left hand side of the critical point of $f^2_{\lambda}$ if and only if $x$ is to the right of $1/\lambda$ and $f_{\lambda}(x)$ is to the right of $1/\lambda$, and this finishes the proof for the case when ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda^2}$ is not periodic. The case when ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda^2}$ is periodic follows from this argument together with Lemma~\ref{lem:DpreservesOrder}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{pro:renorm1} \
If $w$ is a word with positive cumulative sign and $w'$ is the renormalization of $w$, then
\[P_w(z)={z-1\over z+1}P_{w'}(z^2).\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $w$ and $w'$ are words satisfying $\mathfrak{D}(w')=w$. It is easy to see that if $w=w_1w_2\dots w_{2n}$ has positive cumulative sign, then $w'=w'_1w'_2\dots w'_n$ also has positive cumulative sign. So, (1) follows from the following more general statement: if $w'$ is any word, $w$ is the doubling of $w'$, then
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Fequation} F(w, z)-1={z-1\over z+1}\left(F(w', z^2)-1\right).
\end{equation}
We will prove \eqref{eq:Fequation} using induction on $|w'|$. In the base case $|w'|=1$, $w'=1$ or $w'=0$, and the statement is true by calculation.
Now assume the statement is true for all words $w'$ such that $|w'| \leq n-1$. Let $w'$ and $w$ be words with $|w'| =n$ and $\mathfrak{D}(w')=w$. Let $w'_0$ be $w'$ with the last letter removed, and let $w_0$ be $w$ with the last two letters removed. Then by the inductive hypothesis,
\[F(w_0, z)-1={z-1\over z+1}\left(F(w'_0, z^2)-1\right).\]
We divide the inductive step into two cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item Case 1: $w'_n=0$. This implies $w=w_0\cdot 11$, so
\begin{align*}
F(w, z)-1 &=2-z \left(2-z(F(w_0, z))\right)-1\\
&=2-z \left(2-z \left({z-1\over z+1}(F(w'_0, z^2)-1)+1 \right)\right)-1\\
&={z-1\over z+1}\left(z^2F(w'_0, z^2)-1\right)\\
&={z-1\over z+1}\left(F(w', z^2)-1\right)
\end{align*}
\item Case 2: $w'_n=1$. This implies $w=w_0\cdot 10$, so
\begin{align*}
F(w, z)-1 &=z\left(2-z(F(w_0, z)) \right)-1\\
&=z \left(2-z \left({z-1\over z+1}(F(w'_0, z^2)-1)+1\right)\right)-1\\
&={z-1\over z+1} \left(2-z^2F(w'_0, z^2)-1\right)\\
&={z-1\over z+1}\left(F(w', z^2)-1\right)
\end{align*}
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{pro:renorm2} Let $w$ be an admissible word. Then $w^{\infty}$ renormalizable if only if
\[w^\infty<_E {\textrm{It}}_{\sqrt{2}} \quad (= 10\cdot 1^\infty).\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Firstly, it is easy to see that a sequence is renormalizable if and only if all its odd index letters are $1$, and a word is renormalizable if and only if it has even length and all its odd indexed letters are $1$. Because any admissible word starts with $10$, an admissible word $w$ is renormalizable if and only if $w^\infty$ is admissible and renormalizable.
Now suppose $w^\infty$ is admissible and renormalizable. Suppose the second $0$ in $w^\infty$ is at the $k^{\textrm{th}}$ location. It suffices to show that ${\textrm{Prefix}}_{k-1}(w^\infty)$ has positive cumulative sign, which is equivalent to showing that $k$ is even, because the $(k-1)$-prefix of $w^\infty$ and $10\cdot 1^\infty$ are the same. This is an immediate consequence of the admissibility of $w^\infty$.
Now we prove the other direction. The sequence $w^\infty$ being admissible implies that the first $0$ in $w^\infty$ is at the second location. If we can further prove that the distance between any two consecutive $0$s is even, then all $0$s are at even locations, hence $w^\infty$ is admissible. Denote by $i_k$ the location of the $k^{\textrm{th}}$ $0$. Let $k_m$ is the smallest number such that $i_{k_m}-i_{k_{m-1}}$ is odd. Then by definition of $<_E$,
\[\sigma^{i_{k_{m-1}}-1}(w^\infty)>_E10\cdot 1^\infty.\]
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:iter_renorm}
By $k^{\textrm{th}}$ renormalization or $k^{\textrm{th}}$ doubling, we mean carrying out the renormalization or doubling on a word or sequence $k$ times. Proposition~\ref{pro:renorm1} above implies that if $w'$ is the $k^{\textrm{th}}$ renormalization of $w$, then the roots of $P_w$ not on the unit circle are the $(2^k)^{\textrm{th}}$ roots of the roots of $P_{w'}$ that are not on the unit circle.
Furthermore, because renormalization of sequences preserves $<_E$ (Lemma \ref{lem:DpreservesOrder}), we can apply part Proposition~\ref{pro:renorm2} above repeatedly to show that if the $w_k$ is the $k^{\textrm{th}}$ doubling of $10\cdot 1^\infty$, $w$ is admissible and $w^\infty<_Ew_k$, then $w$ has a $k^{\textrm{th}}$ renormalization.
\end{remark}
\section{Roots in $\mathbb{D}$ of reducible Parry polynomials} \label{s:reducibleParrypolys}
The purpose of this section is to prove Theorem \ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter}, an alternative characterization of sets ${\Xi}_\lambda\cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}$, for $\lambda \in (1,2]$, using the results in \cite{BrayDavisLindseyWu}. An upshot of Theorem \ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter} is that we do not need to worry about extraneous roots in $\mathbb{D}$ from reducible Parry polynomials.
We will use the following four results from \cite{BrayDavisLindseyWu}:
\begin{theorem}\cite[Theorem 1 (``Persistence Theorem''), Theorem 2]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}\label{thm:persist}
If $(z, \lambda)\in{\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$, $|z|\leq 1$, then so is $(z, y)$ for any $y\in [\lambda, 2]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proposition}\cite[Lemma 5.3]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}\label{lem:concat}
Let $w_1$ be dominant, $w_1>_E10\cdot 1^{|w_1|-2}$, $w_2$ be admissible, $w_1^\infty>_Ew_2^\infty$, and assume that there is some $m$ such that
\[2m|w_2|>|w_1|>m|w_2|.\] Then there is some $w'$, some integer $m'\geq m$, such that $(w_1w'w_2^{m'})^\infty$ is admissible,
\[|w_1|+|w'|\geq m'|w_2|,\] and the Parry polynomial $P_{w_1w'w_2^{m'}}(z)$ can be written as the product of $(z-1)$ and another polynomial $Q(z)$ such that $Q(z^{2^k})$ is irreducible for all integers $k \geq 0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}\cite[Lemma 5.5]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}\label{lem:root_approx}
If $w_2$ is an admissible word and $z\in\mathbb{D}$ is a root of $P_{w_2}$, then for any $\epsilon>0$ there exists $N\in \mathbb{N}$ such that for any word $w_1$ and any integer $n\ge N$, $P_{w_1w_2^n}$ has a root within distance $\epsilon$ of $z$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}\cite[Lemma 5.7, Remark 5.8]{BrayDavisLindseyWu}\label{lem:lead_root_approx}
If $y\in [\sqrt{2}, 2]$, for any $\epsilon>0$, there exists a dominant word $w_1$ such that for any word $w_2$, the leading root of $P_{w_1w_2}$ is within distance $\epsilon$ of $y$, and $w_1>_E10\cdot 1^{|w_1|-2}$.
\end{proposition}
We now use the above results to establish the following characterization of the sets ${\Xi}_\lambda\cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}$, which will be the starting point of our proof of Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}.
\begin{theorem} \label{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter}
Fix $1 < \lambda < 2$. For each $\lambda' > \lambda$, define $Y_{\lambda'}$ to be the closure of the set of roots in $\overline{\mathbb{D}}$ of all Parry polynomials $P_w$ such that $w$ is admissible and $w^\infty \leq_E{\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$, union with $S^1$, i.e.
$$Y_{\lambda'} := S^1 \cup \overline{ \{z \in \overline{\mathbb{D}} : P_w(z) = 0 \textrm{ for some admissible word } w \textrm{ such that } w^\infty \leq_E{\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}\} }.$$
Then
$${\Xi}_{\lambda}\cap \overline{\mathbb{D}} = \bigcap_{\lambda' > \lambda} Y_{\lambda'}.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
The condition ``$w^\infty<_E{\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$ for every $\lambda'>\lambda$'' is different from ``$w^{\infty} \leq {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$'' because there could exist a symbolic coding for the itinerary of $1$ under the tent map $f_{\lambda}$ that is $>_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof} For any $1 < \lambda < 2$,
let
$${\Xi}'_\lambda = \bigcap_{\lambda' > \lambda} Y_{\lambda'}.$$
We will first prove ${\Xi}_{\lambda} \subseteq {\Xi}_{\lambda}'$.
For any $\lambda'$, define the set $Z_{\lambda'}$ to be the closure of the set of Galois conjugates of critically periodic growth rates that are at most $\lambda'$, union with $S^1$. By the Persistence Theorem, $\lambda_1 < \lambda_2$ implies $Z_{\lambda_1} \subseteq Z_{\lambda_2}$. So if any point $x \in \bigcap_{\lambda' > \lambda} Z_{\lambda}$, then $x \in {\Xi}_{\lambda'}$ since $\Upsilon_2^{cp}$ is closed; similarly, if $x \not \in \bigcap_{\lambda' > \lambda} Z_{\lambda}$, then $x \not \in {\Xi}_{\lambda}$. Hence
$${\Xi}_{\lambda}\cap\overline{\mathbb{D}} = \bigcap_{\lambda' > \lambda} Z_{\lambda'}.$$
The conclusion will now follow from the statement that $Z_{\lambda'} \subseteq Y_{\lambda'}$ for all $\lambda'$. If $z$ is a Galois conjugate of a critically periodic growth rate $\lambda''$ that is at most $\lambda'$, then $z$ is a root of the Parry polynomial $P_w$ such that $w^{\infty}={\textrm{It}}_{\lambda''}$, and ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda''} \leq_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$ by Corollary \ref{cor:monotonicity}. Thus, $Z_{\lambda'} \subseteq Y_{\lambda'}$ for all $\lambda'$.
We will now prove ${\Xi}'_\lambda \subseteq {\Xi}_\lambda$. To do this, it suffices to show $$Y_{\lambda'} \subseteq \bigcap_{\lambda'' > \lambda'} Z_{\lambda''}.$$
We first consider the case $\lambda'\geq \sqrt{2}$.
Suppose $z$ is the root of some $P_w$, where $w$ is admissible and the leading root of $P_w$ is no larger than $\lambda'$. ($Y_{\lambda'}$ is the closure of all such $z$'s). For any $\epsilon>0$, Proposition \ref{lem:lead_root_approx} guarantees the existence of a dominant word $w_1$ such that for any $w_2$, $P_{w_1w_2}$ is in $[\lambda', \lambda'+\epsilon)$ and $w_1>_E10\cdot 1^{|w_1|-2}$. By monotonicity (Corollary \ref{cor:monotonicity}), $w_1^{\infty} >_E w^{\infty}$.
Without loss of generality, we may choose $w_1$ so that its length, $|w_1|$, is arbitrarily big (this is because as we let $\epsilon \to 0$, we get arbitrarily many such dominant strings, and there are finitely many strings of at most any given length). Thus we may assume that $w_1$ and $w$ satisfy the assumptions of Proposition~\ref{lem:concat} with the $m$ of Proposition~\ref{lem:concat} being arbitrarily large, and in particular, $m$ is $\geq$ the $N$ of Proposition ~\ref{lem:root_approx} using $w$ for $w_2$. Let $w_3$ be the word constructed by Proposition~\ref{lem:concat}. Because $w_3$ is admissible, has positive cumulative sign, and $P_{w_3}(z)/(z-1)$ is irreducible, $w_3^{\infty} = {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda_3}$ for some $\lambda_3$ by Proposition \ref{prop:achievedasitinerary}. We know $\lambda_3 \in [\lambda', \lambda'+\epsilon]$ because $w_3$ has the prefix $w_1$. Also, any root of $P_{w_3}$ in $\mathbb{D}$ will be a Galois conjugate of $\lambda_3$, and by construction $P_{w_3}$ has a root close to $z$. The containment now follows from letting $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$.
Now we deal with the case $1<\lambda'<\sqrt{2}$. Let $k$ be the unique natural number such that $(\lambda')^{2^k}\in [\sqrt{2}, 2)$. Remark~\ref{rem:iter_renorm} implies that $w$ has a $k^{\textrm{th}}$ renormalization $w_0$, and $z^{2^k}$ is a root of $P_{w_0}$. Using $w_0$ in place of $w$ in the argument in the previous paragraph, we get a critically periodic growth rate $\lambda_4$ close to $(\lambda')^{2^k}$, such that one of its Galois conjugates $z_2$ is close to $z^{2^k}$. The conclusion in Proposition~\ref{lem:concat} further implies that any $(2^k)^{\textrm{th}}$ root of $z_2$ must be a Galois conjugate of the $(2^k)^{\textrm{th}}$ root of $\lambda_4$ as well, which implies that there is a Galois conjugate of $\lambda_4^{2^{-k}}$ which is close to $z$, which finishes the proof of the proposition.
\end{proof}
The following corollary is not used to prove any further results in the present work.
\begin{corollary} \label{rem_irr_dense}
Let $V$ denote the set of all real numbers $\lambda \in (1,2)$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item the tent map $f_{\lambda}$ is critically periodic,
\item there exists a word $w$ such that ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda} = w^{\infty}$,
\item the Parry polynomial $P_w(z)$ can be written as the product of an irreducible polynomial (in $\mathbb{Z}[z]$) and some cyclotomic polynomials.
\end{enumerate}
Then $V$ is dense in $[1,2]$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The growth rates $\lambda_3$, as well as the growth rates $\lambda_3^{2^{-k}}$, $k \in \mathbb{N}$, constructed in the proof of Theorem \ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter} all satisfy conditions (1)-(3).
\end{proof}
\section{$\lambda$-suitability} \label{sec:lambdasuitability}
In this section, we establish some basic properties of $\lambda$-suitability and prove the technical lemmas about $\lambda$-suitability that we will need in Section \ref{s:insidecylinder}.
For convenience, we reproduce the definition of $\lambda$-suitability here:
For $\lambda \in (1,2)$, a sequence $w$ is called \emph{$\lambda$-suitable} if for every $\lambda'\in (\lambda, 2]$, the following conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item ${\textrm{Reverse}} ( {\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w)) \leq_E {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})$ for all $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
\item If ${\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w)) = {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})$, then the cumulative sign $s({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w)) = -1$.
\item If ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'} = 1 \cdot 0^k \cdot 1 \dots$, $k \in \mathbb{N}$, then $w$ does not contain $k+1$ consecutive $0$s. \newline (That is, if ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$ starts with $1$ followed by $k$ $0$s and then $1$, writing $w$ as $w=w_1w_2\ldots,$ there does not exist $n \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $w_i = 0$ for all $n \leq i \leq n+k$.)
\item If $n \in \mathbb{N}$ satisfies $\sqrt{2} \leq_E (\lambda')^{2^n} < 2$, then $w = \mathfrak{D}'^n(w')$ for some sequence $w'$, where $\mathfrak{D}'$ is the map that replaces $0$ with $11$ and $1$ with $01$.
Furthermore, if $${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'^{2^n}} = 1\cdot 0^k \cdot1\ldots,$$ then $w'$ does not contain $k+1$ consecutive $0$s.
\end{enumerate}
\medskip
The intuition behind the definition of $\lambda$-suitability is that we need a condition on sequences $w$ so that Lemma \ref{lem:main} works.
\begin{remark}
An immediate consequence of monotonicity (Corollary \ref{cor:monotonicity}) is that if $\lambda'$ satisfies conditions (1)-(4) of Definition \ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability} for a sequence $w$, then so does every $\lambda'' > \lambda'$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Every itinerary ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$ is admissible (by Theorem \ref{th:realizableadmissible}), so the admissibility condition implies that if ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'} = 1 \cdot 0^k \cdot 1 \dots$, then ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ does not contain $k+1$ consecutive $0$s.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} Note that the map $\frak{D}'$ defined in the definition of $\lambda$-suitability is related to the doubling map $\frak{D}$ by
$${\textrm{Reverse}} \circ {\textrm{Prefix}}_{2n} \circ \frak{D} = \frak{D}' \circ {\textrm{Reverse}} \circ {\textrm{Prefix}}_n (w)$$
for every sequence $w$ and $n \in \mathbb{N}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:lambdasuitableseqsclosed}
The set of $\lambda$-suitable sequences is closed.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We will show that the set of all sequences that are not $\lambda$-suitable is open. To do this, it suffices to show that given any sequence $w$ which is not $\lambda$-suitable, we can find a prefix of $w$ such that every sequence that shares this prefix is not $\lambda$-suitable.
It is clear that conditions (1) and (2) are closed conditions. For condition (3), we choose the prefix to be one that contains the first $k+1$ consecutive $0$s. Condition (4) is similar.
\end{proof}
The following lemma is immediate because the definition of $\lambda$-suitability is of the form ``for all $\lambda' > \lambda$, $P(w,\lambda')$,'' where $P$ is a predicate.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:semicont}
Let $\mathcal{M}_\lambda$ denote the set of $\lambda$-suitable sequences. Then
$$\mathcal{M}_\lambda=\bigcap_{\lambda'' \in (\lambda,2]}\mathcal{M}_{\lambda''}.$$ \qed
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:reverseislambdasuitable}
If $w$ is an admissible word that satisfies $w^{\infty} \leq_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$ for $\lambda \in (1,2)$, then $({\textrm{Reverse}}(w))^{\infty}$ is $\lambda$-suitable.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that for any $n \in \mathbb{N}$
\begin{equation} \label{eq:somek}
{\textrm{Reverse}} ( {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{Reverse}}(w)^{\infty})) = {\textrm{Prefix}}_n(\sigma^{k}(w^{\infty}))
\end{equation} for some $k \in \mathbb{N}$, where $n+k$ is some multiple of $|w|$. Since $w$ is admissible, ${\textrm{Prefix}}_n(\sigma^k(w^{\infty}) \leq_E {\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w^{\infty})$ for all $k,n \in \mathbb{N}$. By Corollary \ref{cor:monotonicity}, for any $\lambda' > \lambda$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:lambdasstrictineq}
{\textrm{It}}_{\lambda} <_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}.
\end{equation}
We thus have that for any $n \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{multline*}
{\textrm{Reverse}} ( {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{Reverse}}(w)^{\infty})) = {\textrm{Prefix}}_n(\sigma^{k}(w^{\infty})) \leq_E {\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w^{\infty}) \\
\leq_E {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}) \leq_E {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}),
\end{multline*}
which is condition (1) of the definition of $\lambda$-suitability.
Now suppose that for some $\lambda' > \lambda$,
$${\textrm{Reverse}} ( {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{Reverse}}(w)^{\infty}) = {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})$$ and ${\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})$ has positive cumulative sign.
Then from \eqref{eq:somek} we have $${\textrm{Prefix}}_n(\sigma^{k}(w^{\infty})) = {\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}).$$
Admissibility of $w$ and \eqref{eq:lambdasstrictineq} together imply that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:gettingcommonprefix}
\sigma^{k}(w^{\infty})\leq_E w^{\infty}<_E{\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}.
\end{equation}
Because ${\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})$ is the common prefix of $\sigma^{k}(w^{\infty})$ and ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$, \eqref{eq:gettingcommonprefix} implies it must also be a prefix of $w^\infty$.
Removing this common $n$-prefix with positive cumulative sign from both sides of the inequality (by applying $\sigma^n$) yields
$$w^\infty\leq_E\sigma^{n}(w^\infty).$$ However, admissibility also implies that $\sigma^{n}(w^\infty)\leq w^\infty$, so in fact
$$w^\infty = \sigma^{n}(w^\infty).$$
Therefore
\begin{equation} \label{eq:repeatedprefix}
w^\infty=({\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}))^{\infty}.
\end{equation}
Let $j$ be the index of the first place $w^{\infty}$ differs from ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$. Clearly, $j>n$. Pick $m \in \mathbb{N}$ such that $mn<j\leq (m+1)n$. Then, after removing the common prefix of length $mn$ and positive cumulative sign from both $w^{\infty}$ and ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$, we get from \eqref{eq:repeatedprefix} and \eqref{eq:lambdasstrictineq} that
$$\sigma^{mn}(w^{\infty}) = w^{\infty}<_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'},$$
and hence
$${\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})={\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w^\infty)<_E{\textrm{Prefix}}_n(\sigma^{mn}({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})),$$ which contradicts with the fact that ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$ is admissible (by Theorem \ref{th:realizableadmissible}). Thus, condition (2) of the definition of $\lambda$-suitability holds.
Now condition (3) of the definition of $\lambda$-suitability follows from the assumption that $w^{\infty} \leq_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda}$.
For condition (4), suppose for some $\lambda'>\lambda$, $\sqrt{2}\leq (\lambda')^{2^n}<2$. Then $\lambda^{2^n}<2$, so by Lemma~\ref{pro:renorm2}, $w=\mathfrak{D}^n(w')$ for some $w'$. Hence,
$$({\textrm{Reverse}}(w))^\infty=(\mathfrak{D}'^n({\textrm{Reverse}}(w'))^\infty.$$ Because $\mathfrak{D}$ preserves $\leq_E$ and sends itineraries to itineraries (Lemma \ref{lem:DpreservesIter}), the number of consecutive $0$s in $({\textrm{Reverse}}(w'))^\infty$, which is the number of consecutive $0$s in $w'^\infty$, can not be more than the number of consecutive $0$s in ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'^{2^n}}$.
\end{proof}
The key combinatorial result we need to prove Theorem~\ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} is the following:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:main} Fix $\lambda \in [1,2)$ and let $w_0$ be a finite dominant word such that ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}\leq_E w_0^\infty$ for some $\lambda'>\lambda$. Let $\alpha$ be a word such that $\alpha$
\begin{enumerate}
\item ends with $1$,
\item is a prefix of some $\lambda$-suitable sequence,
\item has positive cumulative sign, and
\item $|w_0|>|\alpha|$.
\end{enumerate}
Then the word $w_0\cdot {\textrm{Reverse}}(\alpha)$ is admissible.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\alpha'={\textrm{Reverse}}(\alpha)$. It suffices to show that the admissibility criterion
\[\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty)\leq_E (w_0\alpha')^\infty\]
holds for all $1\leq k< |\alpha|+|w_0|$.
Case 1: $k<|w_0|$. This implies that the comparison between $\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty)$ and $(w_0\alpha')^\infty$ is equivalent to the comparison of a proper suffix of $w_0$ concatenated with $1$ with a prefix of $w_0$ of the same length. Hence
\[\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty)\leq_E (w_0\alpha')^\infty\] because $w_0$ is dominant.
Case 2: $|w_0|\leq k < |\alpha|+|w_0|$. Suppose the first place $\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty)$ and $(w_0\alpha')^\infty$ differ is at the $j^{\textrm{th}}$ position. It is evident that $1\leq j\leq |\alpha|+|w_0|$. We divide this into two subcases:
\begin{itemize}
\item Case 2A: $j\leq |w_0|+|\alpha|-k$. The fact that $|w_0|>|\alpha|$ and $k\geq |w_0|$ implies that $j\leq |w_0|$. Hence, the comparison between $\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty)$ and $(w_0\alpha')^\infty$ is equivalent to the comparison of a proper suffix of $\alpha'$ with a prefix of $w_0$. Hence, item (1) of Definition~\ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability} gives us
$$\sigma^k\left((w_0\alpha')^\infty\right)\leq_E (w_0\alpha')^\infty.$$
\medskip
\item Case 2B: $j>|w_0|+|\alpha|-k$. The word $\beta :={\textrm{Suffix}}_{|w_0|+|\alpha|-k}(\alpha')$, which is a common prefix of $\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty)$ and $(w_0\alpha')^\infty$, is identical to a prefix of $w_0$, which is $\ge_E$ than a prefix of ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$ for some $\lambda'>\lambda$. Hence, due to item (2) of Definition~\ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability}, $\beta$ has negative cumulative sign. Now, using the conclusion of Case 1, we have:
\[\sigma_k^{|w_0|+|\alpha|-k}(\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty))=(w_0\alpha')^\infty>_E \sigma_k^{|w_0|+|\alpha|-k}((w_0\alpha')^\infty)\]
Hence,
$$\sigma^k((w_0\alpha')^\infty)\leq_E (w_0\alpha')^\infty$$ because $\beta$ has negative cumulative sign.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:suitabilityrenormalization} Let $w$ and $w'$ be sequences, and let$\lambda \in (1,2)$ and $k \in \mathbb{N}$ satisfy $\sqrt{2} \leq \lambda^{2^k} < 2$. If $w$ is $\lambda$-suitable and $w = \mathfrak{D'}^k(w')$, then $w'$ is $\lambda^{2^k}$-suitable.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By induction we only need to prove it for $k=1$. Assume $w=\mathfrak{D'}(w')$ is $\lambda$-suitable, we will now show that $w'$ satisfies (1)-(4) of Definition~\ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability}. By definition,
$${\textrm{Reverse}}(\mathfrak{D'}(v))=\mathfrak{D}({\textrm{Reverse}}(v))$$ for any word $v$, so for any $\lambda'>\lambda$.
\[{\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_{2n}(\mathfrak{D'}(w'))={\textrm{Reverse}}(\mathfrak{D'}({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w')))\]
\[=\mathfrak{D}({\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_n(w')))\leq {\textrm{Prefix}}_{2n}({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'})=\mathfrak{D}({\textrm{Prefix}}_n({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'^2}))\]
Hence (1) is true for $w'$ because of Lemma~\ref{lem:DpreservesOrder} and \ref{lem:DpreservesIter}. Condition (2) of Definition~\ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability} can be verified similarly. It is easy to see that $w$ satisfies (4) implies that $w'$ satisfies (4). Lastly, we will now show that $w$ satisfies (4) will imply $w'$ satisfies (3): if $\lambda^2\geq \sqrt{2}$, this follows from the statement of (4). If $\lambda^2<\sqrt{2}$, (4) implies that $w'=\mathfrak{D'}(w'')$ for some $w''$, which implies that $w'$ can never have more than one consecutive 0, hence it also satisfies (3).
\end{proof}
\section{Characterization inside the unit cylinder} \label{s:insidecylinder}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:compactness}
Let $\mathcal{K}$ denote the space of compact subsets of $\mathbb{R}^3$ with the Hausdorff metric topology. Given any compact subset $K$ of $\mathcal{K}$, the union of the elements of $K$ is a compact subset of $\mathbb{R}^3$.
\begin{proof}
First, we claim there exists $R >0$ such that $k \subset \overline{B_R(0)}$ for all $k \in K$. If this was not the case, then there exist $k_1$ and $k_2$ in $K$ such that $d_{\textrm{Haus}}(k_1,k_2)$ is arbitrarily large, contradicting the fact that $K$ is compact. Thus the claim is true.
Consider $K \times \overline{B_R(0)}$. As a product of compact sets, it is compact. Consider the subset $C \subseteq K$ such that $C$ consists of all pairs $(k,x)$ such that $x \in k$. We claim $C$ is closed, and thus as a closed subset of a compact set, $C$ is compact. To see this, we will show that $C$ is sequentially closed, i.e. if $(k_i,x_i)$ is a sequence in $C$ converging to $(k_{\infty},x_{\infty}) \in K \times \overline{B_R(0)}$, then $(k_{\infty},x_{\infty}) \in C$. We have that $k_i \to k_{\infty}$ and $x_i \to x_{\infty}$, so suppose $x_{\infty} \not \in k_{\infty}$. Since $k_{\infty}$ is a compact set, $x \not \in k_{\infty}$ implies there exists $\epsilon > 0$ such that $B_{\epsilon}(x)$ is contained in the complement of $k_{\infty}$. This implies that $\liminf d_{\textrm{Haus}}(k_i,k_{\infty}) \geq \epsilon$, contradicting the fact that $k_i \to k_{\infty}$ in the Hausdorff metric.
So we have a continuous map from $C$ to $\mathbb{R}^3$ sending $(k,x)$ to $x$. The image under this map is compact.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
The following two Lemmas, which we state without proof, are immediate consequences of Rouch\'e's theorem:
\begin{lemma} \label{l:HausdorffCont}
Let $A$ be the set of power series with bounded coefficients equipped with the product topology. Let $\mathcal{C}$ be the set of compact subsets of $\mathbb{C}$ equipped with the Hausdorff topology. Then the map $\rho:A \to \mathcal{C}$ defined by
$$\rho(f) = S^1 \cup \{z \in \mathbb{D} : f(z) = 0\}$$
is continuous.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{series_approx}
Fix real numbers $M>0$, $0<r<1$, $\epsilon>0$. Suppose $\alpha$ is a power series whose coefficients are all bounded in absolute value by $M$.
Then there exists a real number $N = N(\alpha,r,\epsilon,M)$ such that for every power series $\beta$ whose coefficients are all bounded in absolute value by $M$ and whose first $N$ terms equal the first $N$ terms of $\alpha$, for each root $z$ of $\alpha$ with $|z|<r$ there exists a root $z'$ of $\beta$ such that $|z-z'|<\epsilon$. \qed
\end{lemma}
Now we prove the first main theorem:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}]
For the reader's convenience, we reproduce here the statement of Theorem \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}: For any $\lambda \in (1,2]$,
\[{\Xi}_\lambda \cap \overline{\mathbb{D}} = S^1\cup \left \{z\in\mathbb{D}: G(w, z)=1\text{ for some }\lambda\text{-suitable sequence }w \right\}.\]
\medskip
By Remark \ref{rem:holdsfortoplevel}, the result holds for $\lambda=2$. So fix $\lambda \in (1,2)$. For brevity, let
\[Z_\lambda:=\{z\in \mathbb{D}: G(w, z)=1\text{ for some }\lambda\text{-suitable sequence }w\}.\] First, we show that $S^1\cup Z_\lambda$ is compact. For each sequence $w$, the function from $\mathbb{D}$ to $\mathbb{C}$ given by $z \mapsto G(w, \cdot)-1$ is a power series with bounded coefficients. Furthermore, the map from the set of sequences $w$ (with the product topology) to the set of power series (with the product topology on coefficients) given by $w \mapsto G(w,\cdot)-1$ is continuous. Therefore, Lemma \ref{l:HausdorffCont} implies that the map $\rho$ from the set of sequences with the product topology to $\mathcal{C}$, the set of compact subsets of $\mathbb{C}$ with the Hausdorff topology, given by
$$\rho(w) = S^1 \cup \{z \in \mathbb{D} : G(w,z) = 1\}$$ is continuous.
By Lemma \ref{lem:lambdasuitableseqsclosed}, the set of all $\lambda$-suitable sequences is closed (in the product topology on the set of sequences), and hence compact.
Therefore, since $\rho$ is continuous,
$$\{\rho(w) : w \textrm{ is } \lambda-\textrm{suitable}\}$$ is a compact subset of $\mathcal{C}$.
Hence, Lemma \ref{lem:compactness} implies that
\[\bigcup_{w\text{ is }\lambda\text{-suitable}}\rho(w)\]
is compact.
But this set is precisely $S^1\cup Z_\lambda$, so we have shown $S^1\cup Z_\lambda$ is compact for any $\lambda \in [1,2]$.
Next, we show that
\[{\Xi}_\lambda\cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}\subseteq S^1\cup Z_\lambda.\]
Theorem~\ref{t:InsideParryConjugatesDontMatter} shows that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:contained1}
{\Xi}_\lambda\cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}=\bigcap_{\lambda'>\lambda}Y_{\lambda'},
\end{equation}
where $Y_{\lambda'}$ is defined to be the closure of the set of roots in $\overline{\mathbb{D}}$ of all Parry polynomials $P_w$ such that $w$ is admissible and $w^\infty \leq_E{\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$, union with $S^1$. For each such $w$ let $w_r$ be the sequence $$w_r :=({\textrm{Reverse}}(w))^\infty.$$
So fix $\lambda' > \lambda$ and consider any admissible word $w$ such that $w^{\infty} \leq_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}$.
By Lemma~\ref{G-H-P},
$$P_w(z) = (1-z^{|w|})G(w_r,z).$$
By Lemma \ref{lem:reverseislambdasuitable}, $w_r$ is $\lambda'$-suitable. \color{black}
Hence, all roots in $\overline{\mathbb{D}}$ of $P_w$ are in $S^1 \cup Z_{\lambda'}$. Then, since $Z_{\lambda'}$ is closed, we have that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:contained2}
Y_{\lambda'}\subseteq S^1\cup Z_{\lambda'}.
\end{equation}
Now, combining \eqref{eq:contained1} and \eqref{eq:contained2} shows that for any point $z\in {\Xi}_\lambda\cap \mathbb{D}$, for each $n\in\mathbb{N}$, there exists a $(\lambda+{1\over n})$-suitable sequence $v_n$ such that $G(v_n, z)=1$. Let $v_\infty$ be an accumulation point of the set $\{v_n : n \in \mathbb{N}\}$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:semicont}, the sequence $v_\infty$ is $\lambda$-suitable. The continuity of $w\mapsto G(w, \cdot)$ implies that $G(v_\infty, z)=1$. Hence ${\Xi}_{\lambda}\cap\overline{\mathbb{D}}\subseteq S^1\cup Z_{\lambda}$.
Lastly, we show that $S^1\cup Z_\lambda\subseteq {\Xi}_\lambda\cap \overline{\mathbb{D}}.$ We know from \cite{BrayDavisLindseyWu} that $S^1 \times [1,2] \subset \Upsilon_2^{cp}$. Thus $S^1\subset {\Xi}_\lambda$, so it suffices to show that $Z_\lambda\subset {\Xi}_{\lambda}$. Fix a point $z\in Z_\lambda$ and let $w$ be a $\lambda$-suitable sequence such that $G(w, z)=1$. By condition (4) of Definition~\ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability}, there exists a sequence $w'$ such that $w=\mathfrak{D'}^k(w')$, and by Lemma \ref{lem:suitabilityrenormalization}, $w'$ is $\lambda^{2^k}$-suitable, and $\lambda^{2^k}\geq \sqrt{2}$. In particular, if $\lambda\geq \sqrt{2}$, we can let $k=0$ and $w'=w$. As a consequence, there are infinitely many prefixes of $w'$ that end with $1$ and have positive cumulative sign.
For any $m \in \mathbb{N}$ such that ${\textrm{Prefix}}_m(w')$ has positive cumulative sign and any word $w''$ with positive cumulative sign, it follows immediately from the definitions of a Parry polynomial and of $G$ that the first $m$ terms of the power series $G(w', z)-1$ and $P_{w'' \cdot {\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_m(w'))}(z)$ agree. Therefore, for any fixed $\epsilon_1>0$, by Lemma~\ref{series_approx} there exists $N \in \mathbb{N}$ such that ${\textrm{Prefix}}_N(w')$ ends with $1$ and has positive cumulative sign, and
for any word $w''$ with positive cumulative sign, there exists a point $z' \in B_{\epsilon_1}(z^{2^k})$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:closeroot}
P_{w''\cdot {\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_N(w'))}(z')=0.
\end{equation}
For any fixed $\lambda'$ satisfying $2> \lambda' > \lambda^{2^k}$, pick a critically periodic growth rate $\lambda'' \in (\lambda^{2^k},\lambda')$ and word $w_0$ with positive cumulative sign such that ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda''}=w_0^{\infty}$. Since $\lambda'' < \lambda'$, for sufficiently large $n$,
$$w_0^n <_E {\textrm{Prefix}}_{n|w_0|}({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}).$$ Hence, by Proposition~\ref{prop:dense}, there exists $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and a word $w_1'$ such that the word
$$w_1:= w_0^nw'_1$$
is dominant, $|w_1| > |w'|$, and
\begin{equation} \label{eq:prefixineq}
w_1<_E{\textrm{Prefix}}_{|w_1|}({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}).
\end{equation}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:main},
$$w_1 \cdot {\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_N(w))'$$ is admissible.
By \eqref{eq:closeroot},
$$P_{w_1\cdot {\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_N(w'))}$$ has a root within distance $\epsilon_1$ of $z^{2^k}$. By \eqref{eq:prefixineq},
\[(w_1\cdot {\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_N(w')))^\infty<_E {\textrm{It}}_{\lambda'}.\]
Hence, the $k^{\textrm{th}}$ doubling of $w_1\cdot {\textrm{Reverse}}({\textrm{Prefix}}_N(w'))$, denoted as $w_d$, satisfies
\[w_d^\infty<_E{\textrm{It}}_{(\lambda')^{1/2^k}}\]
and $P_{w_d}$ has leading root in $[\lambda, (\lambda')^{1/2^k}]$ and a root in $B_{\epsilon'_1}(z)$, where $\epsilon'_1$ is the diameter of the preimage of $B_{\epsilon'}(z^{2^k})$ under the map $z\mapsto z^{2^k}$.
Now, since $\epsilon_1>0$ and $\lambda'>\lambda$ were arbitrary, and since ${\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$ is closed, we obtain that $(z, \lambda)\in {\Upsilon_2^{cp}}$, and hence $z\in {\Xi}_\lambda$.
\end{proof}
\section{Characterization outside the unit cylinder} \label{sec:outsidecharacterization}
The goal of this section is to prove Theorem \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization}, a characterization of the part of the Master Teapot that is outside the unit cylinder. This follows largely from arguments in \cite{TiozzoGaloisConjugates}, but we will include a proof here for the sake of completeness.
The following proposition is essentially a restatement of \cite[Proposition 3.3]{TiozzoGaloisConjugates}:
\begin{proposition} \label{p:rootsmovecontinuously}
The map $\Phi:(1, 2) \rightarrow \{\text{compact subsets of \ }\overline{\mathbb{D}}\}$ given by
\[\Phi(\lambda)=S^1\cup \left \{z: H(\lambda, z^{-1})=0 \right\}\]
is continuous in the Hausdorff topology.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We only need to show that it is continuous at every point $\lambda_0\in (1, 2)$. If ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda_0}$ is not periodic, the forward orbit of $1$ under $f_{\lambda_0}$ never hits $1/{\lambda_0}$, hence ${\textrm{It}}: \lambda\mapsto {\textrm{It}}_\lambda$ is continuous at $\lambda_0$. This is because for any cylinder set $[a_1,\ldots,a_j]$, the set
$$\{\lambda_1 \in (1,2]: {\textrm{Prefix}}_j({\textrm{It}}_{\lambda_1}) = a_1\ldots a_j\}$$ is open. The continuity of $\Phi$ follows from the definition of $H$ (Definition \ref{def:ifs}) and Lemma \ref{series_approx}.
If ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda_0}$ is periodic, let $w_0$ be the word of shortest length such that ${\textrm{It}}_{\lambda_0}=w_0^\infty$, and let $w_0'$ be the word with the same length as $w_0$ such that ${\textrm{Prefix}}_{|w_0|-1}(w_0) = {\textrm{Prefix}}_{|w_0|-1} (w_0')$ but whose last digit differs from that of $w_0$. Then the proof of Lemma 12.2 in \cite{MilnorThurston} implies
$$\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda_0^-}{\textrm{It}}_\lambda=w_0^\infty$$ and $$\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda_0^+}{\textrm{It}}_\lambda={w_0'}^\infty.$$
However, a simple computation (which we leave to the reader) shows that $H(w_0^\infty, z^{-1})$ and $H({w_0'}^\infty, z^{-1})$ differ by cyclotomic factors, and hence have the same roots inside $\mathbb{D}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization}]
For convenience of notation, set
\[R_\lambda=\{z: H({\textrm{It}}_\lambda, z)=0\}\]
Let $I$ be a small closed neighborhood of $\lambda$ in $(1, 2)$. To show Theorem \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization}, we only need to show \[ \bigcup_{\lambda\in I} \left(({\Xi}_\lambda\backslash\mathbb{D})\cup S^1\right)=\bigcup_{\lambda\in I}\left((R_\lambda\backslash\mathbb{D})\cup S^1\right).\]
The fact that the right hand side is compact is due to Proposition~\ref{p:rootsmovecontinuously}. Furthermore, due to Remark~\ref{series_approx}, a dense subset of the left hand side is dense in the right hand side, so they are identical.
\end{proof}
\section{Algorithms to test membership of ${\Xi}_\lambda$} \label{sec:membership}
In this section we will describe an algorithm to check if a point $z_0\in \mathbb{C}$ is in the complement of a slice ${\Xi}_\lambda$, for $\lambda\in (1, 2)$.
Firstly, if $\lambda<\sqrt{2}$, Theorems \ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization} and \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization} implies that $z\in {\Xi}_\lambda$ if and only if $z^2\in {\Xi}_{\lambda^2}$, so we can always reduce the question to the case $\lambda\in [\sqrt{2}, 2)$.
\subsection{Testing $z_0$ with $|z_0| > 1$}
When $|z_0|>1$, Theorem \ref{t:improvedoutsidecharacterization} gives us a straightforward way to test if $z_0\not\in {\Xi}_\lambda$ -- calculating the first few terms of the power series $H({\textrm{It}}_\lambda, z^{-1})$, then checking if $z_0^{-1}$ is a root of this power series. More precisely, we have the following algorithm:
\medskip
\begin{algorithm}[H] \label{algorithm1}
\For{$n>1$}{
Calculate ${\textrm{Prefix}}_{n+1}({\textrm{It}}_\lambda)$\;
Find the polynomial $P_n$ which consists of the first $n$-terms of power series $H({\textrm{It}}_\lambda, z^{-1})$\;
If $ \left|P_n(z_0^{-1})\right|>{2|z_0|^{-n}\over 1-|z_0|}$, then $z_0\not\in{\Xi}_\lambda$\;
}
\caption{\label{alg:outer} Algorithm to verify that $|z_0|>1$ is not in ${\Xi}_\lambda$}
\end{algorithm}
\medskip
\begin{remark}
If instead of checking if $z_0\not\in{\Xi}_\lambda$, we want to see if an $\epsilon$-neighborhood of $z_0$ is contained in the complement of ${\Xi}_\lambda$, we can change the last line of Algorithm \ref{algorithm1} to make use of Rouch\'e's theorem.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Testing $z_0$ with $|z_0| < 1$.}
If $|z_0|<1$, a way to certify that $z_0\not\in{\Xi}_\lambda$ is by first finding the set of all words of length $N$ that satisfy Conditions (1)-(3) of Definition~\ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability} (Condition (4) is trivial because $\lambda\geq\sqrt{2}$), denoted as $\mathcal{M}_{N, \lambda}$, for each word $w=(w_1\dots w_N)\in \mathcal{M}_{N, \lambda}$, evaluating $f_{w_N, z_0}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, z_0}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, z_0}^{-1}(1)$ and checking that they are all sufficiently large. More precisely, the algorithm can be described as follows:
\medskip
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\For{$N>1$}{
Let $\mathcal{M}_{N, \lambda}$ be the set of all words of length $N$ that satisfies Conditions (1)-(3) in Definition~\ref{def:improvedlambdasuitability}\;
Let $flag\leftarrow False$\;
\For{$w\leftarrow (w_1\dots w_N)\in\mathcal{M}_{N, \lambda}$}{
\If{$f_{w_N, z_0}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, z_0}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, z_0}^{-1}(1)\leq {2\over 1-|z_0|}$}{
$flag\leftarrow True$\;
Break\;
}
}
If $flag=False$, then $z_0\not\in{\Xi}_\lambda$\;
}
\caption{\label{alg:inner} Algorithm to verify that $|z_0|<1$ is not in ${\Xi}_\lambda$, where $\lambda\in[\sqrt{2},2)$.}
\end{algorithm}
\medskip
The reason that Algorithm~\ref{alg:inner} is true is due to the following proposition:
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:alg2}
Let $\lambda\in [\sqrt{2}, 2)$, and let $\mathcal{M}_{N, \lambda}$ be defined as in Algorithm~\ref{alg:inner}. Suppose $|z|<1$, then $z\not\in{\Xi}_\lambda$ if and only if there exists $N \in \mathbb{N}$ such that for every word $w=w_1\dots w_N\in\mathcal{M}_N$,
\[f_{w_N, z}^{-1}\circ \ldots \circ f_{w_1, z}^{-1}(1)\geq {2\over 1-|z|}+\epsilon.\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First, we assume that there is some $N$ such that for every word $w=w_1\dots w_N\in\mathcal{M}_N$,
\[f_{w_N, z}^{-1}\circ \ldots \circ f_{w_1, z}^{-1}(1)\geq {2\over 1-|z|}+\epsilon\] and prove that $z\not\in {\Xi}_\lambda$.
Suppose $z\in {\Xi}_\lambda$. Then by Theorem~\ref{t:improvedinsidecharacterization}, there must be some $\lambda$-suitable sequence $v=v_1v_2\dots $ such that
\[1=G(v, z)=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}f_{v_1, z} \circ\ldots \circ f_{v_n, z}(1)\]
In other words, for any $\delta>0$, there is some $n>N$ such that
\[ \left|f_{v_1, z}\circ\ldots \circ f_{v_n, z}(1)-1 \right|<\delta\]
By the definition of $\mathcal{M}_N$, the word $v_1\dots v_N\in \mathcal{M}_N$. Let $u=f_{v_1, z}\circ \ldots \circ f_{v_n, z}(1)$. Then $|u-1|<\delta$. Because $f_{v_N, z}^{-1} \circ \ldots \circ f_{v_1, z}^{-1}$ is continuous, we can pick $\delta$ small enough such that
\[f_{v_N, z}^{-1}\circ \ldots \circ f_{v_1, z}^{-1}(u)>{2\over 1-|z|}.\]
However,
\[f_{v_N, z}^{-1}\circ \ldots \circ f_{v_1, z}^{-1}(u)=f_{v_{N+1}, z}\circ\ldots \circ f_{v_n, z}(1)\]
By calculation, it is easy to verify that $1$ is in the disc
$$D_{2\over {1-|z|}}=\left \{z\in\mathbb{C}:|z|\leq {2\over {1-|z|}}\right \},$$ and both $f_{0, z}$ and $f_{1, z}$ send $D_{2\over {1-|z|}}$ to itself. Hence
\[ \left|f_{v_{N+1}, z}\circ\ldots \circ f_{v_n, z}(1) \right|\leq {2\over {1-|z|}},\] a contradiction.
Now, for the other direction, we assume that for any $N \in\mathbb{N}$ there is some word $w=w_1\dots w_N\in\mathcal{M}_N$ such that
\[f_{w_N, z}^{-1}\circ \ldots \circ f_{w_1, z}^{-1}(1)\leq {2\over 1-|z|}\]
and prove that $z\not\in {\Xi}_\lambda$. Let $C_N$ be the set of sequences such that an $N$-prefix of it is in $\mathcal{M}_N$, and this $N$ prefix is of the form $w_1\dots w_N$ such that
$$f_{w_N, z}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, z}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, z}^{-1}(1)\leq {2\over 1-|z|}.$$ The fact that $f_{0, z}$ and $f_{1, z}$ both send $D_{2\over {1-|z|}}$ to itself implies that $C_{N+1}\subset C_{N}$, and all these sets are non empty and compact under the product topology, hence their intersection is non-empty. Let $w\in\bigcap_NC_N$, then $w$ is $\lambda$-suitable and it is easy to see that $G(w, z)=1$.
\end{proof}
Furthermore, we have an effective version of the Proposition~\ref{prop:alg2} above:
\begin{proposition}\label{p:effective}
Let $\lambda$, $z$, $N$ and $\epsilon$ as in Proposition~\ref{prop:alg2} above, ${1\over 2}<|z|<1$. Then for any $y\in \mathbb{C}$, if
\[|y-z|<\min \left \{{1-|z|\over 2}, {(1-|z|)^2\epsilon\over 16}, |z|-{1\over 2}, {\epsilon\over N\cdot 2^{N+1}} \right \},\]
then $y\not\in{\Xi}_\lambda$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
The assumption $|z|>{1\over 2}$ is a reasonable one because it is well known (cf. \cite{TiozzoGaloisConjugates}) that if $|z|<{1\over 2}$ then $z\not\in{\Xi}_\lambda$ for any $\lambda\in (1, 2)$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
It is easy to see that as long as $|y|<1$,
\[\left|{2\over 1-|z|}-{2\over 1-|y|}\right|<\epsilon/2,\]
and for any $w=w_1\dots w_N\in\mathcal{M}_N$,
\[ \left|f_{w_N, z}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, z}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, z}^{-1}(1)-f_{w_N, y}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, y}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, y}^{-1}(1)\right|<\epsilon/2\]
then $y$ also satisfy the assumption in Proposition~\ref{prop:alg2}. The first condition, $|y|<1$, holds because $|y-z|<{1-|z|\over 2}$, which implies $|y|<{1+|z|\over 2}<1$. The second condition,
\[\left|{2\over 1-|z|}-{2\over 1-|y|}\right|<\epsilon/2,\]
holds because $|y|<{1+|z|\over 2}$ and $|y-z|<{(1-|z|)^2\epsilon\over 16}$. The third condition,
\[\left |f_{w_N, z}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, z}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, z}^{-1}(1)-f_{w_N, y}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, y}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, y}^{-1}(1) \right|<\epsilon/2,\]
holds because of the following argument: As a polynomial of ${1\over z}$,
$$f_{w_N, z}^{-1}\circ f_{w_{N-1}, z}^{-1}\dots f_{w_1, z}^{-1}(1)$$ has degree $N$ and coefficients bounded between $-2$ and $2$, hence has its derivative bounded by $N2^{N-1}\cdot 2=N\cdot 2^N$ on the annulus $\{y\in\mathbb{C}:1\leq |y|\leq 2\}$. Because $|y-z|<|z|-{1\over 2}$, $y$ is inside this annulus, so this third condition follows from the assumption that $|y-z|<{\epsilon\over N\cdot 2^{N+1}}$ and the mean value theorem.
\end{proof}
\section{Asymmetry of ${\Xi}_\lambda$} \label{sec:asymmetry}
The following proposition is likely well-known to experts; we include the proof for completeness.
\begin{proposition} \label{p:ThurstonSetSymmetrical}
$\Omega_2^{cp} \cap \mathbb{D}$ is invariant under reflection across the real axis and across the imaginary axis. \end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The set $\Omega_2^{cp} \cap \mathbb{D}$ is invariant under reflection across the real axis because Galois conjugates come in complex conjugate pairs. Tiozzo \cite{TiozzoGaloisConjugates} showed that $\Omega_2^{cp} \cap \mathbb{D}\backslash S^1$ is the set of all the roots in $\mathbb{D}$ of all power series with all coefficients in $\{\pm 1\}$. So if $z \in \mathbb{D}$ is a root of a power series $S$ with coefficients in $\{\pm 1\}$, then $-z$ is a root of the power series formed from $S$ by flipping the sign of the coefficients on all terms of odd degree. Therefore the complex conjugate, $\overline{-z}$, is in $\Omega_2^{cp}$.
\end{proof}
However, our Algorithm~\ref{alg:inner} in the previous section can be used to show that ${\Xi}_\lambda\cap\mathbb{D}$ does not necessarily have such symmetry, which proves Theorem~\ref{t:teapotnotsymmetrical}:
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{t:teapotnotsymmetrical}]
We only need to show that there is some $z\in {\Xi}_{1.82}\cap\mathbb{D}$ such that $-z\not\in{\Xi}_{1.82}\cap\mathbb{D}$. Consider the tent map with growth rate being the leading root of
\[-1 + z^2 - z^4 + z^6 - 2 z^7 + 3 z^8 - 4 z^9 + 3 z^{10} - 2 z^{11} + z^{12} - 2 z^{13} + z^{14},\] which is approximately $1.8149185987640513$ and is smaller than $1.82$, hence any Galois conjugate of this leading root must be in ${\Xi}_{1.82}$. Let $z$ be the Galois conjugate near the point $-0.5840341196392905+0.4820600149798202 i$. Applying Algorithm~\ref{alg:inner} to $-z$ for $N=20$ shows that $-z\not\in {\Xi}_{1.82}$.
\end{proof}
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
Accurate measurements of stellar mass, radius, and temperature enable strong tests of stellar evolution theory. Fortunately, eclipsing binary stars provide a direct way to obtain these fundamental stellar parameters, and for the most part the theory and the observations agree. However, several studies have found a discrepancy for main sequence stars with masses $\lesssim$0.8\,\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}, in that these stars have radii that are $\sim$5--15\% larger and effective temperatures that are $\sim$3--5\% lower than predicted by theoretical models \citep[e.g.,][]{Torres02,Ribas06,Torres06,Lopez-Morales07,Ribas08,Torres10, Morales10,Feiden12,Spada13,Torres13}. The disagreement in radius and temperature for these low-mass stars have typically been attributed to enhanced magnetic fields that block convection, producing star spots on the surface that lowers the surface temperature and ``bloats'' the radius of the star \citep[e.g.,][]{Ribas06,Torres06,Chabrier07,Lopez-Morales07,Kraus11}. Enhanced star spot activity is especially expected in short-period binaries ($P<10$\,days), since magnetic activity is enhanced by the faster spinning stars that are tidally locked to their orbital periods \citep{Ribas06, Torres13, Lurie17}. Most well-studied low-mass eclipsing binaries have orbital periods shorter than 3\,days \citep{Devor08-1,Torres13}, but unlocking the nature of the discrepancies in the radius and temperature of low mass stars requires observations of low-mass stars in systems with longer orbital periods that are not necessarily tidally synchronized.
Accurate masses are best measured from double-lined spectroscopic binaries, while measuring accurate radii generally requires that the system is eclipsing \citep[see][]{Torres10}. However, double-lined eclipsing binaries with one or more low-mass stars are rare since the secondary star is usually too faint to spectroscopically observe from the ground. Furthermore, most ground-based surveys cannot continuously observe for more than a few hours at a time and consequently miss eclipses of long-period systems. The \textit{Kepler}\ space telescope \citep{Borucki10, Koch10} provided near continuous observations of $\sim$170,000 stars with the goal of discovering Earth-size planets around Sun-like stars, but also found other exciting astrophysical objects---including identifying $\sim$3000 eclipsing binary systems\footnote{\url{http://keplerebs.villanova.edu/}} \citep{Prsa11, Slawson11, Kirk16}. The continuous, high-precision photometry also made possible the careful study of periodic signatures in the light curves, such as pulsations, phase variations, and stellar activity---especially for systems with long orbital periods \citep[e.g.,][]{Lurie17}.
In this paper we measure the orbital parameters of KIC\,8736245\ \citep[$\alpha = 18^h53^m44.179^s$, $\delta = +44^{\circ}59'23.03''$, J2000, $r=13.8$;][]{Brown11}, a double-lined eclipsing binary with a $\sim$5\,day circular orbital period consisting of a Solar mass primary and $\sim$0.8\,\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}\ secondary star \citep{Devor08}. This system provides a good test of stellar theory given its intermediate orbital period, secondary star being near the upper limit for low-mass stars with observed inflated radii, and evidence for magnetic activity in its light curve.
In \autoref{sec:data} we present our photometric and spectroscopic data. In \autoref{sec:elc} we solve for the orbital parameters of KIC\,8736245\ using the Eclipsing Light Curve package \citep[ELC;][]{Orosz00}. We examine and discuss the periodic signatures identified in the out-of-eclipse portions of the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve and the eclipse timing variations in \autoref{sec:periodicity}. Finally, we summarize our results in \autoref{sec:summary}.
\section{Observations and Data Processing}\label{sec:data}
\subsection{Space-based Photometry}\label{sec:kepler}
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plottwo{lc20day_py}{lcspots_py}
\caption{\textit{Left:} Normalized \textit{Kepler}\ light curve of KIC\,8736245, showing a 20\,day segment from Q6. KIC\,8736245\ exhibits deep 35\% primary eclipses and 16\% secondary eclipses at a 5.07\,day orbital period.
\textit{Top right:} Out-of-eclipse normalized \textit{Kepler}\ light curve for Quarters 1--16. KIC\,8736245\ experiences 1--4\% peak-to-peak quasi-periodic fluctuations in stellar brightness, attributed to stellar activity. \textit{Bottom right:} Zoomed-in region of the top panel, showing a 100\,day time segment from Q6 and Q7. The red diamonds mark the dates when ground-based photometry was obtained from Mount Laguna Observatory. The arrowed lines denote the duration of one full orbital period ($P_{\text{orb}}=5.07$\,days).}
\label{fig:lcspots}
\end{figure*}
Nearly continuous, high-precision long-cadence (29.4\,minutes) photometric observations were taken of KIC\,8736245\ by the \textit{Kepler}\ space telescope \citep{Borucki10, Koch10} from March 2009 through May 2013. We obtain simple aperture photometry \citep[SAP;][]{Jenkins10-1, Jenkins10} light curves from the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes\footnote{\url{http://archive.stsci.edu/kepler/}} (MAST) \textit{Kepler}\ Data Release 24 for Quarters (Q) 1--16, which covers 1426\,days of near continuous observations\footnote{We did not include Q17. It contains five primary and secondary eclipses, compared to the 229 primary and 230 secondary eclipses observed throughout Q1--16.}. Only observations with Data Quality flag less than 16 were used, and in total data gaps were present only 9\% of this time, occurring during monthly spacecraft data downloads, safe modes, and any other spacecraft or photometer anomaly.
To preserve the out-of-eclipse fluctuations attributed to star spot activity, we apply our own detrending technique as described by \citet{Bass12}. Briefly, the SAP data is detrended in small sections, separated by any observation breaks that were $>$1\,day in duration. Then an $n$-piece cubic spline interpolating function (where $n$ is typically 10--30) is fit to the out-of-eclipse portions of the light curve and is used to normalize each subsection.
A 20\,day segment of the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve is shown in the left panel of \autoref{fig:lcspots}. The photometry reveals KIC\,8736245\ to exhibit deep 35\% primary and 16\% secondary eclipses at a 5.07\,day orbital period. The right panel of \autoref{fig:lcspots} shows the out-of-eclipse light curve from Q1--16 in the top panel and a 100\,day segment from Q6--7 in the bottom panel. The 1--4\% peak-to-peak quasi-periodic fluctuations in stellar brightness that are approximately equal to the orbital period are attributed to spots on the stars rotating into and out of the line-of-sight.
Due to stellar activity, fluctuations on a timescale of days are present in the light curve. We investigate whether these variations average out on long timescales by folding and averaging the \textit{Kepler}\ photometry into 300\,bins. The bins are overlain on the folded light curve in the left panel of \autoref{fig:lcphase}, and show that the out-of-eclipse regions are not flat even after averaging together 4\,years of observations. The residual signal could be caused by periodic orbital modulations induced by gravitational and geometric effects, such as Doppler beaming, ellipsoidal variations, and reflection effects \citep[e.g.,][]{Faigler11}. While the $\sim$0.002\% residual modulations in the left panel of \autoref{fig:lcphase} appear to be consistent with ellipsoidal variations, the right panels of \autoref{fig:lcphase} show that the shape of the residuals is not consistent between smaller, 1-year segments of time. Therefore, we conclude that the out-of-eclipse signal in the binned data is a result of star spot variations that do not average out.
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plottwo{lcphase16_py}{lcphase4_py}
\caption{The \textit{Kepler}\ light curve phase folded and averaged into 300\,bins for Quarters Q1--16 (\textit{left}) and in 1\,year segments (\textit{right}). The black points are the individual \textit{Kepler}\ data points and the red circles are the averages per bin. The non-repeatability shown in the yearly figures indicates that the modulations due to stellar activity do not average out over this timescale.}
\label{fig:lcphase}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Ground-based Photometry}\label{sec:mlo}
Multi-waveband ground-based photometry was obtained on 8 separate nights between 2010\,July\,22 and 2012\,October\,23 (UT) using the 0.6\,m and 1.0\,m telescopes at Mount Laguna Observatory (MLO; located near San Diego, California). Observations on the 0.6\,m telescope were taken with a SBIG\,STL-1001E CCD camera in Johnson/Bessel $V$, $R$, and $I$ filters and observations on the 1\,m telescope were taken with a $2048\times2048$\,pixel 2005 Lorel CCD camera in Kron $B$ and $V$ filters. Exposures were 1--2 minutes long depending on the seeing, and typically the center and either the ingress or egress were obtained due to the eclipse duration of 5.475\,hours compared to the short summer nights when the \textit{Kepler}\ field was visible. Each night we obtained twilight sky flats, and took dark current images at the same CCD operating temperature and exposure length as the science images. Standard calibrations are applied using the Astronomical Imaging Processing software (AIP4Win version 2.4.1) created by Richard\,Berry and James\,Burnell (published by Willmann-Bell\,Inc.). Together, the auto-calibration and multi-image photometry tools follow standard treatment of darks and flats to perform differential magnitude photometry.
As is typical of ground-based relative photometry, the MLO light curves often include systematic tilts. These artifacts of imperfect calibration require careful removal such that the intrinsic tilt caused by the stellar activity remains. To retain the intrinsic tilt caused by star spot modulations, we match each MLO light curve with its simultaneously observed \textit{Kepler}\ light curve. The tilt is removed by fitting a cubic polynomial over the out-of-eclipse portions of each respective \textit{Kepler}\ light curve, then subtracting the polynomial from the MLO photometry. The MLO light curve is then normalized to be consistent with the \textit{Kepler}\ photometry by offsetting the MLO data by the difference between the cubic polynomial that was fit to the \textit{Kepler}\ photometry and the mean out-of-eclipse flux of the MLO light curve.
During three of the ground-based observations (2010\,July\,22, 2011\,July\,22, and 2012\,July\,21), the equatorial mount on the MLO 0.6\,m telescope required a pier flip as the observed target crossed the meridian. After a pier flip, the image focal plane rotated $180^\circ$ and the stars fell on a different set of CCD pixels. Ideally the flat fielding calibration would account for the different pixel sensitivities so that the pre- and post-pier flip light curves connect together smoothly, but this is not always the case (perhaps due to imperfect flat fielding caused by scattered light). On the nights of 2010\,July\,22, 2011\,July\,22, and 2012\,July\,21 an addition normalization (magnitude offset) step was required. The standard calibration procedure was applied separately to observations on each side of the pier flip, and systematic tilts were removed from the individual light curve segments as described above. The resulting two separate light curves were each separately fit with the ELC code (see \autoref{sec:elc}) along with the corresponding \textit{Kepler}\ data and radial velocities, simply to determine their relative magnitude offset. This offset was then applied to the post-pier flip light curve. The process was repeated a second time to refine the offset, and then the data segments were combined into one light curve for the night.
\subsection{Spectroscopy}\label{sec:spectra}
\begin{deluxetable}{lrr}
\tablecaption{KIC\,8736245\ Radial Velocity Measurements \label{tab:spec_data}}
\tablehead{\colhead{Time} & \colhead{RV$_1$} & \colhead{RV$_2$} \\ [-5pt] \colhead{(BJD-2455000)} & \colhead{(\kms)} & \colhead{(\kms)}}
\startdata
341.77552 & $24.49\pm0.51$ & $-1.54\pm1.13$ \\
342.79340 & $77.89\pm0.68$ & $-70.60\pm1.28$ \\
347.77079 & $76.50\pm0.28$ & $-69.16\pm0.55$ \\
349.76928 & $-29.23\pm0.17$ & $65.00\pm0.35$ \\
372.70794 & $61.61\pm0.20$ & $-49.49\pm0.25$ \\
426.77896 & $-50.68\pm0.20$ & $91.78\pm0.37$ \\
458.69597 & $49.32\pm0.37$ & $-34.26\pm0.80$ \\
472.65980 & $-41.45\pm0.11$ & $80.25\pm0.23$
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
Echelle spectroscopy was obtained on 8 nights between 2010\,May\,25 and 2010\,October\,3 (UT) using the High Resolution Spectrograph \citep[HRS;][]{Tull98} on the 10\,m Hobby-Eberly Telescope \citep[HET;][]{Ramsey98}. The HRS instrument was configured to a 30,000 resolving power, the central echelle rotation angle, the 2\arcsec \ science fiber, two sky fibers, and the 316\,groove\,mm$^{-1}$ cross disperser was set to give a central wavelength of 6948\,\AA. To aid the removal of cosmic rays, the 600\,s exposure times were split into two parts of 300\,s each. We subtract the electronic bias from each image and remove cosmic rays using \texttt{crreject} in IRAF. Then the ``blue" echelle spectra (wavelength coverage 5100--6900\,\AA) are extracted and wavelength calibrated using the IRAF \texttt{echelle} package.
Radial velocities are measured using the ``broadening function'' technique \citep{Rucinski92, Rucinski02}, which is well-suited for double-lined spectroscopic binaries with component velocity separations that are on the order of the spectral resolution. Refer to \citet{Bayless06} for a detailed discussion of applying the broadening function technique to HET spectra. The broadening functions exhibit two significant peaks, indicating that the system is a double-lined spectroscopic binary. A third peak is also observed, but its strength is dependent on the phase of the Moon and it remained consistent with the systemic velocity over 4\,months of observations. Therefore, the third peak is deemed unrelated to the system. The measured radial velocities measurements are listed in \autoref{tab:spec_data} and shown in the left panel of \autoref{fig:kepecl}. The radial velocities indicate that the system has a nearly circular orbit, which is consistent with the secondary eclipse being precisely at 0.5\,phase.
We measure the effective temperatures ($T_\mathrm{eff}$), surface gravities ($\log{g}$), projected rotational velocities ($v\sin{i}$), and metallicity ([m/H]) of the stars from the spectra using a method similar to the one described in \citet{Kostov16}. We use the two-dimensional cross-correlation technique TODCOR \citep{Zucker94} with template spectra from the CfA library of synthetic templates \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Nordstroem94, Latham02} to assess the best-fit stellar parameters for both stars simultaneously. We carry out the analysis using 210\,\AA\ of the spectrum between 5150--5360\,\AA, which includes the gravity sensitive Mg I b triplet near 5190\,\AA\ and overlaps with the wavelength range of the CfA templates. For every pair of templates in the range $4500\,{\rm K} < T_\mathrm{eff} < 6500\,{\rm K}$, $3.5 < \log{g} < 5.0$, and $-1.5 < {\rm [m/H]} < +0.5$, we calculate the mean cross-correlation peak height across all eight spectra. We then interpolate to the peak of the surface defined by these cross-correlation coefficients and adopt the stellar parameters corresponding to the location of the peak. The spectroscopic parameters suffer from strong degeneracies such that relatively large changes in one parameter can be compensated by changes in the others in order to maintain a good fit to the observed spectrum. To partially overcome this degeneracy, we interpolate to the surface gravities determined from the light curve and radial velocity analyses, and find $T_\mathrm{eff,1} = 5810 \pm 100$\,K, $T_\mathrm{eff,2} = 5030 \pm 125$\,K, and ${\rm [m/H]} = -0.31 \pm 0.15$. However, these internal uncertainties do not account for remaining correlated errors in the primary and secondary $T_\mathrm{eff}$\ and [m/H], which we measure to be 70\,K, 28\,K, and 0.08\,dex, respectively. The errors reported in \autoref{tab:spec_results} represent the combined internal and correlated errors. Finally, we note that we fit $v\sin{i}$ iteratively for computational considerations, and because it does not suffer from the same degeneracies as the other three parameters. All measured spectroscopic properties are listed in \autoref{tab:spec_results}.
\begin{deluxetable}{lc}
\tablecaption{KIC\,8736245\ Spectroscopic Properties \label{tab:spec_results}}
\tablehead{\colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Value}}
\startdata
$K_1$ (\kms) & $66.17\pm0.2$ \\
$K_2$ (\kms) & $83.48\pm0.2$ \\
$e$ & 0 \\
$\gamma$ (\kms) & $12.45\pm0.1$ \\
$T_{\text{eff,1}}$ (K) & $5810\pm120$ \\
$T_{\text{eff,2}}$ (K) & $5030\pm130$ \\
$\log{g}_1$ (dex) & 4.189 (fixed) \\
$\log{g}_2$ (dex) & 4.530 (fixed) \\
$v\sin{i}_1$ (\kms) & $14.7\pm2.0$ \\
$v\sin{i}_2$ (\kms) & $8.5\pm1.5$ \\
$\mathrm{[m/H]}$ (dex) & $-0.31\pm0.17$
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
\section{Light Curve Modeling}\label{sec:elc}
We use the Eclipsing Light Curve code \citep[ELC;][]{Orosz00, Wittenmyer05} to model the light curves and radial velocities. For this binary, we use ELC in its ``numerical'' mode, which covers the stellar surfaces with specific intensity tiles, then sums them. While much slower than the ``analytic'' mode, this mode allow us to include simple star spots. A Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm is used to determine the model parameter values and uncertainties. In total, we fit for 26 free parameters, although not all simultaneously as we explain below. The orbital period $P$ ($= 5.069482\pm0.000001$\,days) is well constrained by the $\sim$230\,primary and secondary eclipses in the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve, as is the time of conjunction $T_{\text{conj}}$. We fit for the primary mass $M_1$, the mass ratio $q=M_2/M_1$, the primary radius $R_1$, and the radius ratio $R_1/R_2$. The temperature of the primary star is fixed at the spectroscopically determined value of 5810\,K, but the temperature of the secondary star is allowed to vary within the spectroscopic uncertainties. This allows the multi-color ground-based photometry to help constrain the temperature ratio. We also fit for the inclination $i$, eccentricity $e$, argument of periastron $\omega$, and the \textit{Kepler}\ background light contamination, which is estimated to be 2.2\% according to the MAST archive. Finally, the modulations in the light curve are modeled by two star spots on each star. Each spot is specified by four parameters: angular size, temperature ratio relative to the star's surface temperature, and its location in latitude and longitude. These star spots do not evolve with time and so only short segments of the light curve can be used.
We discuss our initial fitting procedure using the \textit{Kepler}\ eclipses and radial veloctities in \autoref{sec:initmod}, then we incorporate our ground-based photometry into the ELC fitting in \autoref{sec:nightmod}. Finally, we estimate and present the best-fit orbital parameters in \autoref{sec:finparams}.
\subsection{Initial Orbital Parameter Estimates}\label{sec:initmod}
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plottwo{rv_py}{kepecl_py}
\caption{\textit{Right:} Radial velocities and the best-fit ELC model, with residuals shown in the lower panel. The black and red colors represent radial velocities of the primary and secondary stars, respectively. \textit{Left:} The orbit phase-folded and binned \textit{Kepler}\ light curve, after removing any out-of-eclipse tilts. The solid curve is the best-fit ELC model. The errors have been set to $\pm$0.0005\,magnitudes so that each bin is evenly weighted during the modeling.}
\label{fig:kepecl}
\end{figure*}
It is clear from \autoref{fig:lcspots} that star spots are important in this binary and can bias the system parameters if ignored, but including star spots in the modeling presents challenges. Modeling the star spots is both computationally expensive, and, since our model does not allow for star spot evolution, only short segments of the data (approximately the length of the stellar rotation period) can be fit. To overcome these obstacles, we split the modeling process into two parts: solving for spot-independent parameters, then spot-dependent parameters. The first part uses all of the \textit{Kepler}\ data, the second part uses individual epochs and the ground-based photometry. Both use the radial velocity measurements.
For the first step, we phase fold and bin the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve, and discard any data more than $\pm$0.05\,phase away from the eclipses. We remove any tilt by dividing by a linear function fit through the out-of-eclipse portions of the light curve. We also set the uncertainties to 0.0005 ($\sim$3 times their mean value), so that each bin receives equal weighting. The folded, binned, and trimmed light curve is shown in the right panels of \autoref{fig:kepecl}. This simplified light curve allows us to use the fast analytic mode in ELC in order to estimate the system parameters. We solve for the masses, radii, temperatures, eccentricity, argument of periastron, and \textit{Kepler}\ contamination. The latter three will then be held fixed in the individual epoch fitting. We fix the \textit{Kepler}\ contamination to several constant values between 0.5--3.5\% while allowing all other parameters to be free. In \autoref{fig:cscont} we plot the $\chi^2$ of the model versus the contamination, clearly showing a minimum at 2.2\%. This is in excellent agreement with the estimated contamination level stated on the MAST archive, so we fix the contamination to be 2.2\% for all subsequent models. We find the eccentricity to be $<$10$^{-6}$, therefore it is fixed to zero (and the argument of periastron becomes irrelevant). The best-fit model is shown in \autoref{fig:kepecl}. The extra noise in the residuals near the eclipse centers is likely due to star spot crossing events that do not cancel out in the averaged \textit{Kepler}\ light curve. However, we reiterate that this initial fit is simply used to quickly find appropriate starting parameters for the much slower individual epoch fitting on the simultaneously observed \textit{Kepler}\ and MLO photometry (see \autoref{sec:nightmod}).
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plotone{cscont_py}
\caption{Chi-squared versus the preset contamination level, where all other parameters were set free in the ELC modeling of the phase folded and binned \textit{Kepler}\ light curve. The lowest chi-squared is consistent with 2.2\% contamination, which is in agreement with the contamination level stated on the MAST archive.}
\label{fig:cscont}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Orbital Parameter Measurements by Epoch}\label{sec:nightmod}
\begin{figure*}
\plotone{nightkep}
\caption{The \textit{Kepler}\ photometry associated with each ground-based MLO observation. Notice the modulations in the out-of-eclipse sections of the light curve, due to star spots. The black curves shows the best-fit ELC model to the light curves. Note that there is no primary eclipse data on 2010\,Jul\,22 due to a gap in the \textit{Kepler}\ observations.}
\label{fig:nightkep}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\plotone{MLOfits_P}
\caption{Primary eclipse light curves obtained from MLO observations in $B$ (blue points), $V$ (green points), $R$ (red points), and $I$ (yellow points) bands. The black curves show the ELC model that best-fits the photometry. Most observations were obtained using the 0.6\,m telescope, unless otherwise noted following the filter label (i.e. 40''). Note that 2010\,Sep\,16 has two $V$-band observations due to simultaneous observations taken on the 0.6\,m and 1.0\,m MLO telescopes. The out-of-eclipse light has been matched to the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve and thus has not been renormalized to an instrumental magnitude of zero. }
\label{fig:lcprim}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\plotone{MLOfits_S}
\caption{Secondary eclipse light curves obtained from MLO observations in $B$ (blue points), $V$ (green points), $R$ (red points), and $I$ (yellow points) bands. The black curves show the ELC model that best-fits the photometry. As with the data in \autoref{fig:lcprim}, the light curves have been matched to the simultaneous \textit{Kepler}\ observations and thus the out-of-eclipse levels are not normalized to an instrumental magnitude of exactly zero.}
\label{fig:lcsec}
\end{figure*}
Due to the effects of stellar variability, the shape and depth of individual eclipses may vary from orbit to orbit. Consequently, the inferred stellar radii and temperatures measured from eclipses separated by several cycles may not agree. This statement remains true even if the model includes star spots, because we know that the star spot model is imperfect. In order to estimate the stellar parameters accurately (not just precisely), we split the light curve into sections and model them separately, and then examine the resulting set of system parameters. To be clear, ``separately'' is not ``independently'' since we use the global period, eccentricity, and contamination values obtained from analyzing the entire data set.
Each of the eight nights of ground-based photometry is paired with a section of the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve. The sections span 76--90\% of an orbital period, depending on the duration of the observations, and also because the star spots are expected to evolve on timescales longer than this. Unfortunately there is no \textit{Kepler}\ primary eclipse observation simultaneous with the 2010\,July\,22 observation, so the following secondary eclipse and out-of-eclipse star spot modulations are used. To emphasize the eclipses in the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve, rather than the out-of-eclipse spot variations (for which there are many more data points), we boosted the error bars by a factor of 3 for any datum that lies more than $\pm$0.05 in phase away from the eclipses.
The ELC code was run on each section of data and the best-fit (lowest reduced chi-squared $\chi^{2}_{\nu}$) models are shown in \autoref{fig:nightkep} for the \textit{Kepler}\ data, in \autoref{fig:lcprim} for the MLO primary eclipses, and in \autoref{fig:lcsec} for the secondary eclipses. The parameter estimates are listed in \autoref{tab:res}, although the 16 spot parameter estimates for each night are omitted for brevity. As can be seen in \autoref{fig:lcsec}, the 1--2\,minute cadence ground-based photometry revealed that the secondary star is totally eclipsed for 0.01\,phase ($\sim$73\,minutes). On average, the star spots were $\sim$20\% cooler than the stellar temperature and were $\sim$15\,degrees in angular size. Although the fits to the eclipses are excellent, the relatively high values of the reduced $\chi^2$ are not surprising, given that the \textit{Kepler}\ uncertainties are so small and the star spot model is only a crude approximation. Our goal is not to measure the star spots or to obtain a perfect fit to the star spot-induced modulations in the light curve: we seek only to obtain accurate radius estimates. In the table we list only the best-fit value for the parameters, and not their uncertainty range, for the following reasons. For the night of 2010\,Jul\,22 we computed the formal 1$\sigma$ error bars in the standard way (determining the range spanned by the parameter of interest that corresponds with $\chi^{2}_{min} + 1$ relative to the best-fit model). This was computationally costly (so that repeating for all eight ground-based observations would require a great amount of time), but much more importantly, we found that the uncertainty estimates were significantly smaller than the spread of the best-fit parameters from night to night (underestimated by a factor of $\sim$2--10). In other words, the precision for a given night was much too high compared to the true uncertainty. Under the assumption that the uncertainties from each night are comparable to those of 2010\,Jul\,22, we determined the final best-fit parameters and the 1$\sigma$ errors from the unweighted average and standard deviation of the night-to-night best-fit solutions.
\begin{deluxetable*}{cccccccccc}
\tablecaption{Single Phase Orbital Properties of KIC\,8736245\label{tab:res}}
\tablehead{\colhead{Date} & \colhead{$T_{\text{conj}}$} & \colhead{$M_1$} & \colhead{$q$} & \colhead{$R_1$} & \colhead{$R_1/R_2$} & \colhead{$T_{\text{eff,2}}$} & \colhead{$i$} & \colhead{$\chi_{\nu}^2$} \\ [-5pt] \colhead{} & \colhead{(BJD-2455000)} & \colhead{(\mbox{M$_{\odot}$})} & \colhead{} & \colhead{(\mbox{R$_{\odot}$})} & \colhead{} & \colhead{(K)} & \colhead{(degrees)} & \colhead{}}
\startdata
2010\,Jul\,22 & -36.05682 & 0.985 & 0.792 & 1.312 & 1.65 & 5100 & 88.7 & 2.86 \\
2010\,Aug\,19 & -36.05703 & 0.974 & 0.794 & 1.304 & 1.62 & 5060 & 89.1 & 5.74 \\
2010\,Sep\,16 & -36.05665 & 0.993 & 0.796 & 1.314 & 1.63 & 5000 & 89.1 & 8.01 \\
2010\,Sep\,26 & -36.05683 & 0.983 & 0.794 & 1.309 & 1.63 & 5000 & 89.1 & 5.48 \\
2011\,Jul\,22 & -36.05682 & 0.985 & 0.793 & 1.313 & 1.65 & 5100 & 88.7 & 6.88 \\
2012\,Jul\,21 & -36.05695 & 0.986 & 0.793 & 1.303 & 1.61 & 5050 & 89.2 & 4.46 \\
2012\,Aug\,13 & -36.05683 & 0.981 & 0.797 & 1.306 & 1.62 & 5050 & 89.1 & 4.18 \\
2013\,Oct\,23 & -36.05600 & 1.005 & 0.781 & 1.324 & 1.61 & 5030 & 89.2 & 6.81
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}
\subsection{Final Orbital Parameter Measurements}\label{sec:finparams}
The final set of system parameters for KIC\,8736245\ were determined from the unweighted average of the best-fit parameters derived from the eight simultaneous \textit{Kepler}\ and ground-based MLO light curves along with the radial velocity measurements. The 1$\sigma$ errors are defined by the standard deviation of the scatter in the eight estimates. These individual measurements, averages, and 1$\sigma$ uncertainties are shown for the stellar radii, system inclination, and stellar temperature ratio in \autoref{fig:rit}. The epoch-to-epoch changes emphasize the importance of multi-epoch observations and modeling for binary systems with active stars. The parameters and their respective errors are available in \autoref{tab:final}, although spot parameters are not included as they are variable with time. The measured masses ($0.987\pm0.009$\,\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}\ and $0.782\pm0.009$\,\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}) and radii ($1.311\pm0.006$\,\mbox{R$_{\odot}$}\ and $0.804\pm0.004$\,\mbox{R$_{\odot}$}) indicate the stars in KIC\,8736245\ are G and K type stars, respectively. We use the best-fit stellar masses, radii, temperatures, and the spectroscopically measured metallicity ($\text{[m/H]}=-0.31\pm0.17$\,dex) to find the most suitable theoretical isochrones from the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Program \citep{Dotter08}. We estimate the age of KIC\,8736245\ to be 7--9\,Gyr and show the respective isochrones on the mass-radius and the mass-temperature diagrams in \autoref{fig:mrt}. It is unclear which stellar isochrone is most appropriate for KIC\,8736245. There are several systems where at least one star does not match the stellar isochrones (e.g. UV Psc, \citealt{Popper97}; V636\,Cen, \citealt{Clausen09}; MG1-1819499, \citealt{Kraus11}; ASAS\,J065134-2211.5, \citealt{Helminiak19}; see \citealt{Feiden12}), but in the case of KIC\,8736245, neither star exhibits a mass, radius, and temperature that is consistent with a single theoretical isochrone model. However, the Dartmouth stellar isochrone models \citep{Dotter08} assume solitary stars.
Regardless of the specific age, the primary star is consistent with being a Sun-like G star that is starting to leave the main sequence. The secondary star is a K star that is just within the population of stars that exhibit discrepant temperatures and radii \citep[$\lesssim$0.8\,\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}, see][]{Torres10}. The temperature of the secondary star is $\sim$6\% cooler than predicted by either theoretical isochrone. The radius of the secondary star ranges from being consistent (assuming the 9\,Gyr isochrone) to up to 5\% larger (assuming the 7\,Gyr isochrone) than predicted by theoretical models, although stellar radius measurements may vary by up to 5\% due to stellar activity alone \citep{Feiden12}.
\begin{figure*}
\plotone{rit_py}
\caption{The stellar radii, orbital inclinations, and temperature ratios determined at 8 different epochs. The dates indicate the nights of the ground-based observations. The means and standard deviations are show as the horizontal colored lines and shaded regions.}
\label{fig:rit}
\end{figure*}
\begin{deluxetable}{lc}
\tablecaption{System Parameters for KIC\,8736245\label{tab:final}}
\tablehead{\colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Value}}
\startdata
$P_{\text{orb}}$ (days) & $5.069482 \pm 0.000001$ \\
$T_{\text{conj}}$ (BJD) & $2454963.9433 \pm 0.0003$ \\
$M_1$ ($\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}$) & $0.987 \pm 0.009$ \\
$M_2$ ($\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}$) & $0.782 \pm 0.009$ \\
$R_1$ ($\mbox{R$_{\odot}$}$) & $1.311 \pm 0.006$ \\
$R_2$ ($\mbox{R$_{\odot}$}$) & $0.804 \pm 0.004$ \\
$T_{\text{eff,2}}$ (K) & $5050 \pm 40$ \\
$T_{\text{eff,2}}/T_{\text{eff,1}}$ & $0.869 \pm 0.006$ \\
$i$ (degrees) & $89.0 \pm 0.2$ \\
$e$ & $<$10$^{-6}$
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plottwo{mrz_py}{mtz_py}
\caption{The mass--radius (\textit{left}) and mass--temperature (\textit{right}) relationships for the stars in KIC\,8736245. The solid curves in blue and red represent the 7\,Gyr and 9\,Gyr isochrones from the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Program \citep{Dotter08} for a metallicity equal to [m/H]~$=-0.31$\,dex, respectively. The shaded regions between the dashed lines encompass the associated isochrones with assumed metallicities within the measured error of $\pm0.17$\,dex.}
\label{fig:mrt}
\end{figure*}
\section{Periodic Signatures}\label{sec:periodicity}
Significant variations are observed in the out-of-eclipse light curve (see \autoref{sec:kepler}). When year-long segments of the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve were phase folded on the orbital period, we found that the resulting light curves were inconsistent with each other (see \autoref{fig:lcphase}), indicating that the stellar activity is significantly stronger than any permanent signals (e.g., Doppler beaming, ellipsoidal variations, or reflection effects). Under the assumption that the modulations are caused by star spots, the modulations can be used to measure the spin period(s) of the active star(s). In this section, we investigate periodic signatures of KIC\,8736245\ to identify the stellar spins and, in effect, test theoretical stellar models given that old, circularized systems are expected to exhibit spin periods equal to the orbital period. We analyze the periodicities of the out-of-eclipse \textit{Kepler}\ light curve in \autoref{sec:kep_periods} and the residuals of the eclipse time measurements in \autoref{sec:omc}.
\subsection{Periodicities in the \textit{Kepler}\ Photometry}\label{sec:kep_periods}
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plotone{periodogram_OoE_detail}
\caption{Lomb-Scargle periodogram of the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve after eclipses have been cut for KIC\,8736245. The periods of significant peaks are noted and marked with arrows. \textit{Left:} The full periodogram from 1--300\,days. \textit{Right:} A zoom-in of the shaded region between 4--7\,days, emphasizing the structure in the periodogram. The vertical dashed lines mark the orbital period of KIC\,8736245.}
\label{fig:periodogram}
\end{figure}
In \autoref{fig:periodogram} we show the Lomb-Scargle periodogram \citep{Lomb76, Scargle82} of the entire \textit{Kepler}\ light curve with eclipses removed. We find several strong peaks near the orbital period (5.07\,days) and a peak at 93.59\,days. The latter is likely an artifact of the \textit{Kepler}\ Quarterly roll and CCD change, so we ignore it. The power near the orbital period is much more interesting, and consists of three distinct peaks at $\sim$4.98\,days, $\sim$5.87\,days, and $\sim$5.06\,days. The 5.06\,day spike is consistent with the orbital period, and as such suggests that even though the eclipses have been removed, there is some phenomenon that exists at the timescale of the orbital period, such as low-amplitude Doppler beaming hidden by the star spot modulations. The largest peak, at $\sim$4.98\,days, is likely due to star spots on the primary star and is consistent with the spectroscopically measured rotational velocity within the uncertainties. Therefore, 4.98\,days is the rotation period of the star. The star spot modulation hypothesis is supported by the presence of weaker, but significant, spikes at the 2nd and 3rd harmonics. The $\sim$5.87\,day periodicity is tentatively associated with the spin of the secondary star, though harmonics are not seen in this case and is 1.1$\sigma$ slower than the spectroscopically measured rotational velocity. If these identifications are correct, it is a very peculiar situation: the primary star is spinning super-synchronously while the secondary is spinning sub-synchronously. Both of these are surprising given that the system has a circular orbit ($e<10^{-6}$) and has had plenty of time ($\sim$8\,Gyr) to synchronize the spins with the orbital period (timescale for synchronization is $\ll$1\,Gyr). \citet{Zahn89} stated that circularization occurs pre-main sequence for binaries with orbital periods $<$8\,days, but they will be spun-up when they reach the zero age main sequence due to contraction. In extension, \citet{Zahn94} adds that stars spin down with age as they lose angular momentum through stellar winds, causing the spin periods to be less than the orbital periods. Using models of angular momentum evolution for binary systems, \citet{Keppens00} found that decay of the orbital separation occurs rapidly when one of the component stars leaves the main sequence, but that the spins should remain synchronized or nearly synchronized as the orbital period changes. We speculate that the peculiar rotations may be related to angular momentum exchange within the binary system as the primary star evolves off the main sequence.
Interestingly, the $\sim$5.87\,day spike is ``cleaner'' than the $\sim$4.98\,day spike, meaning there is less power extending out as tails from the base of the peak. Since both periodicities suffer from the same sampling window, this difference is probably not due to a difference in leakage into sidelobes. The excess power near the base of the $\sim$4.98\,day spike is possibly due to the evolution of the star spots (changing amplitudes and random phasing), or perhaps more interestingly, due to star spots at different latitudes coupled with differential rotation \citep[e.g.,][]{Lurie17}.
\begin{deluxetable}{lcc}
\tablecaption{Significant Lomb-Scargle Periodogram Peaks \label{tab:periodogram}}
\tablehead{\colhead{Identification} & \colhead{Period} & \colhead{Equation}}
\startdata
Orbital Period & 5.069482 & $P_{\text{orb}}$ \\
Candidate Spin 1 & 4.980 & $P_{\text{spin,1}}$ \\
2nd Harmonic & 2.470 & (1/2)$\times P_{\text{spin,1}}$ \\
3rd Harmonic & 1.680 & (1/3)$\times P_{\text{spin,1}}$ \\
Beat Period 1 & 280.140 & $[(P_{\text{spin,1}})^{-1}-(P_{\text{orb}})^{-1}]^{-1}$ \\
Candidate Spin 2 & 5.869 & $P_{\text{spin,2}}$ \\
Beat Period 2 & 37.253 & $[(P_{\text{orb}})^{-1}-(P_{\text{spin,2}})^{-1}]^{-1}$ \\
Quarter Gap & 93.588 & ~ \\
~ & 98.436 & ~ \\
Unknown & 19.534 & ~
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
\subsection{Periodicities in the O--C Diagram}\label{sec:omc}
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plotone{omc_orig}
\caption{The O--C eclipse timing variations versus time for the primary (top panel) and secondary (bottom panel) eclipses, respectively.}
\label{fig:omc}
\end{figure}
If the orbital motion of the binary stars were purely Keplerian, the mid-eclipse times would be separated by intervals of the orbital period. The ``observed minus calculated'' (O--C) diagram would then be flat within the observational noise. However, gravitational perturbations (light-travel time effect, classical and relativistic apsidal motion, dynamical effects) can cause the O--C diagram to exhibit curvature and other variations. In addition, star spots can shift the apparent times of the eclipses, causing spurious variations in the O--C diagram. For example, if a star spot is on the side of the stellar disk rotating into view, the light curve will be decreasing (negative slope as the star spot becomes more apparent), and the center of the eclipse profile will be shifted towards later times (because covering a star spot will cause the ingress of the eclipse profile to be higher in flux). This is assuming that the spin is prograde with respect to the orbital motion \citep{Mazeh15}. In \autoref{fig:omc} we show the O---C diagrams for the primary and secondary star eclipses, and while generally flat, they clearly show significant fluctuations. We can be certain that some of these variations are due to star spots by plotting the deviations from zero in the O--C against the local slope of the light curve surrounding each eclipse. If the variations were caused by gravitational interactions, there should be no correlation. But if the variations are caused by star spots, then we expect the eclipse times to be shifted to later times as the star spot comes into view and to earlier times as the star spot rotates out of view behind the star's limb. This behavior is clearly seen in the top left panel of \autoref{fig:omc_periodogram}, as there is a strong (negative) correlation between the shift in time and slope of the light curve.
To better understand the eclipse timing variations, we compute the Lomb-Scargle periodogram of the O--C time series. These are also shown in the bottom panels of \autoref{fig:omc_periodogram}. The periodogram of the primary star eclipse times is essentially just noise, with the most significant peak being consistent with the \textit{Kepler}\ Quarterly roll. The periodogram of the secondary star eclipse times shows a very prominent spike at $\sim$37.25\,days. The origin of this spike is hypothesized to be a beat between the orbital period (5.069482\,days) and the spin period of the secondary star ($\sim$5.869\,days). These yield a period of 37.21\,days, consistent with the observed signal. An equivalent explanation is that the $\sim$37.25\,day signal is an alias of the $\sim$5.869\,day spin period that has been mirrored from above to below the Nyquist frequency of the binary. Similarly, these explanations can be extended to the second most significant peak in the periodogram of the primary star eclipse times at $\sim$280.14\,days, as it is consistent with the expected beat period between the orbital period and the spin period of the primary star ($\sim$4.980\,days) of 282.14\,days. Finally, there remains a weak $\sim$19.534\,day periodicity that is unexplained; it is not a harmonic of the $\sim$37.25\,day period. All of the significant peaks and their identified source are listed in \autoref{tab:periodogram}.
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1.15}
\plottwo{coorprim_py}{coorsec_py}
\plottwo{periodogram_omcPrim_orig_detail}{periodogram_omcSec_orig_detail}
\caption{\textit{Top:} The O--C primary (\textit{left}) and secondary (\textit{right}) eclipse timings versus the local slopes of the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve. \textit{Bottom:} Lomb-Scargle periodograms of the O--C primary (\textit{left}) and secondary (\textit{right}) eclipse timings. The vertical dashed lines mark the expected beat periods between the orbital period and the stellar spins.}
\label{fig:omc_periodogram}
\end{figure*}
\section{Summary}\label{sec:summary}
We combined 4\,years of continuous space-based observations from the \textit{Kepler}\ space telescope with radial velocity measurements and 8 epochs of ground-based photometry from Mount Laguna Observatory to solve for the orbital and stellar parameters of KIC\,8736245. We find that KIC\,8736245\ is an edge-on ($i=89^\circ$) double-lined eclipsing binary with a 5.07\,day circular orbit. The primary star has a mass and radius equal to 0.99\,\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}\ and 1.31\,\mbox{R$_{\odot}$}, respectively, making it an old, Sun-like star that is beginning to leave the main sequence. The secondary star is a K\,star with a mass and radius equal to 0.78\,\mbox{M$_{\odot}$}\ and 0.80\,\mbox{R$_{\odot}$}, respectively, and it exhibits a temperature that is $\sim$6\% cooler than predicted by theoretical models.
Our analysis demonstrates that the when the stars are significantly spotted, it is important to analyze independent eclipses in order to properly estimate the uncertainties in the system parameters. With only a single high quality light curve, one might unintentionally confuse accuracy with precision and obtain underestimates of the uncertainties. This work emphasizes the importance of measuring orbital and stellar properties of active stars from multiple epochs, when possible.
There are 1--4\% peak-to-peak fluctuations in the out-of-eclipse \textit{Kepler}\ light curve caused by stellar activity. From analyzing the \textit{Kepler}\ light curve and O--C eclipse timing variation periodograms, we propose candidate spin periods of approximately 4.98\,days and 5.87\,days for the primary and secondary stars. Neither of these periods match the orbital period, and thus neither star is synchronously rotating. In fact, the primary appears to be spinning super-synchronously while the secondary is rotating sub-synchronously---a puzzle. There are a number of reasons why a star may be sub-synchronously rotating, such as angular momentum loss from stellar winds, orbital separation decay as the primary star evolves, angular momentum conservation as the primary star evolves, or differential rotation. But a super-synchronous spin is more challenging to explain. We leave a more in-depth investigation of the stellar rotation characteristics to future studies, as they may benefit from future observations from ongoing space missions such as the \textit{Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite}. KIC\,8736245\ is also known as TIC\,164527774 and will be observed in \textit{TESS} sectors 14 and 26. Overall, KIC\,8736245\ proves to be an interesting case study for testing stellar astrophysical models due to the evolutionary state of its primary star and asynchronous spins.
\acknowledgments
We thank Trevor A. Gregg, Carolyn Heffner, Aja Canyon, Michael Hill, and Beverly Thackeray-Lacko for obtaining MLO observations. TF acknowledges support from the Minority Biomedical Research Support---Initiative for Maximizing Student Development (MBRS-IMSD) program, which was funded by the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIH/NIGMS) grant \#5R25GM058906-12. The authors also gratefully acknowledge support from the National Science Foundation via grants AST-1109928 and AST-1617004. WFW and JAO thank John Hood, Jr.\ for his generous support of exoplanet research at SDSU. The HET is a joint project of the University of Texas at Austin, the Pennsylvania State University, Stanford University, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universit\"{a}t M\"{u}nchen, and Georg-August-Universit\"{a}t G\"{o}ttingen. The Hobby-Eberly Telescope is named in honor of its principal benefactors, William P. Hobby and Robert E. Eberly. This paper includes data collected by the \textit{Kepler}\ mission. Funding for the \textit{Kepler}\ mission is provided by the NASA Science Mission directorate.
\facilities{HET (HRS), Kepler, MLO:0.6m (SBIG STL-1001E CCD), MLO:1m (2005 Lorel CCD)}
\software{AstroML \citep{VanderPlas12}, Astropy \citep{Astropy_collaboration13, Astropy_collaboration18}, ELC \citep{Orosz00}, IRAF \citep{Tody86, Tody93}, Matplotlib \citep{Hunter07}, NumPy \citep{Oliphant07}, SciPy \citep{Oliphant07}}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:Intro}
Wireless communication carrier frequencies have been gradually expanding over recent years in an attempt to satisfy ever-increasing bandwidth demands. Since the terahertz (THz) band is the last unexplored band of the radio frequency (RF) spectrum, technologies from both the neighboring microwave and optical bands are being explored to support THz communications. Due to the lack of compact and efficient THz devices (the so-called ``THz gap''), THz-band applications have been traditionally restricted to the areas of imaging and sensing. However, following recent advancements in THz signal generation, modulation, and radiation, communication-based THz-band use cases can now be foreseen \cite{elayan2019terahertz}.
Recent advancements in THz transceiver designs are mainly electronic and photonic. While photonic technologies have a data rate advantage, electronic platforms are superior in their ability to generate higher power \cite{sengupta2018terahertz} ($\unit[100]{\mu W}$ to $\unit[]{mW}$ compared to typical tens of $\unit[]{\mu W}$ in photonics). Electronic solutions \cite{Kenneth8808165} based on silicon complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) technology can generate up to $\unit[1.3]{THz}$ signals. The corresponding highest unity current gain frequency ($f_{\mathrm{T}}$) and unity maximum available power gain frequency ($f_{\mathrm{max}}$), however, remain at 280 gigahertz (GHz) and $\unit[320]{GHz}$, respectively. On the photonic side \cite{sengupta2018terahertz}, beyond-$\unit[300]{GHz}$ frequencies have been supported using uni-traveling carrier photodiodes, photoconductive antennas, optical down-conversion systems, and quantum cascade lasers. Furthermore, since satisfying emerging system-level properties requires designing efficient and programmable devices, as opposed to designing best-performing THz devices, integrated hybrid electronic-photonic systems are emerging \cite{sengupta2018terahertz}. In particular, systems composed of photonic transmitters and III-V compound semiconductor-based electronic receivers have demonstrated very high data rates. Furthermore, plasmonic solutions based on novel materials such as graphene \cite{Jornet5995306} are also gaining popularity. Plasmonic antennas support surface plasmon polariton waves over the metal-dielectric interface. They possess high electron mobility and tunability, which results in reconfigurable and compact array designs. Following these advances, it is clear that the THz gap is rapidly closing.
THz communications are attracting both praise and criticism. Is pushing microwave communications beyond the well-established millimeter-wave (mmWave) band worth the effort? And why should we settle for THz communications if high data rates can be supported by the more mature visible light communications (VLC)? In this paper, we discuss how THz communications can reap the benefits of both mmWave and VLC. We argue that the peculiarities of THz sensing and imaging, combined with the high-resolution localization capabilities, can significantly boost the performance of future communication systems and introduce a plethora of novel applications. We advocate this merging of applications by addressing its implementation aspects and demonstrating proof-of-concept simulations; we show that THz sensing and localization can be seamlessly piggybacked onto THz communications. We start by treating each of these applications independently.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.88\textwidth]{apps}
\caption{Prospective indoor and outdoor applications of THz communications (the figure is created by Ivan Gromicho, Scientific Illustrator at KAUST).}
\label{Fig_apps}
\end{figure*}
\section{THz Communications}
\label{sec:Commun}
THz-band communications are expected to play a pivotal role in the upcoming sixth-generation (6G) of wireless mobile communications, enabling ultra-high bandwidth communication paradigms. To this end, many research groups have attracted significant funding to conduct THz-related research and standardization efforts have been launched \cite{elayan2019terahertz}. Despite the fact that by definition the THz band extends from $\unit[300]{GHz}$ to $\unit[10]{THz}$, researchers have found it convenient to categorize beyond-$\unit[100]{GHz}$ applications as THz communications, below which the millimeter-wave bands of 5G are defined.
\subsection{An Argument for THz Communications}
\label{sec:argument}
Unlike mmWave communications, THz communications can leverage the large available bandwidths at the THz band to achieve a terabit/second data rate without additional spectral efficiency enhancement techniques \cite{Jornet5995306}. Pushing research beyond mmWaves is thus inevitable, as some applications can never be accomplished in any current or envisioned mmWave system (transmitting an uncompressed 8K-resolution video, for example). Due to their shorter wavelengths, THz communication systems can support higher link directionality, are less susceptible to free-space diffraction and inter-antenna interference, can be realized in much smaller footprints, and possess higher resilience to eavesdropping. Furthermore, the THz band promises to support higher user densities, higher reliability, less latency, more energy efficiency, higher positioning accuracy, better spectrum utilization, and increased adaptability to propagation scenarios.
On the other side of the spectrum, optical communications over the infrared and visible bands, mainly VLC, are very mature (except for the ultraviolet band, which has limitations). VLC has the potential to provide higher data rates than the rates promised by THz communications, and at a low cost. However, the two technologies are fundamentally different \cite{elayan2019terahertz}. For instance, THz signals are not affected by ambient light, atmospheric turbulence, scintillation, cloud dust, or temporary spatial variations of light intensity in the same way that optical signals are affected. More importantly, the severe unguided narrow-beam properties of optical signals require more delicate pointing, acquisition, and tracking to guarantee alignment. Despite possessing quasi-optical propagation traits, THz communications retain several characteristics of microwave communications, and they can still draw on reflections and antenna array-processing techniques to support non-line-of-sight (NLoS) propagation and efficient beamforming, respectively. Nevertheless, due to human eye sensitivity, VLC is not the best option for uplink communications, and it is susceptible to a different type of blockage. Therefore, availability can be enhanced by using both mmWave/THz communications and VLC in a heterogeneous setup.
\subsection{Challenges and Solutions}
\label{sec:challenges}
Many challenges need to be addressed prior to the widespread introduction of THz communications. For instance, the THz band's high propagation losses and power limitations result in very short communication distances, and frequency-dependent molecular absorptions result in band-splitting and bandwidth reduction. Signal misalignment and blockage are also more severe at the THz band. Furthermore, except for recent measurements at sub-THz frequencies \cite{Rappaport8732419}, there are no realistic THz channel models. In fact, the THz channel is dominated by a line-of-sight (LoS) and a few NLoS paths because of significant signal reflection losses and very high signal diffraction and scattering losses. Note that NLoS communication can naturally exist at the THz band because of the relatively low loss in specular reflection from specific surfaces (drywall for example). We hereby summarize some signal processing solutions to overcome these challenges (see \cite{Sarieddeen8765243,faisal2019ultra} and references therein).
\subsubsection{UM-MIMO and RIS systems}
\label{sec:UM-MIMO}
Very dense ultra-massive multiple-input multiple-output (UM-MIMO) antenna systems can provide the required beamforming gains necessary to overcome the distance problem. While mmWave UM-MIMO systems require footprints of a few square centimeters for a small number of antenna elements, a large number of antenna elements can be embedded at THz in a few square millimeters. Note that both the magnitude of the propagation loss and the number of antennas that can be fit in the same footprint increase in the square of the wavelength. Therefore, higher beamforming gains due to increased compactness can account for the increasing path loss. THz array-of-subarrays (AoSA) configurations enable hybrid beamforming, which in turn reduces hardware costs and power consumption and provides the flexibility to trade beamforming and multiplexing, for a better communication range and spectral efficiency, respectively. Configurable AoSA architectures can support multi-carrier communications and variations of spatial and index modulation schemes \cite{Sarieddeen8765243}, by tuning each antenna element to a specific frequency, turning it on/off, or changing its modulation type in real-time (in plasmonic solutions, the frequency of operation can be tuned by simple material doping or electrostatic bias). To enhance the correlated MIMO channel conditions in LoS scenarios, spatial tuning techniques \cite{Sarieddeen8765243} that optimize the separations between antenna elements can be applied. Nevertheless, a high multiplexing gain can only be achieved when the communication range is less than the so-called Rayleigh distance. Reconfigurable intelligent surfaces (RISs) can extend the communication range and the Rayleigh distance of the THz system.
\subsubsection{Waveform and modulation}
\label{sec:wav_mod}
Since bandwidth reduction from molecular absorption gets more pronounced at larger distances, the available absorption-free spectral windows are distance-dependent. Hence, distance-aware solutions that optimize waveform design, transmission power, and beamforming are required. Optimized THz-specific multi-carrier waveform designs other than orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) are favored. OFDM is very complex to implement at the THz band and it results in a peak-to-average power ratio problem; single-carrier schemes are recommended (alongside carrier aggregation) due to the large available bandwidths and flat nature of the channel. Moreover, since generating continuous modulations in compact architectures is challenging, plasmonic pulse-based architectures (asymmetric on-off keying modulations that consist of transmitting femtosecond-long short pulses) are proposed \cite{Jornet5995306}. However, the output power of pulse-based systems is limited. In addition, since the frequency response of pulse-based systems covers the entire THz range, it is no longer possible to operate in absorption-free spectra. Re-transmissions following molecular absorption (re-radiation of absorbed energy with negligible frequency shifts) result in a frequency-dependent (colored) noise component that is induced by the channel.
\subsubsection{Low-complexity baseband}
\label{sec:baseband}
Many more challenges need to be addressed from a signal processing perspective to overcome the mismatch between the bandwidth of the THz channel (terabit/second) and that of the digital baseband system (which is limited by clock speeds of few GHz). Channel coding is the most computationally-demanding component of the baseband chain; nevertheless, the complete chain should be made efficient and parallelizable. Therefore, joint architecture and algorithm co-optimization of channel coding, channel estimation, and data detection is required. Low-resolution digital-to-analog conversion systems can further reduce the baseband complexity; all-analog THz solutions are also considered.
\section{THz Sensing and Imaging}
\label{sec:Sensing}
THz signals have traditionally been used for wireless sensing and imaging in applications such as quality control, food safety, and security. Several THz-wave propagation properties, which microwave and infrared waves lack, make THz signals a good candidate for material and gas sensing. In particular, many biological and chemical materials exhibit unique THz spectral fingerprints. THz signals can penetrate a variety of non-conducting, amorphous, and dielectric materials, such as glass, plastic, and wood. Moreover, metals strongly reflect THz radiation, which enables detecting weapons. Due to strong molecular coupling with hydrogen-bonded networks, THz signals can be used to observe water dynamics. Similarly, due to unique spectral signatures that arise from transitions between rotational quantum levels in polar molecules, THz signals can be used for gas detection (rotational spectroscopy).
The most popular THz sensing method is THz time-domain spectroscopy (THz-TDS) \cite{jepsen2011terahertz}. THz-TDS is a pulse-based passive-sensing technique that probes a sample with THz broadband radiation in the form of short pulses and records the temporal profiles of these pulses with and without sample presence; the ratio of the electric field strengths of these profiles determines the optical properties of the sample material. There are two types of THz-TDS systems: transmission-based and reflection-based. While transmission spectroscopy analyzes the amount of light absorbed by a material, reflection spectroscopy studies the reflected or scattered light. Most THz sensing and imaging applications are conducted in transmission mode, since absorbance spectroscopy has an easier set-up design and results in higher signal contrast. Nevertheless, several factors make the reflection mode more appealing. For instance, reflection geometry enables detecting targets on non-transparent substrates and measuring the spectrum of highly absorptive materials (THz-opaque). More importantly, from a communication systems perspective, hand-held devices by themselves can support imaging/sensing in reflection mode without requiring infrastructure assistance.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{gas_sensing_H2O}
\caption{Performance analysis of carrier-based water vapor concentration sensing (accuracy $1\%$) over a $\unit[5]{m}$ range as a function of SNR and number of THz carriers (uniformly distributed between $\unit[1]{THz}$ and $\unit[2]{THz}$).}
\label{Fig_gas}
\end{figure}
As an extension to sensing, THz-TDS imaging extracts spectral information to determine the type and shape of the material under study. THz-TDS imaging is amplitude-based, phase-based, or a combination of the two. It consists of measuring the waveform of a THz wave traversing or reflected from an object at multiple positions. Due to low scattering, THz-TDS imaging systems are capable of producing high-contrast images. In fact, mmWave and THz imaging techniques are more powerful than their infrared counterparts, since they are less sensitive to weather and ambient light conditions. The vastly wider channel bandwidths of THz can easily support imaging applications with large fields of view. Furthermore, the high gain of directional antennas enables focused directional sensing/imaging and much finer spatial resolution (sub-millimeter spatial differentiation \cite{Rappaport8732419}).
With the advent of THz technology, carrier-based sensing/imaging systems can offer greater flexibility and fine-tuning capabilities over the frequency ranges of interest. In the following, we illustrate a proof-of-concept simulation for carrier-based THz-band wireless gas sensing (electronic smelling \cite{Kenneth8808165}). We assume a setup that consists of a transmitter shooting a few select high-frequency signals into a medium and a receiver estimating the channel response in order to detect absorption spikes. The estimated channel responses are correlated with a reference database on molecular absorption spectra (high-resolution transmission database (HITRAN) \cite{Jornet5995306}), and a decision is made on the gaseous constituents of the medium. For the specific case of measuring the percentage of water vapor, Fig. \ref{Fig_gas} illustrates the success rate versus the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). A performance enhancement of $\unit[50]{dB}$ is noted by increasing the number of carriers from 2 to 100. However, an SNR of more than $\unit[100]{dB}$ is still required to counter the losses at $\unit[5]{m}$. This can be mitigated via antenna and beamforming gains ($\unit[30]{dB}$ beamforming gain with 1024-element subarrays). Note that, for this simulation, a heuristic search-based algorithm is assumed. To further enhance performance in more complex sensing scenarios, the collected THz measurements can be processed using filtering and noise-reduction schemes followed by rigorous feature-extraction and classification algorithms.
\section{THz Localization}
\label{sec:Localization}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.97\textwidth]{res}
\caption{Localization in THz communication systems using MDS.}
\label{Fig_locmds}
\end{figure*}
Next-generation wireless networks are expected to provide accurate location-based services. It is envisioned that 6G networks based on mmWave and THz frequencies will provide centimeter-level accuracy \cite{Rappaport8732419} that conventional GPS and cell multilateration-based localization techniques fail to provide. High-frequency localization techniques are based on the concept of simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), in which the accuracy improves by collecting high-resolution images of the environment; the THz band can provide such high-resolution images. SLAM-based techniques consist of three major steps: imaging of the surrounding environment, estimation of ranges to the user, and fusion of images with the estimated ranges. For instance, a sub-centimeter level of accuracy can be achieved by constructing three-dimensional (3D) images of the environment using signals between $\unit[200]{GHz}$ and $\unit[300]{GHz}$ and projecting the angle- and time-of-arrival information from the user to estimate locations. Since SLAM deals with relatively slow-moving objects, there is sufficient time to process high-resolution THz measurements. Such measurements can hold sensing information, resulting in complex state models comprising the fine-grained location, size, and orientation of target objects, as well as their electromagnetic properties and material types.
Besides SLAM-based techniques, little effort has been made to develop THz-specific localization methods. In \cite{Absi2018}, a weighted least-squares estimator is used for the localization of transceivers operating at the THz band. Tags with dielectric resonators are used as anchors to transmit beacon signals, whereas the receiver computes the round-trip time of flight (RToF) to the available anchors. The RToF ranging technique is used to avoid the synchronization issue in time-based ranging methods. By increasing the bandwidth of the pulse and the size of the receiver antenna, millimeter-level accuracy is demonstrated. Nevertheless, a direction-of-arrival (DoA)-based approach is studied in \cite{Shree2018} for ranging in nanoscale sensor networks operating at $\unit[6]{THz}$. A uniform linear array is used as a sink node with $N$ antennas, which estimates the direction of the THz signal arriving at its various antennas from different directions. The sensor node uses the multiple signal classification (MUSIC) algorithm to estimate the DoA measurements, which, at a distance of $\unit[6]{m}$, results in an accuracy of less than a degree.
Research on robust and accurate localization algorithms for future THz communications systems is still lacking (the aforementioned schemes focus on ranging only). We hereby consider THz network localization using multidimensional scaling (MDS), which is a data visualization technique. Let the input to the MDS algorithm be the pairwise distance between two arbitrary nodes, which is estimated using any of the above ranging schemes for THz communications. We assume that the estimated distance between two sensor nodes is corrupted by the distance-dependent additive Gaussian noise. Based on the pairwise estimated distances, the MDS algorithm tries to locate the sensor nodes in a given dimensional space. For example, consider a scenario in which $20$ sensor nodes are randomly distributed over a $\unit[15 \times 15]{m^2}$ area and $4$ anchor nodes are located at the corners of this area. MDS tries to graphically show the relationship between all the nodes in the network, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig_locmds}. The left plot of Fig.~\ref{Fig_locmds} shows the actual location of sensor nodes and anchor nodes, while the middle plot shows the MDS-based initial map of the network, which has no actual coordinates (it is centered around the origin). The right plot shows the final node estimation with an accuracy of $\unit[2.4]{cm}$ for a ranging-error variance of $\unit[8]{cm}$.
\section{6G and Beyond Use-Cases}
\label{sec:6G}
Having detailed the peculiarities of THz communications, sensing, and localization, we next envision prospective 6G-and-beyond THz-band use cases. Finland's 6G Flagship envisions THz technology to be a key driver for 6G ubiquitous wireless intelligence \cite{Matti_Oulu}. Through high-data-rate wireless remoting of human cognition, information shower, accurate localization, sensing, and imaging, a plethora of services across multiple industry verticals can thrive in many areas, including transportation systems, robotics, augmented reality, entertainment, and health care (see \cite{Rappaport8732419} and references therein). The large THz bandwidths and massive antenna arrays, combined with the inherent densification caused by machine-type communications, will not only result in enhanced communication-system performance, but also in enhanced sensing, imaging, and localization. For instance, array signal processing techniques such as 3D beamforming, which was originally proposed to extend communication ranges and enhance spectrum efficiency, can also enable precise positioning and tracking, as well as create images of physical spaces by systematically monitoring signals at a wide array of angles.
While high-capacity THz links have already been advocated to replace wired backbone connectivity in network backhauls and data centers, the holy grail of THz communications is to enable indoor and outdoor mid-range mobile wireless communications. The following are some examples.
\subsection{Vehicular and Drone-to-Drone Communications}
\label{sec:vehicular}
Next-generation vehicular networks demand high data rates and reliable communications. For instance, see-through vision and bird's eye view require a data rate of $\unit[50]{Mbps}$ and a latency of $\unit[50]{ms}$. Similarly, automated overtake demands a $\unit[10]{ms}$ delay and $99.999\%$ reliability. Despite the uncertainty of the THz channel, high reliability can be achieved with high bandwidths and sufficiently-dense networks, as demonstrated in \cite{Chaccour8763780} for the case of THz virtual reality. THz-band communications are thus envisioned to be a key technology that can satisfy the reliability and real-time traffic demands of future vehicular networks \cite{Choi2016}, to enhance safety solutions and enable new applications, such as platooning and remote driving. Furthermore, THz sensing/imaging and localization/navigation are particularly useful in a multitude of vehicular communications applications.
High-speed drone-to-drone communications can also be achieved at the THz band. Drones can form flying ad hoc networks (FANETs) to enable broadband communication over a large-scale area. In FANETS, the THz band achieves high capacity at greater flexibility compared to FSO, which has stringent pointing and acquisition requirements. Nevertheless, drones operating at the THz band would require millimeter levels of positioning accuracy \cite{Mendrzik2018}, as opposed to less than a centimeter for a drone operating at $\unit[30]{GHz}$.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.88\textwidth]{RF_chains2}
\caption{A typical THz communication system model featuring AoSA configurations and hybrid signal processing, with the digital and analog domains being separated by digital-to-analog conversion (DAC) and analog-to-digital conversion (ADC) blocks. }
\label{Fig_RF}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Reflection-Assisted Communications}
\label{sec:RIS}
In addition to the aforementioned applications, Fig. \ref{Fig_apps} illustrates the role of both regular (non-reconfigurable) specular reflecting surfaces and RISs. In general, the strong specular component makes existing building surfaces behave like electrical mirrors at sufficiently short THz wavelengths. Nevertheless, intelligent surfaces can be custom built from discrete-element semiconductors and metamaterials. Such RISs can scale up signal power and reflect THz signals towards a direction of interest by introducing specific phase shifts. An electrically-large RIS that supports all these functionalities can be achieved via relatively small footprints at high frequencies \cite{ntontin2019reconfigurable}.
THz imaging, sensing, and localization can enhance the performance of RISs. For instance, the type of material that makes up two neighboring walls can be sensed to help determine the better NLoS route. Note that the change in signal color (Fig. \ref{Fig_apps}) after reflection indicates a change in signal characteristics (due to the reflection coefficient); this can be detected in order to classify the material type of the surface. Similarly, building real-time environment maps results in intelligent beamforming that makes use of reflecting surfaces (beamforming with environment awareness). Furthermore, the unreliability of the channel at high frequencies can be circumvented by sensing the environment in real time and finding alternative propagation routes. Conversely, RISs can enhance the performance of imaging, sensing, and localization, where seeing around corners in NLoS can be leveraged for rescue and surveillance applications as well as for autonomous localization and navigation.
\section{Implementation Aspects}
\label{sec:Implementation}
Given that research on THz communications is still in its infancy, the applications discussed in Sec. \ref{sec:6G} may seem futuristic. In reality, it is still too early to provide specific implementation details because no THz network has yet been built, let alone a multi-functional network. Nevertheless, we can foresee that joint algorithm and hardware design optimization for joint THz ultra-high-speed communications and advanced sensing, imaging, and localization paradigms will inevitably be a hot research topic in the near future.
A typical THz communications system model is illustrated in Fig. \ref{Fig_RF}, where adaptive AoSAs at the transmitting side are configured to serve multiple receiving devices. Each subarray can be tuned to a specific frequency or can be assigned a specific modulation type. Furthermore, after DAC and before ADC, each subarray is fed by a dedicated RF chain. Note that very high-bandwidth low-resolution ADCs/DACs are required. Due to high directivity (``pencil'' beams), each subarray is effectively detached from its neighboring subarrays, and the role of baseband precoding is reduced to defining the utilization of subarrays, or simply to turning subarrays on and off. Depending on the desired communication distance, a required number of antenna elements per subarray is allocated for beamforming. Then, the number of possible subarray allocations, which is bounded by array dimensions and the number of RF chains, dictates the diversity gain.
\subsection{Piggybacked Implementation}
\label{sec:Piggy}
For all the aforementioned reasons, sensing, imaging, and localization are expected to be executed at the same time over communication system nodes. It is thus intuitive to aim to have these applications piggybacked on THz communications by using the same space, time, and frequency resources, in the uplink, downlink, or both. For instance, in the case of electronic smelling, gaseous components can be identified by detecting variations in channel estimations regardless of the data being modulated over the carriers; only a few arbitrary carriers can result in good classification results (Fig. \ref{Fig_gas}). The same concept applies to imaging in reflection mode, in which reflection indices can be detected from received information-bearing carrier signals. Note that gas sensing and material detection can also be conducted simultaneously by assuming one, detecting the other, and then refining decisions over iterations. Nevertheless, a piggybacked implementation is much more convenient in a pulse-based system, where each modulated short-living pulse covers the entire THz band in the frequency domain, and can thus be used to conduct TDS-based sensing and imaging, as well as localization and navigation.
\subsection{Dedicated Resources}
\label{sec:Dedicated}
Despite the attractiveness of full resource sharing, several factors make dedicated resource allocation schemes compulsory. For instance, the accuracy of carrier-based sensing and imaging increases by tuning carriers to absorption spectra that cannot carry information. While it is unlikely that frequencies much higher than $\unit[1]{THz}$ will be useful for communication purposes, sensing applications thrive at higher frequencies with congested absorption spectra. Hence, some applications naturally require separate frequency allocations. In fact, careful frequency planning is required to prevent the overlap of harmonic products when supporting multiple applications. Furthermore, this merging of applications often requires cooperation from nearby infrastructure or users, which is not always available. To distribute THz communication resources, the baseband precoder can assign each chain in Fig. \ref{Fig_RF} to a specific application. Alternatively, the same resources can be shared, but at dedicated time slots.
\subsection{Role of Machine Learning}
\label{sec:ML}
Artificial intelligence is expected to play an important role in future THz systems, especially now that these systems are capable of generating a huge amount of data in a very rapid manner. From a communications perspective, machine learning can be used to enable higher spectrum utilization in UM-MIMO settings by replacing conventional channel estimation and channel coding schemes. Machine learning can also be used for beamforming and efficient data detection in generalized index modulation schemes. The importance of artificial intelligence is further emphasized in THz sensing and imaging, where feature extraction and classification can be conducted via principal component analyses and a support vector machine, or approximate entropy and a deep neural network, respectively. Furthermore, machine learning can prove to be of great importance in THz-based localization, for map interpolation and extrapolation as well as for cooperative localization and multi-source data fusion.
\subsection{Health and Privacy Concerns}
\label{sec:Concerns}
THz-band applications raise many health and privacy concerns. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) considers heating to be the main risk factor of THz radiation. Since THz radiation does not penetrate the body, this risk is confined to the heating of skin tissues. Nevertheless, we can not tell for sure whether THz radiation can cause skin cancer, for example. Given the inherent densification and high antenna gains at THz, it is very important to conduct studies to further understand the true impact of THz radiation on health (\!\cite{Rappaport8732419} and references therein). Furthermore, a privacy concern arises in high-resolution sensing, imaging, and localization. With high beamforming gains and precise beamsteering capabilities, high-quality imaging can be conducted from a distance, perhaps via see-through imaging, as in THz-based airport scanners. This can occur at the user's end (if a user's equipment is hacked) or over the network (assuming network-centric positioning). Combining this with machine learning techniques, the privacy concern is undeniable. Such concerns should be addressed for both the software and the hardware.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:Conc}
In this paper, we present a holistic and progressive vision of the future of THz communications. Alongside communications, THz technology can bring significant advances to the areas of imaging, sensing, and localization. We detailed the peculiarities of each of these applications at the THz band by reviewing relevant works and illustrating proof-of-concept simulations. We argued that merging THz-band applications will guide wireless communication research far beyond 5G use cases, and we showed that multiple THz applications can be seamlessly realized in real-time.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
Blazars are a subclass of active galactic nuclei (AGNs) which include
flat spectrum radio quasars (FSRQ) and BL Lacertae (BL Lac) objects \citepmain{Romero:2016hjn}.
These objects are characterized by
non-thermal spectra at all wavelengths, from radio to
very high energy (VHE, $> 100$ GeV) $\gamma$-rays and show flux variability
on time scales ranging from months to a few minutes \citepmain{Abdo:2010rw}. The flux
variability is produced in a highly relativistic jet pointing towards the observer.
The spectral energy distributions
(SEDs) of blazars are characterized by two non-thermal
peaks \citepmain{Abdo:2009iq}. The first peak (low energy) is located
between infrared to X-ray energies, produced from the
synchrotron emission from the relativistic electrons in the
jet. The general consensus is that the second peak (high energy)
corresponds to the synchrotron self Compton (SSC) scattering of the
high energy electrons with their self-produced synchrotron photons.
Depending on the location of the first peak, blazars are often
subdivided into low energy peaked blazars (LBLs), intermediate energy
peaked blazars (IBLs) and high energy peaked blazars (HBLs) \citepmain{Abdo:2009iq}.
The leptonic model is
very successful in explaining the multiwavelength emission from
blazars \citepmain{Tavecchio:2010ja,Boettcher:2013wxa}. The
nearest HBL Markarian 421 (Mrk 421) was the first to be detected in TeV
energy by Whipple telescopes \citepmain{Punch:1992xw}.
In recent years, the highly sensitive Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov
Telescopes (IACTs) such as VERITAS \citepmain{Holder:2008ux},
HESS \citepmain{Hinton:2004eu} and MAGIC \citepmain{Cortina:2004qt} have great
success in discovering many new extragalactic TeV sources and most of them are
blazars. So, blazars are an important
class of objects to observe and study VHE gamma-ray astronomy.
Flaring in VHE $\gamma$-rays seems to be the major activity of
many HBLs, which is unpredictable and switches between quiescent and
active states involving different time scales \citepmain{Senturk:2013pa}. It
has been
observed that while in some blazars a strong temporal correlation
between X-ray and multi-TeV $\gamma$-ray exists, in some other,
except for VHE $\gamma$-rays, no low energy counterpart is observed and explanation
of such anti-correlation is difficult to explain
by leptonic model \citepmain{Krawczynski:2003fq,Blazejowski:2005ih}.
Different models have been developed to explain these flaring
events \citepmain{Giannios:2009pi,Cerruti:2014iwa}.
Many simultaneous multiwavelength observations have been made to construct
the SED of the flaring period to
constraint different theoretical models \citepmain{Senturk:2013pa,Ahnen:2016hsf}.
The propagating VHE $\gamma$-rays undergo energy dependent
attenuation by the intervening extragalactic background light (EBL)
through pair production \citepmain{Ackermann:2012sza}
and the EBL significantly changes the shape of the VHE spectrum.
So for the calculation of the intrinsic spectrum, a proper understanding
of the EBL SED is important.
Well known EBL models are used by the IACTs collaborations to
analyze the observed VHE $\gamma$-rays from objects of different
redshifts \citepmain{Dominguez:2010bv,Franceschini:2008tp}.
\section*{Photohadronic model}
By assuming that the multi-TeV emission in the HBLs are due to the
photohadronic interaction in the jet \citepmain{Sahu:2019lwj,Sahu:2016mww},
a simple relation
between the observed VHE spectrum and the
intrinsic spectrum is derived. We
assume that during the VHE emission period, the Fermi accelerated protons
having a power-law spectrum \citepmain{Dermer:1993cz}, $dN/dE\propto
E^{-\alpha}$ (the power index $\alpha \ge 2$)
, interact with the background seed photons in the jet to produce the
$\Delta$-resonance ($p\gamma\rightarrow \Delta^+$),
which subsequently decays to $\gamma$-rays via intermediate $\pi^0$
and to neutrinos through $\pi^+$.
In a canonical jet scenario, the $\Delta$ production efficiency
is very low due to the low photon density. So, to
explain the multi-TeV emission through this process,
super-Eddington power in proton is needed \citepmain{Cao:2014nia}.
To circumvent this problem a double jet structure scenario is proposed \citepmain{Sahu:2019lwj}:
a small compact cone enclosed by a bigger
one along the same axis, and the photohadronic interaction occurs in the
inner jet region.
The photon density $n'_{\gamma,f}$ in the inner compact region
is much higher than the outer region $n'_{\gamma}$ (where prime corresponds to jet comoving
frame) and due to the
adiabatic expansion of the inner jet, its photon density
decreases by crossing into the outer region.
As the photon density is
unknown in the inner jet region, we assume a
scaling behavior of the photon densities in the inner and the
outer jet regions, which essentially means that the spectra of
the outer and the inner jets have the same slope. Using this scaling
behavior, we can express the photon density in the inner region in
terms of the photon density of the outer region which is known from
its observed SED.
The kinematical condition to produce
the $\Delta$-resonance is given by \citepmain{Sahu:2019lwj}
\begin{equation}
E_{\gamma} \epsilon_{\gamma} = 0.032 \, \Gamma{\cal D}(1+z)^{-2}
\mathrm{GeV}^2,
\label{kincond}
\end{equation}
where $E_{\gamma}$, $\epsilon_{\gamma}$, $\Gamma$, ${\cal D}$ and $z$
are observed VHE $\gamma$-ray, seed photon energy in the observer's frame,
bulk Lorentz factor, Doppler factor and redshift respectively. For
a HBL, $\Gamma\simeq {\cal D}$ is satisfied.
The observed VHE $\gamma$-ray flux depends on the Fermi accelerated
proton flux $F_p$ and the background seed photon density $F_{\gamma,
obs}(=E^2_{\gamma}\, dN_{\gamma}/dE_{\gamma}) \propto
F_p\, n'_{\gamma,f}$. Also
$F_p\propto E^{-\alpha+2}_\gamma$, and using the scaling
behavior we can express $n'_{\gamma,f}\propto \Phi (\epsilon_{\gamma})
\epsilon^{-1}_{\gamma}$, where $\Phi$ is the observed/fitted flux corresponding to
seed photon energy $\epsilon_{\gamma}$. Previously, the
photohadronic model has been successfully used to explain many flaring HBLs and found that,
for all the cases studied so far, $\Phi$
lies in the tail region of the SSC SED \citepmain{Sahu:2016bdu}.
But this region of the SED is not observed/measured
due to technical difficulties. Mostly leptonic models are used to
calculate the flux in this region and different leptonic models
predict different fluxes. In the same HBL, the flux in this region varies during
different flaring states and also different epochs.
However, irrespective of the model used, the
predicted flux in the tail region of the SSC SED is a power-law given by $\Phi \propto
\epsilon^{\beta}_{\gamma}$ and using the above kinematical condition we
can re-express it as $\Phi \propto E^{-\beta}_{\gamma}$.
Putting everything together and
taking into account the EBL correction, the observed VHE $\gamma$-ray spectrum
can be expressed as the product of the intrinsic flux $F_{\gamma,int}$
and the attenuation factor due to $e^+e^-$ pair production as,
\begin{equation}
F_{\gamma,obs}(E_{\gamma})= F_{\gamma,int}(E_{\gamma})
\, e^{-\tau_{\gamma\gamma}(E_{\gamma},z)} =
F_0 \, \left (
\frac{E_{\gamma}}{TeV} \right )^{-\delta+3} e^{-\tau_{\gamma\gamma}(E_{\gamma},z)},
\label{sed}
\end{equation}
where, $F_0$ is the normalization constant and
$\delta=\alpha+\beta$. The
optical depth $\tau_{\gamma\gamma}$ is a function of $E_{\gamma}$ and $z$.
$F_0$ and $\delta$ are the only parameters to be
adjusted to fit the observed spectrum.
However, strictly speaking the normalization constant is not a free parameter which can be fixed
from the observed data.
It is not necessary to know {\it a priori} the value of $\beta$ but
it can be constrained by fitting the observed data with the parameter $\delta$.
Moreover, the spectral index of the intrinsic differential spectrum
can be defined as $\delta_{int}=-\delta+1$.
The stability of the inner jet on large scales can be estimated from the ratio
$\sigma$ of
the magnetic stress (Poynting flux) and the kinetic stress and for BL Lac objects $\sigma\lesssim 1$.
By considering the generic values of the parameters, magnetic field $B\sim 1$ G, proton density $n_p\sim
10^{-1}-10^{-2}\, \mathrm{cm^{-3}}$, and bulk Lorentz factor
$\Gamma\sim 10$ we obtain $\sigma\sim 0.4$ which corresponds to a
stable inner jet \citepmain{Cavaliere:2017cwv}.
The photon density within the inner jet region can be constrained by
comparing the jet expansion timescale $t'_d$ with the $p\gamma$ interaction
timescale $t'_{p\gamma}$ and
assuming the high energy proton luminosity to be smaller than the
Eddington luminosity \citepmain{Sahu:2015tua}.
\section*{Results and analysis}
Using Eq. (\ref{sed}) we fitted the observed VHE spectra of 42
emission epochs of 23 HBLs of different redshifts very well with
the free parameter $\delta$ is in the range
$2.5\le\delta \le 3.0$.
Depending on the value of $\delta$, we roughly classify these flaring
states into three different categories as follows:
(i) low state, when $\delta = 3.0$, (ii) high state, when $2.6< \delta < 3.0$,
and (iii) very high state, when $2.5 \le \delta \le 2.6$.
We know {\it a priori} that $\alpha \ge 2$, so during the simultaneous observation
period in multiwavelength, we must have $ 0.0\le
\beta \le 1.0$.
The three different emission states are discussed through four
examples with HBLs of different redshifts and the
EBL model of Fransceschini et
al \citepmain{Franceschini:2008tp} is used for our analysis.
\subsection*{1ES 0229+200}
The 1ES 0229+200 is a HBL at a redshift of $z=0.1396$ which was
discovered in the Einstein IPC Slew Survey in 1992 \citepmain{Schachter:1993apj}.
It was observed by VERITAS telescopes during
a long-term observation over three seasons between October 2009 and
January 2013, for a total of 54.3 hours \citepmain{Aliu:2013pya} and an excess
of 489 $\gamma$-ray events were detected in the energy range
$0.29 \mathrm{TeV} \le E_\gamma \le 7.6 \mathrm{TeV}$.
Using the proton-synchrotron model and
the lepto-hadronic model, dominated by emission from the secondary
particles from $p\gamma$ interactions, the observed multiwavelength
SEDs of several HBLs are fitted by Cerruti {\it et al.} \citepmain{Cerruti:2014iwa}. However, these numerical models use about 19 parameters to
fit the entire SED. We have shown their fit to 1ES 0229+200 in
Figure \ref{fig:fig1}. Alternatively, using the photohadronic model an excellent fit is obtained
for $\delta=2.6$ and $F_0 = 3.5\times 10^{-12}\,
\mathrm{erg\,cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$. According to the above discussed
classification scheme, this corresponds to very high emission state
and the intrinsic flux $F_{int}\propto
E^{0.4}_{\gamma}$. Similarly, the extracted differential spectrum
$(dN_{\gamma}/dE_{\gamma})_{int}\propto E^{-1.6}_{\gamma}$ which is not
hard.
This HBL has the central black hole of mass $M_{BH}\sim 1.4\times 10^9 M_{\odot}$
and outer blob size $R'_{b}\sim 10^{16}-10^{17}$ cm \citepmain{Zacharopoulou:2011yr}. Assuming the
high-energy proton flux corresponding to $E_\gamma=7.6$ TeV to be smaller than the Eddington flux and
comparing $t'_d$ (inner blob size $R'_{f}\sim 4\times10^{15}$ cm) with
$t'_{p\gamma}$, we obtain the photon density in the range $4\times
10^8\, \mathrm{cm^{-3}}<n'_{\gamma,f}<2.5\times
10^{11}\, \mathrm{cm^{-3}}$.
From this HBL between 2005 and 2006, the HESS telescopes also observed VHE $\gamma$-rays \citepmain{Aharonian:2007wc} whose time-averaged spectrum is in the
energy range $0.5\, \mathrm{TeV} \le E_\gamma \le 11.5\,
\mathrm{TeV}$ and is very similar to the one discussed
above. This spectrum is fitted with the hadronic model of Essey {\it et al.}
\citepmain{Essey:2009ju,Essey:2010er}.
Using the photohadronic model a very good fit is obtained for
$\delta=2.5$ (see Figure 7 of Supplementary Materials for details).
By reducing 10\% to the hadronic model of Essey {\it et al.} the
spectrum of VERITAS can be fitted well, which is shown in Figure \ref{fig:fig1} for comparison.
\subsection*{1ES 0347-121}
The 1ES 0347-121 is a HBL at a redshift of $z=0.188$. The HESS telescopes observed
this blazar between August and December 2006 for a total of 25.4
hours \citepmain{Aharonian:2007tc} when an excess of 327 VHE gamma-ray events
were detected in the energy range $0.25\, \mathrm {TeV} \le E_\gamma \le 3$ TeV
and no flux variability was detected in the data set.
In a hadronic model scenario, ultra high energy protons escaping from the jet
produce secondary VHE gamma-rays by interacting with the Cosmic
Microwave Background (CMB) and/or EBL \citepmain{Essey:2010er}. Assuming this
scenario the spectra of 1ES 0347-121, 1ES 0229+200 and
1ES 1101-232 are explained well \citepmain{Essey:2010er}. However,
this scenario requires protons in the energy range $10^{8}$–$10^{10}$
GeV which are not easily produced in the jet environment, as well as a
weak extragalactic magnetic field in the range
$10^{-17}\, \mathrm {G}< \mathrm {B}< 10^{-14}$ to produce the observed
gamma-ray spectrum along the line of sight \citepmain{Essey:2010nd}. In an alternative
scenario,
Cerruti {\it et al.} \citepmain{Cerruti:2014iwa}
have applied the proton-synchrotron and lepto-hadronic models to fit
the spectrum of 1ES 0347-121.
Using the photohadronic model we found an excellent fit to the
spectrum with $\delta=2.7$
and $F_0=6.0\times 10^{-12}\, \mathrm {erg\,cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$, which is
a high state emission.
As $\gamma$-ray carries $\sim 10\%$ of the proton
energy \citepmain{Sahu:2019lwj}, $E_{\gamma}=3$ TeV corresponds to 30 TeV
cosmic ray proton energy which can easily be produced and accelerated
in the blazar jet. In Figure \ref{fig:fig2} we compare our result with
Essey {\it et al.} \citepmain{Essey:2010er} and Cerruti et
al. \citepmain{Cerruti:2014iwa} and found that below 1 TeV all have similar
behaviors. However, above 1 TeV our result differs substantially from
the others, particularly from Essey {\it et al.} which uses the EBL
model of Stecker {\it et al.} (high EBL) \citepmain{Stecker:2006aj}.
Comparison of the EBL models of
Franceschini {\it et al.} \citepmain{Franceschini:2008tp} and Stecker {\it et al.} \citepmain{Stecker:2006aj}
shows a significant difference in the attenuation factor above 1 TeV.
\subsection*{1ES 0806+524}
The 1ES 0806+524 is at a redshift of $z=0.138$ and in 2008, the VERITAS
telescopes discovered this in VHE
$\gamma$-rays \citepmain{Acciari:2008cn}.
A multiwavelength observation was performed by MAGIC telescopes from January to
March 2011 for 13 nights for about 24
hours \citepmain{Aleksic:2015ula} and, on February 24, observed a flaring event. Within 3
hours of observation excess events above 250 GeV were recorded
in the energy range $0.17\, \mathrm {TeV} \le E_\gamma \le 0.93\,
TeV$ when, the flux increased by a factor of about 3 from the mean
flux level and no intra-night variability was observed.
The flaring data and the remaining MAGIC
observations are analyzed separately using the photohadronic
scenario, which are shown in Figure \ref{fig:fig3}. Using one-zone SSC
model, the broad-band SEDs during the flaring (high) and the remaining
period (low) are explained using about 14 free
parameters. The electron Lorentz factor for the high state is double
the one for the low state and the remaining parameters are the same \citepmain{Aleksic:2015ula}.
With the photohadronic scenario, the flaring
state can be fitted very well with $\delta=2.9$ and $F_0=1.2\times
10^{-11}\, \mathrm{erg\,cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$ corresponding to a high
emission state and the average of the remaining flux can be
fitted with $\delta=3.0$ and $F_0=4.0\times
10^{-12}\, \mathrm{erg\,cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$, which is a low state. The intrinsic
fluxes in high and low states are respectively proportional to
$E^{0.1}_\gamma$ and $E^0_\gamma$. Comparison of both the models is
shown in the Figure \ref{fig:fig3}. The SSC model does not fit well to
the low state spectrum. Although both models explain well the
flaring data, a significant difference is observed in the
predictions above 1 TeV.
\subsection*{HESS J1943+213}
HESS J1943+213 is a VHE gamma-ray point source discovered by
HESS \citepmain{Abramowski:2011ri} which is identified as an extreme HBL (EHBL).
In VHE, it was observed by VERITAS telescopes from 27 May
to 2 July 2014 and from 20 April to 9 November 2015, a total exposure time of 37.2
hours and no flux variability was observed \citepmain{Archer:2018ehn}. The
time-averaged spectrum of both the observations is presented in Figure \ref{fig:fig4}.
Currently, the redshift of HESS J1943+213 is not known and indirect
limits ($0.03< z < 0.45$) were set by Peter {\it et al} \citepmain{Peter:2014hga}.
Improved gamma-ray spectra of Fermi-LAT and VERITAS were used to derive a
conservative upper limit of $z < 0.23$ \citepmain{Archer:2018ehn}. Using the photohadronic model
and different redshifts, we derived more stringent lower and
upper limits on the redshift ($0.14\le z\le 0.19$) which are shown in
Figure \ref{fig:fig4}. However, the best fit is obtained for $z=0.16$
and $\delta=2.9$ corresponding to a high state emission from the
source. Additional two such examples are discussed in the
supplementary materials.
\section*{Discussion}
The HBLs are known to undergo episodes of VHE flaring in
gamma-rays involving
different time scales and the flaring mechanism is not well
understood. Also the VHE gamma-rays are attenuated by EBL background.
Here we have derived a simple relation between the observed VHE flux
and the intrinsic flux from the flaring HBLs by assuming that
during flaring, Fermi-accelerated high energy protons
interact with the seed photons in the inner compact region of the
jet to produce $\Delta$-resonance which subsequently decays to
gamma-rays and neutrinos from intermediate $\pi^0$ and $\pi^+$
respectively. These gamma-rays can be observed.
To account for the EBL effect we consider the well known EBL model of
Franchesccini {\it et al}.
and analyzed 23 HBLs of different redshifts and a total of 42 different emission
epochs of them. For detailed analysis we only used five emission
epochs of four HBLs, and the rest of the flaring states are
summarized in Table 1. Some of these are briefly discussed in
supplementary materials to strengthen further the validity of the
photohadronic origin of multi-TeV flaring events.
From the analysis we observed that the free
parameter $\delta$ is constrained to be in the range $2.5\le
\delta\le3.0$.
The intrinsic flux for the low state is a
constant, but for high and very high state it is a power-law
proportional to $E^{\eta}_{\gamma}$, where $0 <\eta \le 0.5$.
We could not find any flaring state which has $\delta < 2.5 $.
Some flaring spectra can be fitted well with $\delta > 3$.
However, it is important to note that for these
cases $-\delta+3$ is positive (a very soft
spectrum) and in the low-energy limit the spectrum shoots up very high,
which is certainly not observed. So the soft power-law fits are
ignored \citepmain{Dwek:2004pp,Sahu:2018gik} and we always adhere to $\delta \le 3.0$.
From the analysis we
observed that about 48\% are low states, 38\% high states and 14\%
are very high state emissions. This implies that low and high emission
states constitute the major part of the flaring in HBLs.
Although, the photohadronic scenario works well for $E_{\gamma}
\gtrsim 100$ GeV, there are contributions from the leptonic processes
to the observed spectrum in this energy regime, so in the
low energy regime our model may not fit the data very well. In some
cases, we have
observed that the averaging of long-term VHE observations are difficult
to explain by photohadronic model for the following reasons:
gamma-rays from the leptonic processes contribute to the spectrum in the
low energy regime and the averaging of many unobserved short flares with
the low emission periods contaminates the data.
Several models explain well the observed broadband SEDs but
require many assumptions and many free parameters, some of which are difficult to realize
in the jet environment \citepmain{Cerruti:2014iwa,Essey:2010er,Aleksic:2015ula,Boettcher:2013wxa}. On the other hand, the photohadronic scenario
is based on very simple assumptions which are
very likely to be realized in the jet during the VHE emission
period. Another important aspect of our model is that, the assumption
of the power-law behavior of the
background seed photon is sufficient to fit the observed spectrum and
it is not necessary to have simultaneous multiwavelength observations.
Moreover, the exact simultaneous
multiwavelength observation during a flaring event in a HBL is usually limited
to a few. In our case, the IACTs observations are sufficient.
From the fitting to the observed spectrum and using
$\alpha\ge 2$, the seed photon
spectral index $\beta$ can be constrained. For example, an excellent
fit to the flaring of PG 1553+113 is obtained for $\delta=2.5$
which shrinks the $\beta$ value in the interval 0 to 0.5 (see Table 1).
Nevertheless, the fact that we can explain very well the VHE spectra of
42 epochs of 23 HBLs with a single parameter, provides strong evidence
that VHE gamma-rays are produced mostly through
the photohadronic process with the intermediate $\Delta$-resonance.
In addition, it is important to mention that for HBLs of unknown
redshifts, whose multi-TeV spectra are known, stringent
bounds on the redshifts can be placed using the photohadronic model.
\acknowledgments
The work of S.S. is partially supported by
DGAPA-UNAM (Mexico) Project No. IN103019. S.N. is partially
supported by ``JSPS Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research $<$KAKENHI$>$
(A) 19H00693'',
``Pioneering Program of RIKEN for Evolution of Matter in the Universe
(r-EMU)'', and
``Interdisciplinary Theoretical and Mathematical Sciences Program of RIKEN''.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{Figure_1.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 0229+200}.
The time-averaged observed spectrum (red data points) of HBL 1ES
0229+200 during October 2009 and
January 2013 by VERITAS telescopes \citepmain{Aliu:2013pya} is shown.
An excellent fit is obtained with the photohadronic model with
$\delta=2.6$ and $F_0=4.0\times 10^{-12}
\mathrm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$ (black curve) and the corresponding intrinsic flux is also shown
(black dashed curve). In all the subsequent figures
the values of $\delta$ and $F_0$ (in $\mathrm{erg\, cm^{-2}\,
s^{-1}}$ unit) are given in the legend.
For comparison we have
also shown the proton-synchrotron fit and the lepto-hadronic
fit \citepmain{Cerruti:2014iwa} and the hadronic model \citepmain{Essey:2009ju,Essey:2010er}.
\label{fig:fig1}
}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{Figure_2.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 0347-121}.
The VHE spectrum of HBL 1ES 0347-121 observed by the HESS telescopes between
August and December 2006 \citepmain{Aharonian:2007tc} is fitted using
photohadronic model (black
curve) and its corresponding intrinsic spectrum is shown (black
dashed curve). Our
result is compared with the hadronic model of
Essey et al. (high EBL) \citepmain{Essey:2010er} (blue curve) and the proton-synchrotron
model (blue curve) and lepto-hadronic model (orange curve) \citepmain{Cerruti:2014iwa}.
\label{fig:fig2}
}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{Figure_3.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 0806+524}.
The MAGIC observation of the HBL 1ES 0806+524 from January
to March 2011 is shown here. A flaring event was observed on 24
February. The observed fluxes for both the flaring (red data points) and
the average of the remaining data (blue data points) are shown. They are fitted using
one-zone SSC model \citepmain{Aleksic:2015ula} and the photohadronic model (black curve).
\label{fig:fig3}
}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{Figure_4.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of HESS J1943+213}.
The EHBL HESS J1943+213 has unknown redshift and it was
observed in VHE by VERITAS from 27 May
to 2 July 2014, and 20 April to 9 November
2015. The time-averaged spectrum of both
observations is shown \citepmain{Archer:2018ehn}. Using the photohadronic model
and performing a statistical analysis for
different redshifts, we were able to constrain the
redshift in the range $0.14\le z\le 0.19$. The values of $\delta$ and
$F_0$ are also shown in the figure.
}
\label{fig:fig4}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{table}
\label{table.1}
\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
Name & Redshift($z$) & Period & $F_{0,11}$ & $\delta$ & State \\ [1 mm]
\hline
Mrk 421 & 0.031 & 2004 & $51.3$ & 2.95 & High \\
\ & \ & 22 Apr 2006 & $5.2$ & 2.95 & High \\
\ & \ & 24 Apr 2006 & $10.7$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 25 Apr 2006 & $6.9$ & 2.95 & High \\
\ & \ & 26 Apr 2006 & $5.2$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 27 Apr 2006 & $16$ & 2.95 & High \\
\ & \ & 28 Apr 2006 & $5.0$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 29 Apr 2006 & $4.9$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 30 Apr 2006 & $13.5$ & 2.5 & Very High \\
\ & \ & 16 Feb 2010 & $12$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 17 Feb 2010 & $1.5$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 10 Mar 2010 & $21$ & 2.6 & Very High \\
\ & \ & 10 Mar 2010 & $16.5$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 28 Dec 2010 & $6.7$ & 3.00 & Low \\
Mrk 501 & 0.034 & 22 - 27 May 2012 & $6.3$ & 2.9 & High \\
\ & \ & 23 - 24 Jun 2014 & 28 & 2.93 & High \\
1ES 2344+514 & 0.044 & 4 Oct 2007 - 11 Jan 2008 & $0.8$ & 3.0 & Low \\
1ES 1959+650 & 0.048 & May 2002 & $12$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & Nov 2007 - Oct 2013 & $2.2$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 21-27 May 2006 & $1.1$ & 3.0 & Low \\
\ & \ & 20 May 2012 & $80$ & 2.9 & High \\
1ES 1727+502 & 0.055 & 1-7 May 2013 & $0.9$ & 3.0 & Low \\
PKS 1440-389 & 0.14$\le$$z$$\le$0.24 & 29 Feb - 27 May 2012 & $0.90$ & 3.0 & Low \\
1ES 1312-423 & 0.105 & Apr 2004 - Jul 2010 & $0.20$ & 3.0 & Low \\
B32247+381 & 0.119 & 30 Sep - 30 Oct 2010 & $0.17$ & 3.0 & Low \\
RGB J0710+591 & 0.125 & Dec 2008 - Mar 2009 & $0.5$ & 2.9 & High \\
1ES 1215+303 & 0.131 & Jan - Feb 2011 & $90$ & 3.0 & Low \\
1RXS J101015.9-311909 & 0.14 & Aug 2008 - Jan 2011 & $0.2$ & 2.8 & High \\
1ES 0229+200 & 0.14 & 2005 - 2006 & $0.4$ & 2.5 & Very High \\
H 2356-309 & 0.165 & Jun - Dec 2004 & 0.3 & 2.9 & High \\
1ES 1218+304 & 0.182 & Dec 2008 - 2013 & $1.5$ & 2.9 & High \\
1ES 1101+232 & 0.186 & 2004 - 2005 & $0.60$ & 2.75 & High \\
1ES 1011+496 & 0.212 & 6 Feb - 7 Mar 2014 & $8.2$ & 3.0 & Low \\
1ES 0414+009 & 0.287 & Aug 2008 - Feb 2011 & $0.70$ & 2.9 & High \\
PG 1553+113 & 0.50 & 26 - 27 Apr 2012 & $48$ & 2.5 & Very High \\
RGB J0152+017 & 0.80 & 30 Oct - 14 Nov 2007 & $0.3$ & 3.0 & Low \\
RGB J2243+203 & 0.75$\le$$z$$\le$1.1 & 21 - 24 Dec 2014 & $0.28$ & 2.6
& Very High \\ [1 mm]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\small Flaring states of the additional HBLs (besides the
ones already discussed) are shown here. In the 4th column the
normalization factor is expressed in units of $F_{0,11}=1.0\times\,10^{-11}\, \mathrm {erg\,cm^{-2}\,s^{-1}}$.
The photohadronic fits to some of these emission states are included in the Supplementary materials.}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\bibliographystylemain{aasjournal}
\bibliographymain{Paper_v1_3}
\end{document}
\section*{Supplementary Figures}\label{sup:intro}
Due to space constraints in the main article, we only
analyzed five flaring states of four HBLs in the context of the
photohadronic model and compared it with other available models.
However, to further support the validity of our model and its predictions, here, we
provide eleven additional flaring states of HBLs of different
redshifts. Particularly, our best fits to the flaring events of 1ES 0229+200 and
1ES 1101+232 are compared with other existing leptonic and hadronic models,
where we observed that our results are as good as or better than
these models. The redshifts of the HBLs PKS 1440-389 and RGB J2243+203 are
unknown and, using different observations, limits were set to the
redshifts. We have shown that the predicted photohadronic model limits are
more stringent than the existing ones. The references to all the
additional HBLs given in Table 1 are shown in Table 2.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_1.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of Mrk 421}.
During a multiwavelength campaign of Mrk 421 in March 2010, an ongoing
VHE flare was observed for 13 consecutive days from 10 to 22
March \citep{Aleksic:2014rca}. Initially the flare was high and slowly
decreased during the 13-day period, which was observed by both MAGIC
and VERITAS telescopes. VERITAS observed high VHE flux on 10 March
which is roughly 50\% higher than the flux measured by MAGIC for that
same day. Using the photohadronic model we fitted well with
$F_0=1.65\times 10^{-10} \, \rm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$,
$\delta=2.9$ for the MAGIC spectrum, which is high, and $F_0=2.1\times
10^{-10} \, \rm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$, $\delta=2.6$ for the
VERITAS spectrum, which is very high. The corresponding intrinsic
spectra are shown in dashed lines.}
\label{fig:sfig1}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_2.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 1959+650}.
The VERITAS telescopes observed VHE $\gamma$-rays between
17 April to 1 June 2012 from HBL 1ES 1959+650 \citep{Aliu:2014hra}. On 20
May, a short-lived VHE flare was detected which is fitted with the
photohadronic model using $F_0=8.0\times 10^{-12} \, \rm{erg\,
cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$, $\delta=2.9$. This corresponds to a high
state and the intrinsic flux is shown in dashed line.}
\label{fig:sfig2}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_3.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 0229+200}.
The HESS telescopes observed the HBL 1ES 0229+200 between
2005 and 2006 for
41.8 hours \citep{Aharonian:2017aa} and its VHE
spectrum is shown, fitted with the
photohadronic model with $F_0=4.0\times 10^{-12} \,
\rm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$, $\delta=2.5$, corresponding to a very
high emission state. Here we compare our results with the hadronic
model of Essey et al. \citep{Essey:2009ju1,Essey:2010er1} which uses the EBL model of Stecker et
al. (high EBL) \citep{Stecker:2006aj}. It is important to mention that the
data points shown in \citep{Essey:2010er1} were
slightly shifted to the left, so the model may not
coincide exactly with the original data points as shown here.}
\label{fig:sfig3}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_4.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 1101+232}.
The HESS telescopes observed the HBL 1ES 1101+232 in 2004 for
four nights in April for 2.7 hours, six nights in June
for 8.4 hours and eleven nights in March 2005 for 31.6 hours \citep{Aharonian:2007nq}. The
time-averaged VHE spectrum of these observations is fitted with the
photohadronic model ($F_0=6.0\times 10^{-12} \, \rm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$,
$\delta=2.75$) which corresponds to a high emission state and is compared with the hadronic model of Essey et
al. \citep{Essey:2010er1} and the models of Cerruti et al. \citep{Cerruti:2014iwa}.}
\label{fig:sfig4}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_5.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 1011+496}.
The HBL 1ES 1011+496 at a redshift of z=0.212 was observed by
the MAGIC telescopes during a flaring event between February and
March 2014, for a total of 17 nights \citep{Ahnen:2016gog}. In the photohadronic scenario a very good fit
to the VHE spectrum is obtained for $F_0=8.2\times 10^{-11} \, \rm{erg\, cm^{-2}\,
s^{-1}}$, $\delta=3.0$, which corresponds to a low state and thus a
flat intrinsic spectrum.}
\label{fig:sfig5}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_6.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of RGB J0152+017}.
The HBL RGB J0152+017 (z=0.8) is the farthest HBL in our
list. The HESS telescopes observed during 30 October to 14
November 2007 for a total of 14.7 hours and detected 173 VHE $\gamma$-ray
events \citep{Aharonian:2008aj}. We have shown the time-averaged VHE
spectrum and fitted it with the photohadronic model for $F_0=2.7\times 10^{-12} \, \rm{erg\,
cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$, $\delta=3.0$ which is a low emission state.}
\label{fig:sfig6}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_7.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of 1ES 1218+304}.
The HBL 1ES 1218+304 is at a redshift of z=0.182 and is a
relatively bright source. It was observed by the VERITAS telescopes from December
2008 until the 2012-2013 observing season \citep{Madhavan:2013sea},
for a total of 86 hours. The time-averaged VHE
spectrum is fitted well using the photohadronic model with
$F_0=1.5\times 10^{-11} \, \rm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$,
$\delta=2.9$, corresponding to a high state.}
\label{fig:sfig7}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_8.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of RGB J0710+591}.
The VERITAS telescopes observed RGB J0710+591 from December 2008 to March 2009
for a total of 22.1 hours \citep{Acciari:2010qw}. The observed VHE
spectrum is fitted by the proton-synchrotron and lepto-hadronic models
of Cerruti {\it et al.} \citep{Cerruti:2014iwa} discussed in the main paper and the SSC model of
Bötccher and Chang \citep{Acciari:2010qw}. Using our photohadronic model, we found an excellent fit to the data for
$\delta=2.9$, which corresponds to a high emission state.}
\label{fig:sfig8}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{Sup_Figure_9.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of PG 1553+113}.
A multi-TeV flaring event was observed from PG 1553+113 during the nights of April 26 and 27 of 2012 by the HESS
telescopes
for a total of 3.5 hours in
the energy range $0.25$ TeV to $0.67$ TeV
\citep{Abramowski:2015ixa}. Its time-averaged photon flux
(red data points) is fitted well using the photohadronic model with
$F_0=4.8\times 10^{-10} \, \rm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$,
$\delta=2.5$, corresponding to a very high state.}
\label{fig:sfig9}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_10.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of PKS 1440-389}.
The HBL PKS 1440-389 was observed by HESS telescopes between
29 February to 27 May 2012 for a total of $\sim 12$ hours \citep{Prokoph:2015mza}. Due to
poor spectral quality, the redshift of this object is not well known
and the current best constraint is $0.14 < z <
2.2$ \citep{Shaw:2013pp}. Using the photohadronic model
and performing a statistical analysis for
different redshifts, we constrained the
redshift in the range $0.14\le z\le 0.24$. We observed that for all
these redshifts the value of $\delta=3.0$, which is a low emission
state.}
\label{fig:sfig10}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{Sup_Figure_11.pdf}
\caption{\small \textbf{Multi-TeV SED of RGB J2243+203}.
The HBL RGB J2243+203 has an unknown redshift. Using different EBL models, the Fermi-LAT put an
upper limit on the redshift ($z=1.1$). On 21 December 2014, the VERITAS
telescopes observed elevated VHE flux and continued
observing till 24 of December \citep{Abeysekara:2017moq}.
Using the
photohadronic model and performing a statistical analysis for
different cases, we were able to constraint the
redshift in the range $0.75\le z\le 1.1$. The best fit to the data
was found for $z=0.90$ and $\delta=2.6$, which corresponds to a very high
emission state.}
\label{fig:sfig11}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{table}
\label{table.1}
\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
Name & Redshift($z$) & Period & State & Ref. \\ [1 mm]
\hline
Mrk 421 & 0.031 & 2004 & High & \citep{Blazejowski:2005ih} \\
\ & \ & 22 Apr 2006 & High & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 24 Apr 2006 & Low & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 25 Apr 2006 & High & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 26 Apr 2006 & Low & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 27 Apr 2006 & High & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 28 Apr 2006 & Low & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 29 Apr 2006 & Low & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 30 Apr 2006 & Very High & \citep{Aleksic:2010xj} \\
\ & \ & 16 Feb 2010 & Low & \citep{Singh:2014yba} \\
\ & \ & 17 Feb 2010 & Low & \citep{Galante:crp} \\
\ & \ & 10 Mar 2010 & Very High & \citep{Aleksic:2014rca} \\
\ & \ & 10 Mar 2010 & Low & \citep{Aleksic:2014rca} \\
\ & \ & 28 Dec 2010 & Low & \citep{Singh:2018tzy} \\
Mrk 501 & 0.034 & 22 - 27 May 2012& High & \citep{Chandra:2017vkw} \\
1ES 2344+514 & 0.044 & 4 Oct 2007 - 11 Jan 2008 & Low & \citep{Allen:2017cgm} \\
1ES 1959+650 & 0.048 & May 2002 & Low & \citep{Aharonian:2003be} \\
\ & \ & Nov 2007 - Oct 2013 & Low & \citep{Aliu:2013aas} \\
\ & \ & 21-27 May 2006 & Low & \citep{Albert:2008uda} \\
\ & \ & 20 May 2012 & High & \citep{Aliu:2014hra} \\
1ES 1727+502 & 0.055 & 1-7 May 2013 & Low & \citep{Archambault:2015sla} \\
PKS 1440-389 & 0.14$\le$$z$$\le$0.24 & 29 Feb - 27 May 2012 & Low & \citep{Prokoph:2015mza} \\
1ES 1312-423 & 0.105 & Apr 2004 - Jul 2010 & Low & \citep{Abrawoski:2013hss} \\
B32247+381 & 0.119 & 30 Sep - 30 Oct 2011 & Low & \citep{MAGIC:2012ac} \\
RGB J0710+591 & 0.125 & Dec 208 - Mar 2009 & High & \citep{Acciari:2010qw} \\
1ES 1215+303 & 0.131 & Jan - Feb 2011 & Low & \citep{Aleksic:2012npa} \\
1RXS J101015.9-311909 & 0.14 & Aug 2008 - Jan 2011 & High & \citep{Abrawoski:2012hss} \\
1ES 0229+200 & 0.14 & 2005 - 2006 & Very High & \citep{Aharonian:2017aa} \\
H 2356-309 & 0.165 & Jun - Dec 2004 & High & \citep{Aharonian:2005gh} \\
1ES 1218+304 & 0.182 & Dec 2008 - 2013 & High & \citep{Madhavan:2013sea} \\
1ES 1101+232 & 0.186 & 2004 - 2005 & High & \citep{Aharonian:2007nq} \\
1ES 1011+496 & 0.212 & 6 Feb - 7 Mar 2014 & Low & \citep{Ahnen:2016gog} \\
1ES 0414+009 & 0.287 & Aug 2008 - Feb 2011 & High & \citep{Madhavan:2013sea} \\
PG 1553+113 & 0.50 & 26 - 27 Apr 2012 & Very high & \citep{Abramowski:2015ixa} \\
RGB J0152+017 & 0.80 & 30 Oct - 14 Nov 2007 & Low & \citep{Aharonian:2008aj} \\
RGB J2243+203 & 0.75$\le$$z$$\le$1.1 & 21-24 Dec 2014 & Very High & \citep{Abeysekara:2017moq} \\ [1 mm]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\small The flaring states of the HBLs given in Table 1 of the
main article are given here along with their respective references.}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Supermassive black hole binaries (SBHBs) were first suggested by \cite{Begelman1980} as an explanation for the observed bending and apparent precession of radio jets. According to the scenario outlined by these authors, SBHBs can form from mergers of two galaxies, each with its own central black hole (BH). Since a large fraction of galaxies have central BHs, and galaxy mergers are common, it is reasonable to expect a substantial number of SBHBs in the observable universe. In the scenario of \cite{Begelman1980}, as two galaxies merge, the central BHs will sink into the core of the merger remnant due to dynamical friction. This first stage advances quickly, on a time-scale comparable to the dynamical time-scale of the host galaxies ($\sim 10^8\;$yr). The orbit then decays on a longer time-scale to separations $\sim 1\,$pc as a result of the scattering of stars. If the population of stars available for scattering can be replenished sufficiently quickly and orbital decay can continue until the separation is $\sim 10^{-3}$~pc, then gravitational wave emission will take over as the dominant mechanism of angular momentum loss and drive the binary to coalescence within a Hubble time. Early calculation, assuming that the SBHB is in a spherical star cluster with an isotropic velocity distribution \citep[e.g.,][and references therein]{Roos1981,Valtonen1996}, showed that the orbital decay of typical SBHBs is likely to slow down (or stall) at separations $\sim0.01$--1~pc. This conclusion was a consequence of the slow replenishment of stars available for scattering by the SBHB. As a result, the SBHBs would not merge within a Hubble time, which was termed the ``last parsec problem.'' Some recent works attempt to solve the last parsec problem either by proposing alternative mechanisms for orbital decay of SBHBs, such as interaction with a gaseous reservoir or close-range torques by a circumbinary disc (e.g., \citealt{Armitage2002, Escala2004, Dotti2007, Dotti2009, Hayasaki2007, Hayasaki2009, Cuadra2009, Lodato2009, Roedig2012, Roedig2014}). Other authors adopt more realistic stellar dynamical models (non-spherical, rotating galaxies; e.g., \citealt{Yu2002, Merritt2004, Khan2013, Vasiliev2015}) to show that coalescence of the binary is possible within a Hubble time.
Finding SBHBs at close separations (< 1 pc, the slowest phase of SBHB evolution, according to \citealt{Begelman1980}) will serve as an important test for both galaxy evolution models and stellar and gas dynamical models for SBHB orbital decay. During the late stages of their evolution, SBHBs are also sources of low-frequency (nHz to mHz) gravitational waves detectable by pulsar timing arrays \citep[PTAs; e.g.,][and references therein]{Manchester2013,Kramer2013,McLaughlin2013} and the upcoming Laser Interferometer Space Antenna \citep[LISA; e.g.,][and references therein]{Amaro2017,Danzmann2017}. Therefore, a great deal of effort has been directed recently towards observational searches of such objects.
Only widely separated active BHs \citep[such as NGC~6240, e.g.,][]{Komossa2003} can be resolved by direct imaging. Recent spectroscopic surveys and follow-up imaging studies (e.g., \citealt{Comerford2009a, Comerford2009b, Liu2010a, Liu2010b, Shen2011, Smith2010, Fu2011}) have discovered a significant number of AGNs with offset or {\it narrow}, double-peaked [O~III] emission lines, indicative of dual active nuclei in merging galaxies, typically with separation of a few kiloparsec and presumably not bound to each other. CSO~0402+379 (or 4C~37.11), with a separation of approximately 7~pc \citep[studied by radio interferometry][]{Rodriguez2006, Rodriguez2009, Bansal2017}, is the best candidate for a resolved and presumably bound binary known currently.
Bound SBHBs {\it at sub-parsec separations} cannot be spatially resolved with present methods, hence such close SBHB candidates are found on the basis of indirect evidence such as regular photometric variability or emission-line radial velocity curves suggestive of orbital motion. The candidate with the longest record of photometric monitoring is OJ287, whose long-term light curve shows regular outbursts at 12-year intervals \citep[e.g,][]{Valtonen2008}. Recently, \cite{Graham2015} noted that PG~1302$-$102 could be a close SBHB, due to the periodic behaviour of the light curve with an inferred period of a few years. Many additional examples of such behaviour have been reported by \cite{Liu2015}, \cite{Graham2015b} and \cite{Charisi2016}. However, \cite{Vaughan2016} have pointed out that the typical, stochastic quasar variability could appear periodic for a few cycles \citep[see also][]{Liu2016b}.
Radial velocity searches for SBHBs begin with the detection of displaced emission-line peaks from the broad-line region (BLR) i.e. gas that is bound to each individual BH and follows it in its orbit. The rationale is that orbital motion of the binary will cause the emission line peaks to shift periodically, resulting in displaced single- or double-peaked profiles, depending on whether one or both of the BHs in the SBHB have a BLR associated with it \citep{Begelman1980,Komberg1968}. \cite{Gaskell1984} noted that the two quasars 3C~227 and Mrk~668 had broad H$\beta$ emission lines shifted by 2,000--3,000$\;\mathrm{km\; s^{-1}}$, and suggested that they could be examples of SBHBs where only one BLR is observable. This interpretation fits in well with the scenario of \cite{Begelman1980}, where the BHs in the SBHBs spend most of their lifetimes at separations of 0.1--0.01~pc and periods $\sim 10^2\;$yr, which would lead to broad line velocity displacement on the order of $10^3\;\mathrm{km\; s^{-1}}$. But testing this hypothesis further is made difficult by the long orbital periods. Therefore, work to date in this direction has focused on using the radial velocity curves of the displaced peaks to obtain a {\it lower limit} on the total mass of the SBHB and using that limit to evaluate the plausibility of the SBHB hypothesis. The monitoring campaigns to date have targeted quasars with single and double displaced broad lines using similar techniques but time series of different durations for the two different families.
Quasars with double-peaked broad Balmer lines (see examples in Figure~\ref{fig:sample}; hereafter, double-peaked emitters) have been known and studied for some time \citep[e.g.,][and references therein]{Eracleous1994,Eracleous2003,Strateva2003}. The SBHB hypothesis is not the only hypothesis for their unusual line profiles. Other proposed explanations include emission from an accretion disc, a bipolar outflow, and an anisotropically-illuminated BLR \citep[see summary and critique in][and references therein]{Eracleous2009}. \cite{Halpern1988} tested the SBHB hypothesis using a 5-year radial velocity curve of Arp~102B but did not detect any change in the radial velocity. \cite{Gaskell1996} noted that the failure to detect such a change could be explained by large BH masses, and proposed that 3C~390.3 is also a SBHB in which both BLRs are visible. The observed drift of the displaced peaks in the spectrum of 3C~390.3 between 1968 and 1988 was consistent with this hypothesis, and a sinusoidal model fit to the data suggested a period of 300~yr and a total mass of $\sim 7.7 \times 10^9 \; \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi $. However, the sinusoidal trend did not continue past 1990, and \cite{Eracleous1997} rejected the SBHB interpretation of 3C~390.3, together with two other double-peaked emitters, 3C~332 and Arp~102B. The main argument was that the lower limits on the total masses, based on the best-fitting orbital parameters, were in excess of $ 10^{10} \; \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi $, and such large SBHB masses are difficult to reconcile with other observations. \cite{Liu2016} followed up with an examination of the SBHB hypothesis for 13 double-peaked emitters, many of which had 10--20~yr of observational data. They adopted a circular orbit model to fit the observed radial velocity curves, and derived lower limits on the total SBHB masses using the resulting best-fitting orbital parameters. The lower limits effectively ruled out the SBHB hypothesis for half of the targets, since the minimum masses are even greater than the most massive BHs measured so far, approximately $ 2 \times 10^{10} \; \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi $ \citep{McConnell2012, Thomas2016}. \cite{Inayoshi2016} also argue that BHs are prevented from growing above a few$\,\times 10^{10} \; \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi $ by small-scale accretion physics.
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{0.9\linewidth}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{List of Objects and Sources of Data}
\label{tab:targets}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccl}
\hline
\hline
& & Data Span & \\
Object & $z$\,\footnotemark[1] & (years) & References\,\footnotemark[2] \\
\hline
3C~59 & 0.1096 & 22 & 1, 2, 3 \\
PKS~0235+023 & 0.2072 & 24 & 1, 2 \\
NGC~1097 & 0.0042 & 21 & 4, 5\\
1E 0450$-$1817 & 0.0616 & 23 & 1, 3\\
Pictor~A & 0.0350 & 15 & 1, 3, 6\\
CBS~74 & 0.0919 & 14 & 1, 3, 7 \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & 0.0531 & 16 & 1, 3 \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & 0.1965 & 12 & 3\\
3C~227 & 0.0860 & 35 & 1, 2, 7, 8, 9 \\
Mrk~668 & 0.0768 & 24 & 2, 8, 10\\
3C~332 & 0.1510 & 25 & 1, 2, 7 \\
Arp~102B & 0.0244 & 32 & 1, 8 \\
PKS~1739+184 & 0.1859 & 23 & 1, 3 \\
3C~390.3 & 0.0555 & 41 & 2, 8, 11\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\footnotetext[1]{Redshifts from \citet{Eracleous2004}, except for NGC~1097, whose redshift was measured from the spectra of \cite{Storchi-Bergmann1993}.}
\footnotetext[2]{{\it References to sources of data:} (1) New observations presented in this paper, (2) \cite{Gezari2007}, (3)\cite{Lewis2010}, (4) \cite{Storchi-Bergmann2003} , (5) \cite{Schimoia2015}, (6) \cite{Gaskell1996}, (7) SDSS DR2, (8) \cite{Liu2016}, (9) \cite{Osterbrock1976}, (10) \cite{Shapovalova2013}, (11) \cite{Popovic2014}}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
Recently, large systematic searches for spectroscopic signatures of SBHBs have been made possible thanks to large sky surveys such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). The data from these surveys have yielded $\sim 100$ candidates with single-peaked Balmer lines that have large velocity displacements \citep{Tsalmantza2011, Eracleous2012, Decarli2013, Shen2013, Liu2014, Runnoe2015, Runnoe2017, Guo2019}. In the same spirit as the work on double-peaked emitters, these authors have attempted to assess the plausibility of the candidates by obtaining lower limits on the hypothesised SBHB masses. However, the available radial velocity curves are short and sparsely sampled, leading so far to mass limits that are not restrictive.
The analysis in previous works assumed circular orbits, motivated by the assessment of \cite{Begelman1980} that frictional drag will erase any eccentricity in the orbit. However, more recent simulations have shown that the eccentricity can be very sensitive to the initial conditions of the binary, as well as the properties of the surrounding stellar cluster \citep{Khan2012}, and there are a variety of orbital solutions that are highly eccentric at 0.1--0.01~pc separations. The eccentricity of the SBHB can also increase dramatically in counter-rotating systems (e.g., \citealt{Amaro2010, Sesana2011, Wang2014, Bockelmann2015}). Simulations also show that the SBHB can acquire a substantial eccentricity over time via interactions with inhomogeneities (i.e., dense clumps) in a circumbinary disc \citep[e.g.,][]{Roedig2011, Fiacconi2013, delValle2015}. Therefore, the goal of this work is to re-examine the binary hypothesis assuming more general, eccentric orbits by employing a more sophisticated fitting method than in our previous work. The introduction of additional model parameters (eccentricity, $e$, and argument of periapsis, $\omega$) will significantly enlarge the parameter space, and the wide variety of possible behaviours of the radial velocity curves could provide better fits for many of the targets. More importantly, using eccentric orbits may result in lower limits on the orbital period, hence the total mass of the hypothesized SBHBs and change the conclusions of previous studies. We utilise Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods to derive the entire probability distributions of all model parameters, instead of a single best-fitting solution (see Section~\ref{sec:simulation}). Thus, we are able to derive rigorous lower limits on the total masses from all possible solutions. This is an improvement compared to the lower limits derived by previous works that considered only deviations from the best-fitting models. Another new feature of our improved analysis is that it takes into account radial velocity jitter. Our targets include the 13 double-peaked emitters in \cite{Liu2016} plus another object, NGC~1097, which has similar Balmer line profiles and radial velocity curves spanning two decades. Half of the targets also have additional observations since \cite{Liu2016}, which serve to better constrain the models.
In addition to addressing the SBHB hypothesis, this work are also relevant to the broader question of the origin of double-peaked broad emission lines observed in some quasars. Since a number of alternative explanations have been considered \citep[see][and Section~\ref{sec:discussion} of this paper]{Eracleous2009}, testing and, potentially, disfavouring any one of the scenarios represents significant progress.
In Section~\ref{sec:observations} of this paper, we describe the data we use, including previously published data and new observations. In Section~\ref{sec:jitter}, we study radial velocity jitter and quantify its magnitude empirically. In Section~\ref{sec:fitting}, we describe our eccentric orbit model, our tests of the MCMC code, and our approach for incorporating jitter in the analysis. We then present our findings in Section~\ref{sec:results} and discuss the results in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.
\begin{table*}
\begin{minipage}{0.9\linewidth}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{New Observations and Radial Velocity Measurements}\label{tab:observations}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lllcc}
\hline
\hline
& Observation & Telescope and & $u_b$ (Blue) & $u_r$ (Red)\\
Object & Date (UT) & Instrument\,\footnotemark[2] & ($10^3$ km s$^{-1}$) & ($10^3$ km s$^{-1}$) \\
\hline
3C~59 & 2011/01/01 & HET+LRS & $-1.2 \pm 0.3$ & $4.8 \pm 0.2$ \\
& 2011/08/28 & HET+LRS & \dots & $4.8 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2011/10/25 & HET+LRS & \dots & $4.7 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2012/08/11 & HET+LRS & $-0.7 \pm 0.3$ & $4.8 \pm 0.5$\\
& 2014/08/29 & ARC 3.5m+DIS & $-0.6 \pm 0.2$ & $4.7 \pm 0.4$ \\
& & \\
PKS~0235+023 & 2011/01/27 & HET+LRS & $-4.6 \pm 0.1 $ & \dots \\
& 2011/08/27 & HET+LRS & $-4.7 \pm 0.1 $ & \dots \\
& 2011/10/26 & HET+LRS & $-4.7 \pm 0.1 $ & \dots \\
& 2014/08/29 & ARC 3.5m+DIS & $-4.0 \pm 0.1 $ & \dots \\
& & \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & 2017/12/13 & MDM 2.4m+OSMOS & $-5.4 \pm 0.8 $ & $4.2 \pm 0.6 $ \\
& & \\
Pictor~A & 2016/10/30 & Magellan Baade+MagE & $-5.0 \pm 2 $ & $4.0 \pm 2$ \\
& & \\
CBS~74 & 2011/01/01 & HET+LRS & $-1.2 \pm 0.2 $ & \dots \\
& 2011/10/25 & HET+LRS & \dots & $2.5 \pm 0.2$ \\
& & \\
PKS~0921$-$213\,\footnotemark[1] & 2009/11/20 & CTIO 1.5m+CSPEC & $-3.1 \pm 0.1 $ & $3.0 \pm 0.2$ \\
& 2010/03/18 & CTIO 1.5m+CSPEC & $-3.2 \pm 0.1 $ & $3.1 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2011/02/12 & CTIO 1.5m+CSPEC & $-2.7 \pm 0.1 $ & $3.0 \pm 0.1$ \\
& & \\
3C~227 & 2010/11/08 & HET+LRS & $-2.6 \pm 0.3 $ &\dots \\
& 2011/11/06 & HET+LRS & $-2.9 \pm 0.1 $ &\dots \\
& 2012/03/22 & HET+LRS & $-2.4 \pm 0.1 $ &\dots \\
& 2013/05/08 & HET+LRS \\
& & \\
Arp~102B & 2011/02/05 & HET+LRS & $-5.6 \pm 0.1 $ &\dots \\
& 2011/10/15 & HET+LRS & $-5.4 \pm 0.1 $ &\dots \\
& 2012/04/20 & HET+LRS & $-5.6 \pm 0.1 $ &\dots \\
& 2013/05/07 & HET+LRS & $-5.5 \pm 0.1 $ &\dots \\
& 2014/05/27 & APO 3.5m+DIS & $-5.8 \pm 0.1 $ &\dots \\
& & \\
3C~332 & 2011/01/30 & HET+LRS & $-5.1 \pm 0.1 $ & $4.3 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2011/05/21 & HET+LRS & $-5.3 \pm 0.1 $ & $4.11 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2012/04/15 & HET+LRS & $-5.7 \pm 0.1 $ & $3.86 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2014/05/05 & ARC 3.5m+DIS & $-4.4 \pm 0.1 $ & \dots \\
& & \\
PKS~1739+184 & 2011/05/23 & HET+LRS & $-1.9 \pm 0.5 $ & $3.3 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2012/09/18 & HET+LRS & \dots & $2.9 \pm 0.2$ \\
& 2013/05/08 & HET+LRS & $-2.2\pm 0.5 $ & $3.1 \pm 0.1$ \\
& 2014/05/27 & APO 3.5m+DIS & $-2.6 \pm 0.1 $ & $2.3 \pm 0.2$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\footnotetext[1]{The observations of PKS~0921$-$213 were part of two
intensive monitoring campaigns carried out during
2009/11/07--2010/05/29 and 2011/01/01--2011/06/27. As we explain in
Section~\ref{sec:observations}, we report here selected measurements
from data taken in those two campaigns.}
\footnotetext[2]{See Section~\ref{sec:observations} for details of the telescopes and instruments.}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\section{Previously Published Data and New Observations}\label{sec:observations}
We compiled radial velocity measurements for 14 AGNs from \citet{Eracleous1997}, \citet{Gezari2007}, \citet{Lewis2010}, \citet{Storchi-Bergmann2003}, \citet{Schimoia2012, Schimoia2015}, and \citet{Liu2016}. We supplemented the data collected from the literature with new measurements from spectra obtained from 2009 to 2017, as we describe in detail below. The objects included in this study are listed in Table~\ref{tab:targets} along with their redshifts, the span of the radial velocity measurements, and the sources of the data. Typically, the length of the monitoring period for each object is 20--30~yr.
\begin{figure*}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./3C332.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./PKS1739.pdf}
}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./Arp102b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./CBS74.pdf}
}
\caption{Sample spectra taken with the HET and the ARC 3.5m illustrating a variety of line profiles of objects in our sample. The log of new observations is given in Table~\ref{tab:observations} and the instruments and data reductions are described in Section~\ref{sec:observations} of the text.}
\label{fig:sample}
\end{figure*}
All the new spectra presented here cover the H$\alpha$ lines of the respective targets. Examples of spectra are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sample}. Most of the spectra were taken with the Low-Resolution Spectrograph (LRS) on the Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET) between 2010 and 2013, and with the red channel of the Double Imaging Spectrograph (DIS) of the Astrophysical Research Consortium (ARC) 3.5m telescope at Apache Point Observatory in 2014. PKS~0921$-$213 was observed with the Cassegrain Spectrograph (CSPEC) on the 1.5m telescope at Cerro Tololo Interamerical Observatory (CTIO) as part of two intensive monitoring campaigns, at a rate of approximately once every two weeks. The first campaign lasted from November 2009 to May 2010 and the second one from February to June 2011. The spectrum of Pictor~A was taken with the Magellan Echellette Spectrograph \citep[MagE;][]{Marshall2008} on the Magellan Baade telescope in 2016 and the spectrum of 1E~0450.3-1817 was taken with the Ohio State Multi-Object Spectrograph \citep[OSMOS;][]{Martini2011} on the 2.4m Hiltner telescope at the MDM Observatory in 2018. The log of new observations is given in Table~\ref{tab:observations}.
The HET+LRS spectra were taken with the G3 grism through a 1\farcs0 or 1\farcs5 slit. They cover the wavelength range 6250--9100~\AA\ with a resolution of 4.2~\AA\ when using the 1\farcs0 slit and or 6.3~\AA\ when using the 1\farcs5 slit. The ARC 3.5m+DIS red-channel spectra were taken with the R300 grating through a 1\farcs5 slit. They cover the spectral range 5150--9850~\AA\ with a spectral resolution of 6.0~\AA. The CTIO 1.5m+CSPEC spectra of PKS~0921$-$213 were taken with grating 35 through a 1\farcs8 slit. They cover the wavelength range 6235--7467~\AA\ with a spectral resolution of 3.5~\AA. The spectrum of 1E~0450.3-1817 was taken with the red VPH grism through a 1\farcs2 slit. It covers the wavelength range 5263--10888~\AA\ with a resolution of 3.6~\AA. The spectrum of Pictor~A was taken through a 1\farcs0 slit and covers the wavelength range 3060-8288~\AA\ in orders 8–20 with a spectral resolution of 0.24--0.57~\AA. The H$\alpha$ line fell in the 9th order where the spectral resolution was 0.51~\AA.
All the spectra, except for the Magellan spectrum of Pictor A, were reduced and calibrated using common procedures for long-slit spectra, as described in Section~5.1 of \citet{Eracleous2012}. The spectrum of Pictor~A was reduced with the MagE pipeline available in {\tt CarPy} \citep{Kelson2000,Kelson2003}. The first steps included bias subtraction, flat-field division, sky subtraction, scattered light subtraction, and extraction of raw spectra. The wavelength calibration was based on ThAr arc lamp spectra. The derivation of the wavelength scale used 910 arc lines over the entire spectrum, including 60 in the same order as H$\alpha$. The root-mean-squared residuals of the polynomial fit to the wavelength-pixel number relation were less than 0.1 pixel.
To measure the velocity of a peak in the new H$\alpha$ line profiles we fitted the region around it with a Gaussian in order to get the centroid. For this exercise selected fitting windows encompassing each peak that were 50--100~\AA\ wide. We repeated the measurement 500 times, varying our choice of fitting window, and took the average to be the best estimate of the peak wavelength and the standard deviation of all the measurements to be the measurement uncertainty. In spectra where the red or blue peak are difficult to discern by eye (e.g., PKS~1739+184 and CBS~74 in Figure~\ref{fig:sample}), we performed a double Gaussian fit over both regions and determined the two centres simultaneously.
In the specific case of PKS~0921$-$213, we measure the velocities from all spectra, but only include a subset of the measurements, as we are mainly interested in the long-term behaviour of the radial velocity curve. In doing so, we avoid the effects of short-term jitter (on time-scales of months or less), which could be caused by incorporating numerous data points within a short observing window; long-term velocity variations, on time-scales of years or more, are meant to be described by our orbital model, which we describe in \S\ref{sec:jitter}). We follow the same approach in order to select data for the radial velocity curve of NGC~1097, which was also sampled very frequently. The new velocity measurements are given in Table~\ref{tab:observations}. The radial velocity curves are presented and discussed in Section~\ref{sec:results}.
\section{Velocity Jitter}\label{sec:jitter}
Before we fit the binary model over the observed radial velocity curves, we need to take into account {\it radial velocity jitter}, which we define as small-amplitude fluctuations in the radial velocity curve on time-scales of order a year or less. Jitter can be caused by intrinsic variations in one single BLR that occur on the light-crossing or dynamical time-scale. This view of jitter is bolstered by the values of these time-scales, which we estimate below. Additional corroboration comes from reverberation mapping campaigns that have observed such radial velocity jitter in response to fluctuations in the continuum. Analysis of the data from such campaigns indicates that the velocities of the peaks of the broad Balmer lines fluctuate by a few hundred $\mathrm{km\; s^{-1}}$ over time intervals of 1--6 months (see \citealt{Barth2015} and \citealt{Guo2019}).
To evaluate the time-scales on which we could expect radial velocity jitter in our targets, we estimate the light-crossing and dynamical time-scales of a single broad-line region. We begin with the {\it characteristic} size of the BLR from the empirical radius-luminosity relationship by \cite{Bentz2013}, which we re-cast as:
\begin{equation}
\log\left({R_{BLR}\over 10\;\textrm{lt-day}}\right) = 0.527 + 0.533 \log\left[\lambda L_{\lambda}(5100\,\textrm{\AA})\over10^{44}\;\textrm{erg\,s}^{-1}\right] \; .
\label{eq:rblr}
\end{equation}
In the above equation, $\lambda L_{\lambda}(5100\,\textrm{\AA})$ is the monochromatic continuum luminosity at a rest-frame wavelength of 5100~\AA, which we estimate from the $V$-band magnitude of each object. For the range of $\lambda L_{\lambda}(5100\,\textrm{\AA})$ for our objects, $4.3\times 10^{43}$--$6.7\times 10^{44}\;\textrm{erg\;s}^{-1}$, we obtain light-crossing times (i.e., values of $R_{BLR}/c$) of 21--92~days by direct application of equation~(\ref{eq:rblr}). But we must also consider that the observed $V$-band magnitude of an object represents the sum of the luminosities of the two accreting BHs, which we take to be comparable since the strengths of the peaks of the double-peaked Balmer lines are similar. Therefore, the value of $\lambda L_{\lambda}(5100\,\textrm{\AA})$ that enters in equation~(\ref{eq:rblr}) should be a factor of 2 smaller and the resulting value of $R_{BLR}$ of each individual BH should be approximately 1.45 times smaller, leading to a range of light-crossing times of 14--64 days. Moreover, the value of $R_{BLR}$ is likely to be even smaller than that obtained above, as the BLR around each BH would be truncated by tides from the binary companion \citep[see discussion in Section~4 of][and Section~3.1 of \citealt{Nguyen2016}]{Runnoe2017}.
The dynamical time-scale at $R_{BLR}$ can then be estimated from
\begin{equation}
t_{dyn}(R_{BLR}) = 1.14\,\left(R_{BLR}\over 10\;\textrm{lt-day}\right)^{3/2}
\left(M_\bullet\over 10^8\,\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi\right)^{-1/2}\, \textrm{yr,}
\label{eq:tdyn}
\end{equation}
where $M_\bullet$ is the mass of the BH. To get the range of $t_{dyn}(R_{BLR})$ appropriate for our targets we explore a range of BH masses: we set a lower mass limit by assuming a maximum Eddington ratio of 0.1 and adopt an upper limit of $10^{10} \; \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$. Equation~(\ref{eq:tdyn}) then yields $t_{dyn}$ between 8 months and 7~yr for all our targets, before considering tidal truncation of the BLR. Taking tidal truncation into account, we conclude that $t_{dyn}$ is between a few months and a few years and comparable to or slightly longer than the typical time intervals between our observations. This suggests that reverberation or dynamical processes in a single BLR are plausible causes of jitter in the radial velocity curves of our targets.
With the above considerations in mind it is plausible to separate velocity variations into two broad families, the (fast) jitter observed on time-scales of order a year or less and slower variations observed on time-scales of several years or more. The latter family includes the slow variations or undulations that we aim to use to test the SBHB hypothesis. The former family is a source of noise for our purposes so we seek ways of characterising its properties and dealing with its effects while we try to fit orbital models to the slow variations. In the remainder of this section we describe how we characterise jitter empirically for our particular objects and in Section~\ref{sec:fitting} we describe the statistical methods we use to deal with the effects of jitter while fitting models to the radial velocity curves.
To characterise jitter empirically, we fit the radial velocity curves with a low-order polynomial, and ascribe the departure of the data points from the polynomial fit to jitter. The polynomial is intended to follow the undulations of the radial velocity curves on times scales longer than the dynamical time-scale of the BLR. After experimenting with fits to the well-sampled radial velocity curves of a few objects we find that polynomials of third order or higher do indeed accomplish this goal. The standard deviation of the data about the best fit decreases as we increase the polynomial order but only up to third order; as we increase the polynomial order further, the standard deviation does not decrease. As an illustration of the method, we plot the standard deviation of the fit residuals (the jitter) for the red and blue peaks of 3C~390.3 as a function of the polynomial order in Figure~\ref{fig:jitter}. The jitter does not change significantly for either peak once the polynomial order reaches three. We thus choose to fit the velocity curves of all our targets with a third order polynomial as it can sufficiently describe the long-term shape of the radial velocity curve. Moreover, the polynomial has the ability to fit the undulations of the radial velocity curve without mimicking the orbital model that we wish to fit eventually with the result that the jitter that we determine is not equivalent to the deviations measured relative to the orbital model. We show an example of a 3rd-order polynomial fit to the radial velocity curves of 3C~390.3 in Figure~\ref{fig:jitter}.
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{0.9\linewidth}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Jitter Amplitudes}
\label{tab:jitter}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\noalign{\vskip 4pt}
\hline
\hline
\noalign{\vskip 2 pt}
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{Jitter (km~s$^{-1}$)\,\footnotemark[1]} \\
\noalign{\vskip -6 pt}
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{\hrulefill} \\
Object & Red Peak & Blue Peak \\
\hline
3C 332 & 420 & 640 \\
1E 0450.3$-$1817 & 590 & 610 \\
Arp 102B & 160 & 470 \\
3C 59 & 250 & 110 \\
CBS 74 & 190 & 310 \\
PKS 1020$-$103 & 220 & 080 \\
PKS 0921$-$213 & 170 & 160 \\
3C 390.3 & 210 & 580 \\
PKS 1739+184 & 480 & 230 \\
Pictor A & 470 & 510 \\
Mrk 668 & 190 & 490 \\
NGC 1097 & 230 & 280 \\
PKS 0235+023 & 280 & 310 \\
3C 227 & 330 & 520 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\footnotetext[1]{Standard deviation of the radial velocity values relative to a 3rd order polynomial fit to the radial velocity curve of each peak. See details in Section~\ref{sec:jitter}.}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
We find that the jitter distribution for the well-sampled radial velocity curves of 3C~390.3 and Arp~102B is well represented by a Gaussian. This is also the case for the combined jitter distribution for all objects in our sample. Typically, the magnitude of jitter (i.e., the standard deviation of its distribution) is of order a few hundred $\;\mathrm{km\; s^{-1}}$, i.e., a factor of 2--3 greater than the measurement uncertainty. These findings agree with the conclusions of \citet{Guo2019} on the shape and width of the jitter distribution caused by reverberation and they agree with the magnitude of jitter measured in specific objects by \citet{Barth2015}. Since the jitter distribution is Gaussian we treat jitter in the fitting process described in the next section by adding it in quadrature with the uncertainty in individual measurements, effectively reducing the value of $\chi^2$ and resulting in a more conservative lower limit on the SBHB masses (see Section~\ref{sec:fitting}). We also model jitter as a Gaussian process, as we describe in detail in Section~\ref{sec:gaussproc}, in order to test the validity of the simple approach and we get similar results.
In view of the above results, we henceforth make the assumption that the jitter properties are similar among the objects in our sample i.e. that the distribution can be described by a Gaussian. Since some targets (e.g., Pictor~A, 3C~227, PKS~1020$-$103) have sparsely-sampled radial velocity curves, this approach is straightforward to implement in practice: by fitting the radial velocity curves with a cubic polynomial and finding the standard deviation of the residuals, we determine the magnitude of the jitter for that object. The jitter values measured for each object in this manner are listed in Table~\ref{tab:jitter}. We also expect that the long-term radial velocity variations (variations on time-scales much longer than the time interval between successive measurements) are taken out by the polynomial fit and that the jitter that we measure is not influenced by any of the long-term variations that can be interpreted as the result of orbital motion.
\begin{figure*}
\hbox to 15cm{
\hskip -5cm
\vbox{
\centerline{\includegraphics[height=5.8cm]{jitter_polyfit_3C390_3_ver8.pdf}}
\centerline{\includegraphics[height=5.8cm]{3C390-3-jitter-std-paper-ver9.pdf}}
}
\hskip -4cm
\includegraphics[height=12.4cm]{jitter_dist_3C390_3_ver5.pdf}
}
\caption{Illustration of the method used to determine the jitter properties, described in Section~\ref{sec:jitter} of the text. (a) Fits to the radial velocity curves of the red and blue peaks of the H$\alpha$ line of 3C~390.3 with 3rd-order polynomials. The scatter of the data about the fits makes up jitter that is discussed in Section~\ref{sec:jitter}. (b) The standard deviation of jitter as a function of polynomial order for the red and blue radial velocity curves of 3C~390.3. There is no significant change in the standard deviation when the polynomial order increases above three. (c) The corresponding jitter (i.e., residual) distribution and Gaussian fit, showing that the Gaussian is a good description of the observed distribution.}
\label{fig:jitter}
\end{figure*}
\section{Methodology for Fitting Radial Velocity Curves}\label{sec:fitting}
\subsection{Orbital Model}
\label{sec:model}
We adopt a model of eccentric binary orbits, in contrast to \cite{Liu2016} and earlier works that adopted circular orbits, in order to explore the full parameter space of possible solutions. Thus, our model contains six independent parameters: the (projected) radial velocity at pericentre of the object that produces the red peak (the receding object), $u_{r,pe}$, the orbital period, $P$, the epoch/time of pericentre passage, the phase offset, $t_0$ (defined in equation~\ref{eq:eccanom}), the mass ratio, $q$, the eccentricity, $e$, and the argument of periapsis, $\omega$. For convenience, we define $q \equiv M_r/M_b $, where $M$ is the mass of one of the BHs and the subscripts `$r$' and `$b$' denote the object producing the red and blue peak, respectively (i.e., the receding and approaching object, respectively). With this definition, $q$ can be larger or smaller than unity depending on which peak corresponds to the primary (more massive) BH.
To calculate $u_r$ and $u_b$ in the model, we begin with the radial velocity equation from Keplerian dynamics:
\begin{equation}
u_r = \left[\frac{GM_{tot}}{a(1 - e^2)}\right]^{1/2} {\sin{\textit{i}}\over 1+q}\, \left[ \cos(\omega + f) + e\cos\,\omega \right]
\label{eq:ur_dyn}
\end{equation}
where $\textit{i}$ is the inclination angle of the orbital plane (i.e., the angle between the line of sight and the normal to that plane) and $M_{tot} \equiv M_r + M_b$ is the total mass of the SBHB. We solve for $f$, the true anomaly, numerically from $t_0$, $P$, and $e$ using the set of equations:
\begin{equation}
\tan^2{\left(\frac{f}{2}\right)} = \frac{1+e}{1-e} \tan^2{\left(\frac{E}{2}\right)}
\quad {\rm and} \quad
E - e\sin{E} = \frac{2\pi}{P} \left( t - t_0 \right)
\label{eq:eccanom}
\end{equation}
where $E$ is the eccentric anomaly. Since the projected velocity at pericentre, $u_{r,pe}$, is simply the solution of equation~(\ref{eq:ur_dyn}) for the case $f = 0$, we rewrite $u_r$ in terms of $u_{r,pe}$ as follows
\begin{equation}
u_r = u_{r,pe}\frac{ \cos(\omega + f) + e\cos\,\omega }{\left( 1 + e \right) \cos\,\omega}
\label{eq:ur_geom}
\end{equation}
We can then determine $u_b$ from $u_r$ through the simple relation $ u_b = -q u_r $.
To compare models and data, we adopt the $\chi^2 $ statistic as our likelihood function:
\begin{equation}
\chi^2
= \sum_{k=1}^{N_r} \frac{\left[u_r^{obs}(t_k) - u_r(t_k)\right]^2}{[\sigma_r^{obs}(t_k)]^2}
+ \sum_{k=1}^{N_b} \frac{\left[u_b^{obs}(t_k) - u_b(t_k)\right]^2}{[\sigma_b^{obs}(t_k)]^2} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $u_r^{obs}(t_k)$ and $u_b^{obs}(t_k)$ are the observed radial velocities of the red and blue peaks at time $t_k$, respectively, and $\sigma_r^{obs}(t_k)$ and $\sigma_b^{obs}(t_k)$ are the corresponding uncertainties. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:jitter}, we can account for jitter in our model by increasing these uncertainties accordingly. In Section~\ref{sec:results} we report results of simulations with and without jitter.
\subsection{Exploration of Parameter Space}
\label{sec:simulation}
We use an MCMC method to explore parameter space efficiently and find the probability distributions of all orbital parameters. We also use the fundamental model parameters to compute some of the physical parameters of the system, such as the total mass and the decay time of the orbit by gravitational radiation, and examine their distributions as well. We employ the code \textit{emcee}, a Python implementation of Goodman-Weare affine invariant Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) Ensemble sampler by \cite{Foreman-Mackey2013}. The inputs to the code are the data, the prior distributions of the model parameters, the likelihood function, and initial positions of the random walkers. The code evaluates the likelihood of different solutions, then performs jumps and explores the parameter space for a specified number of steps, before returning as outputs the posterior distributions of model parameters.
For many of our model parameters, we adopted a Jeffreys prior, as it is non-informative and thus presents the least bias in the parameter spaces. The Jeffreys prior prescribes a uniform distribution for location parameters ($t_0$, $\omega$, $e$) and an inverse distribution (uniform in log space) for scale parameters ($u_{r,pe}$, $P$). The mass ratio, $q$, can be calculated as $q = u_b^{obs}(t_k) / u_r^{obs}(t_k)$ for any observation $k$ in which $u_r$ and $u_b$ are measured simultaneously. However, there is a noticeable spread in the observed values of $q$ (most notably in 1E~0450.3$-$1817, where $q$ spans the range from 0.5 to 2.0). In order to be consistent with the binary hypothesis, we attribute the spread to uncertainties in measurements or jitter (see Section~\ref{sec:jitter}), and set the prior for $q$ as a Gaussian distribution, whose mean and standard deviation are determined from the sample of $q$ values for a particular object. The possible values for $u_{r,pe}$ span the range from 0 to $c$, the speed of light. For $P$, we set the lower limit to be $T$, the length of observation; if the binary has completed one revolution within the observation window, both the radial velocity curves for the red and blue peak would have to cross over the zero-point, which is not the case for any of our objects. Since there is no hard constraint on the upper limit on $P$, we set it to be the age of the universe (14~Gyr). We also note that changing the upper limit by one or two orders of magnitude does not appear to affect the posterior distributions of model parameters. The ranges for $t_0$, $e$, and $\omega$ are $\left( 0, P \right) $, $\left( 0, 1 \right)$, and $\left( 0, 2\pi \right)$, respectively. We summarise our choice of priors in Table~\ref{tab:prior}.
\begin{table}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Prior distributions of model parameters $^a$}
\label{tab:prior}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
\hline
& & Lower & Upper \\
Paramater & Distribution & Bound & Bound \\
\hline
$u_{r,pe}$ \dotfill & Inverse & 0 & $c$\\
$P $ (yr) \dotfill & Inverse & T & $ 1.4 \times 10^{10} $\\
$t_0$ (yr) \dotfill & Uniform & 0 & P\\
$q$ \dotfill & Gaussian & 0 & ...\\
$e$ \dotfill & Uniform & 0 & 1 \\
$\omega$ (rad) \dotfill & Uniform & $ 0 $ & $2 \pi $ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[1] \footnotetext[1]{See discussion in Section~\ref{sec:simulation} of the text.}
\end{tablenotes}
\end{table}
To run a simulation we initialise a cluster of 1000 random walkers, slightly perturbed from an initial guess for their position ($\delta{Q}/Q \sim 10^{-4}$, where $Q$ is any one of the parameters). We then perform the burn-in phase, where we run the simulations for enough iterations so that the walkers settle into their posterior distributions. Finally, we reset the MCMC chain, run the simulations for 500 further steps, and collect the posterior distributions from the positions of the walkers in the 6-dimensional parameter space.
For each set of parameters that we obtain at the end of a single fit in an MCMC simulation, we calculate the corresponding total mass of the SBHB, which is the main parameter of interest, using
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{tot} = 1.42 \times 10^9 \left(1+q\over \cos\omega\,\sin i\right)^3 \left( \frac{1-e}{1+e} \right)^{\frac{3}{2}} \nonumber \\
\times \left( \frac{P}{300 \, yr} \right) \left( \frac{u_{r,pe}}{5000 \, \mathrm{km\, s^{-1}}} \right)^3\; \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi
\label{eq:mtot}
\end{eqnarray}
The above expression is obtained by setting $f=0$ and $u_r=u_{r,pe}$ in equation (\ref{eq:ur_dyn}) and then expressing $a$ in terms of the orbital period via $(P/2\pi)^2=a^3/GM_{tot}$. All of the parameters in equation~(\ref{eq:mtot}), except for the inclination angle, are obtained from the fit to the radial velocity curve. Since the inclination angle is unknown, we set $\sin i=1$ to get a conservative lower limit on $M_{tot}$ and note that, if $i < 28^\circ$ this limit would be raised by an order of magnitude or more (see also Section~\ref{sec:discussion}). From the posterior {\it cumulative} mass distribution $\psi (>\! M)$, we define $M_{x\%}$ such that $\psi(>\! M_{x\%}) = x \% $. Figure~\ref{fig:mass_cumm} shows as an example the cumulative mass distribution $\psi (>\! M)$ of 3C~332. The dashed lines locate $M_{99\%}$, the 99th percentile lower limit on the total mass of the BHs.
It is essential that the burn-in phase is sufficiently long, otherwise the posterior distributions would still be biased by our choice of priors. To that end, for each object we carry out tests using burn-in phases of different lengths, spanning three orders of magnitude, and evaluate how the parameter of interest varies with the number of burn-in steps. We also vary the initial parameter guesses to ensure that the result does not depend on these choices. We then determine and plot the values of $M_{99\%}$ across multiple simulations to evaluate whether the above requirements have been satisfied. As an illustration, we present in Figure~\ref{fig:burnin_steps} the results of the MCMC simulations for 3C~332. For all three different choices of initial period ($10^2$, $10^3$, and $10^4\;$yr), $M_{99\%}$ eventually converges to approximately the same value at $\sim 5 \times 10^{4}$ burn-in steps. The convergence to the same period after a large number of burn-in steps is a universal behavior among all our objects, which leads us to adopt $10^5$ burn-in steps for all of them.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{3C332-mass-cumulative-ver7.pdf}
\caption{The cumulative mass distribution, $\psi (>\! M)$, of 3C~332. The dashed lines locate $M_{99\%}$, the 99th percentile lower limit on the total mass of the BHs. See discussion in Section~\ref{sec:simulation} of the text.}
\label{fig:mass_cumm}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{3C332_M99_vs_Burnsteps_ver9.pdf}
\caption{The results of the MCMC simulations for 3C~332. For all three different choices of initial guess period ($10^2$, $10^3$, and $10^4\;$yr), $M_{99\%}$ eventually converge to the same value at $\sim 5 \times 10^{4}$ burn-in steps. The convergence to the same period after a large number of burn-in steps is a universal behaviour among all our objects.}
\label{fig:burnin_steps}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Modeling Jitter as a Gaussian Process}\label{sec:gaussproc}
In order to test the simple approach for incorporating jitter described in earlier sections, we also model it as a Gaussian process, using the code \textit{george}, developed by \cite{Ambikasaran2014}. This approach introduces a covariance matrix into our model. Our primary motivation for the tests described here is not to find the best description of jitter but to assess whether the choice of jitter description influences our results. Since there is no established statistical or physical description of velocity jitter in in quasar broad emission lines, we choose the often used Matern-3/2 covariance function to describe the covariance matrix:
\begin{equation}
C_{3/2}(d) = a \left( 1 + \frac{\sqrt{3}d}{ \tau} \right) \exp \left( - \frac{\sqrt{3}d} {\tau}\right)
\label{eq:matern}
\end{equation}
where $d = \left| t_i - t_j \right|$ is the time interval between two observations, and $a$ and $\tau$ are the amplitude and characteristic time-scale of the Gaussian process, respectively. The Matern-3/2 covariance function is commonly used to define the statistical covariance between measurements made at two different times that are separated from each other by a time interval (or ``distance'') $d$ \citep{Rasmussen2006}. As shown in equation~(\ref{eq:matern}), two additional parameters describing the Gaussian process need to be included into our MCMC model: the amplitude, $a$, and the characteristic time-scale of the process, $\tau$.
To evaluate the degree of agreement between different models, we perform fits for a variety of test cases. Since the simulations involving Gaussian process models are computationally ``expensive'' we only carry out the tests for a subset of the objects in our collection. The test cases we have computed are listed below and the results of the tests are reported in Section~\ref{sec:results}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
In the first set of tests, we assign fixed values for both the amplitude and the characteristic time-scale. We set the amplitude to be the standard deviation of the jitter, and the characteristic time-scale to be 1 year. We choose 1 year because this is typical of the dynamical time-scale, the time-scale on which we expect the jitter to appear (see discussion in Section~\ref{sec:jitter}).
\item \label{it:fixed}
In our second set of tests, we prescribe the prior distribution of $\tau $ as a Gaussian, centred at 1 year with a standard deviation of 0.5 year.
\item
In the third set, we modify our prior distribution of $\tau $ to be a Gaussian centred at 5~yr with a standard deviation of 3~yr to more cover more thoroughly both the regimes of the light-crossing time-scale and the dynamical time-scale.
\item
In the next set of tests, we proceed to relax also our constraint on the amplitude, allowing it to vary as a Gaussian as well. We set the amplitude to be the amplitude of the jitter listed in Table~\ref{tab:jitter}, and the standard deviation to be half of that value.
\item
In our last set of tests, we employ a different covariance function, the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck covariance function, another stationary process that describes Brownian motion \citep{Rasmussen2006}:
\begin{equation}
C_{OU}(d) = a \exp \left( - \frac{d} {\tau}\right)
\label{eq:brownian}
\end{equation}
Where $d$, $a$, and $\tau$ are defined as in equation~(\ref{eq:matern}). The values of $a$ and $\tau$ are the same as in case~\ref{it:fixed}.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Results} \label{sec:results}
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Orbital Parameters Corresponding to 99\% Lower Limits on BH Masses: Circular Orbits, No Jitter}
\label{tab:circnojit}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{9pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabu}{lrrrrrrrr}
\noalign{\vskip 4pt}
\hline
\hline
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$u_{r,pe}$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$P$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t_0$} &
&
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\omega$} &
&
\\
Object &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$q$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$e$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(rad)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( M_{min} / \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( T_{gr}/{\rm yr} \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} \\
\noalign{\vskip 2pt}
\hline
3C~59 & 4470 ~~ & 160 & 10 & 0.48 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.3 ~~~~ & 8.6 ~~~ \\
PKS~0235+023 & 3580 ~~ & 140 & 20 & 1.25 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.5 ~~~~ & 8.4 ~~~ \\
NGC~1097 & 3770 ~~ & 380 & 20 & 1.27 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.7 ~~~~ & 7.5 ~~~ \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & 3270 ~~ & 150 & 20 & 1.58 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.0 ~~~~ & 7.4 ~~~ \\
Pictor~A & 6010 ~~ & 1460 & 30 & 0.95 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.5 ~~~~ & 6.9 ~~~ \\
CBS~74 & 3790 ~~ & 160 & 20 & 0.44 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.4 ~~~~ & 8.4 ~~~ \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & 2900 ~~ & 170 & 30 & 0.40 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.1 ~~~~ & 8.9 ~~~ \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & 6640 ~~ & 15420 & 120 & 1.40 & ... & ... ~~ & 10.4 ~~~~ & 8.8 ~~~ \\
3C~227 & 1210 ~~ & 180 & 20 & 1.45 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.4 ~~~~ & 9.7 ~~~ \\
Mrk~668 & 2630 ~~ & 780 & 30 & 1.38 & ... & ... ~~ & 10.6 ~~~~ & 7.0 ~~~ \\
3C~332 & 9290 ~~ & 990 & 50 & 0.76 & ... & ... ~~ & 10.2 ~~~~ & 6.4 ~~~ \\
Arp~102B &10160 ~~ & 2060 & 120 & 1.08 & ... & ... ~~ & 11.9 ~~~~ & 7.2 ~~~ \\
PKS~1739+184 & 3640 ~~ & 4720 & 40 & 0.73 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.7 ~~~~ & 8.3 ~~~ \\
3C~390.3 & 6110 ~~ & 3420 & 480 & 0.77 & ... & ... ~~ & 12.3 ~~~~ & 7.6 ~~~ \\
\hline
\end{tabu}
\end{center}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[1] \footnotemark[1] These values assume $\sin i=1$. See equation~(\ref{eq:mtot}) and discussion in the first paragraph of Section~\ref{sec:results}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Orbital Parameters Corresponding to 99\% Lower Limits on BH Masses: Circular Orbits, With Jitter}
\label{tab:circjit}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{9pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabu}{lrrrrrrrr}
\noalign{\vskip 4pt}
\hline
\hline
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$u_{r,pe}$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$P$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t_0$} &
&
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\omega$} &
&
\\
Object &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$q$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$e$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(rad)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( M_{min} / \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( T_{gr}/{\rm yr} \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} \\
\noalign{\vskip 2pt}
\hline
3C~59 & 4530 ~~ & 190 & 30 & 0.52 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.1 ~~~~ & 8.8 ~~~ \\
PKS~0235+023 & 3460 ~~ & 130 & 20 & 1.18 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.4 ~~~~ & 8.5 ~~~ \\
NGC~1097 & 3720 ~~ & 350 & 10 & 1.31 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.5 ~~~~ & 7.3 ~~~ \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & 3310 ~~ & 170 & 40 & 1.61 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.8 ~~~~ & 7.5 ~~~ \\
Pictor~A & 5880 ~~ & 1390 & 20 & 0.98 & ... & ... ~~ & 9.5 ~~~~ & 7.1 ~~~ \\
CBS~74 & 3750 ~~ & 180 & 30 & 0.42 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.2 ~~~~ & 8.6 ~~~ \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & 2970 ~~ & 160 & 20 & 0.38 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.8 ~~~~ & 9.2 ~~~ \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & 6490 ~~ & 13380 & 100 & 1.42 & ... & ... ~~ & 10.0 ~~~~ & 8.6 ~~~ \\
3C~227 & 1190 ~~ & 190 & 20 & 1.51 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.3 ~~~~ & 9.9 ~~~ \\
Mrk~668 & 2730 ~~ & 810 & 50 & 1.35 & ... & ... ~~ & 10.3 ~~~~ & 7.2 ~~~ \\
3C~332 & 8860 ~~ & 950 & 40 & 0.79 & ... & ... ~~ & 10.1 ~~~~ & 6.1 ~~~ \\
Arp~102B &10040 ~~ & 2110 & 90 & 1.11 & ... & ... ~~ & 11.4 ~~~~ & 7.4 ~~~ \\
PKS~1739+184 & 3570 ~~ & 4690 & 50 & 0.68 & ... & ... ~~ & 8.6 ~~~~ & 8.2 ~~~ \\
3C~390.3 & 5980 ~~ & 3530 & 440 & 0.81 & ... & ... ~~ & 11.9 ~~~~ & 7.8 ~~~ \\
\hline
\end{tabu}
\end{center}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[1] \footnotemark[1] These values assume $\sin i=1$. See equation~(\ref{eq:mtot}) and discussion in the first paragraph of Section~\ref{sec:results}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Orbital Parameters Corresponding to 99\% Lower Limits on BH Masses: Eccentric Orbits, No Jitter}
\label{tab:eccnojit}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{9pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabu}{lrrrrrrrr}
\noalign{\vskip 4pt}
\hline
\hline
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$u_{r,pe}$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$P$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t_0$} &
&
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\omega$} &
&
\\
Object &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$q$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$e$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(rad)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( M_{min} / \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( T_{gr}/{\rm yr} \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} \\
\noalign{\vskip 2pt}
\hline
3C~59 & 4500 ~~ & 240 & 40 & 0.49 & 0.25 & $-$0.11 ~~ & 9.0 ~~~~ & 9.2 ~~~ \\
PKS~0235+023 & 4370 ~~ & 22200 & 30 & 1.36 & 0.97 & $-$0.16 ~~ & 9.1 ~~~~ & 10.3 ~~~ \\
NGC~1097 & 4280 ~~ & 340 & 30 & 1.21 & 0.63 & $-$2.88 ~~ & 9.2 ~~~~ & 9.3 ~~~ \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & 1940 ~~ & 8370 & 30 & 1.48 & 0.97 & 2.03 ~~ & 9.3 ~~~~ & 9.4 ~~~ \\
Pictor~A & 6540 ~~ & 32420 & 20 & 0.99 & 0.99 & $-$3.14 ~~ & 9.0 ~~~~ & 9.4 ~~~ \\
CBS~74 & 3220 ~~ & 110 & 30 & 0.43 & 0.51 & $-$2.46 ~~ & 8.2 ~~~~ & 9.5 ~~~ \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & 1090 ~~ & 2910 & 50 & 1.01 & 0.95 & $-$1.80 ~~ & 8.7 ~~~~ & 9.6 ~~~ \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & 1750 ~~ & 15200 & 80 & 1.39 & 0.74 & $-$0.51 ~~ & 9.6 ~~~~ & 12.1 ~~~ \\
3C~227 & 1330 ~~ & 4820 & 40 & 1.34 & 0.93 & 2.83 ~~ & 8.0 ~~~~ & 8.9 ~~~ \\
Mrk~668 & 5680 ~~ & 1880 & 40 & 1.19 & 0.95 & 0.12 ~~ & 8.7 ~~~~ & 8.8 ~~~ \\
3C~332 & 9100 ~~ & 460 & 20 & 0.76 & 0.77 & $-$0.60 ~~ & 9.8 ~~~~ & 7.6 ~~~ \\
Arp~102B & 1770 ~~ & 6880 & 80 & 1.11 & 0.96 & 1.41 ~~ & 10.9 ~~~~ & 8.1 ~~~ \\
PKS~1739+184 & 3630 ~~ & 1320 & 30 & 0.76 & 0.91 & $-$0.07 ~~ & 8.2 ~~~~ & 10.3 ~~~ \\
3C~390.3 & 3960 ~~ & 2840 & 50 & 0.84 & 0.36 & $-$0.62 ~~ & 10.4 ~~~~ & 9.2 ~~~ \\
\hline
\end{tabu}
\end{center}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[1] \footnotemark[1] These values assume $\sin i=1$. See equation~(\ref{eq:mtot}) and discussion in the first paragraph of Section~\ref{sec:results}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Orbital Parameters Corresponding to 99\% Lower Limits on BH Masses: Eccentric Orbits, With Jitter}
\label{tab:eccjit}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{9pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabu}{lrrrrrrrr}
\noalign{\vskip 4pt}
\hline
\hline
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$u_{r,pe}$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$P$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$t_0$} &
&
&
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\omega$} &
&
\\
Object &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(yr)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$q$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$e$} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{(rad)} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( M_{min} / \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} &
\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log{\left( T_{gr}/{\rm yr} \right)}$\,\footnotemark[1]} \\
\noalign{\vskip 2pt}
\hline
3C~59 & 3920 ~~ & 320 & 60 & 0.52 & 0.45 & 0.72 ~~ & 9.1 ~~~~ & 9.2 ~~~ \\
PKS~0235+023 & 3590 ~~ & 1950 & 30 & 1.29 & 0.85 & 2.92 ~~ & 9.0 ~~~~ & 10.1 ~~~ \\
NGC~1097 & 4340 ~~ & 360 & 40 & 1.14 & 0.61 & $-$2.94 ~~ & 9.1 ~~~~ & 9.0 ~~~ \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & 1900 ~~ & 8430 & 20 & 1.38 & 0.96 & 1.99 ~~ & 9.0 ~~~~ & 9.6 ~~~ \\
Pictor~A & 5020 ~~ & 1660 & 20 & 0.96 & 0.95 & 2.14 ~~ & 9.2 ~~~~ & 7.9 ~~~ \\
CBS~74 & 1880 ~~ & 80 & 30 & 0.46 & 0.64 & 1.97 ~~ & 8.0 ~~~~ & 9.0 ~~~ \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & 2960 ~~ & 3790 & 50 & 1.00 & 0.90 & $-$2.80 ~~ & 8.6 ~~~~ & 10.8 ~~~ \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & 2440 ~~ & 1150 & 50 & 1.30 & 0.96 & 1.22 ~~ & 8.7 ~~~~ & 7.9 ~~~ \\
3C~227 & 1480 ~~ & 850 & 10 & 1.17 & 0.80 & $-$0.59 ~~ & 7.9 ~~~~ & 11.3 ~~~ \\
Mrk~668 & 1440 ~~ & 1010 & 40 & 2.02 & 0.97 & 1.33 ~~ & 8.7 ~~~~ & 8.0 ~~~ \\
3C~332 & 8730 ~~ & 1980 & 20 & 0.77 & 0.92 & 2.54 ~~ & 9.6 ~~~~ & 8.1 ~~~ \\
Arp~102B & 4950 ~~ & 173120 & 900 & 1.02 & 0.93 & 0.74 ~~ & 11.1 ~~~~ & 10.7 ~~~ \\
PKS~1739+184 & 3510 ~~ & 28080 & 30 & 0.76 & 0.98 & 0.09 ~~ & 8.4 ~~~~ & 11.2 ~~~ \\
3C~390.3 & 2750 ~~ & 1300 & 60 & 0.84 & 0.21 & 1.11 ~~ & 10.6 ~~~~ & 8.7 ~~~ \\
\hline
\end{tabu}
\end{center}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[1] \footnotemark[1] These values assume $\sin i=1$. See equation~(\ref{eq:mtot}) and discussion in the first paragraph of Section~\ref{sec:results}.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Goodness of Fit Statistics for Different Orbital Models}
\label{tab:chisq}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{9pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabu} to \textwidth{lccccc}
\noalign{\vskip 4pt}
\hline
\hline
\noalign{\vskip 2pt}
& & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Reduced $\chi^2$ Values for Best Fits\,\footnotemark[1]} \\
\noalign{\vskip -4pt}
& & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\hrulefill}\\
& Degrees & Circular & Circular & Elliptical & Elliptical \\
Object & of Freedom \footnotemark[2] & No Jitter & With Jitter & No Jitter & With Jitter \\
\hline
3C~59 & 28 & ~7.91 & 6.44 & ~5.44 & 4.47 \\
PKS~0235+023 & 24 & ~8.17 & 1.86 & ~4.55 & 0.84 \\
NGC~1097 & 32 & 31.63 & 3.17 & 22.34 & 2.26 \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & 38 & 53.81 & 3.93 & 37.48 & 2.42 \\
Pictor~A & 22 & 65.95 & 5.51 & 46.76 & 3.82 \\
CBS~74 & 30 & 18.77 & 3.15 & 11.50 & 1.93 \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & 32 & 14.36 & 3.52 & ~7.85 & 2.06 \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & 18 & 11.19 & 3.22 & ~6.72 & 1.91 \\
3C~227 & 32 & 71.01 & 3.65 & 32.65 & 1.55 \\
Mrk~668 & 23 & 18.82 & 8.19 & ~4.78 & 2.17 \\
3C~332 & 69 & 28.11 & 2.19 & 21.47 & 1.67 \\
Arp~102B & 184 & ~9.62 & 2.10 & ~6.17 & 1.35 \\
PKS~1739+184 & 32 & 13.04 & 3.01 & ~5.78 & 1.46 \\
3C~390.3 & 97 & 64.02 & 4.04 & 39.84 & 1.67 \\
\hline
\end{tabu}
\end{center}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[1] \footnotemark[1] The orbital models are those described in the first paragraph of Section~\ref{sec:results} This is the degree of freedom corresponding to the elliptical cases. To get the degree of freedom for circular cases, add two to these numbers.
\item[2] \footnotemark[2] Test
\end{tablenotes}
\end{table*}
Using the methods of Section~\ref{sec:fitting} we first perform four sets of simulations to explore the effects of orbital eccentricity and the simple jitter prescription. Specifically we explore the following scenarios: (a) circular orbits without jitter, (b) circular orbits with jitter, (c) eccentric orbits without jitter, and (d) eccentric orbits with jitter. From the output of the simulations we calculate the SBHB total mass for each solution using equation~(\ref{eq:mtot}) and assuming that $\sin i = 1$. We also calculate $T_{gr}$, the orbital decay time-scale due to gravitational radiation, by numerically integrating equation~(5.14) of \citet{Peters1964}. Since $T_{gr}\propto M_{tot}^{-3}$ and $M_{tot}\propto (\sin i)^{-3}$ the gravitational radiation decay time is a very sensitive function of the (unknown) inclination of the binary, $T_{gr}\propto (\sin i)^9$. For the four sets of simulations described above, we report the 99\% lower limit on the mass, together with corresponding values of orbital parameters and the orbital decay time-scale, in Tables~\ref{tab:circnojit}--\ref{tab:eccjit}, respectively. We note that the resulting minimum masses and decay time-scales do not change significantly as we take jitter into consideration i.e. from case (a) to case (b), and from case (c) to case (d). However, they do change by an order of magnitude or more as we relax the assumption of circular orbits i.e. from case (a) to (c) and from case (b) to (d). This is reasonable as the former change is a change in the effective uncertainty, whereas the latter change significantly enlarges the space of possible orbits and parameters. The goodness of fit statistics (the reduced $\chi^2$ value, $\chi^2_\nu=\chi^2/\nu$, where $\nu$ is number of degrees of freedom, and $\nu$) for the best-fitting models in all of the above cases are reported in Table~\ref{tab:chisq}. As this table shows, the $\chi^2_\nu$ values are quite large in cases (a) and (c) where jitter is not included. This is not a surprise since the amplitude of the jitter is typically a few times larger than the measurement errors. The fits of elliptical orbit models including jitter yield the lowest $\chi^2_\nu$ values, as expected. However, a substantial fraction of objects have $\chi^2_\nu > 2$ even with this family of models.
\begin{table*}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{BH Mass Limits for Gaussian Process Description of Jitter}
\label{tab:gaussproc}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{9pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabu} to \textwidth{lccccccc}
\noalign{\vskip 4pt}
\hline
\hline
\noalign{\vskip 2pt}
& \multicolumn{6}{c}{$\log{\left( M_{min} / \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi \right)}$}\\
\noalign{\vskip -4pt}
& \multicolumn{6}{c}{\hrulefill}\\
& Fixed $\tau$\,\footnotemark[1] & $\tau = \mathcal{N}(1,0.5)$\,\footnotemark[2] & $\tau = \mathcal{N}(5,3)$\,\footnotemark[2] & $\tau = \mathcal{N}(5,3)$\,\footnotemark[2] & \hskip -1.5em Ornstein-Uhlenbeck & \hskip -.5em Simple Jitter \\
Object & Fixed $a$\,\footnotemark[1] & Fixed $a$\,\footnotemark[1] & Fixed $a$\,\footnotemark[1] & $a = \mathcal{N}(j,j/2)$\,\footnotemark[3] & \hskip -1.5em Description\,\footnotemark[4] & \hskip -.5em Description\,\footnotemark[5] \\
\hline
3C~59 & ... & ~9.4 & ... & ... & ... & ~9.1 \\
PKS~0235+023 & ... & ~8.7 & ... & ... & ... & ~9.0 \\
NGC~1097 & ... & ~9.4 & ... & ... & ... & ~9.1 \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & ~9.6 & ~9.4 & ~9.3 & ~9.1 & ~9.3 & ~9.0 \\
Pictor~A & ~9.3 & ~9.0 & ... & ... & ... & ~9.2 \\
CBS~74 & ... & ~7.8 & ... & ... & ... & ~8.0 \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & ... & ~8.8 & ... & ... & ... & ~8.6 \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & ... & ~8.5 & ... & ... & ... & ~8.7 \\
3C~227 & ... & ~7.7 & ... & ... & ... & ~7.9 \\
Mrk~668 & ... & ~8.5 & ... & ... & ... & ~8.7 \\
3C~332 & ~9.8 & ~9.7 & ... & ... & ... & ~9.6 \\
Arp~102B & 10.4 & 10.6 & 11.2 & 11.3 & 10.8 & 11.1 \\
PKS~1739+184 & ~8.6 & ~8.7 & ~8.6 & ~8.3 & ~8.4 & ~8.4 \\
3C~390.3 & 10.4 & 10.7 & ... & ... & ... & 10.6 \\
\hline
\end{tabu}
\end{center}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[1] \footnotemark[1] The fixed value of $\tau=1\;$yr. The fixed value of $a$ is the measured jitter for each object listed in Table~\ref{tab:jitter}. See details in Section~\ref{sec:jitter}.
\item[2] \footnotemark[2] $\tau={\cal N}(m,s)$ denotes $\tau$ drawn from a normal distribution of mean $m$ and standard deviation $s$, both expressed in years.
\item[3] \footnotemark[3] In the $a = \mathcal{N}(j,j/2)$ case we draw the value of $a$ from a normal distribution with a mean equal to the jitter in Table~\ref{tab:jitter} and a standard deviation equal to half that value.
\item[4] \footnotemark[4] We use a fixed value $\tau=1\;$yr and the value of $a$ for each object, as listed in Table~\ref{tab:jitter}.
\item[5] \footnotemark[5] In this description we expand the error bars on the radial velocity measurements to match the jitter measured by the method of Section~\ref{sec:jitter}. These are the same results reported in Table~\ref{tab:eccjit} and are reproduced here for easy comparison.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{table*}
Our results of modeling jitter via Gaussian processes are presented in Table~\ref{tab:gaussproc}, where we quote the value of the 99\% lower limit on the total mass of the SBHB. Because of the high computational cost of running Gaussian process simulations, we perform a limited number of representative tests. Nevertheless, comparison of the results of these tests with the results presented above show that there are minimal differences between the results of the Gaussian process methods and those from our fiducial treatment of jitter in the previous paragraph. The mass limits resulting from the various methods differ by a factor of a few, which leads us to conclude that our simple description of jitter is fairly robust. Thus we adopt the results of the simple jitter description in our later discussion.
We focus our attention on the orbital parameters of case (d) that involves eccentric orbits and includes jitter, as it is the most inclusive scenario and yields the most conservative constraint on BH masses. Henceforth, we illustrate the results of case (d), unless noted otherwise. As shown in Table~\ref{tab:eccjit}, the lower limits on the SBHB masses are in the range $10^8$--$10^{11}\; \ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$. However, the eccentricity corresponding to the minimum mass tends to be very high, as more than half the cases have eccentricity values greater than 0.9. We also note that the decay time-scale falls in the range $10^7$--$10^{12}\;$yr. We re-iterate that the realistic mass limits should be higher than those of Table~\ref{tab:eccjit} by a factor of $(\sin i)^3$ and the orbital decay times should be shorter by a factor of $(\sin i)^9$; we discuss this issue further in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.
In Figure~\ref{fig:radvel} we present the radial velocity curves along with three solutions for each object, corresponding to the 99\%, 90\% and 68\% lower limits on the period; these are shown respectively as solid blue, dashed green, and dotted red lines superimposed on the data. The minimum $\chi^2_\nu$ values corresponding to these fits are in the last column of Table~\ref{tab:chisq}. Some of the fits are particularly poor, which is reflected in the $\chi^2_\nu$ values. Some noteworthy examples of poor fits are: (a) 3C~59, 1E~0450.3$-$1817 and Pictor~A where there are very large gradients in the peak velocities on time-scales of a decade that are inconsistent with orbital motion, (b) Mrk~668 where the well-sampled radial velocity curve of the red peak has the opposite curvature from what orbital motion would dictate, and (c) NGC~1097, CBS~74, 3C~332 and PKS~1739+184 where the radial velocities in last 5--10~yr of the monitoring period depart systematically from the fit that describes well the radial velocities of the first 15--20~yr. There are also examples of fits that appear reasonable, such as PKS~1020$-$103, Arp~102B and 3C~390.3.
Figure~\ref{fig:periodecc} shows a projection of the space of model parameters in the period--eccentricity plane. The colour indicates the relative density of solutions within a specific area in the diagram. As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:periodecc}, some of the objects (e.g. 3C~59, 1E~0450.3$-$1817, NGC~1097) have solutions most densely concentrated in an arc in the diagram; however, not all objects show this behavior. We also note that in many cases, the distribution of eccentricity is almost uniform from 0 to 1 (e.g. PKS~1020$-$103, PKS~0921$-$213), implying that there is no specific preference for or constraint on the value of eccentricity. Similarly, the periods tend to vary across many orders of magnitude. However, in specific cases such as Arp~102B or Pictor~A, the periods tend to concentrate at $\sim$ $10^{10}\;$yr, the upper boundary in our simulation. We attribute this behavior to the inability of the MCMC simulation to find satisfactory solutions at periods lower than the age of the universe, and we take it to suggest that the SBHB hypothesis is incompatible with the data.
Figure~\ref{fig:massdecay} shows the main scientific result of the simulations, the distribution of solutions in the 2-dimensional parameter space of total mass versus orbital decay time. The colours have the same meaning as in Figure~\ref{fig:periodecc}. The vertical dashed line indicates a BH total mass of $10^{10} M_{\odot}$, above which we deem the binary hypothesis unfavourable (see Section~\ref{sec:discussion}). As shown in the Figure~\ref{fig:massdecay}, the general behavior is that the solutions are concentrated most densely along a ridge or an arc in the parameter space, and the density of solutions decreases outward in all directions. The minimum masses resulting from this analysis are close to $10^{11}\;\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$ for two objects (Arp~102B, 3C~390.3), in the range (0.4--4)$\times 10^{9}\;\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$ for nine objects, and in the range (0.8--3)$\times 10^{8}\;\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$ for the remaining three objects.
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}
We begin our discussion of the results by considering whether the orbital model provides a reasonable description of the radial velocity curves on statistical grounds. We then consider constraints on the orbital inclination based on the radio properties of the targets that increase the minimum SBHB masses we reported in Table~\ref{tab:eccjit}. We also provide a set of additional arguments disfavouring the SBHB hypothesis for many members of our sample. We conclude with a summary of the status of each object and a brief discussion of one of the alternative explanations for double-peaked line profiles.
The goodness-of-fit tests for many of the objects in our sample indicate that the binary orbit model provides a poor description of the observed radial velocity curves. This conclusion holds even if we use the jitter as a measure of the uncertainty in our calculations of $\chi^2$. The probability that the orbital model provides an adequate description of the radial velocity curves for the six cases with $\chi^2_\nu > 2$ in Table~\ref{tab:eccjit} (3C~59, NGC~1097, 1E~0450.3$-$1817, Pictor~A, CBS~74, PKS~0921$-$213, Mrk~668) is $p<10^{-4}$. An inspection of Figure~\ref{fig:radvel} shows that the fits to the radial velocity curves of those six objects do not capture the full behavior of the data. For 3C~59, the upward trend of the blue peak from 1997--2015 strongly contradicts the model, which predicts a downward trend. In NGC~1097, the model fits the radial velocities of the blue peak but not those of the red peak. In 1E~0450.3$-$1817, the sudden drop in the velocity curve of the red peak during the period 1995--2000 cannot be explained by a binary model. For CBS~74, the velocity of the blue peak rises and drops sharply within a few years in an erratic manner. The radial velocity curve of the red peak of Mrk~668 stays relatively flat for a long period of time, before experiencing a sudden rise, forcing the eccentricity of the fit to be very high as a result. Moreover, the radial velocity curve of the red peak of Mrk~668 is convex, which is inconsistent with orbital motion (this was also noted by \citealt{Marziani1993} and \citealt{Gezari2007}). In the case of Pictor~A, both the red and the blue peak radial velocity curves display a rise during the same time period, which is inconsistent with the binary hypothesis. Finally, regarding PKS~0921$-$213, the binary model cannot explain the velocity fluctuations of the red and the blue peak during the period 1995--2000. These considerations argue against the orbital model for these six objects.
The lower limits on SBHB masses that we obtain by adopting the circular orbit model without velocity jitter (Table~\ref{tab:circnojit}) are very similar to those obtained by \cite{Liu2016} for nine of the 13 objects in common. For the remaining four objects, our limits are a few orders of magnitude lower than theirs. We attribute this difference to the different approach used to obtain the minimum mass: we calculate the SBHB mass for every solution that our algorithm finds and then take the minimum value while \cite{Liu2016} find the minimum period based on their fit to the radial velocity curve and use it to compute the minimum mass. For the eccentric orbit models with velocity jitter included (see Table~\ref{tab:eccjit}), we obtain minimum masses for most objects that are a few orders of magnitude lower than in \cite{Liu2016} and previous works. This difference is reasonable, since there is more flexibility in the models that we employ here due to the addition of eccentricity. Nevertheless, we are still able to confidently disfavour the SBHB hypothesis for two targets (Arp~102B, 3C~390.3) on the basis of a very high mass; the 99\% lower limits on the total masses are greater than the most massive BH measured so far \citep[$2 \times 10^{10}\;\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$; e.g.,][]{McConnell2012, Thomas2016}.
We can refine the mass limits of Table~\ref{tab:eccjit} further by considering constraints on the inclination of the orbital plane of the hypothesized SBHB -- $M_{tot}\propto \left(\sin i\right)^3$ as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:fitting}. Since the vast majority of our objects are radio loud, we can obtain constraints on the inclination angle of the radio jet and connect the direction of the radio jet to the axis of the binary orbit by assuming that the jet is emitted along the spin axis of one of the BHs and that the spins of the two BHs in an SBHB are aligned with the axis of the orbit. The former assumption is justified by the the theory and recent simulations of jet formation \citep[e.g.][and many references therein]{Narayan2014,Tchekhovskoy2010}. The latter assumption is justified in the context of evolutionary scenarios for SBHBs at separations of a few pc or less: a massive circumbinary disc extracts angular momentum from the orbit causing it to decay, supplies accretion fuel to the BHs, and exerts torques to align the spins of the two BHs with the orbital angular momentum vector \citep[see][]{Bogdanovic2007,Dotti2010,Miller2013}. Thus, we can use the spectral index of the radio core and the brightness contrast between the radio core and the radio lobes, which are regarded as indicators of relativistic beaming effects in the jet \citep[e.g.,][]{Orr1982}, to constrain the jet inclination.
We collected values of the spectral index of the radio core, $\alpha_{\rm core}$ (where $f_\nu\propto \nu^{+\alpha}$), and the core-to-lobe ratio, $\log R$ (where $R\equiv S_{core}/S_{lobes}$, with $S_{core}$ and $S_{lobes}$ the core and lobe fluxes at a rest-frame frequency of 5~GHz), from the literature in Table~\ref{tab:radio} along with references to the sources of the data and relevant observational details. In cases where the value of $S_{core}$ and/or $S_{lobes}$ was measured at a frequency other than 5~GHz, we inferred the 5~GHz values assuming core and lobe spectral indices of $\alpha_{core}=0$ and $\alpha_{lobes}=-0.7$, respectively. In most cases only $\alpha_{core}$ or $\log R$ was readily available (not both) so we used the empirical correlation between $\alpha_{core}$ and $\log R$ by \citet{Runnoe2012}, $\alpha_{core} = - 0.433 + 0.206\,\log R$, to deduce the missing quantity. As Table~\ref{tab:radio} shows, we were unable to find useful information on four of the 14 objects (NGC~1097, 1E~0450-3$-$1817, CBS~74, and Mrk~668). In contrast, in the case of 3C~390.3 a trustworthy upper limit on the inclination is available from superluminal motions in the radio jet.
We compare the data in Table~\ref{tab:radio} with detailed analyses of the emission properties of jets in a variety of radio-loud AGNs by various authors. \citet{Ghisellini1993} and \citet{Guerra1997} have studied the radio morphologies, spectral energy distributions, and superluminal motions of samples of radio-loud quasars and radio galaxies of different types (with and without broad lines). They concluded that in core-dominated quasars ($\log R > 0$) the jet inclination angles are $i\,\la\, 10^\circ$, while lobe-dominated quasars ($-1.36 < \log R < 0$ in their samples) have $10^\circ\,\la\, i \,\la\, 40^\circ$ with a median of $26^\circ$. Similarly, \citet{Hovatta2009} have considered the variability properties and jet beaming factors of a large sample of radio-loud quasars and BL~Lac objects with $\log R > -0.5$ and concluded that in almost all cases the jet inclinations are $i < 20^\circ$ and \citet{DiPompeo2012} carried out a statistical study of radio core spectral indices and concluded that values of $\alpha_{core} > -1$ are associated with inclination angles $i < 26^\circ$, albeit with some scatter.
Considering the radio properties of the objects in Table~\ref{tab:radio} in this light, we find that two of the 10 objects with useful radio information (PKS~0921--213, PKS~1020--103) are likely to have $i\,\la\, 10^\circ$, four (Pictor~A, Arp~102B, PKS~1739+184, 3C~390.3) are likely to have $i\,\la\, 26^\circ$, and the remaining four (3C~59, PKS~0235+023, 3C~227, 3C~332) are likely to have $i\,\la\, 40^\circ$. Taken at face value, these inclination angle limits change the minimum masses of Table~\ref{tab:eccjit} as follows: for $i\,\la\, 40^\circ$, $\log(M_{min}/\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi)$ increases by 0.6, for $i\,\la\, 26^\circ$, $\log(M_{min}/\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi)$ increases by 1.1, and for $i\,\la\, 10^\circ$, $\log(M_{min}/\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi)$ increases by 2.3. As a result, the minimum masses of four more objects from our sample rise above the threshold of $10^{10}\;\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$ (Pictor~A, PKS~0921--213, PKS~1020--103, 3C~332) and the minimum masses of two other objects get close to this threshold (3C~59, PKS~0235+023, PKS~0921--213). Similarly, the orbital decay times due to gravitational radiation decrease substantially once the orbital inclination angle is taken into account: for $i\,\la\, 40^\circ$, $\log(T_{gr}/{\rm yr})$ decreases by 1.7, for $i\,\la\, 26^\circ$, $\log(T_{gr}/{\rm yr})$ decreases by 3.2, and for $i\,\la\, 10^\circ$, $\log(T_{gr}/{\rm yr})$ decreases by 6.8. This change makes the orbital decay time uncomfortably short for some objects; $T_{\rm gr}$ becomes shorter than 100~yr for PKS~1020--103 and shorter than $10^6\;$yr for Pictor~A, PKS~0921--213, and 3C~390.3.
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Radio Properties of Sample Objects}
\label{tab:radio}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccl}
\hline
\hline
Object & $\alpha_{\rm core}$\,\footnotemark[1] & $\log R$\,\footnotemark[2] & References\,\footnotemark[3] \\
\hline
3C~59 & [$-0.74$] & $-1.47$ & 1 \\
PKS~0235+023 & $-0.72$ & [$-1.39$] & 2 \\
NGC~1097\,\footnotemark[4] & $-0.58$ & ... & 3, 4 \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & ... & ... & \\
Pictor~A & [$-0.71$] & $-1.34$ & 1 \\
CBS~74 & ... & ... & \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & $-0.38$ & [$+0.26$] & 5 \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & $-0.43$ & $-0.07$ & 5, 6 \\
3C~227 & [$-0.78$] & $-1.68$ & 1 \\
Mrk~668\,\footnotemark[5] & ... & ... & \\
3C~332 & [$-0.85$] & $-2.04$ & 7 \\
Arp~102B\,\footnotemark[6] & $+0.08$ & ... & 8, 9 \\
PKS~1739+184 & $+0.07$ & $-0.85$ & 10, 11 \\
3C~390.3\,\footnotemark[7] & $+0.39$ & $-1.31$ & 12, 13 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\footnotetext[1]{The spectral index of the radio spectrum of the core under the convention $f_\nu\propto\nu^{+\alpha}$. Values in square brackets were inferred from $\log R$, as described Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.}
\footnotetext[2]{Measured at 5~GHz for 3C~59, PKS1020--103, and PKS~1739+184, at 5~GHz (core) and 408~MHz (lobes) for 3C~332, at 2.3~GHz for Pictor A and 3C~227, and at 1.48~GHz for 3C~390.3. All values of $\log R$ were converted to 5~GHz assuming $\alpha_{\rm core}=0$ and $\alpha_{\rm lobes}=-0.7$. Values in square brackets are inferred from the value of $\alpha_{\rm core}$ as described in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.}
\footnotetext[3]{{\it References to sources of data:}
(1) \citet{Bondi1993},
(2) \citet{Downes1986},
(3) \citet{Orienti2010},
(4) \citet{Hummel1987},
(5) \citet{Drinkwater1997},
(6) \citet{Lister1994},
(7) \citet{Giovannini1988}
(8) \citet{Helmboldt2007},
(9) \citet{Healey2007},
(10) \citet{Swarup1984},
(11) \citet{Gower1984},
(12) \citet{Leahy1991},
(13) \citet{Leahy1995}.
}
\footnotetext[4]{NGC~1097 hosts a compact nuclear radio source. Although the spectral index of the core is available, we do not consider this a useful constraint on the presence of a jet or its possible orientation.}
\footnotetext[5]{Mrk~668 hosts a compact, GHz-peaked radio source \citep[see][]{ODea1998}. We have not found any information that can constrain the jet orientation.}
\footnotetext[6]{The radio maps of Arp~102B show a core with an elongation on one side, reminiscent of a jet, but no lobes.}
\footnotetext[7]{The orientation of the radio jet of 3C~390.3 has been examined by \citet{Eracleous1996} who constrained the inclination angle to be in the range $i=19$--26$^\circ$ based on the observed superluminal motion and the morphology of the double-lobed radio source.}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\caption{Arguments Against SBHB Hypothesis}
\label{tab:arguments}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\hline
\hline
& & Large & Other\\
Object & $\chi^2_\nu > 2$?\,\footnotemark[1] & $M_{min}$?\,\footnotemark[2] & Arguments?\,\footnotemark[3] \\
\hline
3C~59 & yes & & \\
PKS~0235+023 & & & yes \\
NGC~1097 & yes & & yes \\
1E 0450$-$1817 & yes & & \\
Pictor~A & yes & yes & yes \\
CBS~74 & yes & & \\
PKS~0921$-$213 & yes & yes & yes \\
PKS~1020$-$103 & & yes & yes \\
3C~227 & & & \\
Mrk~668 & yes & & \\
3C~332 & & yes & yes \\
Arp~102B & & yes & yes \\
PKS~1739+184 & & & yes \\
3C~390.3 & & yes & yes \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\footnotetext[1]{The radial observed velocity curves are not described well by an orbital model. See discussion at the beginning of Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.}
\footnotetext[2]{The minimum BH mass exceeds $ 10^{10}\;\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$ after considering constraints on the inclination angle. See discussion in the middle of Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.}
\footnotetext[3]{See discussion in Section~\ref{sec:discussion}.}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
We also re-iterate additional general arguments against the binary interpretation of double-peaked emitters.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
As \cite{Liu2016} pointed out, the Ly$\alpha$ lines of double-peaked emitters are in fact single-peaked \citep[Arp~102B, 3C~390.3, NGC~1097, PKS~0921--213 -- see][respectively]{Halpern1996, OBrien1998, Storchi-Bergmann2005, Eracleous2009}. This is a strong argument against the binary hypothesis, as one would expect the Ly$\alpha$ line profile to mirror that of the Balmer lines (i.e. double-peaked) if the peaks originate from separate and physically distinct regions.
\item
\cite{Liu2016} noted that the minimum masses inferred from fitting the radial velocity curves are substantially larger than the masses determined from the stellar velocity dispersions of the host galaxies by \citet{Lewis2006} for six objects in our sample (NGC~1097, 1E~0450.3--1817, Pictor~A, PKS~0921--213, Arp~102B, 3C~390.3).
\item
\cite{Storchi-Bergmann2003} analysed spectra of NGC~1097 spanning 11~yr and noted that the relative separation of the two peaks in the line profile change with the luminosity of the AGN. They reported a decrease of the broad-line flux as the red and blue peak moved further apart from one another (see also \citealt{Schimoia2012,Schimoia2015}). Additionally, \cite{Shapovalova2001} monitored 3C~390.3 during the period 1995-2000 and reported similar behavior and \citet{Zhang2013} reached the same conclusion after studying a different set of observations of the same object. This behavior is a manifestation of the ``breathing'' of a single BLR, observed in variability studies of Seyfert galaxies and quasars \citep[e.g.,][]{Guo2014, Barth2015} and suggests strongly that the two sides of double-peaked emission lines originate in the same BLR.
\item
In a binary scenario, the velocity of the gas orbiting individual BHs is at least several times greater than the velocity of the BHs orbiting one another. Thus, we would expect the two peaks that make up the line profiles to be separated by less than their width, instead of well-separated peaks as is the case for eight objects (PKS~0235+023, NGC~1097, 1E~0450.3--1817, PKS~0921$-$213, PKS~1020--103, Arp~102B, 3C~332, 3C~390.3; see footnote 3 in \citealt{Chen1989a}, the heuristic models of \citealt{Shen2010}, and the detailed models of \citealt{Nguyen2019}).
\item
Reverberation mapping projects offer additional evidence against the SBHB hypothesis. In the SBHB picture, the two BHs are typically at parsec or sub-parsec separation, so it would take years, or at least months, for changes in the continuum of one BH to reach the BLR of the other. Thus, one should expect a corresponding time lag between the two peaks as they respond to changes in the continuum. However, \cite{Dietrich1998} performed reverberation mapping studies on 3C~390.3 and report that the blue and the red peaks in the double-peaked line profiles vary simultaneously within 3 days. Similarly, \cite{Sergeev2000} and more recently \cite{Shapovalova2013} who performed reverberation mapping studies on Arp~102B found no significant time lag between the two peaks.
\end{enumerate}
We conclude our evaluation of the SBHB hypothesis by summarizing the Table~\ref{tab:arguments} the arguments against this hypothesis for each of the objects in our sample. Included in this table are columns on the goodness of the fit to the radial velocity curves with orbital models, the minimum SBHB mass (after constraining $\sin i$), and additional arguments from other observations presented just above. We populate each of these four columns depending on whether an argument applies to a particular object in our sample. As Table~\ref{tab:arguments} shows there is only one object that passes all the tests (3C~227) and only four objects fail only one test (3C~59, PKS~0235+023, CBS~74, and Mrk~668). Therefore, we disfavour the SBHB hypothesis for 2/3 of the objects in our sample; for Arp~102B and 3C~390.3, the hypothesis can be rejected with great confidence based on the minimum masses alone, even for $\sin i =1$. Several other objects identified earlier in this section have minimum masses very close to the threshold of $10^{10}\;\ifmmode{\rm M}_{\mathord\odot}\else M$_{\mathord\odot}$\fi$, especially when the orbital inclination angle is taken into account. If we insist on $\sin i =1$, four more objects fail the $\chi_\nu^2$ test {\it and} are disfavoured by additional arguments. Finally, it is important to point out that, if double-peaked emitters are a homogeneous sub-class of AGNs, as their general properties suggest, and the SBHB hypothesis is disfavoured for a substantial fraction of them, then we should not expect {\it any} of them to host SBHBs. Future observational work can test this conclusion further. Specifically, continued spectroscopic monitoring will extend the radial velocity curves of all objects and lead to better constraints on the SBHB mass. Additional constraints on the orbital inclination angle through additional radio observations will help improve the mass limits from the radial velocity curves. Other tests involving UV spectroscopy \citep[see][]{Eracleous2009} and reverberation mapping \citep[see][]{Dietrich1998} will also be helpful.
As the binary hypothesis is unlikely for most of our targets, it is necessary to focus on other hypotheses for objects with double-peaked Balmer lines. To explain the double-peaked profiles of 3C~390.3 and Arp~102B, \citet{Chen1989a} and \cite{Chen1989b} proposed a model consisting of only one BH at the centre, and a disc illuminated by a central source. \cite{Schimoia2015} argue that the radial velocity changes of the Balmer line peaks could be explained by variations in the illumination of such a disc. The model and its extensions can also fit many of the other double-peaked profiles in our sample and the physical picture associated with this model has passed all the observational tests carried out so far \citep{Eracleous1994, Eracleous1995, Eracleous2003}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Jason Wright for useful discussions on modeling jitter as a Gaussian process and Jupes Halpern for a careful reading of teh manuscript.
JCR acknowledges support from the National Geographic Society under grant no. W455-16. She thanks the staff at Las Campanas observatory for their expert help in carrying out the Magellan/MageE observations and the University of Michigan Astronomy department for access to this instrument. This paper includes data gathered with the 6.5 meter Magellan Telescopes located at Las Campanas Observatory, Chile.
We thank the staff at MDM Observatory, Cerro-Tololo INteramerican Observatory, Apache Point Observatory, and the Hobby-Eberly Telescope for their expert help in carrying out the observations.
The Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET) is a joint project of the University of Texas at Austin, the Pennsylvania State University, Stanford University, Ludwig-`Maximillians-Universit\"at M\"unchen, and Georg-August-Universit\"at G\"ottingen. The HET is named in honor of its principal benefactors, William P. Hobby and Robert E. Eberly.
The Marcario Low-Resolution Spectrograph is named for Mike Marcario of High Lonesome Optics, who fabricated several optics for the instrument but died before its completion; it is a joint project of the Hobby-Eberly Telescope partnership and the Instituto de Astronom\'{\i}a de la Universidad Nacional Aut\'onoma de M\'exico.
The OSMOS spectrograph has been generously funded by the National Science Foundation and the Center for Cosmology and AstroParticle Physics at The Ohio State University. Additional support has also been provided by the Department of Astronomy at The Ohio State University and the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Ohio University.
This work is based on observations obtained with the Apache Point Observatory 3.5m telescope, which is owned and operated by the Astrophysical Research Consortium.
This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{ Introduction}
Since great successes for linear programming (LP) problems \cite{wright97,ye97},
the interior-point methods
have been extended to nonlinear programming
problems (NLPs)
\cite{bgn00,bhn99,ettz96,fg98,nww09,tp98,twbul02,uuv04,vs99}.
Almost all known strategies developed for LPs
were proposed for NLP formulated in different forms.
The most general form for NLP was considered in
\cite{bgn00,bhn99,ettz96,fg98,tp98,twbul02,vs99}, while some
special form was discussed in \cite{nww09,uuv04}.
Byrd et al.~\cite{bgn00,bhn99} handled the equality constraints ``as is'' in the papers,
Vanderbei and Shanno~\cite{vs99} split the equality constraints into inequality constraints, and
Forsgren and Gill~\cite{fg98} introduced a quadratic penalty function.
To analyze the convergence,
trust-region mechanisms were examined in
\cite{bgn00,bhn99}, and line-search strategies were also employed in
\cite{ettz96,fg98,nww09,tp98,twbul02,uuv04,vs99}.
In the viewpoint of iterative methods, the interior-point methods can be classified
into two groups by initial points;
``feasible'' interior-point methods \cite{fg98,twbul02}, which are easier to analyze but
needs a ``phase-I'' process to find a feasible initial point,
and ``infeasible'' interior-point
methods \cite{bgn00,bhn99,ettz96,nww09,uuv04,vs99}, which
do not need a feasible initial point but their convergence
analysis is more difficult and their assumptions are more demanding.
From extensive numerical experience
on interior-point methods for LPs in \cite{lms91,lms92a,Mehrotra92,yang17},
infeasible interior-point methods can be considered as a better
strategy than feasible interior-point methods for NLPs.
\begin{comment}
Most of interior-point methods relied on ``first-order'' approximations, but
``higher-order'' approximations were also already investigated in, for example,
\cite{nww09,twbul02}.
\red{(Remove) However, these two papers \cite{nww09,twbul02} reported
some conflicting conclusions arising from ``higher-order'' approximations.
A higher-order algorithm in \cite{twbul02}
was proved to be globally convergent and enjoyed
a super-linear convergence rate, and the numerical test
demonstrated a promising result. On the other hand, it
is shown in \cite{nww09} that a higher-order algorithm,
like Mehrotra-type algorithms \cite{Mehrotra92} and their
extensions to NLPs, may perform poorly if the initial
point is not appropriately selected}
Although these
proposed methods use higher-order approximations,
they approximate a smooth curve called the central path by a straight line.
\end{comment}
The central path plays an important part in the interior-point methods.
In particular, its accumulation point is an optimal solution,
thus the path-following type interior-point methods numerically trace
the central path and reach the optimal solution.
Most of the path-following type interior-point methods approximate
the central path with a line determined by the search direction,
but the central path itself is usually not a straight line but a curve.
Recently, many researchers pay attention to arc-search
interior-point methods.
Yang~\cite{yang13} proposed the original arc-search
interior-point method for LPs.
The main idea in the arc-search methods is to approximate the central path
with an arc of part of an ellipse
and find the next iterate on the arc. Since the central path is usually
a curve, the arc can fit it more appropriately
than the line. Yang and Yamashita~\cite{yy18} reported that
an arc-search interior-point algorithm performed better than a
line-search type interior-point algorithm for LPs.
The merit of the arc-search strategy is well demonstrated
in \cite{yang18} where an arc-search algorithm achieves
the best polynomial bound of $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{n}\log{1/\epsilon})$
for all interior-point methods, feasible or infeasible, and is
numerically competitive to the well-known Mehrotra’s algorithm.
The arc-search type methods are already extended to convex
quadratic programming~\cite{yang13}, semidefinite
programming~\cite{zyzlh19}, symmetric programming~\cite{ylz17},
and linear complementarity problems~\cite{kheirfam17}.
In this paper, we examine an extension of an infeasible
arc-search interior-point algorithm to NLPs.
We discuss the convergence property of the proposed
arc-search algorithm under mild conditions.
Compared to existing extensions above, the extension
to NLPs is not simple due to their complicated structures.
To show the convergence property, we introduce a merit function
that measures a deviation from the KKT conditions.
We also discuss the analytical formula for the step angle.
To verify the numerical performance of the proposed arc-search algorithm,
we conducted numerical experiments on the CUTEst problems~\cite{gould2015cutest}.
The results showed that the proposed algorithm required
fewer iterations than a line-search algorithm.
In particular, the reduction in the number of iterations was clearer for quadratic-constrained quadratic programming (QCQP) problems.
We also examined a computation time reduction by a modification on the second derivative.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section~\ref{sec:description}
introduces the problem. In Section~\ref{sec:algorithm}, we describe the proposed arc-search
algorithm, and in Section~\ref{sec:convergence}, we discuss its convergence properties. Section~\ref{sec:experiments} provides the numerical results and discusses the modification on the second derivatives.
Finally, Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} gives the conclusions of this paper.
\section{Problem description}\label{sec:description}
We consider a general nonlinear programming problem:
\begin{align}
\begin{array}{rcl}
\min &:& f(x) \\
\textrm{s.t.} &:& h(x) = 0, \ g(x) \ge 0,
\end{array}
\label{NP}
\end{align}
where $f: {\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}$, $h: {\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^m$, $m<n$, and
$g: {\mathbb{R}}^n \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}^p$. To simplify the latter discussions, we assume $p \ge 1$.
The decision variable is $x \in {\mathbb{R}}^n$.
For the inequality constraints $g(x) \ge 0$, we convert them
into equality constraints introducing a slack vector $s \in {\mathbb{R}}^p$ as follows:
\begin{align}
\begin{array}{rcl}
\min &:& f(x) \\
\textrm{s.t.} &:& h(x)=0, \
g(x) - s = 0, \ s \ge 0.
\end{array}
\label{NP1}
\end{align}
Throughout the paper, a tuple is used to denote
a concatenation of vectors, for example,
$(x,y,z)$ stands for $(x^{{\rm T}},y^{{\rm T}},z^{{\rm T}})^{{\rm T}}$,
where the superscript ${\rm T}$ is the transpose of a vector or a matrix.
For a vector $x \in {\mathbb{R}}^n$,
${\cal D}(x) \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n \times n}$ is a diagonal matrix whose
diagonal elements form $x$,
and $\min(x)$ is the minimum value in $x$.
Let ${\mathbb{R}}_+^n$ (${\mathbb{R}}_{++}^n$) denote the space of nonnegative vectors
(positive vectors, respectively),
and $e$ denote a vector of all ones with
appropriate dimension.
For (\ref{NP1}), we introduce Lagrangian multipliers
$y \in {\mathbb{R}}^m, w \in {\mathbb{R}}^p$ and $z \in {\mathbb{R}}^p$ and use
$v = (x,y,w,s,z) \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p} $ to denote the tuple of decision variables
and multipliers. Then, the Lagrangian function for (\ref{NP1}) is
\begin{equation*}
L(v)=f(x)+y^{{\rm T}}h(x)-w^{{\rm T}}(g(x)-s)-z^{{\rm T}}s,
\label{lagrangian1}
\end{equation*}
and its gradients with respect to $x$ and $s$ are
\begin{equation}
\nabla_x L(v)=\nabla f(x)+\nabla h(x) y-\nabla g(x) w,
\hspace{0.1in} \nabla_s L(v)=w-z,
\label{dlagrangian}
\end{equation}
respectively.
The notation related to derivatives in this paper are summarized in \ref{section:derivatives}.
The KKT conditions for (\ref{NP1}) are
\begin{align}
F(v) = 0, \
(w, s, z) \in {\mathbb{R}}_+^{3p},
\label{KKT1}
\end{align}
where $F:{\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p} \to {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p}$ is defined by
\begin{equation*}
F(v) = \left[ \begin{array}{c}
\nabla_x L(v) \\
h(x) \\
g(x)-s \\
w-z \\
{\cal D}(z)s
\end{array} \right].
\label{defineF}
\end{equation*}
The Jacobian of $F$ is given by
\begin{align*}
F' (v) = \left[ \begin{array}{ccccc}
\nabla_x^2 L(v) & \nabla h(x) & -\nabla g(x) & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla h(x)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla g(x)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & -I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & I & 0 & -I \\
0 & 0 & 0 & {\cal D}(z) & {\cal D}(s)
\end{array} \right].
\label{firstJacobian}
\end{align*}
The index set of active inequality constraints at $x \in {\mathbb{R}}^n$ is denoted by
\begin{equation*}
I(x)=\left\{i \in \{1,\ldots,p\} : g_i(x)=0 \right\}.
\label{index}
\end{equation*}
Similarly to \cite{ettz96}, we make the following standard
assumptions for (\ref{NP}).
\vspace{0.05in}
\noindent
{\bf Assumptions}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A1)] Existence. There exists $v^*=(x^*,y^*,w^*,s^*,z^*)$,
an optimal solution of (\ref{NP1}) and its associate
multipliers. The KKT conditions (\ref{KKT1}) hold at
any optimal solution.
\item[(A2)] Smoothness. $f(x)$ is differentiable up to the third order, and
$h(x)$ and $g(x)$ are up to the second order.
In addition, $f(x)$, $g(x)$, and $h(x)$
are locally Lipschitz continuous at $x^*$.
\item[(A3)] Regularity. The set $\{ \nabla h_j(x^*) : j =1, \ldots, m\} \cup
\{ \nabla g_i(x^*) : i \in I(x^*) \}$
is linearly independent.
\item[(A4)] Sufficiency. For all $\eta \in {\mathbb{R}}^n \backslash \{0\}$,
we have $ \eta^{{\rm T}} \nabla_x^2 L(v^*) \eta >0$.
\item[(A5)] Strict complementarity. For each
$i \in \{ 1, \ldots, p \}$, we have $z_i^*+s_i^* >0$
and $z_i^* s_i^* =0$.
\end{itemize}
From these assumptions, we can guarantee the nonsingularity
of the Jacobian matrix at the optimal solution $v^*$.
\begin{theorem}\label{nonsingular}
If (A1), (A3), (A4), and (A5) hold, the Jacobian
matrix $F'(v^*)$ is nonsingular.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\begin{comment}
Let $(\hat{a},\hat{b},\hat{c},\hat{d},\hat{e})$ be a constant vector that satisfies
\begin{equation}
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
\nabla_x^2 L(v^*) \\
\left( \nabla h(x^*)\right)^{{\rm T}} \\
\left( \nabla g(x^*)\right)^{{\rm T}} \\
0 \\
0
\end{array} \right] \hat{a} +
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
\nabla h(x^*) \\
0 \\
0 \\
0 \\
0
\end{array} \right] \hat{b} +
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
-\nabla g(x^*) \\
0 \\
0 \\
I \\
0
\end{array} \right] \hat{c} +
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
0 \\
0 \\
-I \\
0 \\
{\cal D}(z^*)
\end{array} \right] \hat{d} +
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
0 \\
0 \\
0 \\
-I \\
{\cal D}(s^*)
\end{array} \right] \hat{e} =0.
\label{independent}
\end{equation}
To conclude the nonsigularity of $F'(v^*)$,
it is enough to show that (\ref{independent})
holds only if $(\hat{a},\hat{b},\hat{c},\hat{d},\hat{e})=0$.
First, the fourth row indicates
that $\hat{c}=\hat{e}$, therefore, the last row leads to:
\begin{equation}
z_i^*\hat{d}_i+s_i^*\hat{e}_i = z_i^*\hat{d}_i+s_i^*\hat{c}_i = 0
\label{zdse}
\end{equation}
for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, p\}$.
Therefore, we can derive from (A5) that
\begin{equation*}
\hat{d}^{{\rm T}} \hat{c} =0.
\label{dTcIsZero}
\end{equation*}
Actually, for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, p\}$,
either $z_i^*$ or $s_i^*$ is positive.
Thus, if $z_i^* > 0$, (A5) implies $s_i^* = 0$,
therefore we know $\hat{d}_i = 0$ due to (\ref{zdse});
Similarly, if $s_i^* > 0$, (A5) implies $z_i^* = 0$,
we know $\hat{c}_i = 0$ due to (\ref{zdse}).
From the second and third rows of (\ref{independent}),
we have
\begin{equation}
\left(\nabla h(x^*)\right)^{{\rm T}} \hat{a} =0, \
\left(\nabla g(x^*)\right)^{{\rm T}} \hat{a} - \hat{d}=0.
\label{rows23}
\end{equation}
Multiplying $\hat{a}^{{\rm T}}$ from the left of the first row of
(\ref{independent}) and using (\ref{dTcIsZero}) and
(\ref{rows23}), we have
\begin{equation*}
\hat{a}^{{\rm T}} \nabla_x^2 L(v^*) \hat{a}+ \hat{a}^{{\rm T}} \left( \nabla h(x^*)\right) \hat{b}
- \hat{a}^{{\rm T}} \left( \nabla g(x^*)\right) \hat{c}
= \hat{a}^{{\rm T}} \nabla_x^2 L(v^*) \hat{a} - \hat{d}^{{\rm T}} \hat{c}
=\hat{a}^{{\rm T}} \nabla_x^2 L(v^*) \hat{a} =0.
\label{aIsZero}
\end{equation*}
In view of (A4), we conclude $\hat{a}=0$. Then,
the third row of (\ref{independent}) derives $\hat{d}=0$,
therefore, we know $s_i^* \hat{c}_i = 0$ for each $i$ from (\ref{zdse}).
If $s_i^* >0$, it holds $\hat{c}_i = 0$ for
$i \notin I(x^*)$.
On the other hand,
if $s_i^* = 0$, it holds that $i \in I(x^*)$,
so that the first row of (\ref{independent}) turns to be
$\nabla h(x^*) \hat{b} + \sum_{i \in I(x^*)} \nabla g_i(x^*) \hat{c}_i = 0$,
since $\hat{c}_i = 0$ for $i \notin I(x^*)$.
Consequently, it holds
$\hat{b}=0$ and $\hat{c}_i = 0$ for $i \in I(x^*)$
because of (A3).
As a result, we obtain $\hat{c} = 0$, and we already know
$\hat{c} = \hat{e}$ from the fourth row.
This proves the theorem.
\end{comment}
This is a well-known result and its proof is omitted.
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
\begin{comment}
\begin{remark}
This theorem shows that the algorithm to be proposed is
well posed (has a solution around the optimal solution).
\end{remark}
\end{comment}
\section{The arc-search algorithm}\label{sec:algorithm}
Given a point
${v}=({x},{y},{w},{s},{z})$ and $t>0$,
let ${v}\BL{t} =({x}\BL{t},{y}\BL{t},{w}\BL{t},{s}\BL{t},{z}\BL{t}) \in
{\mathbb{R}}^n \times {\mathbb{R}}^m \times {\mathbb{R}}^p \times {\mathbb{R}}^p\times {\mathbb{R}}^p$ be the solution of
the perturbed KKT conditions $F({v}\BL{t}) = t F({v})$ with
nonnegative conditions, that is, ${v}\BL{t}$ satisfies
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[ \begin{array}{l}
\nabla_x L({v}\BL{t}) \\
h({x}\BL{t}) \\
g({x}\BL{t})-s\BL{t} \\
\nabla_s L({v}\BL{t}) \\
{\cal D}({z}\BL{t}){s}\BL{t}
\end{array} \right]= \left[ \begin{array}{l}
t \nabla_x L({v}) \\
t h({x}) \\
t (g({x})-{s}) \\
t \nabla_s L({v}) \\
t {\cal D}({z}) {s}
\end{array} \right],
\hspace{0.1in}
({w}\BL{t}, {s}\BL{t}, {z}\BL{t}) \in {\mathbb{R}}_+^{3p}.
\label{KKTcurve}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that under some mild conditions that will be introduced as
(B1)-(B4) later, ${v}\BL{t}$ is uniquely determined for each
$t \in (0,1]$ due to the implicit
function theorem and Lemma~\ref{FpInv} below, thus we define
$C = \left\{{v}\BL{t} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p} : t \in (0,1] \right\}$.
Since the right-hand-side of (\ref{KKTcurve}) converges to zeros
when $t \to 0$,
$v\BL{t}$ also converges to
a point that satisfies the KKT conditions \eqref{KKT1} under the mild condition.
The main strategy of the arc-search algorithm is to
approximate $C$ with an ellipse.
We denote the ellipse by
\begin{equation}
{\cal E}=\lbrace v\AN{\alpha}:
v\AN{\alpha} =
\vec{a}\cos(\alpha)+\vec{b}\sin(\alpha)+\vec{c}, \alpha \in [0, 2\pi] \rbrace,
\label{ellipse}
\end{equation}
where $\vec{a} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p}$ and $\vec{b} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p}$ are
the axes of the ellipse, and $\vec{c} \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p}$ is its center.
The ellipsoid approximation of $C$ will be given
in Theorem~\ref{theorem:ellip} below.
Before formally stating Theorem~\ref{theorem:ellip}, we
introduce notation on the derivatives.
The first-order derivative at $t=1$ along $C$ is given by
$F' (v\BL{t})\vert_{t=1} = F'({v})$.
Let ${\mu}=\frac{{z}^{{\rm T}}{s}}{p}$ be the duality
measure at ${v}$ and $\sigma \in (0,1)$ be a parameter.
We use \begin{align*}
\dot{v} = (\dot{x}, \dot{y}, \dot{w}, \dot{s}, \dot{z})
\end{align*}
to denote the solution of a modified Newton system
\begin{align*}
F'({v}) \dot{v} = F({v}) - \sigma {\mu} \bar{e},
\end{align*}
where $\bar{e} = (0,0,0,0,e)$ is the vector with $p$ ones at
the bottom of the vector.
Here, we add $-\sigma {\mu} e$ to
the last element in a similar way to the strategy used in \cite{Mehrotra92,yang17}.
This modification is applied to guarantee that a substantial segment of
the ellipse satisfies $(s,z)>0$, thereby
the step size along the ellipse is greater than zero.
The system $F'({v}) \dot{v} = F({v}) - \sigma {\mu} \bar{e}$ is also written as
\begin{equation}
\left[ \begin{array}{ccccc}
\nabla_x^2 L({v}) & \nabla h({x}) & -\nabla g({x}) & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla h({x})\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla g({x})\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & -I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & I & 0 & -I \\
0 & 0 & 0 & {\cal D}({z}) & {\cal D}({s})
\end{array} \right]
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
\dot{x} \\ \dot{y} \\ \dot{w} \\ \dot{s} \\ \dot{z}
\end{array} \right]
= \left[ \begin{array}{l}
\nabla_x L({v}) \\
h({x}) \\
g({x})-{s} \\
{w}-{z} \\
{\cal D}({z}) {s} -\sigma {\mu} e
\end{array} \right].
\label{firstOrder}
\end{equation}
Next, for the second-order derivative at
$t=1$ along the curve, we define $\ddot{v} = (\ddot{x}, \ddot{y}, \ddot{w}, \ddot{s}, \ddot{z})$
as the solution of the following system:
{\footnotesize
\begin{eqnarray}
\left[ \begin{array}{ccccc}
\nabla_x^2 L(v) & \nabla h(x) & -\nabla g(x) & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla h(x)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla g(x)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & -I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & I & 0 & -I \\
0 & 0 & 0 & {\cal D}({z}) & {\cal D}({s})
\end{array} \right]
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
\ddot{x} \\ \ddot{y} \\ \ddot{w} \\ \ddot{s} \\ \ddot{z}
\end{array} \right]
= \left[ \begin{array}{l}
-(\nabla_x^3 L(v))\dot{x} \dot{x}
-2(\nabla_x^2 h(x))\dot{y} \dot{x}
+2(\nabla_x^2 g(x))\dot{z} \dot{x} \\
-(\nabla_x^2 h(x))^{{\rm T}} \dot{x} \dot{x} \\
-(\nabla_x^2 g(x))^{{\rm T}} \dot{x} \dot{x} \\
0 \\
-2{\cal D}(\dot{z}) \dot{s}
\end{array} \right].
\label{secondOrder}
\end{eqnarray}
}
The formula for computing the elements in the right-hand-side can be found in \ref{section:derivatives}.
We call $\dot{v} = (\dot{x}, \dot{y}, \dot{w} ,\dot{s}, \dot{z})$ in (\ref{firstOrder})
and $\ddot{v} = (\ddot{x}, \ddot{y}, \ddot{w},\ddot{s},\dot{z})$ in
(\ref{secondOrder}) the first derivative
and the second derivative of the ellipse ${\cal E}$, respectively.
Using $\dot{v}$ and $\ddot{v}$, we can approximate
$C$ at $t=1$ by an ellipse (\ref{ellipse})
that has the explicit form as in the following theorem.
Note that, ${v}\BL{t}$ passes ${v}$ at $t=1$ while
${v}\AN{\alpha}$ passes $v$ at $\alpha = 0$, that is,
${v}\BL{1} = {v}\AN{0} = {v}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:ellip}
\upshape{\cite{yang13}}
Suppose that an ellipse ${\cal E}$
of form \textrm{(\ref{ellipse})} passes through
a point ${v}$ at $\alpha=0$, and its first and second
order derivatives at $\alpha=0$ are
$\dot{v}$
and $\ddot{v}$, respectively. Then
${v}\AN{\alpha} = ({x}\AN{\alpha}, {y}\AN{\alpha}, {w}\AN{\alpha}, {s}\AN{\alpha}, {z}\AN{\alpha})$
of ${\cal E}$ is given by
\begin{align}
{v}\AN{\alpha} = {v} - \dot{v}\sin(\alpha)+\ddot{v}(1-\cos(\alpha))
\label{vAlpha}.
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
The computation of (\ref{vAlpha})
can be simplified as the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{eqwz}
If ${v}$ satisfies ${w}={z}$, then ${w}\AN{\alpha}={z}\AN{\alpha}$
holds for any $\alpha \in {\mathbb{R}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From the fourth row of (\ref{firstOrder}), we have
$\dot{w}-\dot{z}={w}-{z} = 0$. Similarly, the fourth
row in (\ref{secondOrder}) leads to
$\ddot{w}-\ddot{z}=0$. Therefore, the formula
(\ref{vAlpha}) gives the lemma.
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
To reach an optimal solution that satisfies the KKT conditions (\ref{KKT1})
along the ellipse ${\cal E}$,
the merit function defined by
\begin{equation}
\phi(v) = \| F(v) \|^2
\end{equation}
should sufficiently decrease at ${v}\AN{\alpha}$ for
some constants $\beta \in (0, \frac{1}{2}]$,
$\sigma \in \left(\bar{\sigma}, 1 \right)$, and step angle
$\alpha \in (0, \pi/2]$, \textit{i.e.},
\begin{equation*}
\phi({v}\AN{\alpha}) = \| F({v}\AN{\alpha}) \|^2
\le \phi({v}) (1 - 2\beta (1-\sigma) \sin(\alpha))
< \phi({v})
\label{merit}
\end{equation*}
which will be proved later.
Using the ellipsoid approximation and the merit function
$\phi(v)$, we give a framework of the proposed arc-search
algorithm.
\begin{algorithm}\label{algorithm:arc-search} {\bf (an infeasible arc-search interior-point algorithm
)} \newline\newline
\indent Parameters: $\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$,
$\beta \in (0, \frac{1}{2}]$, $\bar{\sigma} \in (0, \frac{1}{2})$, and $\gamma_{-1} \in [0.5,1)$.
\newline\indent Initial point: $v^0 = (x^0,y^0,w^0,s^0,z^0)$
such that $(w^0,s^0,z^0) \in {\mathbb{R}}_{++}^{3p}$ and $w^0=z^0$.
\newline
\newline
\indent {\bf for} iteration $k=0,1,2,\ldots$
\begin{itemize}
\item[] Step 1: If $\phi(v^k) \le \epsilon$, stop.
\item[] Step 2: Calculate $\nabla_x L(v^k)$, $h(x^k)$, $g(x^k)$,
$\nabla_x^2 L(v^k)$, $\nabla_x h(x^k)$, and $\nabla_x g(x^k)$.
\item[] Step 3: Select $\sigma_k$ such that
$\bar{\sigma} \le \sigma_k < \frac{1}{2}$
and let
$\dot{v}^k = (\dot{x}^k,\dot{y}^k,\dot{w}^k,\dot{s}^k,\dot{z}^k)$
be the solution of (\ref{firstOrder}) at ${v} = v^k$.
\item[] Step 4: Calculate
$\left(\nabla_x^3 L \right)\dot{x}\dot{x}$,
$\left(\nabla_x^2 h \right)\dot{x}\dot{y}$,
$\left( \nabla_x^2 g \right) \dot{x}\dot{z}$,
$\left( \nabla_x^2 h \right)^{{\rm T}} \dot{x}\dot{x}$,
$\left( \nabla_x^2 g \right)^{{\rm T}} \dot{x}\dot{x}$, and
${\cal D}(\dot{z})\dot{s}$.
\item[] Step 5: Let
$\ddot{v}^k = (\ddot{x}^k,\ddot{y}^k,\ddot{w}^k,\ddot{s}^k,\ddot{z}^k)$
be the solution of (\ref{secondOrder}) at ${v} = v^k$.
\item[] Step 6: Choose $\gamma_k$ such that $\frac{1}{2} \le \gamma_{k}
\le \gamma_{k-1}$. Find appropriate
$\alpha_k > 0$ by (\ref{alphaK}) below using $\gamma_k$.
\item[] Step 7: Update $v^{k+1} = v^k\AN{\alpha_k} = v^k
- \dot{v}^k \sin(\alpha_k) + \ddot{v}^k (1-\cos(\alpha_k))$ .
\end{itemize}
\indent\indent {\bf end (for)}
\hfill \qed
\label{mainAlgo1}
\end{algorithm}
As an interior-point method, we should choose the step angle $\alpha_k \in (0, \pi/2] $ which satisfies
the following conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(C1)] $(w^k\AN{\alpha_k}),s^k\AN{\alpha_k},z^k\AN{\alpha_k}) \in {\mathbb{R}}_{++}^{3p}$.
\item[(C2)] The generated sequence $\{v^k\}$
should be bounded.
\item[(C3)] $\phi(v^{k+1}) = \phi(v^k\AN{\alpha_k}) < \phi(v^k)$.
\end{itemize}
We can realize (C1) by
a process developed in \cite{yang17}. Due to Lemma~\ref{eqwz}, we can always have $z^k\AN{\alpha}=w^k\AN{\alpha}$.
Fix a small $\delta \in (0,1)$.
We will select the largest $\tilde{\alpha}$ such that all
$\alpha \in [0, \tilde{\alpha}]$ satisfy
\begin{subequations}\label{positive}
\begin{align}
w^k\AN{\alpha}&=w^k - \dot{w}^k\sin(\alpha)+\ddot{w}^k(1-\cos(\alpha))
\ge \delta w^k, \label{key1a} \\
s^k\AN{\alpha}&=s^k - \dot{s}^k\sin(\alpha)+\ddot{s}^k(1-\cos(\alpha))
\ge \delta s^k. \label{key1b}
\end{align}
\label{analyticArc}
\end{subequations}
To this end, for each
$i \in \lbrace 1,\ldots, p \rbrace$, we select the largest
$\alpha_{w_i}^k$ such that
the $i$th inequality of (\ref{key1a}) holds
for any $\alpha \in [0, \alpha_{w_i}^k ]$
and the largest
$\alpha_{s_i}^k$ such that
the $i$th inequality of (\ref{key1b}) holds for any $\alpha \in [0, \alpha_{s_i}^k ]$ .
We then define
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\alpha}_k=\min_{i \in \lbrace 1,\ldots, p \rbrace}
\lbrace \min \{\alpha_{w_i}^k, \alpha_{s_i}^k, \frac{\pi}{2} \} \rbrace.
\label{alpha}
\end{equation}
The largest $\alpha_{w_i}$ and $\alpha_{s_i}$ can be given in analytical
forms. See \ref{section:ComputeAlpha}.
For (C2), we define
\begin{equation}
\hat{m}_k(\alpha) = \min ({\cal D}(z^k\AN{\alpha}) s^k\AN{\alpha} )- \gamma_k
\min ({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\phi (v\AN{\alpha})}{\phi (v^0)}.
\label{measurePos}
\end{equation}
If $\alpha_k$ is chosen such that $\hat{m}_k(\alpha_k) \ge 0$,
$(w_k,s_k,z_k)$ should not
approach to the boundary too fast,
and this guarantees (C2).
This essentially has the same effect as the wide neighborhood
of interior-point methods \cite{wright97}.
Here, we define
\[
\hat{\alpha}_k = \max\left\{ \alpha \in \left(0, \frac{\pi}{2}\right] : \hat{m}_k(\alpha) \ge 0 \right\}.
\]
Finally, to realize (C3), we present the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\alpha \in (0, \frac{\pi}{2}]$, $\beta \in (0, \frac{1}{2}]$ and $\sigma \in \left(\bar{\sigma}, 1 \right)$.
Let $\mu = \frac{z^{{\rm T}}s}{p}$.
If
\begin{equation}
\phi({v}\AN{\alpha}) \le \phi({v}) - \beta \sin(\alpha) \nabla_{\alpha} \phi({v}\AN{\alpha})|_{\alpha=0},
\label{cond1}
\end{equation}
then
\begin{equation}
\phi({v}\AN{\alpha}) \le \phi({v}) (1 - 2\beta (1-\sigma) \sin(\alpha))
< \phi({v}).
\label{conC1}
\end{equation}
\label{decrease}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The right inequality in (\ref{conC1}) is clear for given
$\alpha, \beta$, and $\sigma$. The left inequality in (\ref{conC1})
follows from a similar argument in \cite{ettz96}.
Since $\dot{v}$ is defined as the solution of
$F'({v}) \dot{v}=F({v})-\sigma {\mu} \bar{e}$ at $\mu = \frac{z^{\rm T} s}{p}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\alpha} \phi({v}\AN{\alpha})|_{\alpha=0} =2F({v})^{{\rm T}}F'({v})
\dot{v}
=2 F({v})^{{\rm T}}( F({v}) -\sigma {\mu} \bar{e})
=2( \phi({v})-\sigma {\mu}^2/p),
\label{tmp1}
\end{equation}
where the last equality is derived from
$F({v})^{{\rm T}} (\sigma {\mu} \bar{e}) = \sigma {\mu}
\sum_{i=1}^{p} {z}_i {s}_i = \sigma {\mu} {z}^{{\rm T}}{s}
=\sigma {\mu}^2 /p$.
Since $|{z}^{{\rm T}}{s}| \le \sqrt{p} \| {\cal D}({z}) {s} \|_2$ and $p \ge 1$,
we have
\[
{\mu}^2/p =({z}^{{\rm T}}{s})^2 /p^2 \cdot (1/p)
\le \|{\cal D}({z}){s} \|_2^2 \cdot 1 \le \| F({v}) \|_2^2 = \phi({v}).
\]
Substituting this inequality into (\ref{tmp1}), we have
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\alpha} \phi({v}\AN{\alpha})|_{\alpha=0} \ge 2\phi({v}) (1-\sigma).
\label{objReduction}
\end{equation}
From (\ref{cond1}), it holds
\[
\phi({v}\AN{\alpha}) \le \phi({v}) - 2 \beta \sin(\alpha) \phi({v}) (1-\sigma)
=\phi({v}) (1 - 2\beta (1-\sigma) \sin(\alpha) ).
\]
This completes the proof.
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
We define
$\check{\alpha}_k$ as the largest $\alpha$ that satisfies
(\ref{cond1}), therefore, for a small constant parameter $\delta$, we define
\begin{equation}
\check{\alpha}_k = \max\left\{ \alpha \in \left(0, \frac{\pi}{2}\right] :
\beta \sin(\alpha) \nabla_{\alpha} \phi({v^k}\AN{\alpha})|_{\alpha=0} >\delta
\right\}.
\label{alphaCheck}
\end{equation}
From these observation, the step angle in the $k$th iteration
should be taken as:
\begin{equation}
\alpha_k = \min\{\tilde{\alpha}_k, \hat{\alpha}_k, \check{\alpha}_k \} > 0.
\label{alphaK}
\end{equation}
We will show through the convergence analysis in the next section that
the sequence $\{\alpha_k\}$ is bounded below and away from zero
during the iterations of algorithm.
A sequence $\{c_k\} \subset {\mathbb{R}} $ is said to be \textit{bounded below and away from zero
if there exists $\bar{c} > 0 $ such that $c_k \ge \bar{c}$
for all $k \ge 1$.}
\begin{remark}
(C1) is enforced by (\ref{analyticArc}), (C3) is proved
to hold in Lemma \ref{decrease}, and (C2) will be
proved to hold in the next setion.
\end{remark}
\section{Convergence analysis}\label{sec:convergence}
To discuss the global convergence of Algorithm \ref{mainAlgo1},
we define a set $\Omega(\epsilon)$ for $\epsilon > 0$ as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\Omega (\epsilon) = \left\{ v \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p}: \epsilon \le \phi(v) \le \phi(v^0),
\ \min ({\cal D}(s)z) \ge \frac{1}{2} \min ({\cal D}(s^0)z^0)
\frac{\phi (v\AN{\alpha})}{\phi (v^0)}
\right\}.
\label{epsilonSet}
\end{equation*}
\begin{comment}
We also define a set $\Omega_0$ that includes the points which satisfies the KKT conditions~(\ref{KKT1}).
\begin{equation*}
\Omega_0 = \left\{ v \in {\mathbb{R}}^{n+m+3p}: 0 \le \phi(v) \le \phi(v^0),
\,\,\, \min ({\cal D}(s)z) \ge \frac{1}{2}
\min ({\cal D}(s^0)z^0) \frac{\mu}{\mu_0}
\right\}.
\label{epsilonSet0}
\end{equation*}
\end{comment}
Some additional assumptions similar to the ones used in
\cite{ettz96} are introduced.
\vspace{0.05in}
\noindent
{\bf Assumptions}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(B1)] In the set $\Omega(\epsilon)$,
the columns of $\nabla h(x)$ are linearly
independent.
\item[(B2)] The sequence $\{ x^k \} \subset {\mathbb{R}}^n$ is bounded.
\item[(B3)] The matrix $\nabla_x^2 L(v)+\nabla g(x) {\cal D}(s)^{-1} {\cal D}(z) (\nabla g(x))^{{\rm T}}$
is invertible for any $v$ in any compact subset of $\Omega(\epsilon)$.
\item[(B4)] Let $I_s^k$ be the index set
$\{ i: 1 \le i \le p, \,\, s^k_i =0 \}$. Then,
the determinant of $(J^k)^{{\rm T}} J^k$
is bounded below and away from zero, where $J^k$ is a matrix
whose column vectors are composed of
\[
\{ \nabla h_j (x^k) : j = 1, \ldots, m\} \cup
\{\nabla g_i(x^k): i \in I_s^k \}.
\]
\end{itemize}
\begin{remark}
Note that if $v^k$ is close to $v^*$ for sufficiently large $k$, (B1) and (B4)
automatically hold from (A3). (B3) also holds from (A4) for a small compact
subset of $\Omega(\epsilon)$ around $v^*$. It is worthwhile to point out
that Assumptions (B1), (B2), and (B3) are not more restrictive than the
assumptions of (C1), (C2), and (C3) in \cite{ettz96}, which is a widely cited article.
\end{remark}
The convergence analysis is divided into a series of lemmas.
Through Lemma \ref{boundAboveBelow} to Lemma \ref{ettzTheorem},
we show that all the vectors and the matrices are bounded. Then, the positivenesses of
$\tilde{\alpha}^k, \check{\alpha}^k$ and $\hat{\alpha}^k$
are guaranteed in Lemmas~\ref{barAlpha}, \ref{checkAlpha} and \ref{hatAlpha},
respectively. Using these lemmas, the convergence of Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1}
will be established in Theorem~\ref{global}.
\begin{lemma}\label{boundAboveBelow}
Assume that (B1)-(B4) hold. If the sequence $\{v^k\}$ satisfies $\{v^k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$
for some $\epsilon > 0$,
then $\{ v^k \}$ is bounded
and $\{(w^k, s^k, z^k)\} \subset {\mathbb{R}}_{++}^{3p}$
is bounded below and away from zero.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From (B2) and the continuity of $g$, the boundedness of $\{ x^k \}$
implies that $\{ g(x^k) \}$ is bounded.
In view of Lemma \ref{decrease}, Step~6 of Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1} guarantees that
\eqref{conC1} holds, which indicates that
$\{ \phi(v^k) \}$ is monotonically decreasing. Therefore,
$\| g(x^k) -s^k \|^2 \le \|F(v^k)\|^2 = \phi(v^k) \le \phi(v^0)$ is bounded.
Since $\| s^k \| \le \| g(x^k) -s^k \| + \| g(x^k) \|$, we know that
$\{s^k\}$ is bounded.
We prove that $\{z^k\}$ is also bounded.
In view of Lemma~\ref{eqwz}, we have $w^k = z^k$.
Suppose by contradiction that $z_i^k =
w_i^k \rightarrow \infty$ when $k\to \infty$ for some $i$.
Since $\{ \phi(v^k)\}$ is
bounded as discussed above, $\{\nabla_x L(v^k)\}$ and $\{{\cal D}(z^k) s^k\}$ are bounded.
Furthermore, (B2) implies that $\{ \nabla f(x^k) \}$ is bounded.
Therefore, in view of (\ref{dlagrangian}),
\[
\| \nabla h(x^k) y^k-\nabla g(x^k) w^k \|
\le \| \nabla_x L(v^k) \|
+ \| \nabla f(x^k) \|
\]
is also bounded.
This indicates that
$\| \nabla h(x^k) y^k-\nabla g(x^k) z^k \|$ is bounded
because of $w^k = z^k$. As $ w_i^k \rightarrow \infty$
implies $\| (y^k, w^k) \| \rightarrow \infty$, it holds
\begin{equation}
\| \nabla h(x^k) y^k-\nabla g(x^k) w^k \|/ (\| (y^k,w^k) \|)
\rightarrow 0.
\label{contradict}
\end{equation}
Let $(\hat{y}, \hat{w})$ be an accumulation point of
$\{ (y^k, w^k) / \| (y^k, w^k) \|\}$. Clearly $\| (\hat{y},\hat{w}) \| =1$.
The boundedness of $\{{\cal D}(z^k)s^k\}$
implies that $\{z_i^k s_i^k\}$ is bounded for each $i$.
Since $\{s^k\}$ is bounded, we can take an accumulation point $\hat{s}$,
and we define a set $I_s = \{i : 1 \le i \le p, \hat{s}_i = 0\}$.
Due to $w_i^k = z_i^k$,
$w_i^k \rightarrow \infty$ indicates
$\hat{s}_i = 0$, therefore, $i \in I_s$.
If $j \notin I_s$, then $w_j^k < \infty$, hence
$\hat{w}_j = 0$.
From (\ref{contradict}), it holds that
\[
\nabla h(x^k) \hat{y} -\nabla g(x^k) \hat{w} =
\nabla h(x^k) \hat{y} - \sum_{i \in I_s} \nabla g_i(x^k) \hat{w}_i \to 0.
\]
Since $\| (\hat{y},\hat{w}) \| =1$, this contradicts with (B4).
Therefore, $\{w^k\}$ and $\{z^k\}$ are bounded.
Since $\{v^k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$, the sequence $\{ z_i^k s_i^k \}$
are all bounded below and away from zero for each $i=1, \ldots, p$;
more precisely, $z_i^k s_i^k \ge \frac{1}{2} \min({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\phi(v^k)}{\phi(v^0)} \ge \frac{1}{2} \min({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\epsilon}{\phi(v^0)}$ for each $i$.
Therefore, $\{ z_i^k \}$ is bounded below and away from zero, since
$\{ s_i^k \}$ is bounded.
Similarly, $\{ s_i^k \}$ is also bounded below and away from zero.
Finally, using (\ref{dlagrangian}) and (B1), we have
\[
y^k = ((\nabla h(x^k))^{{\rm T}}\nabla h(x^k))^{-1}(\nabla h(x^k))^{{\rm T}}
\left[ \nabla_x L(v^k) - \nabla f(x^k)
+ \nabla g(x^k) w^k
\right],
\]
hence, $\{y^k\}$ is bounded because $\{x^k\}$ and $\{w^k\}$ are bounded.
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
The invertiblility of a block matrix guaranteed in the following lemma
will be used to show the boundedness
of the inverse of the Jacobian $\{F'(v^k)\}$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:inverseFprime} below.
\begin{lemma}\label{blockInverse}\upshape{\cite{ls02}}
Let $R$ be a block matrix
\[
R=\left[ \begin{array}{cc}
A & B \\ C & D \end{array} \right].
\]
If $A$ and $D-CA^{-1}B$ are invertible,
or $D$ and $A-BD^{-1}C$ are invertible, then $R$ is invertible.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:inverseFprime}
Assume that (B1)-(B4) hold. If $\{v^k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$ for some $\epsilon > 0$,
then $\{ [F'(v^k)]^{-1} \}$ is bounded.
\label{invertibility}
\label{FpInv}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We decompose $F'(v^k)$ into sub-matrices:
\begin{align}
F' (v^k) = \left[ \begin{array}{ccccc}
\nabla_x^2 L(v^k) & \nabla h(x^k) & -\nabla g(x^k) & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla h(x^k)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla g(x^k)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & -I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & I & 0 & -I \\
0 & 0 & 0 & {\cal D}(z^k) & {\cal D}(s^k)
\end{array} \right]
= \left[ \begin{array}{cc}A^k & B^k \\ C^k & D^k \end{array}\right]
\end{align}
where
\begin{align*}
& A^k = \left[ \begin{array}{cc}
\nabla_x^2 L(v^k) & \nabla h(x^k) \\
(\nabla h(x^k))^{\rm T} & 0
\end{array} \right],
B^k = \left[ \begin{array}{ccc}
-\nabla g(x^k) & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
\end{array} \right], \\
& C^k = \left[ \begin{array}{cc}
(\nabla g(x^k))^{\rm T} & 0 \\
0 & 0 \\
0 & 0
\end{array} \right], \ \text{and} \
D^k = \left[ \begin{array}{ccc}
0 & -I & 0 \\
I & 0 & -I \\
0 & {\cal D}(z^k) & {\cal D}(s^k)
\end{array} \right].
\end{align*}
From Lemma \ref{boundAboveBelow}, the two sequences $\{s^k\}$ and $\{z^k\}$ are
bounded and each component of the two sequences are bounded below and away from zeros,
therefore, the sequence $\{(D^k)^{-1}\}$ is also bounded, where
\[
(D^k)^{-1} = \left[ \begin{array}{ccc}
{\cal D}(s^k)^{-1}{\cal D}(z^k) & I & {\cal D}(s^k)^{-1} \\
-I & 0 & 0 \\
{\cal D}(s^k)^{-1}{\cal D}(z^k) & 0 & {\cal D}(s^k)^{-1}
\end{array} \right].
\]
We know that
$\nabla_x^2 L(v^k) + \nabla g(x^k) {\cal D}(s^k)^{-1} {\cal D}(z^k) \nabla g(x^k)^{{\rm T}}$ is invertible from Lemma~\ref{boundAboveBelow} and (B3),
therefore,
$(\nabla h(x^k))^{{\rm T}} \left( \nabla_x^2 L(v^k) + \nabla g(x^k) {\cal D}(s^k)^{-1} {\cal D}(z^k) (\nabla g(x^k))^{{\rm T}}
\right)^{-1} \nabla h(x^k)$ is also invertible from (B1).
Therefore,
\[
H^k := A^k - B^k(D^k)^{-1}C^k = \left[ \begin{array}{cc}
\nabla_x^2 L(v^k) + \nabla g(x^k) {\cal D}(s^k)^{-1} {\cal D}(z^k) \nabla g(x^k)^{{\rm T}} & \nabla h(x^k) \\
(\nabla h(x^k))^{{\rm T}} & 0
\end{array} \right]
\]
is invertible from Lemma \ref{blockInverse}.
Since
$A^k$ and $H^k$ are invertible, we again use Lemma \ref{blockInverse}
to show that
$F'(v^k)$
is invertible.
Next, we show the boundedness
of $\{[F'(v^k)]^{-1}\}$.
Since $[F'(v^k)]^{-1}$ is given by
\[
[F'(v^k)]^{-1} = \left[\begin{array}{cc}
(H^k)^{-1} & -(H^k)^{-1} B^k (D^k)^{-1} \\
-(D^k)^{-1} C^k (H^k)^{-1} & (D^k)^{-1} C^k (H^k)^{-1} B^k (D^k)^{-1} + (D^k)^{-1}
\end{array}\right],
\]
we need to show $\{(H^k)^{-1}\}$ is bounded,
For each $k$, $(H^k)^{-1}$ is given as follows:
\[
(H^k)^{-1} = \left[\begin{array}{cc}
\bar{L}^{-1} - \bar{L}^{-1} \nabla h(x^k) \bar{H}^{-1} (\nabla h(x^k))^{{\rm T}} \bar{L}^{-1} & \bar{L}^{-1} \nabla h(x^k) \bar{H}^{-1} \\
\bar{H}^{-1} (\nabla h(x^k))^{{\rm T}} \bar{L}^{-1} & - \bar{H}^{-1}
\end{array}\right],
\]
where $\bar{L} =
\nabla_x^2 L(v^k) + \nabla g(x^k) {\cal D}(s^k)^{-1} {\cal D}(z^k) (\nabla g(x^k))^{{\rm T}}$ and $\bar{H} = (\nabla h(x^k))^{{\rm T}} \bar{L}^{-1} \nabla h(x^k)$.
Therefore, it is enough to show
the boundedness of $\bar{L}$ and $\bar{H}$, and this is done by
Assumptions (B4) and (B3), and Lemma~\ref{boundAboveBelow}.
This completes the proof.
\hfill\qed
\end{proof}
The following lemma follows directly from Lemma~\ref{invertibility}.
\begin{lemma}\label{ettzTheorem}
Assume that (B1)-(B4) hold. If $\{v_k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$,
then (i) Steps 3 and 5 in Algorithm \ref{mainAlgo1} are well-defined,
and (ii) the sequences $\{ \dot{v}^k \}$ and $\{ \ddot{v}^k \}$
are bounded.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The claim (i) follows directly from Lemma~\ref{invertibility}.
In the view of (\ref{firstOrder}), the boundedness of
$\{ [F'(v^k)]^{-1} \}$ and $\{ v^k \}$ guarantees that of
$\{ \dot{v}^k \}$. Using
(\ref{secondOrder}), the boundedness of $\{ \ddot{v}^k \}$
can be shown from a similar argument.
\hfill\qed
\end{proof}
These lemmas allow us to show that $\{\tilde{\alpha}_k \}$
is bounded below and away from zero.
\begin{lemma}
Assume that (B1)-(B4) hold.
If $\{v^k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$, then the sequence
$\{ \tilde{\alpha}_k \}$ is bounded below and away from zero.
\label{barAlpha}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We can rewrite (\ref{key1a}) as
\begin{equation}
(1 - \delta) w^k +\dot{w}^k\sin(\alpha)+\ddot{w}^k(1-\cos(\alpha))
\ge 0.
\label{alphaiNew}
\end{equation}
From Lemma \ref{boundAboveBelow},
$\{(w^k, s^k, z^k)\} \subset {\mathbb{R}}_{++}^{3p}$
is bounded below and away from zero, thus
$\{(1 - \delta) w^k\} $ is bounded below and away from zero.
Since $\{\dot{w}^k\}$ and $\{\ddot{w}^k\}$ are bounded from Lemma~\ref{ettzTheorem},
$\{\tilde{\alpha}_k\}$ should be bounded below and away from zero such that the
inequality (\ref{alphaiNew}) holds for all $\alpha \in [0, \tilde{\alpha}_k]$.
We can apply the same arguments
to $\{s^k \}$ and $\{z^k \}$. This proves the Lemma.
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
Next, we show that $\{ \check{\alpha}_k \}$ is bounded below and away from zero.
\begin{lemma}
If $\{v^k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$, then the sequence
$\{ \check{\alpha}_k \}$ is bounded below and away from zero.
\label{checkAlpha}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\{v^k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$, we have
$\epsilon \le \phi(v^k)$.
From (\ref{objReduction}),
it follows that
$\nabla_{\alpha} \phi({v}\AN{\alpha})|_{\alpha=0} \ge
2\phi({v}) (1-\sigma) \ge 2\epsilon(1-\sigma)
\ge 2 \epsilon (1-\bar{\sigma})$.
Therefore, if $\sin(\alpha) \ge \frac{\delta}{2\beta \epsilon(1-\bar{\sigma})}$,
we have $\beta \sin(\alpha) \nabla_{\alpha} \phi({v}\AN{\alpha})|_{\alpha=0}
> \delta$. From \eqref{alphaCheck}, we can take $\check{\alpha}_k \ge
\sin^{-1}\left(\frac{\delta}{2\beta \epsilon(1-\bar{\sigma})}\right)$,
and this implies $\{\check{\alpha}_k\}$ is bounded below and away from zero.
\begin{comment}
Therefore, $\phi({v}) - \beta \sin(\alpha) \nabla_{\alpha} \phi({v}\AN{\alpha})|_{\alpha=0} \le
\phi({v}) - 2 \beta \sin(\alpha) \epsilon(1-\sigma).$
In the view of (\ref{cond1}), \modify{there is a
$\check{\alpha}$ bounded below and away from zero such that
$\phi({v}(\alpha))$ will reduce at least a constant, }
{there is a
$\check{\alpha} > 0 $ such that
$\phi({v}(\alpha))$
will reduce at least a constant for all $\alpha \in [0, \check{\alpha}]$, }
\textit{i.e.}, (\ref{conC1}) holds.
\end{comment}
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
Finally, we show that $\{ \hat{\alpha}_k \}$ is bounded below and away from zero in Lemma~\ref{hatAlpha} using
a formula related to the arc of ellipse ${\cal E}$.
\begin{lemma}
Assume that ${v}$ is the current point (\textit{i.e.}, $v = v^k$ at the $k$th iteration) and $\dot{v}$ and $\ddot{v}$ satisfy
(\ref{firstOrder}) and (\ref{secondOrder}). Let $v\AN{\alpha}$ be computed with (\ref{vAlpha}). Then,
\begin{eqnarray}
{z}_i\AN{\alpha} {s}_i\AN{\alpha} & = & {z}_i {s}_i (1-\sin(\alpha)) +\sigma {\mu} \sin(\alpha)
-(\dot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i+\ddot{z}_i\dot{s}_i)\sin(\alpha)(1-\cos(\alpha))
\nonumber \\
& & +(\ddot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i-\dot{z}_i\dot{s}_i) (1-\cos(\alpha))^2.
\label{compWise}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using the last rows of (\ref{firstOrder}) and (\ref{secondOrder}),
we have
\begin{eqnarray}
{z}_i\AN{\alpha}{s}_i\AN{\alpha} & = &
[{z}_i-\dot{z}_i\sin(\alpha)+\ddot{z}_i(1-\cos(\alpha))]
[{s}_i-\dot{s}_i\sin(\alpha)+\ddot{s}_i(1-\cos(\alpha))]
\nonumber \\
& = & {z}_i {s}_i-(\dot{z}_i{s}_i+ {z}_i\dot{s}_i)\sin(\alpha)
+(\ddot{z}_i {s}_i+ {z}_i\ddot{s}_i) (1-\cos(\alpha))
+ \dot{z}_i\dot{s}_i \sin^2(\alpha) \nonumber \\
& & -(\dot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i+\ddot{z}_i\dot{s}_i)
\sin(\alpha)(1-\cos(\alpha))
+\ddot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i (1-\cos(\alpha))^2
\nonumber \\
& = & {z}_i {s}_i (1-\sin(\alpha)) +\sigma {\mu} \sin(\alpha) -2\dot{z}_i\dot{s}_i
(1-\cos(\alpha)) + \dot{z}_i\dot{s}_i \sin^2(\alpha) \nonumber \\
& & -(\dot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i+\ddot{z}_i\dot{s}_i)
\sin(\alpha)(1-\cos(\alpha))
+\ddot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i (1-\cos(\alpha))^2
\nonumber \\
& = & {z}_i {s}_i (1-\sin(\alpha)) +\sigma {\mu} \sin(\alpha)
+\dot{z}_i\dot{s}_i (\sin^2(\alpha)+2\cos(\alpha)-2)
\nonumber \\
& & -(\dot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i+\ddot{z}_i\dot{s}_i)\sin(\alpha)(1-\cos(\alpha))
+\ddot{z}_i\ddot{s}_i (1-\cos(\alpha))^2.
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting $\sin^2(\alpha)+2\cos(\alpha)-2=-1+2\cos(\alpha)
-\cos^2(\alpha)=-(1-\cos(\alpha))^2$ into the last equation gives
(\ref{compWise}).
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
Assume that (B1)-(B4) hold. If $\{v^k\} \subset \Omega(\epsilon)$
for some $\epsilon > 0$, then $\{\hat{\alpha}_k\}$ is bounded below and away from zero.
\label{hatAlpha}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For each $k$,
find $i$ such that $z_i^1 s_i^1 = \min({\cal D}(z^1) s^1)$, and let
$\eta_1^k= \dot{z}_i^k\ddot{s}_i^k+\ddot{z}_i^k\dot{s}_i^k$ and
$\eta_2^k= \ddot{z}_i^k\ddot{s}_i^k-\dot{z}_i^k\dot{s}_i^k$.
Since $\{\dot{v}^k\}$ and $\{\ddot{v}^k\}$ are bounded
due to Lemma~\ref{ettzTheorem},
the sequences $\{ | \eta_1^k | \}$ and $\{ | \eta_2^k | \}$
are also bounded.
The proof is based on induction.
For $k=1$, from (\ref{compWise}) and (\ref{conC1}), we have
\begin{eqnarray}
& & \min ({\cal D}(z^1) s^1) - \frac{1}{2} \min ({\cal D}(z^0) s^0) \frac{\phi (v^1)}{\phi (v^0)} \nonumber \\
& \ge & z_i^1 s_i^1 - \frac{1}{2} \min (z^0 s^0)
[1- 2\beta (1-\sigma_0) \sin(\alpha_0)] \nonumber \\
& \ge & {z}_i^0 {s}_i^0 (1-\sin(\alpha_0)) +\sigma_0 {\mu_0} \sin(\alpha)
-\eta_1^0\sin(\alpha_0)(1-\cos(\alpha_0))
+\eta_2^0 (1-\cos(\alpha_0))^2 \nonumber \\
& & -\frac{1}{2} (z_i^0 s_i^0) [1- 2\beta (1-\sigma_0) \sin(\alpha_0)] \nonumber \\
& \ge & \frac{1}{2} {z}_i^0 {s}_i^0 - {z}_i^0 {s}_i^0\sin(\alpha_0)
+\sigma_0 {\mu_0} \sin(\alpha_0) -\eta_1^0\sin(\alpha_0)(1-\cos(\alpha_0)) \nonumber \\
& & +\eta_2^0 (1-\cos(\alpha_0))^2
+{z}_i^0 {s}_i^0 \beta (1-\sigma_0) \sin(\alpha_0).
\label{inter1}
\end{eqnarray}
Since $v^k \in \Omega(\epsilon)$, we know
$z_i^k s_i^k \ge \frac{1}{2} \min({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\phi(v^k)}{\phi(v^0)} \ge \frac{1}{2} \min({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\epsilon}{\phi(v^0)} > 0$, therefore
there must be $\alpha_0 > 0 $ such that
the last express in (\ref{inter1}) is greater than zero.
Next, for $k>1$, assume that there exists $\alpha_{k-1} >0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\min ({\cal D}(z^k) s^k) - \frac{1}{2} \min ({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\phi (v^k)}{\phi (v^0)} > 0,
\label{inter2}
\end{equation}
then we show that there exists $\alpha_{k}>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\min ({\cal D}(z^{k+1}) s^{k+1}) - \frac{1}{2} \min ({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\phi (v^{k+1})}{\phi (v^0)} > 0.
\nonumber
\end{equation}
From (\ref{compWise}) and (\ref{conC1}), it holds that
\begin{eqnarray}
& & \min ({\cal D}(z^{k+1}) s^{k+1}) - \frac{1}{2} \min ({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\phi (v^{k+1})}{\phi (v^0)} \nonumber \\
& \ge & z_i^{k+1} s_i^{k+1} - \frac{1}{2} \min ({\cal D}(z^0) s_j^0)
\frac{\phi (v^k)}{\phi (v^0)}[1- 2\beta (1-\sigma_k) \sin(\alpha_k)]
\nonumber \\
& \ge & {z}_i^k {s}_i^k (1-\sin(\alpha_k)) +\sigma_k {\mu_k} \sin(\alpha_k)
-\eta_1^k\sin(\alpha_k)(1-\cos(\alpha_k))
+\eta_2^k (1-\cos(\alpha_k))^2 \nonumber \\
& & -\frac{1}{2} \min ({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\phi (v^k)}{\phi (v^0)}[1- 2\beta (1-\sigma_k) \sin(\alpha_k)]
\label{inter3}
\end{eqnarray}
Since ${z}_i^k {s}_i^k \ge \min ({\cal D}(z^k) s^k) \ge \frac{1}{2} \min({\cal D}(z^0) s^0)
\frac{\epsilon}{\phi(v^0)} > 0 $ and (\ref{inter2}),
we can find $\alpha_k >0$ such
that the last express in (\ref{inter3}) is greater than zero.
We already know that $\{z_i^k s_i^k\}$ and $\{\sigma_k\}$ are bounded below and away from zero, and $\{ |\eta_1^k|\}$ and $\{|\eta_2^k|\}$ are bounded
due to Lemma~\ref{ettzTheorem}. Therefore, $\{\hat{\alpha}_k\}$
is bounded below and away from zero.
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
We are now ready to prove the convergence of Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1}.
From Lemmas~\ref{barAlpha}, \ref{checkAlpha}, \ref{hatAlpha},
we already establish that $\{\alpha_k\}$ is bounded below and away from zero.
\begin{theorem}\label{global}
Assume (B1)-(B4) hold and $\phi(v^0)$ is bounded. Then,
(i) for all $k \ge 0$, the sequence $\{\phi(v^k)\}$
decreases in a constant rate, and
(ii) the algorithm terminates in finite iterations and
the finds an $\epsilon$-approximate solution of the
problem \eqref{NP}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since $\{\alpha_k\}$ is bounded below and away from zero,
there must be $\bar{\alpha} > 0$ such that
$\check{\alpha}_k \ge \alpha_k \ge \bar{\alpha} > 0$.
This shows that $\{\phi(v^k)\}$ decreases in a constant rate
due to \eqref{conC1}.
Since $\phi(v^0)$ is bounded, and $\{\phi(v^k)\}$ decreases
in a constant rate, it needs only a finite iterations $K$
to $\phi(v^K) \le \epsilon$
with $(w^K, s^K, z^K) \in {\mathbb{R}}_+^{3p}$.
\hfill \qed
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Although assumptions similar to \cite{ettz96} are made
in (B1)-(B4), we obtained a stronger finite convergence
result than \cite{ettz96}.
\end{remark}
\section{Numerical Experiments}\label{sec:experiments}
We conducted numerical experiments to compare
the performance of the proposed arc-search algorithm (Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1}) and a line-search algorithm.
A framework of the line-search algorithm we used
in the numerical experiments is given as follows.
The main difference from Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1}
is that Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo_line} uses only $\dot{v}$ and not $\ddot{v}$.
\begin{algorithm} \label{mainAlgo_line}
{\bf (an infeasible line-search type interior-point algorithm for nonlinear
programming problems)} \newline
\indent Parameters: $\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$,
$\beta \in (0, \frac{1}{2}]$, and $\gamma_{-1}=1$.
\newline\indent Initial point: $v^0 = (x^0,y^0,w^0,s^0,z^0)$
such that $(w^0,s^0,z^0)>0$ and $w^0=z^0$.
\newline
\newline
\indent {\bf for} iteration $k=0,1,2,\ldots$
\begin{itemize}
\item[] Step 1: If $\phi(v^k) \le \epsilon$, stop.
\item[] Step 2: Calculate $\nabla_x L(v^k)$, $h(x^k)$, $g(x^k)$,
$\nabla_x^2 L(v^k)$, $\nabla_x h(x^k)$, and $\nabla_x g(x^k)$.
\item[] Step 3: Select $\sigma_k$ such that
$\bar{\sigma} \le \sigma_k < \frac{1}{2}$
and let
$\dot{v}^k = (\dot{x}^k,\dot{y}^k,\dot{w}^k,\dot{s}^k,\dot{z}^k)$
of the solution of (\ref{firstOrder}) with ${v} = v^k$.
\item[] Step 4: Choose $\gamma_k$ such that $\frac{1}{2} \le \gamma_{k}
\le \gamma_{k-1}$, and find appropriate
$\alpha_k > 0$ using $\gamma_k$
such that $w^{k+1} \in {\mathbb{R}}_{++}^p, s^{k+1} \in {\mathbb{R}}_{++}^p$
and $\phi(v^{k+1}) < \phi(v^k)$ hold.
\item[] Step 5: Update $v^{k+1} = v^k + \alpha_k \dot{v}^k$.
\end{itemize}
\indent\indent {\bf end (for)}
\hfill \qed
\end{algorithm}
A main objective of the numerical experiments in this paper is to observe numerical behaviors of the arc-search algorithm (Algorithm~\ref{algorithm:arc-search}) compared with
the line-search algorithm (Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo_line})
Existing packages often employ many techniques
to improve numerical stability or computation time.
However, such techniques might prevent us from focusing the difference of two algorithms
and
implementing such techniques should be separated as a future work,
therefore, we did not include existing packages in the numerical experiments.
For the test problems, we used the CUTEst test set \cite{gould2015cutest}. According to the types of problems, we classified the entire set
into four types; LP (linear programming) problems, QP (quadratic programming) problems, QCQP (quadratically-constrained quadratic programming) problems and Others.
Here, the problems in ``Others'' include a function whose degree is higher than 2.
In the numerical experiments, we excluded LP and QP types,
since the proposed arc-search algorithm in this paper is designed for NLPs,
and existing arc-search algorithms \cite{yang13, yang11, yy18}
proposed for LP and QP types are more effective for these types.
The variable size $n$ in QCQP and Others ranges from $2$ to $2002$, and the total number of constraints in $h,g$ from $2$ to $1722$.
The commands of the CUTEst provides the gradient vectors
and the Hessian matrices, but not the third derivatives.
Therefore, we used numerical differentiation for computing $\nabla_x^3 L(v) $, for example, we computed
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{x_i}(\nabla_x^2 L(x, y, w,s,z)) = \frac{\nabla_x^2 L(x+\hat{\epsilon} e_i, y, w,s,z) - \nabla_x^2 L(x, y, w,s,z)}{\hat{\epsilon}} \label{eq:num-diff}
\end{equation}
where $e_i$ is the $i$th unit vector and $\hat{\epsilon}$ is a small positive number.
In the numerical experiments, we set $\hat{\epsilon} = 10^{-4}$.
For the parameters, we set
$\delta = 10^{-3}$ and
$\gamma_k = \frac{1}{2}, \sigma_k = \frac{1}{8}\min\{1, \phi(v^k)p/(\mu^k)^2\}$ for
all $k$.
We stop the algorithms when the deviation from the KKT conditions gets
smaller than a tolerance, $\phi(v^k) \le 10^{-8}$,
or the iteration number exceeds a limit, $k \ge 1000$.
\subsection{Numerical Results}\label{sec:results}
We compare the number of iterations and the computation time
with
problems that are solved by
both Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1} and Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo_line},
The detailed tables of the numerical results are put in \ref{sec:detailedResults}.
For summarizing the numerical results, we utilize
the performance profiling proposed in \cite{gould2016note}.
In the performance profiling for the computation time,
the vertical axis $P(r_{p,s} \le \tau)$ is the proportion of the problems
in the numerical experiments
for which $r_{p,s}$ is at most $\tau$, where $r_{p,s}$ is the ratio of the computation time
of the algorithm against
the shorter computation time among the two algorithms.
Simply speaking, the algorithm that approaches to 1 at smaller $\tau$ is better.
Figure~\ref{10-01_pp} shows the performance profile
of Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1} and Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo_line}
We observe that the number of iterations is less than that of the line-search algorithm.
We can consider that the proposed arc-search algorithm approximates the central path better than the line-search algorithm.
In contrast, in the viewpoint of the computation time, the proposed arc-search algorithm
consumed a longer time.
We found that the main bottleneck in Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo1}
was the right-hand side of (\ref{secondOrder}), in particular, the computation on
$ (\nabla_x^3 L(v))\dot{x} \dot{x}$,
$ (\nabla_x^2 h(x))\dot{y} \dot{x}$,
$ (\nabla_g^2 h(x))\dot{z} \dot{x}$,
$ (\nabla_x^2 h(x))\dot{x} \dot{x}$,
and
$(\nabla_x^2 g(x))\dot{z} \dot{x})$.
We will discuss these higher-order derivatives in Section~\ref{sec:discussions}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterAll_10-01.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterAll_10-01.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllAll_10-01.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllAll_10-01.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\caption{Performance profiles of the number of iterations (left) and the computation time (right) for all solvable problems.}
\label{10-01_pp}
\end{figure}
Figures~\ref{10-01_qcqp} illustrates
the performance profile for QCQPs.
This result indicates that the computation time of the proposed
arc-search algorithm is competitive with the line-search algorithm
in QCQPs.
The degrees of the functions in QCQPs are at most 2,
therefore, the approximation with the ellipse fits the central path well
and the number of iterations is much smaller than the line-search algorithm.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterQCQP_10-01.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterQCQP_10-01.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllQCQP_10-01.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllQCQP_10-01.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\caption{Performance profiles of the number of iterations (left) and the computation time (right) for QCQP problems} \label{10-01_qcqp}
\end{figure}
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterOthers_10-01.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterOthers_10-01.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllOthers_10-01.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllOthers_10-01.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\caption{Performance profiles of the number of iterations (left) and the computation time (right) for Other problems} \label{10-01_others}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\subsection{High-order derivatives}\label{sec:discussions}
As pointed out above,
the main bottleneck of the proposed arc-search algorithm
is the computation of the high-order derivatives;
$ (\nabla_x^3 L(v))\dot{x} \dot{x}$,
$ (\nabla_x^2 h(x))\dot{y} \dot{x}$,
$ (\nabla_g^2 h(x))\dot{z} \dot{x}$,
$ (\nabla_x^2 h(x))\dot{x} \dot{x}$,
and $(\nabla_x^2 g(x))\dot{z} \dot{x})$.
However, these higher-order derivatives appear only in
the right-hand side of (\ref{secondOrder}) for obtaining $\ddot{v}$.
Since the second-order approximation $\ddot{v}$ gives a less influence on ${v}\AN{\alpha}$
than the first-order approximation $\dot{v}$ when $\alpha$ is small,
we can expect that small deviations in the computation of $\ddot{v}$ would not affect the approximation of ${v}$ so much. In addition, we can remove the effect of numerical errors in the numerical differentiations like (\ref{eq:num-diff}).
Based on these intuitions,
we examine another approximation with $\ddot{\ddot{v}} = (\ddot{\ddot{x}}, \ddot{\ddot{y}}, \ddot{\ddot{w}}, \ddot{\ddot{s}}, \ddot{\ddot{z}})$
defined as the solution of the following system in which we ignored
the higher-order derivatives of (\ref{secondOrder}):
{\small
\begin{eqnarray}
\hspace{-2.2cm}
\left[ \begin{array}{ccccc}
\nabla_x^2 L(v) & \nabla h(x) & -\nabla g(x) & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla h(x)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\left( \nabla g(x)\right)^{{\rm T}} & 0 & 0 & -I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & I & 0 & -I \\
0 & 0 & 0 & {\cal D}({z}) & {\cal D}({s})
\end{array} \right]
\left[ \begin{array}{c}
\ddot{\ddot{x}} \\ \ddot{\ddot{y}} \\ \ddot{\ddot{w}} \\ \ddot{\ddot{s}} \\ \ddot{\ddot{z}}
\end{array} \right]
& = & \left[ \begin{array}{l}
0 \\
0 \\
0 \\
0 \\
-2 {\cal D}(\dot{z}) \dot{s}
\end{array} \right].
\nonumber \label{ddotddotv}
\end{eqnarray}
}
Figure~\ref{19-04_pp} compares the arc-search algorithm with $\ddot{\ddot{v}}$
and the line-search algorithm (Algorithm~\ref{mainAlgo_line}) using the performance profiling.
In the viewpoint of the number of iterations, the arc-search algorithm keeps its superiority.
In addition, the arc-search algorithm solves the problems in a shorter time than the line-search algorithm, since we skip the main bottlenecks.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterAll_19-04.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{iterAll_19-04.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.48\textwidth}
\iffigure
\iffigureeps
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllAll_19-04.eps}
\else
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{time_AllAll_19-04.pdf}
\fi
\fi
\end{minipage}
\caption{Performance profiles of the number of iterations (left) and the computation time (right) with the use of $\ddot{\ddot{v}}$} \label{19-04_pp}
\end{figure}
Since $\ddot{\ddot{v}}$ can not draw the ellipse ${\cal E}$ exactly, we cannot apply the same theoretical developments in the previous section. However, these numerical results give promising insights for further improvements on the arc-search algorithm.
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we extend the arc-search algorithm, which approximates the central path with an arc of the ellipse, for NLPs and also discuss the convergence of the proposed algorithm.
From the results of numerical experiments, the arc-search algorithm succeeded in reducing the number of iterations compared with the line-search algorithm.
As a future work, we should focus the computation time reduction of the arc-search algorithm.
In particular, we expect the drop of the high-order derivatives in the computation of $\ddot{v}$ will bring us an enhancement of the algorithm as observed in Section~\ref{sec:discussions},
though the deviation from the arc due to the drop should be theoretically addressed.
We should also incorporate some implementation techniques to improve the numerical stability for NLPs.
\bibliographystyle{siam}
|
\section{Introduction}
In this paper we explore a connection between G\"odel's second incompleteness theorem and recursion-theoretic jump hierarchies. Our primary technical contribution is a method for proving the well-foundedness of jump hierarchies; this method crucially involves the second incompleteness theorem. We use this technique to provide a proof of the following theorem:
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{main}
\label{thm-main}
There is no sequence $(A_n)_{n<\omega}$ of reals such that, for each $n$, the hyperjump of $A_{n+1}$ is hyperarithmetical in $A_n$.
\end{restatable}
This theorem is an immediate consequence of a result of Spector's, namely that if $\mathcal{O}^A \leq_H B$ then $\omega_1^A < \omega_1^B$ (so the existence of such a sequence $(A_n)_{n<\omega}$ would imply the existence of a descending sequence $\omega_1^{A_0} > \omega_1^{A_1} > \ldots$ in the ordinals). We provide an alternative proof that makes no mention of admissible ordinals, and which has the additional benefit of showing the theorem is provable in $\mathsf{ACA}_0$.
Here is a brief sketch of how our alternative proof works: Consider the theory $\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS}$ where $\mathsf{DS}$ is a sentence asserting the existence of a sequence of reals as described in Theorem \ref{thm-main}. We work \emph{inside} the theory and let $A_0, A_1, \ldots$ be such a sequence. $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ proves that if the hyperjump of a real exists then there is a $\beta$-model (a model that is correct for $\Sigma^1_1$ sentences) containing it. In this case $\mathcal{O}^{A_1}$ exists so there is a $\beta$-model containing $A_1$. Moreover, since all $A_n$'s for $n \geq 1$ are hyperarithmetical in $A_1$, the $\beta$-model will contain all of them. All $\beta$-models are models of $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ (in fact, $\mathsf{ATR}_0$) so it appears this model is a model of the theory $\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS}$, meaning that the theory proves its own consistency. By G\"odel's second incompleteness theorem, this implies that $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ proves $\neg \mathsf{DS}$.
There is one problem, however. Just because the model contains all the elements of the sequence $(A_n)_{n \geq 1}$ does not mean it contains the sequence itself (here we are thinking of the sequence as a single real whose slices are the $A_n$'s). Indeed, the sequence itself could be much more complicated than any single real in the sequence. In our proof, we overcome this flaw by showing that if there is a descending sequence then there is a descending sequence that is relatively simple---in fact there is one that is hyperarithmetic relative to $A_1$. This means the $\beta$-model above really does contain a descending sequence.
In \cite{friedman1976uniformly}, H. Friedman uses similar ideas to prove the following theorem originally due to Steel:
\begin{restatable}[Steel]{theorem}{Steel}
\label{Steel}
Let $P\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ be arithmetic. Then there is no sequence $(A_n)_{n<\omega}$ such that for every $n$,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $A_n\geq_T A'_{n+1}$ and
\item[(ii)] $A_{n+1}$ is the unique $B$ such that $P(A_n,B)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{restatable}
In these proofs we move from the second incompleteness theorem to the well-foundedness (or near well-foundedness) of recursion-theoretic jump hierarchies. In fact, the implication goes in both directions: the well-foundedness of appropriate jump hierarchies entails semantic versions of the second incompleteness theorem. For example, theorem \ref{thm-main} yields a simple and direct proof of the following semantic version of the second incompleteness theorem originally due to Mummert and Simpson (recall that $\mathcal{L}_2$ is the standard two-sorted language of second order arithmetic):
\begin{restatable}[Mummert--Simpson]{theorem}{ms}
\label{ms}
Let $T$ be a recursively axiomatized $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory. For each $n \geq 1$, if there is a $\beta_n$-model of $T$ then there is a $\beta_n$-model of $T$ which contains no countable coded $\beta_n$-models of $T$.
\end{restatable}
In fact, our proof sharpens the Mummert-Simpson result somewhat by dropping the requirement that $T$ be recursively axiomatized.
A different semantic version of the second incompleteness theorem also follows from theorem \ref{Steel}, as observed by Steel in \cite{steel1975descending}. Namely, the following:
\begin{restatable}[Steel]{theorem}{Steelincompleteness}
\label{Steel2}
Let $T$ be an arithmetically axiomatized $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory extending $\mathsf{ACA}_0$. If $T$ has an $\omega$-model then $T$ has an $\omega$-model which contains no countable coded $\omega$-models of $T$.
\end{restatable}
These results all point to a general connection between incompleteness and well-foundedness. Elucidating this connection is the central goal of this paper. Though many of the theorems we prove could also be proved from the application of known methods, we believe that the new techniques are more conducive to achieving our central goal. Additionally, our techniques are able to prove somewhat sharper results than the original methods.
We also investigate directly the well-founded hierarchy at the center of theorem \ref{thm-main}. It follows from that theorem that the relation $A \prec B$ defined by $\mathcal{O}^A \leq_H B$ is a well founded partial order. We call the $\prec$ rank of a real its \emph{Spector rank}. There is a recursion-theoretically natural characterization of the Spector ranks of reals:
\begin{restatable}{theorem}{ranks}
\label{thm-ranks}
For any real $A$, the Spector rank of $A$ is $\alpha$ just in case $\omega_1^A$ is the $(1 + \alpha)^{\text{th}}$ admissible ordinal.
\end{restatable}
It follows, assuming suitable large cardinal hypotheses, that, on a cone, the Spector rank of $X$ is $\omega_1^X$.
Here is our plan for the rest of the paper. In \textsection{\ref{well_foundedness}} we describe related research. In \textsection{\ref{proof}} we prove the main theorem. In \textsection{\ref{incompleteness}} we provide an alternative proof of the Mummert-Simpson theorem. In \textsection{\ref{ranks}} we turn to the calculation of Spector ranks.
\section{Second Incompleteness \& Well-Foundedness}
\label{well_foundedness}
The second incompleteness theorem implies the well-foundedness of various structures (in particular, sequences of models). In turn, the well-foundedness of structures sometimes yields a semantic version of the second incompleteness theorem (in the form of a minimum model theorem). It is worth emphasizing that the former argument does not rely on the theory of transfinite ordinals and the latter argument does not rely on self-reference or fixed point constructions. This point allows us to sharpen certain results. Because we avoid the use of ordinals, we can verify that Theorem \ref{thm-main} is provable in $\mathsf{ACA}_0$; because we avoid self-reference, we can drop the restriction in the statement of Theorem \ref{ms} that $T$ be recursively axiomatized.
We will now describe both types of arguments, describe their historical antecedents, and point to related research.
\subsection{Well-foundedness via incompleteness}
\leavevmode
To derive well-foundedness from incompleteness we work in the theory $T$ + ``there is a descending sequence,'' where $T$ is sound and sufficiently strong. We build a model of $T$ containing a tail of the sequence, yielding a consistency proof of $T$ + ``there is a descending sequence'' \emph{within the theory} $T$ + ``there is a descending sequence.'' By the second incompleteness theorem, this means that $T$ proves that there are no descending sequences.
The main difficulties lie in building a model that is correct enough that if a descending sequence is in the model, the model knows it is descending and in finding a $T$ that is strong enough to prove the model exists but weak enough that the model built satisfies it.
As far as we know, the first arguments of this type are due to H. Friedman. We were inspired, in particular, by H. Friedman's \cite{friedman1976uniformly} proof of a theorem originally due to Steel \cite{steel1975descending}.
\Steel*
Steel's proof is purely recursion-theoretic, whereas Friedman's proof appeals to the second incompleteness theorem. In particular, Friedman supposes that there is an arithmetic counter-example $P$ to Steel's Theorem. He then works in the theory $T:= \mathsf{RCA} +\textrm{``$P$ produces a descending sequence}$'' and uses $P$ to build $\omega$-models of arbitrarily large fragments of $T$. This yields a proof of $\mathsf{Con}(T)$ in $T$, whence $T$ is inconsistent by G\"odel's second incompleteness theorem.
Recently, Pakhomov and the second named author developed proof-theoretic applications of this technique in \cite{pakhomov2018reflection}. They show that there is no sequence $(T_n)_{n<\omega}$ of $\Pi^1_1$ sound extensions of $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ such that, for each $n$, $T_n$ proves the $\Pi^1_1$ soundness of $T_{n+1}$. This result is proved by appeal to the second incompleteness theorem, though it could be proved by showing that a descending sequence $(T_n)_{n<\omega}$ of theories would induce a descending sequence in the ordinals (namely, the associated sequence of proof-theoretic ordinals). They also show that, ``on a cone,'' the rank of a theory in this well-founded ordering coincides with its proof-theoretic ordinal. These results are strikingly similar to the main theorems of this paper.
\subsection{Incompleteness via well-foundedness}
\leavevmode
Here is an informal argument for incompleteness via well-foundedness. Suppose that second incompleteness fails, i.e.\ that a consistent $T$ proves its own consistency. If $T$ also proves the completeness theorem, then every model $\mathfrak{M}$ of $T$ has (what it is by the lights of $\mathfrak{M}$) a model within it. This produces a nested sequence of models. If these models can be indexed by ordinals, then this produces a descending sequence of ordinals. So the well-foundedness of the ordinals produces some form of the second incompleteness theorem. If we know that the models form a well-founded structure, we can argue directly, without the detour through the ordinals.
To sharpen this argument one must know that the objects that are ``models of $T$'' in the sense of $\mathfrak{M}$ are genuinely models of $T$. So one must restrict one's attention to structures that are sufficiently correct. In addition, one must clarify the relation by which the models are being compared and prove that it is well-founded.
An early argument of this sort is attributed to Kuratowski (see \cite{kennedy2015incompleteness, kripke2009collapse}). Set theory cannot prove the following strong form of the consistency of set theory: that there is an $\alpha$ such that $V_\alpha$ is a model of set theory. For if it does then there is $\alpha$ such that $V_\alpha$ is a model of set theory. Since $V_\alpha$ is a model of set theory, there is also a $\beta<\alpha$ such that $V_\beta$ is a model of set theory. Iterating this argument produces an infinite descending sequence of ordinals. Contradiction.
Steel has also developed an argument of this sort. Using his Theorem \ref{Steel}, he demonstrates that if an arithmetically axiomatized theory of second order arithmetic extends $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ and has an $\omega$-model then it has an $\omega$-model which contains no countable coded $\omega$-models of the theory.
\subsection{Kripke structures}
\leavevmode
We conclude this discussion of related work with the following observation. Formalized in the language of modal logic, the statement of G\"odel's second incompleteness theorem characterizes well-founded Kripke frames. Indeed, the formalization corresponds to the least element principle:
$$\diamondsuit\varphi \rightarrow \diamondsuit(\varphi\wedge\neg\diamondsuit\varphi).$$
Its contrapositive (writing $\psi$ for $\neg\varphi$) is a modal formalization of L\"ob's theorem which corresponds to induction\footnote{Note that since we replaced $\varphi$ with $\lnot \varphi$ before taking the contrapositive, the two modal statements are equivalent only as \emph{schemas}.}:
$$\Box (\Box\psi \rightarrow \psi) \rightarrow \Box \psi$$
Beklemishev has suggested that this observation is connected with ordinal analysis. In \cite{beklemishev2004provability}, he uses a modal logic of provability known as $\mathsf{GLP}$ to develop both an ordinal notation system for $\varepsilon_0$ and a novel consistency proof of $\mathsf{PA}$.
\section{The Main Theorem}
\label{proof}
In this section we provide our alternative proof of Theorem \ref{thm-main}.
\subsection{Outline of proof}
\leavevmode
In broad strokes, here is our strategy. We will consider a statement $\mathsf{DS}$ which states that there \emph{is} a descending sequence in the hyperjump hierarchy. We then work in the theory $\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS}$ and derive the statement $\mathsf{Con}(\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS})$. By G\"odel's second incompleteness theorem, this implies that there is a proof of $\neg\mathsf{DS}$ in $\mathsf{ACA}_0$.
To derive $\mathsf{Con}(\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS})$ in $\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS}$, we use the hyperjump of a real to construct a coded $\beta$-model of $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ containing that real. In particular, if we are given a descending sequence then we can use the existence of the hyperjump of the second real in the sequence to find a $\beta$-model containing all the elements of the tail of the sequence. The point is that the tail of a descending sequence is again a descending sequence and $\beta$-models are correct enough to verify this.
The only problem is that while the $\beta$-model we found contains all the elements of the tail it may not contain the tail itself (i.e.\ it may not contain the recursive join of all the elements of the tail). Our strategy to fix this is to show that there is a family of descending sequences which is arithmetically definable relative to some parameter whose hyperjump exists. A $\beta$-model containing this parameter must contain an element of this family (because $\beta$-models contain witnesses to all $\Sigma^1_1$ statements).
For the parameter, we will use a countable coded $\beta$-model which contains each element of a tail of the original descending sequence. The arithmetic formula will then essentially say that the $\beta$-model believes each step along the sequence is descending. The point is that we have replaced a $\Pi^1_1$ formula saying the sequence is descending by an arithmetic formula talking about the truth predicate of some coded model and $\beta$-models are correct enough that this does not cause any errors.
The $\beta$-model will just come from the existence of the hyperjump of some element of the original sequence, and we can guarantee the hyperjump of the model exists by taking one more step down the original descending sequence.
\subsection{Useful facts}
\leavevmode
In this section, we record the facts about $\beta$-models that we will use in the proof of the main theorem. Unless otherwise noted, proofs of all propositions in this section can be found in \cite{simpson_2009}.
\begin{definition}
A $\beta$-model is an $\omega$-model $\mathfrak{M}$ of second order arithmetic such that for any $\Sigma^1_1$ sentence $\varphi$ with parameters in $\mathfrak{M}$, $\mathfrak{M} \vDash \varphi$ if and only if $\varphi$ is true.
\end{definition}
\begin{proposition}[\cite{simpson_2009}, Lemma VII.2.4, Theorem VII.2.7] \label{beta} Provably in $\mathsf{ACA}_0$, all countable coded $\beta$-models satisfy $\mathsf{ATR}_0$ (and hence also $\mathsf{ACA}_0$).
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}[\cite{simpson_2009}, Lemma VII.2.9] \label{hyperjump} Provably in $\mathsf{ACA}_0$, for any $X$, $\mathcal{O}^X$ exists if and only if there is a countable coded $\beta$-model containing $X$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}
\label{absoluteness}
All of the following can be written as Boolean combinations of $\Sigma^1_1$ formulas and hence are absolute between $\beta$-models
\begin{enumerate}
\item $A$ is the hyperjump of $B$.
\item $A \leq_H B$
\item $M$ is a countable coded $\beta$-model.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Proof of the main theorem}
\leavevmode
\main*
\begin{proof}
It suffices to prove the inconsistency of the theory $\mathsf{ACA}_0+\mathsf{DS}$, where
\[
\mathsf{DS} := \exists X \forall n (\mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}} \text{ exists and } \mathcal{O}^{X_{n+1}}\leq_H X_n).
\]
To do this, we reason in $\mathsf{ACA}_0+\mathsf{DS}$ and derive $\mathsf{Con}(\mathsf{ACA}_0+\mathsf{DS})$. The inconsistency of $\mathsf{ACA}_0+\mathsf{DS}$ then follows from G\"odel's second incompleteness theorem.
\bigskip
\noindent\textbf{Reasoning in $\mathsf{ACA}_0+\mathsf{DS}$:}
\smallskip
Let $A$ witness $\mathsf{DS}$. That is, for all $n$, $\mathcal{O}^{A_{n + 1}}$ exists and $\mathcal{O}^{A_{n+1}}\leq_H A_n$. Our goal is now to show there is a model of $\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS}$.
\begin{claim}
There is a countable coded $\beta$-model $\mathfrak{M}$ coded by $M$ such that $\mathcal{O}^{M}$ exists and $\mathfrak{M}$ contains $A_n$ for all sufficiently large $n$.
\end{claim}
The proof of Proposition \ref{hyperjump} in \cite{simpson_2009} actually shows that for any $X$, if $\mathcal{O}^X$ exists then $X$ is contained in a countable coded $\beta$-model which is coded by a real that is recursive in $\mathcal{O}^X$. So $A_2$ is contained in some countable coded $\beta$-model $\mathfrak{M}$, coded by $M$, such that $M \leq_T \mathcal{O}^{A_2} \leq_H A_1$. Hence $\mathcal{O}^M \leq_T \mathcal{O}^{A_1}$. Since $\mathcal{O}^{A_1}$ exists, so does $\mathcal{O}^{M}$. And since $\mathfrak{M}$ is closed under hyperarithmetic reducibility, $\mathfrak{M}$ contains $A_n$ for all $n \geq 2$.
\begin{claim}
There is an arithmetic formula $\varphi$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $\exists X\, \varphi(M, X)$
\item[(ii)] For any $X$, if $\varphi(M, X)$ holds then $X$ is a witness of $\mathsf{DS}$
\end{enumerate}
where $M$ is as in the previous claim.
\end{claim}
Basically $\varphi(M, X)$ says that $X$ is a sequence of reals whose elements are in $\mathfrak{M}$ and for each $n$, $\mathfrak{M}$ believes that $\mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}}$ exists and is hyperarithmetical in $X_n$. More precisely $\varphi(M, X)$ is the sentence
\[
\forall n\, (X_{n + 1}, X_n \in \mathfrak{M} \land \mathfrak{M} \vDash ``\exists Y\, [Y = \mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}} \land Y \leq_H X_n]").
\]
To see why $\varphi(M, X)$ has a solution, recall that $\mathfrak{M}$ contains $A_n$ for all $n$ sufficiently large. Let $X$ be the sequence $A$ but with the first few elements removed so that $\mathfrak{M}$ contains all elements in $X$. For each $n$, the fact that $A$ is a witness of $\mathsf{DS}$ guarantees that there is some $Y$ such that $\mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}} = Y$ and $Y \leq_H X_n$. Since $\mathfrak{M}$ contains $X_n$ and since $\beta$-models are closed under hyperarithmetic reducibility, $\mathfrak{M}$ contains $Y$. And by proposition \ref{absoluteness}, $\beta$-models are sufficiently correct that $\mathfrak{M} \vDash ``Y = \mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}} \land Y \leq_H X_n."$
Suppose $X$ is a sequence such that $\varphi(M, X)$ holds. Then for each $n$ there is a $Y$ such that $\mathfrak{M} \vDash ``Y = \mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}} \land Y \leq_H X_n."$ By proposition $\ref{absoluteness}$, both clauses of the conjunction are absolute between $\beta$-models. Hence $\mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}}$ exists and is hyperarithmetical in $X_n$. So $X$ is a witness of $\mathsf{DS}$.
\begin{claim}
There is a model of $\mathsf{ACA}_0 + \mathsf{DS}$.
\end{claim}
By proposition \ref{hyperjump}, there is a $\beta$-model $\mathfrak{N}$ that contains $M$. Since $\mathfrak{N}$ is a $\beta$-model, by proposition \ref{beta}, it is a model of $\mathsf{ACA}_0$.
Since the $\Sigma^1_1$ formula $\exists X\, \varphi(M, X)$ holds and $\mathfrak{N}$ is correct for $\Sigma^1_1$ formulas with parameters from $\mathfrak{N}$, there is some $X$ in $\mathfrak{N}$ such that $\mathfrak{N} \vDash \varphi(M, X)$. And since $\mathfrak{N}$ is a $\beta$-model, it is correct about this fact---that is, $\varphi(M, X)$ really does hold. Since $\varphi(M, X)$ holds, $X$ is a witness to $\mathsf{DS}$. The point now is just that $\mathfrak{N}$ is correct enough to see that $X$ is a witness to $\mathsf{DS}$. In detail: for each $n$, $\mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}}$ exists and is hyperarithmetical in $X_n$. Since $X_n$ is in $\mathfrak{N}$, this means $\mathcal{O}^{X_{n + 1}}$ is in $\mathfrak{N}$. And by proposition \ref{absoluteness}, $\mathfrak{N}$ agrees that it is the hyperjump of $X_{n + 1}$ and that it is hyperarithmetical in $X_n$. Therefore $\mathfrak{N}$ agrees that $X$ is a witness to $\mathsf{DS}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The previous proof actually demonstrates that $\mathsf{ACA}_0$ proves Theorem \ref{thm-main}. The original Spector proof relies on the theory of admissible ordinals, so it is unlikely to be formalizable in systems weaker than $\mathsf{ATR}_0$.
\end{remark}
\section{Semantic Incompleteness Theorems}
\label{incompleteness}
Steel derives the following theorem as a corollary of his Theorem \ref{Steel}.
\Steelincompleteness*
Because $\omega$-models are correct for arithmetic statements, we can restate this as
\begin{corollary}
Let $T$ be an arithmetically axiomatized $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory extending $\mathsf{ACA}_0$. If there is an $\omega$-model of $T$ then there is an $\omega$-model of
\[
T + \textrm{``there is no $\omega$-model of T''}.
\]
\end{corollary}
Similarly, we can use Theorem \ref{thm-main} to prove a stronger version of a theorem originally proved by Mummert and Simpson in \cite{mummert2004}. Note that in our version we do not need to assume that $T$ is recursively axiomatized, only that it has a $\beta$-model.
\begin{theorem}\label{minimalmodel}
Let $T$ be an $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory. If there is a $\beta$-model of $T$ then there is a $\beta$-model of $T$ that contains no countable coded $\beta$-models of $T$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose not. Then every $\beta$-model of $T$ contains a countable coded $\beta$-model of $T$. Let $\mathfrak{M}$ be a $\beta$-model of $T$. So $\mathfrak{M}$ contains some countable coded $\beta$-model $\mathfrak{N}_0$ coded by a real $N_0$. Similarly $\mathfrak{N}_0$ contains a countable coded $\beta$-model of $T$, $\mathfrak{N}_1$, coded by a real $N_1$. In this manner we can define a sequence of countable $\beta$-models of $T$, $\mathfrak{N}_0, \mathfrak{N}_1, \mathfrak{N}_2, \ldots$ along with their codes $N_0, N_1, N_2, \ldots$
But for each $n$, $N_{n + 1} \in \mathfrak{N}_n$ and since $\mathfrak{N}_n$ is a $\beta$-model it is correct about all $\Pi^1_1$ facts about $N_{n + 1}$. In other words, $\mathcal{O}^{N_{n + 1}}$ is arithmetic in $N_n$. So $N_0, N_1, \ldots$ provides an example of the type of descending sequence in the hyperdegrees shown not to exist in theorem \ref{thm-main}.
\end{proof}
In fact, this same proof actually yields a seemingly stronger result. A $\beta_n$-model is defined to be an $\omega$-model of second order arithmetic which is correct for all $\Sigma^1_n$ statements with parameters from the model. The same proof as above proves the theorem mentioned in the introduction (where once again our new proof shows that the assumption that $T$ is recursively axiomatized can be dropped):
\ms*
Since the statement that a real is the code for a $\beta_n$-model is $\Pi^1_n$, $\beta_n$-models are correct about such statements. And if $T$ is a $\Sigma^1_n$ axiomatized theory then $\beta_n$-models are also correct about which formulas are in $T$. Thus for $\Sigma^1_n$ axiomatized theories we can restate the above theorem to get the following theorem of Mummert and Simpson:
\begin{theorem}\label{ms2}
Let $T$ be a $\Sigma^1_n$ axiomatized $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory. If there is a $\beta_n$-model of $T$, then there is a $\beta_n$-model of $$\textrm{$T$+``there is no countable coded $\beta_n$-model of $T$.''}$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathfrak{M}$ be a $\beta_n$-model of $T$ which contains no countable coded $\beta_n$-models of $T$. For any $N \in \mathfrak{M}$, the statement that $N$ is not a countable coded $\beta_n$-model of $T$ is a true $\Sigma^1_n$ sentence and thus is satisfied by $\mathfrak{M}$. Therefore $\mathfrak{M}$ satisfies the statement ``there is no countable coded $\beta_n$-model of $T$.''
\end{proof}
From this we immediately infer the following corollary, a strengthened version of Mummert and Simpson's Corollary 2.4 from \cite{mummert2004}:
\begin{corollary}\label{ms3}
Let $T$ be a $\Sigma^1_n$ axiomatized $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory. If $T$ has a $\beta_n$-model then $T$ has a $\beta_n$ model that is not a $\beta_{n+1}$ model.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $T$ be a $\Sigma^1_n$ axiomatized $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory with a $\beta_n$ model. By Theorem \ref{ms2}, there is a $\beta_n$ model $\mathfrak{M}$ of
$\textrm{$T$+``there is no countable coded $\beta_n$-model of $T$.''}$ The latter is a false $\Pi^1_{n+1}$ sentence, whence $\mathfrak{M}$ is not a $\beta_{n+1}$ model.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The definability restriction on $T$ in Theorem \ref{ms2} and Corollary \ref{ms3} can be relaxed slightly to the requirement that $T$ have an axiomatization definable by a formula consisting of a series of first order quantifiers over a Boolean combination of $\Sigma^1_n$-formulas. The proof is essentially the same.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Further discussion of definability restrictions}
When this paper was first published, Theorem \ref{ms2} and Corollary \ref{ms3} were missing the definability restriction on $T$. We will now address whether such a restriction is necessary. Before doing so, it will be helpful to state a result implicit in the proof of Theorem \ref{minimalmodel}, since we will use it several times below.
\begin{theorem}\label{minimalmodel2}
The relation ``contains a countable coded model isomorphic to'' is a well-order on $\beta$-models.
\end{theorem}
If the definability restriction is removed completely from Theorem \ref{ms2}, it is not even clear what the statement means. The most reasonable interpretation is to assume that $T$ is definable in second order arithmetic (but with no bound on the complexity of the definition) and to use the formula defining $T$ to write ``there is no countable coded $\beta_n$-model of $T$'' as an $\mathcal{L}_2$ sentence. Unfortunately, this interpretation is false, as the following proposition demonstrates.
\begin{proposition}
There is an $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory $T$ and a $\Sigma^1_2$ formula $\psi$ which defines $T$ (relative to some fixed, standard coding of $\mathcal{L}_2$ sentences) such that $T$ has a $\beta$-model but every $\beta$-model of $T$ satisfies
\[
\text{``there is a countable coded $\beta$-model of the theory defined by $\psi$.''}
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\varphi_1$ be the sentence ``there is a countable coded $\beta$-model'' and let $\varphi_2$ be the sentence ``there is a countable coded $\beta$-model which contains a countable coded $\beta$-model.'' Note that $\varphi_2$ is a true $\Sigma^1_2$-sentence. Let $T$ be the theory $\{\varphi_1\land\lnot\varphi_2\}$. By Theorem \ref{minimalmodel2}, there is a $\beta$-model of $T$.
Now assume that $\langle\theta_n\rangle_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ is a fixed, standard enumeration of all $\mathcal{L}_2$-sentences. Let $\psi(n)$ be the formula
\[
\varphi_2\land (\text{$\theta_n =$ ``$\varphi_1\land\lnot\varphi_2$''}).
\]
In other words, if $\varphi_2$ holds then $\psi$ defines $T$ and if $\varphi_2$ does not hold then $\psi$ defines the empty theory. Since $\varphi_2$ is true, $\psi$ is a $\Sigma^1_2$ definition of $T$.
Now let $\mathfrak{M}$ be any $\beta$-model of $T$. Since $\mathfrak{M} \models \varphi_1$, $\mathfrak{M}$ believes there is a countable coded $\beta$-model. And since $\mathfrak{M} \models \lnot\varphi_2$, $\mathfrak{M}$ believes that $\psi$ defines the empty theory and thus that the theory defined by $\psi$ is satisfied in every model. Thus $\mathfrak{M}$ believes there is a countable coded $\beta$-model of the theory defined by $\psi$.
\end{proof}
Thus the definability restriction on Theorem \ref{ms2} cannot even be relaxed to include all $\Sigma^1_{n + 1}$ axiomatized theories. The situation for Corollary \ref{ms3} is less clear. In particular, the authors do not currently know if the result holds when the definability restriction is removed, and consider this to be an interesting question. The following two results demonstrate why finding a counterexample may not be easy.
\begin{proposition}\label{separation}
Let $T$ be an $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory. If $T$ has a $\beta_n$-model that contains $T$ then $T$ has a $\beta_n$-model that is not a $\beta_{n + 1}$-model.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{minimalmodel2}, we can find a $\beta_n$-model $\mathfrak{M}$ of $T$ which contains $T$ but which contains no countable coded $\beta_n$-model of $T$ containing $T$. Hence the statement
\[
\text{``there is a countable coded $\beta_n$-model of $T$''}
\]
does not hold in $\mathfrak{M}$. Since it is a true $\Sigma^1_{n + 1}$ statement with parameters from $\mathfrak{M}$ (since $\mathfrak{M}$ contains $T$), $\mathfrak{M}$ is not a $\beta_{n + 1}$-model.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
Let $T$ be a true $\mathcal{L}_2$ theory. Then for all $n \ge 1$, $T$ has a $\beta_n$-model that is not a $\beta_{n + 1}$-model.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
If $T$ is a true theory, then for every $n$ there is a $\beta_n$-model containing $T$, so we may apply Proposition \ref{separation}.
\end{proof}
\section{Spector Ranks}
\label{ranks}
Define a relation $\prec$ on pairs of reals by $A \prec B$ iff $\mathcal{O}^A \leq_H B$. By theorem \ref{thm-main}, this relation is well-founded and therefore reals can be assigned ordinal ranks according to it. Let's refer to the $\prec$-rank of a real as its \emph{Spector rank}. In this section we will calculate the Spector ranks of reals, showing that we get the same ranks as those induced by the $\omega_1$'s of reals.
We will need to use the following theorems:
\begin{theorem}[Spector]
\label{spector}
For any reals $A$ and $B$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\mathcal{O}^B \leq_H A$ then $\omega_1^B < \omega_1^A.$
\item If $B \leq_H A$ and $\omega_1^B < \omega_1^A$ then $\mathcal{O}^B \leq_H A.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}[Sacks]
\label{sacks}
If $\lambda$ is an admissible ordinal greater than $\omega$ and $X$ is a real such that $X$ computes a presentation of $\lambda$ (i.e.\ $\lambda < \omega_1^X$) then there is a real $Y$ that is hyperarithmetical in $X$ such that $\omega_1^Y = \lambda$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Theorem \ref{sacks} is typically stated without the requirement that $Y$ is hyperarithmetical in $X$, though this is implicit in all or nearly all extant proofs of the theorem. For instance, in \cite{steel1978} Steel uses the method of forcing with tagged trees to prove Sacks' theorem. In that case, the real $Y$ is obtained as the reduct of a generic filter over $L_\lambda$. Since any presentation of $\lambda$ can hypercompute such a generic (if you can compute a presentation of $\lambda$ then it just takes $\omega\cdot(\lambda + 1)$ jumps to compute the theory of $L_\lambda$), $X$ can hypercompute a $Y$ witnessing Sacks' theorem.
\end{remark}
The calculation of Spector ranks now follows relatively easily.
\ranks*
\begin{remark}
The only reason we need to say $(1 + \alpha)^\text{th}$ admissible rather than $\alpha^\text{th}$ admissible is that the way admissible is usually defined, $\omega$ is an admissible ordinal but unlike all other countable admissible ordinals, it is not the $\omega_1$ of any real.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
We will argue by induction on $\alpha$ that for any $A$ if $\rank(A) > \alpha$ then $\omega_1^A$ is greater than the $(1 + \alpha)^\text{th}$ admissible ordinal and conversely that if $\omega_1^A$ is greater than the $(1 + \alpha)^\text{th}$ admissible then $\rank(A) > \alpha$.
First suppose $\rank(A) > \alpha$. So there is some $B$ of rank $\alpha$ such that $\mathcal{O}^B \leq_H A$. By Spector's result, theorem \ref{spector}, this implies $\omega_1^B < \omega_1^A$. And by the induction assumption, $\omega_1^B$ is at least the $(1 + \alpha)^\text{th}$ admissible so $\omega_1^A$ is greater than the $(1 + \alpha)^\text{th}$ admissible.
Now suppose that $\omega_1^A$ is greater than the $(1 + \alpha)^\text{th}$ admissible. Let $\lambda$ denote the $(1 + \alpha)^\text{th}$ admissible. By Sacks' theorem, there is some $B$ hyperarithmetical in $A$ such that $\omega_1^B = \lambda$. Since $\omega_1^B < \omega_1^A$, Spector's theorem implies that $\mathcal{O}^B \leq_H A$ and hence $\rank(B) < \rank(A)$. By the induction assumption, $\rank(B)$ is at least $\alpha$, so $\rank(A) > \alpha$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Silver]
If $\alpha$ is admissible relative to $0^\sharp$ then $\alpha$ is a cardinal in $L$.
\end{theorem}
Hence if $X$ is a real in the cone above $0^\sharp$ then $\omega_1^X$ is a cardinal in $L$. Suppose that $\omega_1^X$ is the $\alpha^\text{th}$ admissible. Since $\omega_1^X$ is a cardinal in $L$, it follows that actually $\alpha = \omega_1^X = \omega_\alpha^{CK}$. So if $0^\sharp$ exists then on a cone, the Spector rank of a real $X$ is equal to $\omega_1^X$.
\begin{theorem}
If $0^\sharp$ exists, then for all $A$ on a cone, the Spector rank of $A$ is $\omega_1^A$.
\end{theorem}
Alternatively, one can infer the previous theorem from the following proposition due to Martin.
\begin{proposition}[Martin]
Assuming appropriate determinacy hypotheses, if $F$ is a degree invariant function from reals to
(presentations of) ordinals such that $F(A)\leq \omega_1^A$, then either
$F$ is constant on a cone or $F(A)=\omega_1^A$ on a cone.
\end{proposition}
One could also consider the analogous relation given by replacing hyperarithmetic reducibility and the hyperjump with Turing reducibility and the Turing jump. Namely, define $\prec_T$ by $A \prec_T B$ iff $A' \leq_T B$. By results of Harrison (see \cite{harrison1968}), this relation is not well-founded. However, it \emph{is} well-founded if we restrict ourselves to the hyperarithmetic reals, as shown by Putnam and Enderton in \cite{enderton1970}. In that paper, Putnam and Enderton also show that the rank of a hyperarithmetic real $A$ in this relation is ``within $2$'' of the least $\alpha$ such that $A$ cannot compute $0^{(\alpha)}$. More precisely, if the rank of $A$ is $\alpha$ then $A$ cannot compute $0^{(\alpha + 1)}$ and if $A$ cannot compute $0^{(\alpha)}$ then the rank of $A$ is at most $\alpha + 2$.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
In a tidal disruption event (TDE), a star is tidally disrupted by a black hole (BH) when the distance between them is smaller than a tidal radius, $R_t \equiv R_\star (M_{\mathrm{BH}} / M_\star)^{1/3}$ (e.g. \citealt{1988Natur.333..523R}).
After the disruption, about half of the debris is bound to the BH, leading to emission across a wide wavelength range (for a review, see \citealt{2019GReGr..51...30S}).
If the disrupted star is a white dwarf (WD), only an intermediate-mass BH (IMBH) with $\lesssim 10^5\,M_{\sun}$ can disrupt it.
By contrast, a supermassive BH (SMBH) with $\gtrsim 10^5\,M_{\sun}$ cannot tidally disrupt a WD because the SMBH swallows the WD before the tidal disruption \citep{1989A&A...209..103L}.
Therefore, the WD TDEs are useful for studying the existence and properties of IMBHs.
The WD TDEs have another unique feature:
the WD is not only tidally disrupted but also can be detonated by the tidal compression and by succeeding shocks.
The thermonuclear explosions triggered by the detonation occur if the encounter is sufficiently deep inside the tidal radius (e.g. \citealt{1982Natur.296..211C,2009ApJ...695..404R}).
It releases nuclear energy, affects dynamics of the WD debris, and produces radioactive nuclei that could later power the emission from the unbound ejecta.
\citet{2016ApJ...819....3M} studied the properties of the emission from thermonuclear explosions in a carbon-oxygen (CO) WD TDE.
They showed that the emission is reminiscent of supernovae (SNe) I.
However, \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M} only considered one particular case of a CO WD TDE.
Therefore, it is not clear if other WD TDEs share the same properties shown in their model once other parameter sets (e.g. different WD/BH masses) are considered.
WD TDEs are interesting targets for current and upcoming transient surveys.
\citet{2016ApJ...819....3M} also estimated the detection rate of the thermonuclear emission from WD TDEs.
They showed that the Vera C. Rubin Observatory (previously known as the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope) may be able to detect tens of the events per year if a number density of IMBHs is $\simeq0.02\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-3}$, which is still unknown.
Even current surveys such as the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF) may be able to detect these events if the number density of IMBHs is larger.
It is useful to derive synthetic light curves and spectra of WD TDEs in order to search for them with such surveys.
Here, we study properties of the emission from a WD TDE where an IMBH disrupts a helium WD.
A motivation for this is that we can intuitively expect different observational signatures of helium WD TDEs from those of CO WD TDEs; the ejecta mass and nucleosynthetic yields, such as $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ mass, significantly differ between the two types \citep{2018MNRAS.477.3449K}.
Another motivation is that helium WD TDEs have been suggested to be an origin of calcium-rich transients \citep{2015MNRAS.450.4198S,2018MNRAS.475L.111S}.
\citet{2015MNRAS.450.4198S} proposed that the properties of the calcium-rich transients may be explained by the helium WD TDE, based on hydrodynamic models by \citet{2009ApJ...695..404R}.
However, the models by \citet{2009ApJ...695..404R} lack detailed elemental abundance and synthetic observations.
Thus, it is still unclear whether helium WD TDEs can be the origin of calcium-rich transients (see also \citealt{2019ApJ...887..180S}).
In this study, we perform detailed nucleosynthesis calculations and radiative transfer simulations, and predict synthetic observables for the helium WD TDE.
The structure of this Letter is as follows.
We describe our numerical methods and hydrodynamical models in \secref{sec:method}.
We present synthetic multi-band light curves and spectra in \secref{sec:result}.
Discussions are given in \secref{sec:discussion}, where our model is compared to observational properties of some transients whose origins are not yet clarified.
\section{Methods and models}
\label{sec:method}
We consider a helium WD TDE with a parameter set of $M_{\mathrm{BH}} = 10^{2.5}\,M_{\sun}$, $M_{\mathrm{WD}}=0.2\,M_{\sun}$, and a penetration parameter $\beta \equiv R_t/R_p =5$, where $R_p$ is a pericenter radius of an orbit, with a pure $^4$He composition of the WD.
Additionally, we consider a CO WD TDE with the parameter set used in \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M}, $M_{\mathrm{BH}}=500\,M_{\sun}$, $M_{\mathrm{WD}}=0.6\,M_{\sun}$, and $\beta=5$ with a composition of 50~\% mass fractions of $^{12}$C and $^{16}$O, in order to cross-check our methods with theirs.
\subsection{Hydrodynamic Simulations}
First, we perform smoothed particle hydrodynamic (SPH) simulations coupled with nuclear reactions.
We summarize the methods here; detailed description can be found in \citet{2017ApJ...839...81T} and \citet{2018MNRAS.477.3449K}.
The initial separation between the BH and WD is $5 R_t$.
We use \texttt{Helmholtz} equation of state with Coulomb correction \citep{2000ApJS..126..501T}.
The SPH simulations are coupled with $\alpha$-chain nuclear reaction networks among 13 species \citep{2000ApJS..129..377T}.
We use the gravitational potential of \citet{2013MNRAS.433.1930T} to include an approximate general relativistic correction for the Schwarzschild BH.
For the CO WD TDE, we apply the Newtonian gravity in order to set the same condition as that of \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M}.
We terminate the simulation at 2000~s (1000~s) for the helium (CO) WD TDE, when the homologous expansion of the ejecta is well realized.
We employ 786,432 (393,216) SPH particles to represent the helium (CO) WD on a parabolic orbit around the BH.
These resolutions are not enough to resolve shock structure during the tidal compression, and thus the nucleosynthetic results are resolution dependent \citep{2017ApJ...839...81T}.
However, we expect that our results do not change significantly.
One reason is that detonations in helium WD TDEs are confirmed in \citet{2018ApJ...858...26T} and in \citet{2018ApJ...865....3A}, who use independent numerical methods.
Another reason is that we also see rough matches between nucleosynthetic yields of our hydrodynamic simulations (see \citealt{2018MNRAS.477.3449K}) and those of \citet{2018ApJ...865....3A}.
\figref{fig:distribution} shows the distribution of the fallback/ejecta debris and $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ at the end of the helium WD TDE simulation.
The shape of the ejecta is very aspherical due to the tidal disruption.
The properties of the unbound ejecta are as follows.
The mass is $0.12\,M_{\sun}$.
Its center of mass (COM) escapes from the BH with the velocity of $12,000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
The kinetic energy with respect to the COM is $6.5\times10^{49}$~erg.
Because we focus on the emission from the unbound ejecta, the fallback debris, which is bound to the BH after the first approach, is hereafter ignored.
\begin{figure}
\plotone{figs/particle_distribution2_with_phi.png}
\caption{Distribution of helium WD TDE debris at the end of the hydrodynamic simulation.
The upper panels show the distribution of fallback and ejecta debris, and the lower panels show the $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ distribution.
}
\label{fig:distribution}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Detailed Nucleosynthesis Calculations}
\label{sec:nucleosynthesis}
Second, we perform detailed nucleosynthesis calculations to derive accurate and detailed elemental abundances of the ejecta with the \texttt{torch} code\footnote{\url{http://cococubed.asu.edu/}} \citep{2000ApJS..129..377T}.
We record histories of density and temperature for all the SPH particles in the hydrodynamic simulations during phases when explosive nuclear reactions take place.
Then we perform the nucleosynthesis calculations for all the particles in a post-process manner with the density-temperature histories, considering networks among 640 isotopes.
We take the same initial nuclear composition as that those used in the SPH simulations.
\figref{fig:abundance} shows the elemental abundance of the ejecta in the helium WD TDE, which is derived from this method.
For comparison, we also show abundance derived from the simplified network adopted in the hydrodynamic simulations.
$^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ is dominant in the radioactive nuclei with its mass of $0.030\,M_{\sun}$.
$^{40}\mathrm{Ca}$ is dominant in the intermediate-mass elements (IMEs) with the mass of $0.0014\,M_{\sun}$, while $^{28}\mathrm{Si}$ is sub-dominant with its mass of $7.0 \times 10^{-4}\,M_{\sun}$.
Interestingly, this abundance pattern is quite different from SNe Ia and from a CO WD TDE, while it is qualitatively consistent with previous studies on helium WD detonations \citep{2013ApJ...771...14H}.
\begin{figure}
\plotone{figs/abundance.pdf}
\caption{Nucleosynthesis in our helium WD TDE case.
The blue and orange lines respectively show the masses of radioactive and stable elements in the unbound ejecta derived from the post-process detailed nucleosynthesis calculations.
The green line shows those derived from the simple nuclear reaction networks adopted in the hydrodynamic simulation.}
\label{fig:abundance}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Radiative Transfer Simulations}
We perform radiative transfer simulations using \texttt{HEIMDALL} \citep{2006ApJ...644..385M,2014ApJ...794...37M}.
\texttt{HEIMDALL} can handle multi-dimensional, multi-frequency, and time-dependent Monte Carlo radiative transfer simulations.
We assume local thermal equilibrium and homologous expansion of the ejecta.
We consider stable elements with atomic numbers $Z$ from 1 to 30.
Radioactive decays of $^{48}$Cr/V/Ti, $^{52}$Fe/Mn/Cr, and $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$/Co/Fe are included as the power sources.
The computational domain is set such that its origin is at the COM of the ejecta.
The three-dimensional spherical grid of $(v_r, \cos \theta, \phi)$ is equally sampled with bins of $(100, 50, 50)$, where the outer edge of the radial grid is set at the velocity of $2 \times 10^4\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$, corresponding to the radius of $4\times10^{12}$~cm at the end of the SPH simulation (see \figref{fig:distribution}).
We map the results of the SPH simulations and detailed nucleosynthesis calculations to the grid following the prescription by \citet{2018arXiv180303652R}, which can well conserve integral fluid properties and can maintain resolution of the SPH data.
Note that results of the helium WD TDE in a later phase, after $\simeq30$~days, are uncertain because the ejecta become optically thin and thus the local thermal equilibrium assumption becomes invalid.
\section{Results: light curves and spectra}
\label{sec:result}
The top panel of \figref{fig:lightcurve} shows our synthetic multi-band light curves of the helium WD TDE.
We consider filters of the Swift and Vera C. Rubin Observatory here.
The origin of the time is when the first WD-BH pericenter passage occurs.
The top panel of \figref{fig:lightcurve} also compares bolometric light curves of the CO WD TDE derived in this study and in \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M},\footnote{The data are available on \url{https://github.com/morganemacleod/WhiteDwarf_Thermonuclear_Transients}} in order to cross-check the methods employed in this work.
We see a good agreement for the CO WD TDE models.
Hereafter, we will focus on the helium WD TDE.
The helium WD TDE appears fainter, with more rapid evolution than the CO WD TDE.
Depending on the viewing angle, the isotropic equivalent peak luminosity is $L_{\mathrm{peak}} \simeq 0.7\text{--}2.0 \times 10^{42}\,\mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ (see the bottom panel of \figref{fig:lightcurve}).
The time in which the bolometric luminosity declines by one magnitude from the peak is $\Delta t_{1\mathrm{mag}} \simeq 5\text{--}10$~days.
These features are attributed to a less-massive ejecta mass ($0.12\,M_{\sun}$) and $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ mass ($0.030\,M_{\sun}$) than the CO WD TDE.
The luminosities and timescales are similar to those of calcium-rich transients, .Ia explosions, and rapid transients (see \secref{sec:obs}).
The color of the light curves also show rapid evolution: $g-r\simeq-0.4$~mag and $r-i\simeq-0.5$~mag around the peak, while $g-r\simeq+0.9$~mag and $r-i\simeq-0.2$~mag at 10~days after the peak.
The near-infrared (NIR) $izy$ bands show the second hump at $t\simeq12\text{--}18$~days, which is commonly seen in SNe Ia, and originates from the recombination of Fe/Co III to Fe/Co II \citep{2006ApJ...649..939K}.
The bottom panel of \figref{fig:lightcurve} shows a strong dependence of the peak luminosity on the viewing angle.
\figref{fig:obs} also shows how the multi-band light curves vary by viewing angle.
The figure also shows comparisons to a few observed transients, which will be discussed in \secref{sec:discussion}.
The viewing angle dependence reflects the aspherical distribution of the ejecta (see \figref{fig:distribution}), which is a unique feature of the tidal disruption by the BH.
The brightest emission is realized for a viewing angle $\phi\simeq0.8\pi$, where a projected surface area of the ejecta is maximized and also photons escape to the ejecta surface more quickly than at other angles.
The short photon diffusion timescale leads to a fast decline ($\Delta t_{1\mathrm{mag}}\simeq5$~days) and bluer color ($g-r\simeq-0.5$ around the peak) for this brightest viewing angle.
By contrast, the faintest event is the case for $\phi\simeq0.2\pi$, which shows a slow decline ($\Delta t_{1\mathrm{mag}}\simeq10$~days) and redder color ($g-r\simeq-0.1$ around the peak).
These viewing angle dependences are qualitatively consistent with the CO WD TDE model of \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M}, although the peak luminosity of our model varies by a factor of $\simeq3$, while that of \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M} varies by a factor of $\simeq10$.
The difference arises because the ejecta shape of our model is less distorted from the spherical than that of \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M}.
This difference would generate a different behavior of the NIR second hump: contrary to our helium WD TDE model, the CO WD TDE model of \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M} does not show the NIR second hump.
The second hump is produced when the NIR emissivity of Fe/Co sharply increases at a temperature of $\simeq7000$~K because of recombination \citep{2006ApJ...649..939K}.
The ejecta of the CO WD TDE model is more aspherical and thus the photosphere temperature varies significantly depending on the viewing angle (see Figure~7 in \citealt{2016ApJ...819....3M}).
At a particular moment, only a small part of photosphere would be at the recombination temperature and thus would contribute to the NIR emission.
Photon scattering would mix photons from different angles with different temperatures, and then the NIR emission by the recombination would be smoothed out.
As a result, the second hump in the CO WD TDE would be much weaker than the helium WD TDE.
We expect that thermonuclear emission from WD TDEs may show polarization because of the aspherical shape of the ejecta \citep{1982ApJ...263..902S,1991A&A...246..481H}.
We plan to study this issue in our future work.
\begin{figure}
\plotone{figs/lightcurve_jet.pdf}
\plotone{figs/Lpeak_viewing_angle_contourf.pdf}
\caption{Top panel: light curves of WD TDEs. The solid curves show the bolometric and multi-band light curves of the helium WD TDE.
The black dashed and dotted curves, respectively, show the bolometric light curves of the CO WD TDE derived in this study and in \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M}.
Bottom panel: isotropic equivalent peak luminosity as a function of viewing angle.}
\label{fig:lightcurve}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\gridline{
\fig{figs/DES14S2plb.pdf}{0.33\textwidth}{(a) DES14S2plb (rapid and faint)}
\fig{figs/DES16S1dxu.pdf}{0.33\textwidth}{(b) DES16S1dxu (rapid and faint)}
\fig{figs/SN2010et.pdf}{0.33\textwidth}{(c) SN2010et (calcium-rich)}
}
\gridline{
\fig{figs/SN2016hgs.pdf}{0.33\textwidth}{(d) SN2016hgs (calcium-rich)}
\fig{figs/SN2010X.pdf}{0.33\textwidth}{(e) SN2010X (.Ia explosion candidate)}
\fig{figs/iPTF14gqr-SN2014ft.pdf}{0.33\textwidth}{(f) iPTF14gqr/SN2014ft (rapid Type Ic)}
}
\gridline{
\fig{figs/SN2005ek.pdf}{0.33\textwidth}{(g) SN2005ek (rapid Type Ic)}
}
\caption{Comparisons between our model and some rapid transients reported so far.
We compare them with rapid and faint transients reported in \citet{2018MNRAS.481..894P}, calcium-rich transients SN2010et \citep{2012ApJ...755..161K} and SN2016hgs \citep{2018ApJ...866...72D}, a .Ia explosion candidate SN2010X \citep{2010ApJ...723L..98K}, and rapid Type Ic transients iPTF14gqr/SN2014ft \citep{2018Sci...362..201D} and SN2005ek \citep{2013ApJ...774...58D}.
The points show the observed flux/magnitude and its 1$\sigma$ error.
The open triangles in the panels (a, b) are the cases where the detection significance is less than 3$\sigma$, while those in the other panels show upper limits.
The thin solid curves show our model light curves with different viewing angles $(\cos\theta, \phi)$ equally sampled with $(10, 10)$ bins.
The thick solid curves show those with the angle where the model can best fit the observations.
}
\label{fig:obs}
\end{figure*}
The left panel of \figref{fig:spectra} shows the time evolution the synthetic spectra of the helium WD TDE and a spectrum of SN Iax 2012Z, which shows similar features to the helium WD TDE (we will compare them in \secref{sec:obs} ).
They share some common features with SNe Ia: the lack of hydrogen lines, the appearance of strong Fe II lines from $4000$ to $5000\,\mathrm{\AA}$, and P Cygni profiles.
Because of the abundance of IMEs in the helium WD TDE, strong Ca II H/K and infrared (IR) triplet emission lines appear, and silicon emission/absorption lines around $6150\,\mathrm{\AA}$ are, interestingly, absent or very weak, depending on the viewing angle.
The appearance/lack of these lines do not depend on the viewing angle.
Profiles of helium lines are of interest because the ejecta are rich in helium with 0.076~$M_{\sun}$ (see \figref{fig:abundance}).
However, our spectrum synthesis simulation does not allow for a detailed investigation of this issue, because of the local thermal equilibrium assumption in the radiative transfer simulation \citep{1987ApJ...317..355H,1991ApJ...383..308L,2012MNRAS.422...70H}.
Therefore, we will discuss them in our future work, which is also interesting in relation to the similarity to SNe Iax, because a few SNe Iax are reported to show the He lines \citep{2013ApJ...767...57F}.
The right panel of \figref{fig:spectra} shows the dependence of the Ca II IR triplet profile on the viewing angle.
The spectra are redshifted or blueshifted, depending on the viewing angle, with velocities up to $\simeq12,000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$, or with red/blueshift of $\Delta z \simeq \pm 0.054$.
This spectral shift is also predicted in the CO WD TDE model of \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M} with its velocity up to $\simeq\pm10,000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
This is a distinguishable signature of the WD TDEs from the other transients such as SNe Ia.
The spectral shift is due to the intrinsic velocity of the bulk motion of the ejecta.
An orbital energy distribution of the tidal debris of the WD is spread due to the tidal disruption by the BH.
The unbound ejecta obtain positive orbital energy in this process, corresponding to the velocity of
\begin{eqnarray}
v_t &\sim& \left(2 \beta^n \frac{G M_{\mathrm{BH}} R_{\mathrm{WD}}} {R_t^{2}} \right)^{1/2}\\
&\simeq& 7.9 \times 10^3 \,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1} \nonumber \\
&\;&\times \beta^{n/2}
\left (\frac{R_{\mathrm{WD}}}{10^9\,\mathrm{cm}}\right )^{-1/2}
\left (\frac{M_{\mathrm{BH}}}{10^{2.5}\,M_{\sun}}\right )^{1/6}
\left (\frac{M_{\mathrm{WD}}}{0.2\,M_{\sun}}\right )^{1/3},
\label{eq:spread_vel}
\end{eqnarray}
where $n=2$ for a canonical model, while recent studies show that the value should be revised as $n=0$, which is the so-called "frozen-in approximation" \citep{2013MNRAS.435.1809S,2019MNRAS.485L.146S}.
The velocity is a little smaller than the velocity of the bulk motion, $\simeq 12,000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
We note that the release of the nuclear energy also increases the orbital energy of the ejecta.
The contributions by the tidal disruption and release of the nuclear energy result in the red/blueshifted spectra.
Not only does the global spectral shift depend on the viewing angle, but absorption velocities do as well.
The right panel of \figref{fig:spectra} also shows the absorption velocities of the Ca II IR triplet line at $t\simeq16$~days for different viewing angle in the observer frame.
In the ejecta-comoving frame, the corresponding absorption velocity appears relatively smaller ($-11,000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$) from the brightest angle ($\phi\simeq0.8$) than from the faintest angle ($\phi\simeq0.2$), where it is $-15,000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
This is because the radial velocity with respect to the ejecta COM is smaller for the brightest angle than the faintest angle (see \figref{fig:distribution}).
This is qualitatively consistent with the behavior in the CO WD TDE \citet{2016ApJ...819....3M}.
\begin{figure*}
\plottwo{figs/spectra_time_line_identification.pdf}{figs/spectra_velocity_absorption.pdf}
\caption{Time evolution and viewing-angle dependence of spectra of the helium WD TDE.
The left panel shows the spectral evolution, which is calculated by taking the mean over all the angles in the ejecta-comoving frame.
The vertical thick gray lines show rest-frame wavelengths of some lines seen in SNe Ia, and the vertical gray shades show ranges of the wavelengths shifted with a velocity range from $-10,000\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ to $0\,\mathrm{km}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
Some other spectral lines are shown with the red labels.
For comparison, we also show a $+1.1$~days spectrum of SN2012Z since its $V$ maximum with the black line \citep{2013ApJ...767...57F}.
The right panel shows the viewing angle dependence of the shape of Ca II IR triplet lines at $t \simeq 16$~days.
The circles show peaks of the emission lines, and the triangles show the minima of the absorption lines.
We take the mean over the angle of $-0.3 < \cos \,\theta < 0.3$ with 20 samples of $\phi$.
}
\label{fig:spectra}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussions}
\label{sec:discussion}
\subsection{Fallback Components}
In this study, we focus on emission from the unbound ejecta.
There could be an additional power source: the bound debris falling back onto the BH.
Here, we discuss which emission dominates over the other.
We can naively estimate the fallback luminosity from the mass fallback rate as
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{\mathrm{fb}} &\sim& \eta \dot{M}_{\mathrm{fb}} c^2 \\
&\sim& 2 \times 10^{49}\, \mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1} \,
\left( \frac{t}{10^2\,\mathrm{s}} \right)^{-5/3} \nonumber \\
&\;& \times
\left( \frac{\eta}{0.1} \right)
\left( \frac{\dot{M}_{\mathrm{fb,p}}}{10^{-4} \,M_{\sun}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}} \right)
\left( \frac{t_{\mathrm{fb}}}{10^2\,\mathrm{s}} \right)^{5/3},
\label{eq:Lfb}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\eta$ is the conversion efficiency.
We estimate the peak mass fallback rate $\dot{M}_{\mathrm{fb, p}}$ and fallback timescale $t_{\mathrm{fb}}$ from the results of the hydrodynamic simulation.
This luminosity is much larger than the luminosity of thermonuclear emission $L_{\mathrm{therm}}\simeq10^{42}\,\mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ around its peak $t\simeq5$~days.
However, the thermonuclear emission can be dominant if the fallback emission is limited by the Eddington luminosity,
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{\mathrm{Edd}} &\simeq& 8 \times 10^{40} \,\mathrm{erg}\,\mathrm{s}^{-1} \, \nonumber\\
&\;& \times
\left( \frac{\kappa}{0.2\,\mathrm{cm}^2\,\mathrm{g}^{-1}} \right) ^{-1}
\left( \frac{M_{\mathrm{BH}}}{10^{2.5} \,M_{\sun}} \right),
\label{eq:LEdd}
\end{eqnarray}
where we take fiducial value of the opacity $\kappa$ as 0.2$\,\mathrm{cm}^2\,\mathrm{g}^{-1}$.
It is expected that super-Eddington emission from the fallback debris is observed only when relativistic jets are formed and are viewed on-axis (e.g. \citealt{2016ApJ...819....3M}).
Additionally, if the fallback debris forms an accretion disk and it emits thermal emission, its temperature would be $\sim10^6$~K \citep{2016ApJ...819....3M}.
In the optical wavelength, the disk thermal emission would be much smaller than the thermonuclear emission.
Note that although the fallback emission is not a main focus of this study, it is still an interesting target (e.g. \citealt{2017ApJ...841..132L}) and would be detectable with the eROSITA telescope \citep{2019MNRAS.489.5413M}.
\subsection{Possible Observational counterparts}
\label{sec:obs}
The synthetic spectra of the helium WD TDE have striking similarities to the spectra of SNe Iax (or 2002cx-like SNe Ia).
For example, the left panel of \figref{fig:spectra} shows that our day 12 spectrum (in the declining phase in the $V$-band) is very similar to the spectrum of SN Iax 2012Z around the $V$-band maximum \citep{2015A&A...573A...2S,2015ApJ...806..191Y}.
Both the spectra are dominated by Fe II, Fe III, Ca II, and lines from Fe-peak elements \citep{2004PASP..116..903B,2014A&A...561A.146S}.
This may indeed not be surprising; the helium WD TDE produces a mixture of Fe, Fe-peaks and IMEs, qualitatively similar to the weak/failed SN Ia model that explains the spectra of SNe Iax \citep{2013MNRAS.429.2287K}, except that the helium WD TDE has the higher expansion velocity.
The main differences are the nearly complete lack of Si II and S II in the TDE spectra, and the broader, more blue-shifted lines in the TDE.
Another difference is seen in their photometric properties, especially in their declining timescales:
the helium WD TDE shows a more rapid decline ($\Delta m_{15} (\mathrm{B})\simeq4$~mag) than SNe Iax ($\Delta m_{15} (\mathrm{B})\simeq0.5\text{--}2.5$~mag).
However, given the diversity in the properties of SNe Iax \citep{2015A&A...573A...2S,2017hsn..book..375J}, it is an interesting possibility that a sub-population of SNe Iax may be explained by the helium WD TDE.
The helium WD TDE light curves show similar timescales and luminosities to the calcium-rich transients \citep{2010Natur.465..322P,2012ApJ...755..161K,2014MNRAS.437.1519V,2017ApJ...836...60L,2017ApJ...846...50M,2018ApJ...866...72D}, .Ia explosion candidates \citep{2010ApJ...723L..98K}, and other rapid transients \citep{2013ApJ...774...58D,2014ApJ...794...23D,2018Sci...362..201D,2018MNRAS.481..894P}.
We compare our model with observed transients of these classes, on their light curves (see \figref{fig:obs}) and spectra.
We do not find good matches between our model and the calcium-rich transients, .Ia explosion candidates, or rapid transients in \citet{2013ApJ...774...58D,2014ApJ...794...23D}, and \citet{2018Sci...362..201D}.
Compared with the calcium-rich transients, our model shows brighter and bluer emission around the peak.
This is because the $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ mass in our model, 0.030~$M_{\sun}$ is larger than the calcium-rich transients, $\lesssim 0.015\,M_{\sun}$.
Also, our model shows very weak silicon features, while a part of calcium-rich transients, such as PTF10iuv/SN2010et \citep{2012ApJ...755..161K} and SN2016hgs \citep{2018ApJ...866...72D}, show strong silicon features.
SN2010X, a .Ia explosion candidate, also shows strong silicon features and thus does not match to our model, while the light curves show good matches except for the $r$-band maximum: our models show brighter $r$-band maximum than SN2010X by $\simeq-$0.4~mag.
Our model shows fainter peak luminosity than any rapid transients reported in \citet{2013ApJ...774...58D,2014ApJ...794...23D} and \citet{2018Sci...362..201D}.
Our model can well explain multi-band light curves of two rapid transients among the samples presented by \citet{2018MNRAS.481..894P}.
Physical offsets of these transients from the centers of their host galaxies are 3.26~kpc and 10.2~kpc for DES14S2plb and DES16S1dxu, respectively.
DES16S1dxu is noticeably distant from its host center, which may imply that an old stellar population is the source.
This may support its possible origin as a helium WD TDE, of which a star cluster containing an IMBH and WD is the plausible environment.
Although comparisons of spectra between our model and these transients are important to identify their origin(s) with certainty, such observational data are lacking.
Interestingly, they are two of the faintest transients among the rapid transients presented by \citet{2013ApJ...774...58D,2014ApJ...794...23D}, \citet{2018Sci...362..201D}, and \citet{2018MNRAS.481..894P}.
\citet{2018MNRAS.481..894P} reported a much larger sample of rapid transients than the other studies so that they would be able to find the faintest transients with relatively low event rates.
To find helium WD TDEs more certainly, we encourage searching for a larger number of faint and rapid transients and performing rapid spectroscopic follow-ups.
\subsection{Variety}
\label{sec:variety}
We consider a single parameter set of the WD TDE in this study, namely $M_{\mathrm{BH}} = 10^{2.5}\,M_{\sun}$, $M_{\mathrm{WD}}=0.2\,M_{\sun}$, and $\beta=5$.
\citet{2018MNRAS.477.3449K} showed that nucleosynthesis and dynamics of ejecta, such as the $^{56}\mathrm{Ni}$ mass and ejecta mass, in WD TDEs have a large variety depending on these parameters.
Therefore, we intuitively expect a large variety of luminosity, timescale, and other features of the thermonuclear emission from WD TDEs for other parameter cases.
Although our particular model in this study does not explain observed SNe Iax, calcium-rich transients, .Ia explosion candidates, or other rapid transients, they may be explained using other parameter cases.
For example, we can expect even more rapidly evolving transients than the model in this study if we consider less-massive WDs, because it would lead to less-massive ejecta and smaller diffusion timescale.
Such a model may be able to explain a very rapidly declining type I transient SN2019bkc/ATLAS19dqr (\citealt{2019arXiv190905567P,2020ApJ...889L...6C}).
If we consider more-massive WDs, instead, more slowly evolving transients would appear and may explain a sub-population of SNe Iax.
In the future, we plan to study the thermonuclear emission from WD TDEs to establish a range of the parameter space.
\acknowledgements
The authors thank Kazumi Kashiyama, Toshikazu Shigeyama, Masaomi Tanaka, and Takashi Moriya for fruitful discussions.
We also thank Morgan MacLeod and Miika Pursiainen for kindly providing us with their data.
K.K. is supported by the Advanced Leading Graduate Course for Photon Science.
This work is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 17H02864, 17H06360, 18H04585, 18H05223, 18J20547, 19K03907.
Numerical calculations in this work were carried out on Cray XC50/XC30 at Center for Computational Astrophysics, National Astronomical Observatory of Japan and on Cray XC40 at the Yukawa Institute Computer Facility.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Head and human detection are two important research topics in computer vision field with various applications, such as human behavior analysis, intelligent video surveillance and automatic driving. Although great progress has been made by deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) on general object detection \cite{DBLP:journals/pami/RenHG017,DBLP:conf/nips/DaiLHS16,DBLP:conf/cvpr/LinDGHHB17,DBLP:conf/eccv/LiuAESRFB16,DBLP:conf/iccv/LinPRK17,DBLP:conf/cvpr/RedmonDGF16}, research in the realm of these two subtasks remains challenging due to their characteristics.
Head detection has experienced tremendous development in recent years. The context-aware CNN model \cite{DBLP:conf/iccv/VuOL15} employs a pairwise CNN to model pairwise relations among heads. The HeadNet \cite{DBLP:conf/fgr/ChenCHSC18} utilizes spatial semantic relations between pedestrian head and other body parts. However, how to reduce the false positives, such as hair, hands and elbows shown in Figure \ref{fig:rm}, still remains an active research direction. Tracing the main cause, the lack of adequate features and contextual informations is the main difficulty.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[Remove head false positives]{
\label{fig:rm}
\includegraphics[width=0.525\linewidth]{remove.png}}
\subfigure[Recall suppressed bodies]{
\label{fig:rc}
\includegraphics[width=0.435\linewidth]{recall.png}}
\vspace{-3.0mm}
\caption{Effectiveness of JointDet. (a) Remove head false positives: red bounding boxes are the head detection results, and yellow dotted bounding boxes are the removed false positives. (b) Recall missing bodies: red bounding boxes are the human detection results after NMS, and green bounding boxes are the recalled results from suppressed detections.}
\label{fig:effect-post}
\vspace{-3.0mm}
\end{figure}
As for human detection, occlusion is one of the main challenges, especially in the crowded scenes. Some efforts have been made to handle occlusion. The repulsion loss proposed in \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/WangXJSSS18} pushes each proposal not only to approach its designated target, but also to keep it away from the other ground truth objects and their corresponding designated proposals. The attention model \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/Zhang0S18} employs an attention network employing an attention mechanism across channels with guidances. The Bi-box model \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhouY18} proposes a network to simultaneously detect pedestrian and estimate occlusion by regressing two bounding boxes for full body and visible part estimation respectively. These methods can alleviate the occlusion issue to some extent. However, while it comes to extremely crowded scenes where the overlaps between humans become large, the Non-Maximum Suppression (NMS) post-process method will result in missing a very large portion of targets, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:rc}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{network.png}
\caption{Network structure of JointDet. It consists of RPN, Head R-CNN, Body R-CNN and RDM. RPN only generates head proposals, then a statistical head-body ratio is applied to obtain full-body proposals. After that, head and full-body proposals are sent into two parallel R-CNN branches to obtain temporary results. These temporary results are further processed to get final results as follows: (1) matching them using the proposed strategy to output the matched body-head pairs as Pair 1 to Pair N; (2) extracting corresponding features of each pair for RDM to discriminate their relation ({\em i.e.}, whether they belong to the same person); (3) according to the learned relationship to reduce head false positives and recall suppressed human detections.}
\label{fig:framework}
\end{figure*}
In this paper, we propose a novel joint head and human detection network, namely JointDet, which detects head and human body simultaneously and performs relational learning between them to improve the performance of both two tasks. As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:framework}, we tile a small quantity of anchors with only one scale and one aspect ratio in each pyramid level to generate head proposals in RPN and then a statistical ratio is applied on head proposals to obtain human body proposals, which significantly accelerates both training and inference. These two classes of proposals are sent into two parallel R-CNN to perform second-stage detection. Moreover, we design a head-body Relationship Discriminating Module (RDM) to predict the relationship between heads and bodies. Since even in extremely crowded scenes, the occlusion between heads is not very serious, we utilize the head location to regain the suppressed body detections. On the other hand, due to the lack of adequate features, head detection usually has false positives on elbows, hands and knees. The proposed post-process strategy also reduces these head false positives via the learned relationship.
As mentioned above, both head and human body annotations are necessary for the proposed method, and only the CrowdHuman dataset \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1805-00123} is publicly available to conduct experiments. To further verify the effectiveness of the proposed model, we annotate head bounding boxes of CityPersons \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBS17} and Caltech-USA \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/DollarWSP09} based on their human body annotations. However, the commonly used $10\times$ training annotations \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBOHS16} of Caltech-USA are refined automatically with relatively poor quality, it is hard to annotate head bounding boxes based on the original annotations. Therefore, we also re-annotate Caltech-USA with the full-body bounding-box and the visible-region bounding-box, which serves as a satisfied version of Caltech-USA. All these new annotations will be released.
To summarize, this work has five main contributions: 1) proposing an effective framework for joint detection of head and human; 2) designing a RDM to perform relational learning between head and human; 3) introducing a post-process strategy to recall suppressed human detections and reduce head false positives simultaneously; 4) providing the re-annotated body annotations of Caltech-USA, and the head annotations of CityPersons and Caltech-USA to facilitate further studies on the joint detection of head and human; 5) achieving state-of-the-art performance on CrowdHuman, CityPersons and Caltech-USA.
\section{Related Work}
{\flushleft \textbf{Generic Object Detection.}}
Early generic object detectors \cite{DBLP:journals/pami/FelzenszwalbGMR10} rely on the sliding window paradigm based on hand-crafted features and classifiers to find objects of interest. In recent years, a new generation of more effective object detectors based on deep convolutional neural network (CNN) significantly improve the state-of-the-art performances, which can be roughly divided into two categories, {\em i.e.}, the one-stage approach and the two-stage approach. The one-stage approach \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/LiuAESRFB16,DBLP:conf/cvpr/RedmonDGF16} directly predicts object class label and regresses object bounding box based on the pre-tiled anchor boxes using deep CNNs. The main advantage of the one-stage approach is its high computational efficiency. In contrast to the one-stage approach, the two-stage approach \cite{DBLP:journals/pami/RenHG017,DBLP:conf/nips/DaiLHS16,DBLP:conf/cvpr/LinDGHHB17} always achieves top accuracy on several benchmarks, which first generates a pool of object proposals by a separated proposal generator ({\em e.g.}, RPN \cite{DBLP:journals/pami/RenHG017}), and then predicts the class label, accurate location and size of each proposal.
\noindent \textbf{Head Detection.}
Early head detectors are used for crowd counting. Merad {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/avss/MeradAT10} combine positive points of all previous techniques in the head detector. Venkatesh {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/avss/VenkateshDC12} train a head detector using a state-of-the-art cascade of boosted integral features. However, their performance is severely affected under high scene and scale variations because of the usage of handcrafted features. With the arrival of deep learning, some CNN-based methods are proposed. Stewart {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/StewartAN16} introduce a proposal-free head detector that is produced from CNN encoders using a regression module, where the regression is generally composed of LSTM so that the variable length output prediction is possible.
Le {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/icip/LeMWL18} introduce a pairwise head detector based on key parts context of the human head and shoulder, and assisted by priority of scene geometry structure. Vu {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/iccv/VuOL15} predict the scales and the positions of the head directly from the image, then model the pairwise relationships among the objects. Recently introduction of context information is attractive to improve performance.
Some methods \cite{DBLP:conf/avss/ChenBNT16} exploit depth information for head detection with depth images. Nghiem {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/isspa/NghiemAM12} conduct head detection on 3D data as first step for a fall detection system.
\noindent \textbf{Human Detection.}
One of the key challenges in human detection is occlusion, which increases the difficulty in human localization. Several methods \cite{DBLP:conf/iccv/TianLWT15} use part-based model to describe the pedestrian in occlusion handling, which learn a series of part detectors and design some mechanisms to fuse the part detection results to localize partially occluded pedestrians. Besides the part-based model, Zhou {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/iccv/ZhouY17} propose to jointly learn part detectors to exploit part correlations and reduce the computational cost. Wang {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/WangXJSSS18} introduce a novel bounding box regression loss to detect pedestrians in the crowd scenes. Zhang {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/Zhang0S18} propose to utilize channel-wise attention in convnets allowing the network to learn more representative features for different occlusion patterns in one coherent model. Zhang {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhangWBLL18} design an aggregation loss to enforce proposals to be close and locate compactly to the corresponding objects. Zhou {\em et al. } \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhouY18} design a method to detect full body and visible part estimation simultaneously to further estimate occlusion.
Although numerous pedestrian detection methods are presented in literature, how to robustly detect each individual human in extremely crowded scenarios is still one of the most critical issues for human detectors.
\section{JointDet}
\subsection{Framework Overview}
The overall framework is shown in Figure \ref{fig:framework}. We first utilize RPN to generate head proposals, then apply a statistical head-body ratio on these head proposals to obtain full-body proposals. The specific head-body ratio is shown in Figure \ref{fig:ratio} that is statistically obtained based on all human head-body pairs in the CrowdHuman dataset. After that, the head and full-body proposals are sent into two parallel R-CNN branches, respectively. Since the body proposals are obtained coarsely according to the head proposals, we adopt the cascade training strategy proposed by \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1712-00726} for the full-body R-CNN branch to regress more accurate results, where the full-body branch is passed through twice in the training and inference phases. The advantages of this framework can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}
\setlength{\parsep}{0pt}
\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}
\item \emph{A more efficient way to get head and human proposals.} The aspect ratio of head is almost fixed and we just need to tile anchors with one aspect ratio to obtain head proposals. In contrast, the human body has a wide range of aspect ratios because of its deformability and various postures. Tiling anchors to generate human proposals needs to preset a couple of aspect ratios that greatly reduce efficiency. To solve this issue, we use a statistical head-body ratio on head proposals to directly obtain human proposals for free.
\item \emph{Decoupling the classification task.} The two parallel R-CNNs only concentrate on detection of one class of object, {\em i.e.}, head or human body. This design decouples two tasks into separate branches, which is beneficial to make targeted optimization respectively, {\em e.g.}, using cascade strategy to improve the accuracy of calculated human proposals.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[Statistical head-body ratio]{
\label{fig:ratio}
\includegraphics[width=0.438\linewidth]{head_ratio.png}}
\ \ \ \ \
\subfigure[Examples]{
\label{fig:com-pro}
\includegraphics[width=0.477\linewidth]{computed_proposal.png}}
\caption{(a) The statistical head-body ratio to calculate the human body proposal based on the head proposal. (b) Red: head proposals; Green: inferred body proposals from head proposals via the statistical head-body ratio.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Relationship Discriminating Module}
RDM is designed to learn to discriminate the relationships between the head-body pairs with larger Intersection over Head-box (IoH). The detail expression of IoH is as below:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\mbox{IoH}=\frac{\mbox{Area of Overlap}}{\mbox{Area of Head-box}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The structure of RDM is three stacked fully-connected layers, whose channel setting is same as the classification branch in R-CNN. The process of head-body pair matching and relationship prediction is described in Line $1$ to $9$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:rdm}. During training, when the matched pair belongs to one person, its ground-truth is $1$, otherwise $0$. We use the binary cross-entropy loss to optimize RDM. In addition, we set the batch size to be $512$, where the proportion of positive and negative examples is set as $1$:$3$.
In the inference phase, we gather the mismatched head detections that have low relationship score or are not matched through IoH, which is demonstrated in Line $10$ to $12$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:rdm}. There are two situations with the mismatched head detection: 1) The human body corresponding to this head is suppressed by NMS; 2) This head detection is a false positive without a corresponding body. Therefore, we use these mismatched heads and the body detections before NMS to perform matching and relationship discrimination again, as described in Line $14$ to $22$ of Algorithm \ref{alg:rdm}. If one mismatched head gets strong relationship response in the second time, then we recall the corresponding body detection (described in Line $23$ to $25$). In contrast, if one mismatched head fails again, then we treat it as a false positive, removing it from the results (described in Line $26$ to $28$).
\begin{algorithm}[!t]
\begin{small}
\caption{Relationship Discriminating Module}
\label{alg:rdm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require{$ \mathcal{H},\ \mathcal{B}_{1},\ \mathcal{B}_{2},~\mathcal F,~\lambda,~\beta_1,~\beta_2$
\newline $\mathcal{H}$ is a set of head detections after NMS
\newline $\mathcal{B}_{1}$, $\mathcal{B}_{2}$ are a set of body detections before and after NMS
\newline $\mathcal{F}$ is the feature map of the P2 level in the FPN structure
\newline $\lambda$ is the IoH threshold while matching
\newline $\beta_1$, $\beta_2$ are the low and high relationship score thresholds
}
\Ensure{$ \mathcal{D}_{h},\ \mathcal{D}_{b}$
\newline $\mathcal{D}_{h}$, $\mathcal{D}_{b}$ are final head and body detections after post process
}
\vspace{3mm}
\newline \emph{/*- - - - - - -Find Mismatched Head for Post-process- - - - - -*/}
\State{$\mathcal{H}_m \leftarrow{} \varnothing $} ($\mathcal{H}_m$ is the set of mismatched head detections)
\For{$h_i \in \mathcal{H}$}
\State{$Score \leftarrow{} \varnothing $}
\For{$b_j \in \mathcal{B}_2$}
\If{$\mathrm{IoH(}h_{i},b_{j})>\lambda$}
\State{$Feat \leftarrow \mathrm{Concat(}{\mathrm{RoIPool}(\mathcal{F}, h_i),\mathrm{RoIPool}(\mathcal{F}, b_j))}$}
\State{$Score \leftarrow{Score\cup \{\mathrm{RDM(}Feat)\}}$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\If{$\mathrm{max(}Score) < \beta_1$ or $Score = \varnothing$}
\State{$\mathcal{H}_m \leftarrow{\mathcal{H}_m \cup {h_i}}$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\vspace{3mm}
\newline \emph{/*- - - - - - - - - - - - -Post-process Method- - - - - - - - - - - - -*/}
\State{$\mathcal{D}_{h} \leftarrow{} \mathcal{H},\ \mathcal{D}_{b} \leftarrow{} \mathcal{B}_2$}
\For{$h_i \in \mathcal{H}_m$}
\State{$Score \leftarrow{} \varnothing $}
\For{$b_j \in \mathcal{B}_1$}
\If{$\mathrm{IoH(}h_{i},b_{j})>\lambda$}
\State{$Feat \leftarrow \mathrm{Concat(}{\mathrm{RoIPool}(\mathcal{F}, h_i),\mathrm{RoIPool}(\mathcal{F}, b_j))}$}
\State{$Score \leftarrow{Score\cup \{\mathrm{RDM(}Feat)\}}$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\vspace{1.5mm}
\newline
\vspace{0mm}
\quad\ \emph{/*- - - - - - -Recall Suppressed Body Detections- - - - - -*/}
\If{$\mathrm{max(}Score) > \beta_2$}
\State{$\mathcal{D}_{b}\!\leftarrow{}\!\mathcal{D}_{b} \cup$ \{$b$ is the body detection with $\mathrm{max(}Score)$\}}
\EndIf
\vspace{1.5mm}
\newline
\vspace{0mm}
\quad\ \emph{/*- - - - - - - -Remove Head False Positives- - - - - - - - -*/}
\If{$\mathrm{max(}Score) < \beta_1$ or $Score = \varnothing$}
\State{$\mathcal{D}_{h} \leftarrow{} \mathcal{D}_{h} \setminus \{h_i\}$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State{\Return{$\mathcal{D}_{h},\ \mathcal{D}_{b}$}}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{small}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Implementation Detail}
{\flushleft \textbf{Anchor Design.} }
At each location of the detection layer, we only associate one specific scale of anchors ({\em i.e.}, $2S$, where $S$ represents the downsampling factor of the detection layer) and one aspect ratio ({\em i.e.}, $1.25$). In total, there are $A=1$ anchors per level and they cover the scale range $8-128$ pixels across different levels with respect to the input image.
{\flushleft \textbf{Sample Matching.} }
During training, anchors and proposals need to be divided into positive and negative samples. Specifically, samples are assigned to ground-truth boxes using an IoU threshold of $\theta_{p}$, and to background if their IoU is in $[0, \theta_{n})$. If an anchor is unassigned, which may happen with overlap in $[\theta_{n}, \theta_{p})$, it is ignored during the training phase. We set $\theta_{n}=0.3$ and $\theta_{p}=0.7$ for the RPN stage, and $\theta_{n}=0.5$ and $\theta_{p}=0.5$ for the R-CNN stage.
{\flushleft \textbf{Loss Function.} }
The whole network is optimized by ${\cal L}={\cal L}_\text{RPN} + \lambda_1 {\cal L}_\text{Head} + \lambda_2 {\cal L}_\text{Body} + \lambda_3 {\cal L}_\text{RDM}$, where ${\cal L}_\text{RPN}$, ${\cal L}_\text{Head}$ represent the classification and regression loss of RPN and the head R-CNN branch, which are the same as those proposed in \cite{DBLP:journals/pami/RenHG017}. ${\cal L}_\text{Body}$ contains two-stage classification and regression loss as Cascade R-CNN \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/abs-1712-00726}. ${\cal L}_\text{RDM}$ is the log softmax loss over two classes, which indicates whether the head-body pair belong to one person. The loss weight coefficients ${\lambda_1}$, ${\lambda_2}$ and ${\lambda_3}$ are used to balance different loss terms and we empirically set them as $1$ in all the experiments.
{\flushleft \textbf{Initialization.} }
The backbone network is initialized by the ImageNet \cite{DBLP:journals/ijcv/RussakovskyDSKS15} pretrained ResNet-50. The parameters of newly added layers in RPN are initialized by the normal distribution method, and the parameters in R-CNN are initialized by the MSRA normal distribution method \cite{DBLP:conf/iccv/HeZRS15}.
{\flushleft \textbf{Optimization.} }
We fine-tune the model using SGD with $0.9$ momentum, $0.0001$ weight decay. The proposed JointDet is trained on $16$ GTX 1080Ti GPUs with a mini-batch $2$ per GPU for CrowdHuman and Caltech-USA, and the mini-batch size for Citypersons is $1$ per GPU. Each mini-batch involves $512$ RoIs per image. Multi-scale training and testing are not applied to ensure fair comparisons with previous methods. We implement JointDet using the PyTorch~\cite{paszke2017pytorch} library. The specific settings of training process for different datasets are described in next sections.
{\flushleft \textbf{Evaluation Metric.} }
Following \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/DollarWSP09}, the log-average miss rate over $9$ points ranging from $10^{-2}$ to $10^0$ FPPI ({\em i.e.}, $\text{MR}^{-2}$) is used to evaluate the performance of the detectors. We report the detection performance for instances in head and full-body ({\em i.e.}, human) categories.
\section{Experiments}
In this section, we perform extensive experiments on the CrowdHuman, CityPersons and Caltech-USA datasets to verify the effectiveness of the proposed framework.
\subsection{CrowdHuman Dataset}
CrowdHuman is a benchmark dataset to better evaluate detectors in crowd scenarios. It is large, rich-annotated, high-diversity and contains $15,000$, $4,370$ and $5,000$ images for training, validation and testing subsets, respectively. There are totally $470k$ human instances from the training and validation subsets, and $22.6$ persons per image, with various kinds of occlusions in the dataset. Each human instance is annotated with a head bounding-box, human visible-region bounding-box and human full-body bounding-box. The images and annotations of the training and validation subsets are made freely available to academic for scientific use, while only the images of the testing subset are released and the corresponding annotations are held-out. Since the online evaluation server is not available until now, all our models are trained on the CrowdHuman training subset and tested on the validation subset. During the training phase, the input images are resized so that their short edges are at $800$ pixels while the long edges should be no more than $1333$ pixels at the same time. We train JointDet with the initial learning rate $0.04$ for the first $16$ epochs, and decay it by $10$ and $100$ times for another $6$ and $3$ epochs.
\begin{table}[t]
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
\begin{center}
\caption{$\text{MR}^{-2}$ performance of different methods on CrowdHuman. Lower $\text{MR}^{-2}$ mean better performance.}
\label{tab:crowdhuman}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5.5pt}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Source & Method & Head & Human \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{CrowdHuman}& FPN-Head & 52.1 & - \\
& FPN-Human & - & 50.4 \\
\hline
\multirow{5}{*}{Ours} & FPN-Head & 48.9 & - \\
& FPN-Human & - & 49.7 \\
& FPN-Human-Cascade & - & 49.2 \\
& JointDet w/o RDM & 48.7 & 47.0 \\
& JointDet & \bf{48.3} & \bf{46.5} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
{\flushleft \textbf{Baseline.} }
Before delving into our proposed framework of joint head and human detection, we first build two strong baselines based on FPN \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/LinDGHHB17} for these two tasks, respectively. We set anchor scale to $2S$ in the head baseline and $8S$ in the full body baseline, where $S$ represents the stride size of each pyramid level. After considering the human body shape, we modify the height \emph{vs.} width ratios of anchors as $\{0.5$:$1$, $1$:$1$, $2$:$1\}$ for all the experiments related to human detection. While for head detection, the ratios are set to $1.25$:$1$. As shown in Table \ref{tab:crowdhuman}, the baseline of head detection, denoted as FPN-Head, achieves $48.9\%$ $\text{MR}^{-2}$ that is $3.2\%$ better than the head detection baseline in CrowdHuman ({\em i.e.}, $52.1\%$). And the baseline of human detection, denoted as FPN-Human, obtains $49.7\%$ $\text{MR}^{-2}$ that is $0.7\%$ better than the full-body detection baseline in CrowdHuman ({\em i.e.}, $50.4\%$). Thus, the detectors trained for the head and human respectively are two strong baselines to verify the effectiveness of our proposed framework.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfigure[Human]{
\label{fig:human}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Qualitative-human}}
\subfigure[Head]{
\label{fig:head}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Qualitative-head}}
\caption{Qualitative results of JointDet on CrowdHuman. Red bounding boxes represent original results. Green bounding boxes represent recalled human results via RDM. Yellow bounding boxes represent removed head results via RDM.}
\label{fig:example}
\end{figure*}
{\flushleft \textbf{Ablation Study on Joint Detection.} }
As illustrated in Table \ref{tab:crowdhuman}, after jointing head and human detection in a single detection framework, we achieve $48.7\%$ $\text{MR}^{-2}$ for head detection and $47.0\%$ $\text{MR}^{-2}$ for human detection. Comparing to the baselines that each task is executed with a separate network, the proposed joint framework not only merges these two tasks into a single network so as to greatly improve the detection efficiency, but also has better $\text{MR}^{-2}$ performance, {\em i.e.}, from $48.9\%$ to $48.7\%$ for head detection and from $49.7\%$ to $47.0\%$ for human detection. The $2.7\%$ improvement on human detection demonstrates the effectiveness of proposed proposal generation method. Notably, we use the cascade training strategy on the full-body R-CNN branch in our joint framework. To have a fair comparison, we train another human detection baseline, denoted as FPN-Human-Cascade, where the R-CNN branch is also passed through twice in the training and inference phases. FPN-Human-Cascade obtains $49.2\%$ $\text{MR}^{-2}$, which still has a large gap with the joint result of human detection. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of the joint framework of head and human detection.
{\flushleft \textbf{Ablation Study on RDM.} }
The final model of our proposed method is formed by adding the RDM on the joint framework of head and human detection. All the training and testing settings are consistent with previous experiments. The three hyperparameter is set as below: matching IoH threshold $\lambda$ is set to $0.7$, relationship score thresholds $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$ are set to $0.1$ and $0.9$, respectively. As demonstrated in Table \ref{tab:crowdhuman}, after utilizing the head location information to recall the suppressed human bounding boxes, the $\text{MR}^{-2}$ of human detection is improved from $47.0\%$ to $46.5\%$. The advancement indicates that the proposed RDM does recall some human detections suppressed by NMS as shown in Figure \ref{fig:human}, making our JointDet robust to heavy occlusion in human detection. On the other hand, using the learned head-body relationship can also reduce some head false positives as shown in Figure \ref{fig:head}, boosting the $\text{MR}^{-2}$ of head detection from $48.7\%$ to $48.3\%$ and allowing our head detector to perform well in complex scenarios.
\subsection{CityPersons Dataset}
CityPersons serves as a widely used benchmark dataset for pedestrian detection, which is built upon the semantic segmentation dataset Cityscapes \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/CordtsORREBFRS16}. It is recorded across $18$ different cities in Germany with $3$ different seasons and various weather conditions. The dataset includes $5,000$ images ($2,975$ for training, $500$ for validation, and $1,525$ for testing) with $\sim\negmedspace35,000$ manually annotated persons plus $\sim\negmedspace13,000$ ignore region annotations. Both the bounding boxes and visible parts of pedestrians are provided and there are approximately $7$ pedestrians in average per image. \textbf{For each annotated pedestrian instance, we additionally label the corresponding head bounding box}. The newly annotated head bounding box is within the scope of the original body bounding box. If the head is partly occluded, the annotators are asked to complete the invisible part. Some illustrations of additional head annotations are shown in Figure \ref{fig:citypersons-head}. The proposed JointDet detector is trained on the training set and evaluated on the validation set. Following the experiment settings in previous works \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/WangXJSSS18,DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhangWBLL18}, we enlarge input images by $1.3$ times. The initial learning rate is set to $0.02$ for the first $26$ epochs, and is decreased to $0.002$ and $0.0002$ for another $9$ and $5$ epochs, respectively.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{citypersons-head.pdf}
\caption{Illustrations of additional head annotations of CityPersons dataset. Green: original pedestrian annotations. Red: additional head annotations.}
\label{fig:citypersons-head}
\end{figure}
We compare JointDet with TLL(MRF) \cite{Song_2018_ECCV}, Adapted FasterRCNN \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBS17}, ALFNet \cite{Liu_2018_ECCV}, Repulsion Loss \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/WangXJSSS18}, PODE+RPN \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhouY18}, OR-CNN \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhangWBLL18} on the CityPersons validation subset in Table \ref{tab:cityperson-val}. Similar with previous works, we evaluate the final model on the Reasonable subset of the CityPersons dataset. The proposed method surpasses all published methods and reduces the $\text{MR}^{-2}$ of state-of-the-art results from $11.0\%$ to $10.23\%$ with $0.77\%$ improvement compared with the second best method \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhangWBLL18}, demonstrating the superiority of the proposed method in pedestrian detection.
\begin{table}[t]
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.1}
\centering
\caption{$\text{MR}^{-2}$ performance on the CityPersons validation set. The scale indicates the enlarge number of original images in training and testing.}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5pt}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Method &Backbone &Scale &{\em Reasonable} \\
\hline
TLL(MRF) & ResNet-50 &- &14.40 \\
Adapted FasterRCNN & VGG-16 &$\times$1.3 &12.97 \\
ALFNet & VGG-16 &$\times$1 &12.00 \\
Repulsion Loss & ResNet-50 &$\times$1.3 &11.60 \\
PODE+RPN & VGG-16 &- &11.24 \\
OR-CNN & VGG-16 &$\times$1.3 &11.00 \\
\hline
JointDet (Ours) & ResNet-50 &\textbf{$\times$1.3} &\textbf{10.23} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:cityperson-val}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{caltech-new-anno.pdf}
\caption{Left: refined annotations provided by Zhang {\em et al. } Right: our new pedestrian body and head annotations. For simplicity, we do not draw the annotations of visible regions.}
\label{fig:caltech-new}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Caltech-USA Dataset}
Caltech-USA is one of the most popular and challenging datasets for pedestrian detection, which comes from approximately $10$ hours $30$Hz VGA video recorded by a car traversing the streets in the greater Los Angeles metropolitan area. The training and testing sets contain $42,782$ and $4,024$ frames, respectively. The commonly used $10\times$ training annotations \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBOHS16} of Caltech-USA are refined automatically with only $16,376$ poor-quality instances in the training set. \textbf{We re-annotate the dataset manually, with a total of $32,273$ instances in the training set and $1,123$ instances in the testing set}. The labeling rule and method are consistent with the original ones \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/DollarWSP09}. \textbf{With the help of new pedestrian annotations, we also label their corresponding head bounding boxes}. Figure \ref{fig:caltech-new} shows the comparison of our new annotations and the widely used annotations provided by \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBS15}. It is obvious that the quality of our new annotations is higher. The detailed analysis of the impact of our new annotations is described below and we use the new annotations to analyze the proposed JointDet method in next section. Following the experiment settings in \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/WangXJSSS18,DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhangWBLL18}, we train the proposed method using $2\times$ scale of the image size. The initial learning rate is $0.04$ for the first $4$ epochs, and is reduced by $10$ and $100$ times for another $2$ and $1$ epochs.
\begin{table}[h]
\renewcommand\arraystretch{1.2}
\centering
\caption{Effects of different training annotations on different validation annotations of the Caltech-USA dataset. We use the FPN baseline detector for clarification. `Refined Annotation' indicates the refined annotations by \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBOHS16}. `New Annotation' indicates the new annotations re-annotated by us.}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\diagbox{Training}{$\mbox{MR}^{-2}$}{Testing} & Refined Annotation & New Annotation\\
\hline
Refined annotation &4.31 &16.52 \\
New annotation &3.26 &14.26 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:caltech-anno}
\end{table}
Here we first analyze the effect of our sanitised version of the annotations. As shown in Table \ref{tab:caltech-anno}, using the refined annotations provided by Zhang {\em et al. }~\cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBOHS16} for training, the FPN detector achieves $4.31\%$ $\text{MR}^{-2}$ on the refined testing set. It is reduced to $3.26\%$ with our re-annotated annotations as training set, indicating our new annotations possesses higher quality. When evaluating on our new testing annotations, performances of both detectors drop significantly, {\em i.e.}, from $4.31\%$ to $16.52\%$ and from $3.26\%$ to $14.26\%$, which also verify the higher quality of our testing annotations. By statistics, our new annotations have a total of $32,273$ and $1,123$ ground truths in training and testing sets respectively, while the refined version in \cite{DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBOHS16} only has $16,376$ and $912$ instances. Since the benchmark of the original annotations are reaching saturation, our new annotations can serve as a new evaluation metric.
Figure \ref{fig:caltech} shows the comparison of the JointDet method with other state-of-the-art methods \cite{DBLP:conf/eccv/CaiFFV16,DBLP:conf/iccv/CaiSV15,DBLP:conf/cvpr/CosteaN16,DBLP:conf/wacv/DuELD17,DBLP:journals/tmm/LiLSXFY18,DBLP:conf/cvpr/MaoXJC17,DBLP:conf/icpr/Ohn-BarT16a,DBLP:conf/iccv/TianLWT15,DBLP:conf/cvpr/WangXJSSS18,DBLP:conf/eccv/ZhangLLH16,DBLP:conf/cvpr/ZhangBS15} on the Caltech-USA refined testing set. All the reported results are evaluated on the widely-used Reasonable subset, which only contains pedestrians with at least $50$ pixels tall and occlusion ratio less than $35\%$. The proposed method outperforms all other methods by producing $2.95\%$ $\text{MR}^{-2}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{Caltech.png}
\caption{Comparisons with the state-of-the-art methods on the Caltech-USA dataset. The scores in the legend are the ${\text{MR}}^{-2}$ scores of the corresponding methods.}
\label{fig:caltech}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Discussion}
{\flushleft \textbf{Head and Human Annotation.} } The proposed method requires both head and human annotations, which is feasible in practical applications and academic research with the consideration of the following two aspects: 1) If the human or the heads are annotated, another kind of annotations is easy to obtain via the automatic labelling method ({\em e.g.}, using a trained head or human detector) or the semi-automatic labelling method ({\em e.g.}, manual correcting after pre-labelling); 2) We will release all new annotations of head and human to facilitate further studies of head and human detection.
{\flushleft \textbf{Occluded Head.} }
The proposed method generates the human proposals based on the corresponding head proposals. The results of FPN-Human-Cascade ($49.2\%$) and JointDet w/o RDM ($47.0\%$) in Table \ref{tab:crowdhuman} have verify that this way of generating human proposals is better than using the RPN proposals. If the head is occluded, it maybe cause some human miss detection but has a slight impact due to: 1) Human with only head occluded is small number case, while occluded body is more common; 2) With help of human body context, RPN can generate proposals for some occluded heads. Thus, the occluded head has ignorable impact and our state-of-the-art human detection performance also confirms the above statement.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have presented a novel joint detection network to detect head and human simultaneously, which utilizes the learned relationship between heads and human bodies to recall the suppressed human detections and reduce head false positives. To sufficiently verify the effectiveness of these proposed components, we have made some efforts in the dataset: 1) providing a better version of Caltech-USA annotations with full body and visible region; 2) annotating the head bounding boxes of CityPersons and Caltech-USA. Consequently, the proposed JointDet detector achieves state-of-the-art performance on CrowdHuman, CityPersons and Caltech-USA. All new annotations, source codes and trained models will be public to facilitate further studies of head and human detection.
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{aaai}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Probability theory, developed over the last three centuries, has provided an overarching framework for modeling uncertainty in the real-world. As a result, it has become a key mathematical tool used in designing state estimation and inference algorithms. Pierre-Simon Laplace and Thomas Bayes were among the first to formulate the notion of conditional probability, and use it to estimate an unknown parameter from observed data~\cite{Hald_2007_ProbHistory1713Till1935, Stigler_1986_StatHistoryTill1900}. Ever since the axiomatic foundations laid by Kolmogorov~\cite{Kolmogorov_1933_ProbTheory} and the appearance of de Finetti's theorem~\cite{1978_Kingman_Exchangeability, 1985_Aldous_Exchangeability}, the theory of probability has justifiably formed the basis for inference and state estimation algorithms.
In Bayesian inference, for example, the goal is to successively improve an estimate of a model parameter or an evolving state variable, such as the pose of a robot~\cite{thurn_prob_robotics}, by incorporating the observed information~\cite{christian_robert_ml, bishop_ml}. A prior probability distribution is assigned to the initial state variable or the model parameter, and this distribution is successively improved by computing the posteriori distribution, using the observed data. Bayes' law and the law of total probability form the theoretical basis for this computation.
One of the main difficulties in such state estimation and inference procedures is its computational tractability. Computing the posteriori distribution and the maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimate is hard in most problems of practical significance~\cite{2004_Complexity_MAP_BayNet, pmlr-v99-tosh19a, bishop_ml}. Several approximation methods have been considered to overcome this limitation~\cite{2001_minka_EP, 2002_particle_filtering, Andrieu2003_mcmc, Blei2017_variational_inference, bishop_ml}, and it remains an active field of research. Graphical models such as Bayesian network leverage the underlying conditional independence structure for better inference algorithms~\cite{koller_ProbGraphModels, jordan_GraphModels}.
Another major issue with using distribution functions is that they are chosen mostly to ensure easier analysis and algorithm design. In robotic perception, for example, an additive Gaussian noise is often assumed in the motion and sensing model~\cite{thurn_prob_robotics}. Although, this produces the elegant Kalman filter solution, it can cause severe degradation in performance due to the inherent non-linearities in motion and sensing~\cite{Barefoot_2017_StateEstimation_Robotics}. In several such applications, and in robotic perception in particular, a bounded noise model may be more suited.
Probability theory, characterizes an uncertain quantity by a distribution function (or equivalently a measure function), which assigns a number to every (almost every) possible outcome. Perhaps, this distribution function is too much information to carry for computation, and results in computational intractability. The difficulty in computing the posteriori distribution is a manifestation of such intractability. Secondly, in the case of bounded, but unknown uncertainty, it may be more useful to model an uncertain quantity as a set.
Probability theory uses a distribution function as a primitive and builds all useful ideas such as the law of total probability, Bayes' law, independence, graphical models, point estimate on top of it. Is it then possible to construct an alternative theory, which replaces the distributions functions, with something much elementary, such as a set? Can we develop similar useful ideas such as law of total probability, Bayes' law, independence, graphical models, and point estimates on such a construct? Can such a theory provide a hope for devising better algorithms? In our quest towards answering these questions we develop a new theory of uncertainty variables.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{uv_examples}
\caption{\textbf{(a)}~Robot $R$ is taking distance measurements of obstacle corners. Here, $x$ denotes the state space, which includes the pose of the robot as well as the configuration of obstacles (shaded regions). $b(x)$ denotes the distance of a particular corner from $R$ and $y$ its measurement. Given $x$ and $b(x)$, the measurement $y$ can be modeled as a UV $Y = (D_Y, U_Y)$ such that $D_Y = E$ and $U_Y = \{ y \in E~|~ ||y - b(x)|| \leq \sigma~\}$, where $E$ denotes the empty space (the unshaded region).
~\textbf{(b)}~Robot $R$ is at the corner of a tunnel and makes three distance measurements shown by dotted lines. With these measurements it can infer that its location is either in region $A$ or $B$. This is modeled by UV $X = (D_X, U_X)$, where $U_X = A\cup B$ and $D_X$ is the entire tunnel region.
~\textbf{(c)}~We observe a sequence of coin tosses $x_{1:N}$. $H$ and $T$ is represented by $1$ and $0$, respectively. The probability that a coin turns out $H$, namely, $q$ is more likely to lie in certain region of $[0, 1]$, given the observations $x_{1:N}$. This is modeled by a UV $Q = (D_Q, U_Q)$, where $D_Q = [0, 1]$ and $U_Q$ is shown in (c), where $D(\cdot||\cdot)$ is KL divergence.}
\label{fig:uv_examples}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Contribution}
Suppose we want to characterize uncertain quantities such as the measured temperature in a room, the position of a robot, noisy sensor measurements, or the state of a control system. Such uncertain quantities have an implicitly defined underlying domain. For example, a temperature measurement can take any real values, a pose of a robot is a point in a $d$ dimensional configuration space. All such uncertain quantities are more likely to lie in certain region of this domain, and not spread out everywhere.
An uncertainty variable $X$ is characterized by a tuple $(D_X, U_X)$ where $D_X$ denotes the domain set and $U_X$ the \emph{uncertainty set} of $X$. A realization $x$ of an uncertainty variable $X$, which we write as $X = x$, can lie only in its uncertainty set, i.e. $x \in U_X$. See Figure~\ref{fig:uv_examples} for examples. Conditional uncertainty is characterized by a \emph{conditional uncertainty map} $P_{Y|X}: x \rightarrow P_{Y|X}(x) \subset D_Y$, that maps every realization $x \in U_X$ of $X$ to a subset of $D_Y$, which is the set of all realizations of $Y$, i.e. given a realization $X = x$, a realization of $Y$ can only lie in the set $P_{Y|X}(x)$. Thus, the larger the set $P_{Y|X}(x) \subset D_Y$, the larger is the uncertainty in $Y$ given $X = x$.
Using this notion of uncertainty variables and conditional uncertainty maps, we first prove the Bayes' law and the law of total probability equivalent for uncertainty variables.
We then define the notions of independence, conditional independence, and pairwise independence for a collection of uncertainty variables. We argue that this new notion of independence over uncertainty variables preserves the same properties of independence that we know from random variables. For example, we show that total independence between a collection of uncertainty variables does not imply pairwise independence.
Graphical models over random variables have been very useful in designing exact and approximate inference algorithms~\cite{koller_ProbGraphModels, jordan_GraphModels}. We extend the theory of uncertainty variables, developed in the first part of the paper, and define a graphical model over uncertainty variables.
We define \emph{Bayesian uncertainty network}, as a directed graphical model over a collection of uncertainty variables. As the name suggests, this is equivalent to the Bayesian network defined over random variables. We show that all the conditional independence properties, expected out of a Bayesian network, also hold for the Bayesian uncertainty network.
In many state estimation and inference problems, one is interested in a point estimate. We, therefore, define the notion of a point estimate. We prove a relation between the point estimate and the MAP estimate when the uncertainty sets are high-probability sets with respect to the appropriate distribution functions.
This illustrates the generality of this new approach of characterizing uncertainty.
\subsection{Related Works}
Using bounded sets instead of probability distributions is not a new idea, and has been explored in the control systems literature~\cite{2015_Franco_SetEstiAndControl, 1971_Ber_Thesis, 1971_BerRhodes_ReachabilityTubes}. Some of these early works on bounded noise models in control theory, also inspired the formulation of set-estimation in the signal processing literature~\cite{1989_deller_set_mem_identification_dsp, 1993_combettes_foundations_set_estimation, 2015_Franco_SetEstiAndControl}. The motivation here was that the point estimate, such as MAP or ML, is not good enough, and a confidence region, namely a set, would be useful. A set estimate, for say a model parameter, was defined as an intersection of sets, each of which corresponds to an observation. To help compute such an intersection, especially of ellipsoidal sets, several approximating methods were proposed~\cite{2002_Ros_EllipsoidalCalculus, 1997_Book_Ellipsoidal_Calculus}.
A notion of uncertainty sets has also been used in the robust optimization literature~\cite{2011_DBerm_RO_theory_n_applications, BenTal_RO_Book}. Robust optimization also begins with the same premise as ours, that the way probability theory characterizes uncertainty results in computational intractability. As a recourse, when many uncertain quantities are involved, robust optimization constructs uncertainty sets over these uncertain quantities, using the law of large numbers and the central limit theorems~\cite{2011_DBerm_RO_high_dim}. The objective is then to solve a worst case optimization problem, which is either min-max or max-min, over these uncertainty sets.
Our work, on the other hand, uses an uncertainty set instead of a distribution function, and develops a theory in parallel to the theory of probability used in state estimation and Bayesian inference. The notion of conditional uncertainty maps, independence, conditional independence, graphical models, and point estimates, developed here is novel, and does not exist in either the robust optimization or the set-estimation literature.
In~\cite{laValle_2012_sensing_filtering}, a sensor was abstractly modeled as a mapping $h$ from state space to the observation space. The preimage of the sensor mapping $h^{-1}$, evaluated at a sensor observation, gave the set of all states that could result in the particular observation. A general triangulation principle was proposed to obtain the set of all possible states, as an intersection of all sensor preimages. A general mathematical foundation for the proposed method of filtering was suggested as an open challenge in~\cite{laValle_2012_sensing_filtering}. We believe that the theory of uncertainty variables comes close to addressing this challenge. In Section~\ref{sec:bay_nets}, we will derive the general triangulation principle.
\subsection{Notations}
\label{sec:notations}
We use the following notation. For an indexed set $A$, $y_A$ denotes the collection $\{ y_i~|~i \in A \}$. We use $1:N$ to denote the set of integers $\{1, 2, \ldots N\}$. Uncertainty variables are usually denoted by $X$, $Y$, and $Z$, while random variables are denoted by $\bar{X}$, $\bar{Y}$, and $\bar{Z}$.
For a set $A$, we use $2^A$ to denote the collection of all subsets of $A$. A set cross product is denoted by $\times$. Empty set is denoted by $\emptyset$. We also use a notion of a cross product between a set and a set function. For a set $A \subset D_X$ and a set function $B: D_X \rightarrow 2^{D_Y}$, where $D_X$ and $D_Y$ are two sets, we define the cross product
\begin{align}
A\otimes B &= \cup_{x \in A}\{x\}\times B(x), \nonumber \\
&= \{ (x,y)~|~x \in A~\text{and}~y \in B(x) \}. \nonumber
\end{align}
As an example, if $A = \{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n~|~f(x) \leq 0\}$ and $B(x) = \{ y \in \mathbb{R}^m~|~g(x,y) \leq 0 \}$, for all $x \in A$, then $A\otimes B = \{ (x,y) \in \mathbb{R}^{n+m}~|~f(x) \leq 0,~g(x,y) \leq 0~\}$.
We use the following notion of projection. If a set $D$ is such that $D = D_A\times D_B$, then the projection operator on $D_A$ is a mapping $\Pi: 2^{D} \rightarrow 2^{D_A}$, which maps every subset in $D$ to a subset in $D_A$, such that
\begin{equation}\nonumber
\Pi(U) = \{ x_A \in D_A~|~\exists~x_B~\text{s.t.}~(x_A, x_B) \in U\},
\end{equation}
for all $U \subset D$.
\subsection{Organization}
In Section~\ref{sec:theory_uv}, we develop the notion of uncertainty variables, conditional uncertainty map, and prove the two fundamental results, namely, the law of projections and Bayes' law. In Section~\ref{sec:indep}, we define independence and conditional independence over uncertainty variables, and argue that this notion retains the independence properties over random variables. In Section~\ref{sec:bay_nets}, we define the Bayesian uncertainty network and establish all the conditional independence relations it satisfies. Point estimates are discussed in~\ref{sec:pt_estimate} and we conclude in Section~\ref{sec:conc}.
\section{Theory of Uncertainty Variables}
\label{sec:theory_uv}
We first define the notion of an uncertainty variable and the conditional uncertainty map.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:uv}
An uncertainty variable (UV) $X$ is a tuple denoted as
\begin{equation}
X = (D_X, U_X),
\end{equation}
where $D_X$ is the domain of the UV and $U_X \subset D_X$ is the uncertainty set such that every realization $x$ of $X$ is in $U_X$, i.e. $x \in U_X$.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
We will use the notation $X = x$ to denote a realization of a UV $X$. Whenever we say $X = x$ it will be presumed that $x \in U_X$. We will use upper-case letters to denote UVs and smaller-case letters to denote its realization.
Conditional uncertainty should characterize the uncertainty on one variable, say $Y$, given a realization of another variable, say $X = x$. This can be defined as a set map.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:uv_cond_map}
Let $X = (D_X, U_X)$ and $Y = (D_Y, U_Y)$ be two uncertainty variables. The conditional uncertainty map of $Y$ given $X$ is a set function $P_{Y|X}: D_X \rightarrow 2^{D_Y}$ that maps every $x \in D_X$ to a set $P_{Y|X}(x) \subset D_Y$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $P_{Y|X}(x) \neq \emptyset$ if $x \in U_X$, and
\item $P_{Y|X}(x) \subset U_Y$ for all $x \in U_X$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
The first condition enforces that whenever $x \in U_X$, $P_{Y|X}(x)$ cannot be $\emptyset$, i.e. it induces some uncertainty on variable $Y$. Note that we do not impose any condition on $P_{Y|X}(x)$ for $x \notin U_X$. The second condition makes sure that the conditional uncertainty set, given $X = x$, cannot be larger than the marginal uncertainty set $U_Y$.
We next define the joint uncertainty variable $Z = (X, Y) = (D_Z, U_Z)$ given the marginal uncertainty variable $X$ and the conditional uncertainty map $P_{Y|X}$. We use the $\otimes$ operation between a set and a set function defined in Section~\ref{sec:notations}.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:joint_uv}
Let $X = (D_X, U_X)$ and $Y = (D_Y, U_Y)$ be two uncertainty variables. Let $P_{Y|X}$ be the conditional uncertainty map of $Y$ given $X$. Then the joint uncertainty variable $Z = (X, Y)$ is defined by the domain set $D_Z = D_X\times D_Y$ and the uncertainty set
\begin{equation}
\nonumber
U_Z = U_X\otimes P_{Y|X} = \left\{ (x,y)~\left|~\begin{array}{c}
x \in U_X,~\text{and}\\
y \in P_{Y|X}(x)
\end{array} \right.\right\}.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
In order to illustrate this definition, consider $U_X = \{ x \in \mathbb{R}^n~|~f(x) \leq 0\}$ for some function $f: \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. Let the conditional uncertainty map be $P_{Y|X}(x) = \{ y \in \mathbb{R}^m~|~g(x,y) \leq 0\}$ for some function $g: \mathbb{R}^{n+m} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. Then, the joint uncertainty set for $Z = (X, Y)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
U_Z = \{ (x,y) \in \mathbb{R}^{n+m}~|~f(x) \leq 0,~g(x,y) \leq 0\}.
\end{equation}
This implies that in the characterization of the joint uncertainty set, the two variables, namely $x$ and $y$, need to satisfy both the conditions: $f(x) \leq 0$ and $g(x, y) \leq 0$. One of which defines the marginal uncertainty set $U_X$, while the other defines the conditional uncertainty map $P_{Y|X}$.
It is important to note that the joint uncertainty variable $Z = (X, Y)$ is defined with a domain that is just a cross product of the two domains $D_X \times D_Y$. However, it is not necessarily true that the joint uncertainty set $U_{X,Y}$ will also be a cross product of the marginal sets $U_X$ and $U_Y$. In Figure~\ref{fig:not_indep_example}, we provide an example. In it we have plotted the joint uncertainty set $U_{X,Y}$. Here, $U_{X} = [0, 5]$ and $P_{Y|X}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
P_{Y|X}(x) = \left\{\begin{array}{cc}
\left[5/2 - x, 5/2 + x\right] & \text{if}~x \in [0, 5/2]\\
\left[x - 5/2, 15/2 - x\right] & \text{if}~x \in [5/2, 5]\\
\emptyset &\text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right..
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{not_indep_example}
\caption{Plots joint uncertainity set $U_{X,Y}$ of two UVs that are not independent.}
\label{fig:not_indep_example}
\end{figure}
The conditional uncertainty $P_{Y|X}$ maps each $x \in D_X$ to a set in the collection $2^{D_Y}$. The larger the set $P_{Y|X}(x)$, the greater is the uncertainty in UV $Y$, given $X = x$. For the example in Figure~\ref{fig:not_indep_example}, the conditional uncertainty in $Y$, given $X$, is the most when $X = 5/2$.
In Definition~\ref{def:uv_cond_map}, we did not impose any restriction on $P_{Y|X}(x)$ for $x \notin U_X$.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
We say that the conditional uncertainty map $P_{Y|X}: D_X \rightarrow 2^{D_Y}$ is \emph{always definite} if $P_{Y|X}(x) \neq \emptyset$ for any $x \in D_X$.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
In principle, we can set $P_{Y|X}(x)$ to any subset of $D_Y$, for $x \notin U_X$, without affecting the joint uncertainty. Therefore, assuming that the conditional uncertainty maps are always definite does not change any of the results we derive. However, it simplifies some of the proofs. Hence, without loss of generality, we make the following assumption.
\begin{framed}
\begin{assumption}
\label{ass00}
Conditional uncertainty maps are always definite.
\end{assumption}
\end{framed}
\subsection{Fundamental Laws}
\label{sec:bayes}
\label{sec:fundamental_laws}
In probability theory, the law of total probability and Bayes' law form the basis for inference and state estimation. Here, we provide equivalents of these two laws for the case of uncertainty variables.
In Definition~\ref{def:joint_uv}, we saw how the uncertainty set of a joint UV can be constructed from a marginal uncertainty set and the conditional uncertainty map. The following theorem provides a way to construct the marginal uncertainty sets and the conditional uncertainty maps, given a joint uncertainty variable.
\begin{framed}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:law_of_projections}
Let $Z = (D_Z, U_Z)$ be an uncertainty variable such that $D_Z = D_X\times D_Y$. Then, the two marginal uncertainty variables $X = (D_X, U_X)$ and $Y = (D_Y, U_Y)$ are such that
\begin{equation}
U_{X} = \Pi_{X}[U_{Z}]~~~\text{and}~~~U_Y = \Pi_{Y}[U_Z],
\end{equation}
where $\Pi_X$ and $\Pi_Y$ denote projection operators on $D_X$ and $D_Y$, respectively. Furthermore, the conditional uncertainty map $P_{Y|X}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
P_{Y|X}(x) = \Pi_{Y}\left[ U_{Z}\cap \{ X = x \}\right],~~~\forall~x \in U_X,
\end{equation}
where $\{X = x\}$ denotes the set $\{ (x', y') \in D_Z~|~x' = x \}$.
\end{theorem}
\end{framed}
\begin{IEEEproof}
See Appendix~\ref{pf:thm:law_of_projections}.
\end{IEEEproof}
In probability theory, the marginal distribution is obtained, from a joint distribution, by a integrating out the other variable. Theorem~\ref{thm:law_of_projections} implies that for the case of uncertainty variables the marginal uncertainty set can be obtained by a projection of the joint uncertainty set. We shall refer to this as \emph{the law of projections}. In the theory of uncertainty variables, this law is as critical as the law of total probability in probability theory.
We next prove an equivalent of Bayes' law for uncertainty variables.
\begin{framed}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:bayes_suv}
For the joint UV $Z = (X, Y)$, the uncertainty set is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:law_bayes}
U_{X,Y} = U_X \otimes P_{Y|X} = \mathcal{R}_{YX\leftrightarrow XY}\left(U_Y \otimes P_{X|Y}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{R}_{YX\leftrightarrow XY}\left(y, x\right) = (x, y)$ for all $x \in D_X$ and $y \in D_Y$.
\end{theorem}
\end{framed}
\begin{IEEEproof}
This result follows directly from Definition~\ref{def:joint_uv} by noting that the joint uncertainty $U_{X,Y}$ can be equivalently defined as $U_X\otimes P_{Y|X}$ or as $U_Y\otimes P_{X|Y}$, except for the change of variable ordering.
\end{IEEEproof}
In the next section, we argue that the uncertainty sets and conditional uncertainty maps, can be represented as sub-level sets of some functions. This representation will be useful in proving some of the results later in the paper.
\subsection{Representation}
\label{sec:rep}
We have represented uncertainty variables and conditional uncertainties as sets and set functions, respectively. It is, at times, useful to deal with functions rather than sets. In this small section, we present a result, that states that every such uncertainty set or a conditional uncertainty map can be represented as a sub-level set of a function.
\begin{framed}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:fun_rep_suv}
The following statements are true:
\noindent 1)~An uncertainty set $U_X \subset D_X$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
U_X = \left\{ x \in D_X~|~ H_X(x) \leq h_X \right\},
\end{equation}
for some function $H_X:D_X \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^m$, $h_X \in \mathbb{R}^m$, and some positive integer $m$.
\noindent 2)~A conditional uncertainty map $P_{Y|X}:D_X \rightarrow 2^{D_Y}$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
P_{Y|X}(x) = \left\{ y \in D_Y~|~ H_{Y|X}(y, x) \leq h_{Y|X} \right\},
\end{equation}
for some function $H_{Y|X}:D_Y\times D_X \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^m$, $h_{Y|X} \in \mathbb{R}^m$, and some positive integer $m$.
\end{lemma}
\end{framed}
\begin{IEEEproof}
The proof is trivial, as such functions, namely $H_X$ and $H_{Y|X}$, can always be obtained by a simple construction. For the first part, given a set $U_X \subset D_X$, take $H_X(x) = 1 - \mathbb{I}_{U_X}(x)$, for all $x \in D_X$. Here, $\mathbb{I}_{U_X}(x)$ is the indicator function for the set $U_X$. Take $m = 1$ and $h_X = 1/2$. Then, $U_X = \{x \in D_X~|~H_X(x) \leq h_X \}$. Similarly, for the second part, take $H_{Y|X}(y,x) = 1 - \mathbb{I}_{P_{Y|X}(x)}(y)$, $m = 1$, and $h_{Y|X} = 1/2$.
\end{IEEEproof}
Note that we have not imposed any conditions on the functions $H_{X}$ and $H_{Y|X}$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:fun_rep_suv}, except that they take values in some Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^{m}$.
In the following, we provide three parametric uncertainty variables, which may be useful in practice. These are obtained by restricting $H_X$ in Lemma~\ref{lem:fun_rep_suv} to a specific function class.
\noindent (1)~\textbf{Elliptic UV}: An Elliptic UV is defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:uv_elliptic}
X = \left(\Rn, \{ x \in \Rn~|~(x-\bar{x})^{T}Q^{-1}(x-\bar{x}) \leq \eta \} \right),
\end{equation}
where $Q$ is a positive definite matrix and $\bar{x}$ is a vector in $D_X = \mathbb{R}^n$. This UV can be used to model noisy measurement of a location $\bar{x}$.
\noindent (2)~\textbf{Polytopic UV}: A polytopic UV is defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:uv_polytope}
X = \left(\Rn, \{ x \in \Rn~|~H(x-\bar{x}) \leq h\}\right),
\end{equation}
where $H$ is a matrix, and $h$ and $\bar{x}$ are vectors in $\mathbb{R}^n$.
\noindent (3)~\textbf{Canonical UV}: For every random variable $\bar{X}$, taking values in $D_X$ with a probability density function $f_{\bar{X}}(x)$, we can construct a simple canonical UV $X = (D_X, U_X)$. We call it the canonical UV -- canonical to the random variable $\bar{X}$. The canonical UV $X$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:uv_cannonical}
X = \left( D_X, \{x \in D_X~|~ -\log f_{\bar{X}}(x) \leq \eta \}\right),
\end{equation}
for some $\eta \in \mathbb{R}$. Note that the Elliptic UV in~\eqref{eq:uv_elliptic} is a Canonical UV for the Gaussian random variable $\mathcal{N}(\bar{x}, Q)$ and the polytopic UV in~\eqref{eq:uv_polytope} is a Canonical UV for a uniformly distributed random variable over the polytope.
In the next section, we illustrate the usefulness of the uncertainty variables in computing the posteriori distribution. The main tool is the application of the law of total projections (Theorem~\ref{thm:law_of_projections}) and the Bayes' rule (Theorem~\ref{thm:bayes_suv}).
\subsection{Computing the Posteriori Map}
\label{sec:posteriori_examples}
The main advantage of this formulation is that it can be easier to compute the posteriori uncertainty map. For example, in many machine learning applications, we are given a model for the data, say $Y$, and a model for the prior parameters, say $X$. This is equivalent to knowing the conditional uncertainty map $P_{Y|X}$ and the uncertainty set $U_X$. With this, the joint uncertainty set can be computed as
\begin{equation}
U_{X,Y} = U_{X}\otimes P_{Y|X}.
\end{equation}
Then, the posteriori uncertainty map $P_{X|Y}:D_Y \rightarrow 2^{D_X}$ can be computed by a simple projection on $D_X$ (see Theorem~\ref{thm:law_of_projections}):
\begin{equation}
P_{X|Y}(y) = \Pi_X\left( U_{X,Y} \cap \{ Y = y \}\right).
\end{equation}
This posteriori map, for a given observed data $Y = y$, will produce a set in $D_X$ that tells us about the uncertainty in $X$ given the observed data $Y = y$.
Let us use the sub-level set representations of Lemma~\ref{lem:fun_rep_suv}. Let
\begin{align}
U_X &= \{ x \in D_X~|~H_{X}(x) \leq h_X\}~\text{and} \\
P_{Y|X}(x) &= \{ y \in D_Y~|~H_{Y|X}(y,x) \leq h_{Y|X}\}.
\end{align}
Then the posteriori uncertainty map $P_{X|Y}(y)$, for a given observed data $Y = y$, is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:no1}
P_{X|Y}(y) = \left\{ x \in D_X~\left|~\begin{array}{c}
H_{X}(x) \leq h_X~\text{and} \\
H_{Y|X}(y,x) \leq h_{Y|X}
\end{array}
\right.~\right\}.
\end{equation}
To see the meaning in~\eqref{eq:no1}, we define an information map $\mathcal{I}_{X|Y}$ for every conditional uncertainty map $P_{Y|X}$.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
\label{def:info_map}
Information map for $P_{Y|X}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:info_map}
\mathcal{I}_{X|Y}(y) = \{ x \in D_X~|~y \in P_{Y|X}(x)\},
\end{equation}
for every $y \in D_Y$.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
The information map is, in a sense, an inverse of $P_{Y|X}$. It measures the set of all $x \in D_X$ which can produce an observation $y$, with the model $P_{Y|X}$. Note that for $P_{Y|X}(x) = \{ y \in D_Y~|~H_{Y|X}(y,x) \leq h_{Y|X}\}$ the information map is
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{I}_{X|Y}(y) = \{ x \in D_X~|~H_{Y|X}(y,x) \leq h_{Y|X}\}.
\end{equation}
The posteriori map in~\eqref{eq:no1} can be written as
\begin{equation}
P_{X|Y}(y) = U_X\cap \mathcal{I}_{X|Y}(y),
\end{equation}
which is the intersection of the prior uncertainty in $X$ and the uncertainty induced by the observation $Y = y$ on variable $X$, namely $\mathcal{I}_{X|Y}(y)$.
The idea of obtaining set-estimates, as intersection of sets, existed in the set-estimation literature~\cite{1989_deller_set_mem_identification_dsp, 1993_combettes_foundations_set_estimation, 2015_Franco_SetEstiAndControl}. However, the literature mostly limited itself to linear models, in which, the observed data $Y$ and the underlying state variable $X$ were related by a linear equation. Furthermore, it was not clear as to why an intersection would make sense over any other set operation. The theory of uncertainty variables developed here provides the answer.
In the next section, we define the notion of independence and conditional independence for a given set of uncertainty variables. We show that all the independence properties that are true for random variables, such a total independence not implying pairwise independence and more, are retained for the uncertainty variables.
\section{Independence}
\label{sec:indep}
We first define independence between two uncertainty variables.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
We say that the two UVs, $X$ and $Y$, are independent if $P_{Y|X}(x) = P_{Y|X}(x')$ for all $x, x' \in U_X$.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
It is trivial to see that for independent uncertainty variables $X$ and $Y$, the joint uncertainty set also factors into the product of the marginal uncertainty set. We articulate this in the following lemma.
\begin{framed}
\begin{lemma}
Uncertainty variables $X$ and $Y$ are independent if and only if $U_{X,Y} = U_X \times U_Y$, where $U_X$, $U_Y$, and $U_{X,Y}$ are uncertainty sets for $X$, $Y$, and $(X,Y)$, respectively.
\end{lemma}
\end{framed}
\begin{IEEEproof}
We first prove the following lemma about the operation $\otimes$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:o-times-prop}
Let $A \subset D_X$ and $B:D_X \rightarrow 2^{D_Y}$. If the mapping $B$ is such that $B(x) = B(x') = \bar{B} \subset D_Y$, for all $x, x' \in A$, then $A\otimes B = A\times \bar{B}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Using the definition of $A\otimes B$ we have
\begin{equation}
A\otimes B = \bigcup_{x \in A} \{ x \}\times B(x) = \bigcup_{x \in A} \{ x \}\times \bar{B}, \label{eq:nooo1}
\end{equation}
where the last equality following because of the assumption $B(x) = B(x') = \bar{B} \subset D_Y$, for all $x, x' \in A$. Now, we can take the union inside the cross product in~\eqref{eq:nooo1} to get
\begin{equation}
A\otimes B = \bigcup_{x \in A} \{ x \}\times \bar{B} = \left( \bigcup_{x \in A} \{ x \} \right)\times \bar{B},
\end{equation}
which is nothing but $A\times \bar{B}$.
\end{IEEEproof}
We first prove that, if $X$ and $Y$ are independent then $U_{X,Y} = U_X\times U_Y$. Since $P_{Y|X}(x) = P_{Y|X}(x')$ for all $x, x' \in U_X$, by Lemma~\ref{lem:o-times-prop} and Theorem~\ref{thm:bayes_suv}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nooo10}
U_{X,Y} = U_X\otimes P_{Y|X} = U_X \times \bar{B},
\end{equation}
where $\bar{B} = P_{Y|X}(x)$, for an $x \in U_X$. It now suffices to show that $\bar{B} = U_Y$. Using Theorem~\ref{thm:law_of_projections}, we get $U_Y$ to be
\begin{equation}
U_Y = \Pi_{Y}\left[ U_{X,Y} \right] = \Pi_{Y}\left[ U_{X}\times \bar{B} \right] = \bar{B}.
\end{equation}
We now show that if the joint uncertainty set factorizes, i.e. $U_{X,Y} = U_X\times U_Y$, then $X$ and $Y$ are independent. We, therefore, have to show that $P_{Y|X}(x) = P_{Y|X}(x')$ for all $x, x' \in U_X$. Again, using Theorem~\ref{thm:law_of_projections}, the conditional uncertainty map is given by
\begin{align}
P_{Y|X}(x) &= \Pi_Y\left[ U_{X,Y} \bigcap \{ X = x \}\right], \\
&= \left\{ \begin{array}{cc}
U_Y &~\text{if}~x \in U_X \\
\emptyset &~\text{otherwise}
\end{array}\right.,
\end{align}
for any $x \in D_X$. This implies that $P_{Y|X}(x) = P_{Y|X}(x')$ for all $x, x' \in U_X$.
\end{IEEEproof}
Conditional independence can be similarly defined. We do so in terms of factorization of the uncertainty maps.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
We say that the UVs $X = (D_X, U_X)$ and $Y = (D_Y, U_Y)$ are independent, given a UV $Z = (D_Z, U_Z)$, if
\begin{equation}
P_{X,Y|Z}(z) = P_{X|Z}(z)\times P_{Y|Z}(z),
\end{equation}
for all $z \in U_Z$.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
We will use the notation $X \independent Y$ to denote that $X$ and $Y$ are independent, and $X \independent Y | Z$ to denote that $X$ and $Y$ are conditionally independent, given $Z$.
When it comes to several uncertainty variables, the notion of independence is as tricky as it is for the random variables. Moreover, it turns out that the independence and conditional independence properties that hold for random variables also hold for uncertainty variables. In Section~\ref{sec:bay_nets}, we will introduce Bayesian network models on a collection of uncertainty variables. We will see that the set of uncertainty variables preserve the conditional independence properties, which hold for the Bayesian network defined over random variables~\cite{koller_ProbGraphModels}.
To provide a prelude, we define pairwise and total independence between a collection of uncertainty variables. In probability theory, pairwise independence does not imply total independence between a collection of random variables. The same is true for the uncertainty variables. Let us first define pairwise and total independence for the uncertainty variables.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
A collection of uncertainty variables $X_{1:N}$ is said to be
\noindent 1)~pairwise independent if for each $i, j \in [N]$, $i \neq j$, we have
\begin{equation}
U_{X_i, X_j} = U_{X_i}\times U_{X_j},
\end{equation}
where $U_{X_i}$, $U_{X_j}$, and $U_{X_i, X_j}$ are uncertainty sets for $X_i$, $X_j$, and $(X_{i},X_{j})$, respectively.
\noindent 2)~totally independent if
\begin{equation}
U_{X_{1:N}} = \times_{i=1}^{N}U_{X_i},
\end{equation}
where $U_{X_{1:N}}$ and $U_{X_i}$ are the uncertainty sets of $X_{1:N}$ and $X_i$, respectively.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
In the following lemma, we prove that pairwise independence does not implies total independence.
\begin{framed}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:tot_pair_indep}
If $X_{1:N}$ are totally independent then they are also pairwise independent, but the converse is not true.
\end{theorem}
\end{framed}
\begin{IEEEproof}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{independence_example}
\caption{Plot of the joint uncertainty set $U_{X_{1:3}}$ given by~\eqref{eq:independence_example}.}
\label{fig:independence_example}
\end{figure}
(a)~Let $X_{1:N}$ be totally independent uncertainty variables. Then we have $U_{X_{1:N}} = \times_{k=1}^{N}U_{X_k}$. Take $i, j \in [N]$ such that $i \neq j$. We know that the uncertainty set $U_{X_i, X_j}$ of $(X_i, X_j)$ is given by a simple projection of $U_{X_{1:N}}$ on $(X_i, X_j)$. Therefore,
\begin{align}
U_{X_i, X_j} &= \Pi_{(X_i,X_j)}\left( U_{X_{1:N}} \right), \\
&= \Pi_{(X_i,X_j)}\left( \times_{k=1}^{N}U_{X_k} \right), \\
&= U_{X_i}\times U_{X_j},
\end{align}
where $i$ and $j$ to be any $i, j \in [N]$ such that $i \neq j$. Thus, $X_{1:N}$ is also pairwise independent.
(b)~We prove that the converse is not true by constructing a counter-example. Take three uncertainty variables $X_{1:3}$ such that $U_{X_i} = [0, 1]$ and $U_{X_i, X_j} = [0,1]\times[0,1]$, for all $i, j \in [N]$ and $i \neq j$. However, the joint uncertainty set $U_{X_1, X_2, X_3} \neq [0,1]\times [0, 1]\times[0, 1]$. Such a joint uncertainty set $U_{X_1, X_2, X_3}$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:independence_example}
U_{X_{1:3}} = \left\{ x_{1:3}~\left|~\left[\begin{array}{rrr}
1 & 1 & 1 \\
-1 & -1 & 1 \\
-1 & 1 & -1 \\
1 & -1 & -1
\end{array}\right] \left[\begin{array}{c}
x_1 \\
x_2 \\
x_3
\end{array}\right] \leq \left[\begin{array}{c}
2 \\
0 \\
0 \\
0
\end{array}\right]\right.~\right\},
\end{equation}
which is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:independence_example}.
\end{IEEEproof}
In the next section, we define the Bayesian uncertainty network, in which we extend the concept of Bayesian network, defined over a collection of random variables, to a collection of uncertainty variables. We will see that the independence properties that hold for the collection of random variables also hold for the collection of uncertainty variables.
\section{Bayesian Uncertainty Networks}
\label{sec:bay_nets}
We now extend the notion of Bayeian network, defined for a collection of random variables, to a collection of uncertainty variables. We call it the Bayeian uncertainty network.
Let $G = (V, E)$ be a directed acyclic graph (DAG). For each node $i \in V$, let $\pa{i}$ denote the set of parents of node $i$, i.e. for each $j \in \pa{i}$ there exists a link $(j,i) \in E$. A node $k \in V$ is said to be descendant of $i$ if there exists a directed path from node $i$ to node $k$ in G. We use $\NonDes{i}$ denote the set of nodes that are non-descendants of $i$. Also, we will use $R$ to denote the set of all nodes that have no parents, i.e. $R = \{i \in V~|~\pa{i} = \emptyset \}.$ Typically, we would need to order the nodes in $V$ in a sequence.
A canonical ordering of nodes in $V$ is an ordering such that parents are indexed before their children, i.e., for all $j \in \pa{i}$, we have $j < i$. We know that such an ordering of nodes in a DAG is always possible.
A collection of uncertainty variables is characterized by its joint uncertainty set. We now formally define the notion of \emph{Bayesian uncertainty network}, in which the uncertainty set of a collection of uncertainty variables factorizes according to an underlying DAG.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
A \emph{Bayesian uncertainty network} is the tuple $\mathcal{BN} = (X_V, G)$ of uncertainty variables $X_V$ and a DAG $G = (V, E)$, such that $X_V$ \emph{factorizes} according to $G$, namely, every node $i \in V$ is associated with a unique uncertainty variable $X_i$, and
there exists conditional uncertainty maps
\begin{equation}
P_{X_i|X_{\pa{i}}}: D_{\pa{i}} \rightarrow 2^{D_i},
\end{equation}
for each $i \in V\backslash R$, such that, for any canonical ordering of nodes in $V$, the joint uncertainty set of $X_{V}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:uset_bun}
U_{X_{V}} = U_{X_{R}}\otimes P_{X_{|R|+1}|X_{\pa{|R|+1}}}\otimes \cdots \otimes P_{X_{|V|}|X_{\pa{|V|}}},
\end{equation}
where $U_{X_{R}}$ is a simple cross product of $U_{X_i}$, over $i \in R$, namely
\begin{equation}
U_{X_{R}} = \times_{i \in R} U_{X_i}.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
Note that the factorization in~\eqref{eq:uset_bun} is well defined, provided we ignore the ordering of variables in the tuple. To see this, let us make use of Lemma~\ref{lem:fun_rep_suv} in Section~\ref{sec:rep}. For each $i \in R$, $U_{X_i} = \{ x_i \in D_i~|~ H_{i}(x_i) \leq h_i~\}$, and for all $i \in V\backslash R$ let
\begin{equation}
P_{X_i|X_{\pa{i}}}(x_{\pa{i}}) = \{ x_i \in D_{X_i}~|~H_{i}(x_i, x_{\pa{i}}) \leq h_i~\},
\end{equation}
for some functions $H_i$ and vectors $h_i$. Then, the factorization in~\eqref{eq:uset_bun} implies that the joint uncertainty set $U_{X_{V}}$ equals
\begin{equation}\label{eq:joint_uv_baynet}
U_{X_V} = \left\{ x_V~\left|~\begin{array}{c}
H_{i}(x_i) \leq h_i~\forall~i \in R \\
H_{i}(x_i, x_{\pa{i}}) \leq h_i~\forall~i \in V\backslash R
\end{array}\right.\right\},
\end{equation}
This set remains the same, except for the ordering of variables in the tuple $x_{V}$. Thus, due to representation result of Lemma~\ref{lem:fun_rep_suv} we can take~\eqref{eq:joint_uv_baynet} to define the joint uncertainty set of the Bayesian uncertainty network $(X_V, G)$.
A Bayesian network, defined over random variables, satisfies many conditional independence properties. In the next section, we show that these independence properties are retained for the Baysian uncertainty network.
In Section~\ref{sec:theory_uv}, we made a simplifying assumption that the conditional uncertainty maps $P_{Y|X}$ are always definite. We argued that this does not change any of the results, but helps simplify the proofs. We make the same assumption here, and is stated as follows.
\begin{framed}
\begin{assumption}
\label{ass:0}
The conditional uncertainty map $P_{X_i|X_{\pa{i}}}$ is always definite for all $i \in V$.
\end{assumption}
\end{framed}
\subsection{Conditional Independence Properties}
We first define the local independence properties. These are a set of conditional independence properties that are satisfied by the Bayesian network. We will show that these independence properties are also valid for the Bayesian uncertainty network.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
We say that the uncertainty variables $X_{V}$ satisfy \emph{local independence properties} according to a DAG $G = (V, E)$ if
\noindent (1)~each node $i \in V$ is associated with a unique UV $X_i$, and
\noindent (2)~for every $i \in V$, we have $X_i \independent X_{\NonDes{i}} | X_{\pa{i}}$.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
We now briefly recall the notion of d-separation in Bayesian networks. We first need to recall a few definitions. We define a path $P$ on a DAG $G$ to be a sequence of nodes $P = (i_1, i_2, \ldots i_M)$ such that either $(i_k, i_{k+1})$ or $(i_{k+1}, i_k)$ is a valid directed edge in $E$, for all $k = 1, 2, \ldots M-1$. A node $j$ on a path $P$ is said to be \emph{serial} if there exists $i, k \in P$ such that $(i, j) \in E$ and $(j, k) \in E$. Pictorially, node $j$ on path $P$ looks like $\rightarrow j \rightarrow$. Similarly, a node $j$ on path $P$ is said to be \emph{diverging} if there exists $i, k \in P$ such that $(j, i) \in E$ and $(j, k) \in E$. Pictorially, node $j$ on path $P$ looks like $\leftarrow j \rightarrow$. And finally, a node $j$ on path $P$ is said to be \emph{converging} if there exists $i, k \in P$ such that $(i, j) \in E$ and $(k, j) \in E$. Pictorially, node $j$ on path $P$ looks like $\rightarrow j \leftarrow$.
Let $A$, $B$, and $C$, be three disjoint collection of nodes in the DAG $G = (V, E)$. A path $P$ from $A$ to $B$ is a path that starts from some node in $A$ and ends at a node in $B$. We say that a path $P$ from $A$ to $B$ is \emph{blocked} by $C$ if one of the following conditions are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the path $P$ contains a node $j \in C$, and $j$ on $P$ is either serial or diverging
\item the path $P$ contains a node $j \in V$, $j$ on $P$ is converging, and that $j$ and its descendants are not in $C$
\end{enumerate}
We say that $A$ and $B$ are \emph{d-separated} by $C$ if all paths from $A$ to $B$ are blocked by $C$. In the case of a Bayesian network, defined over a collection of random variables $\bar{X}_V$, it is known that if nodes $A$ and $B$ are d-separated by nodes of $C$, then the random variables $\bar{X}_A$ and $\bar{X}_B$ are independent given $\bar{X}_C$. We show that this relation of conditional independence also holds for the Bayesian uncertainty networks.
\begin{framed}
\begin{definition}
A collection of uncertainty variables $X_V$ satisfy \emph{global independence properties} with respect to a DAG $G = (V, E)$ if
\noindent (1)~each node $i \in V$ is associated with a unique uncertainty variable $X_i$, and
\noindent (2)~for all subsets $A$, $B$, and $C$ of $V$ such that $C$ d-separates $A$ and $B$ we have $X_{A}\independent X_{B} | X_{C}$.
\end{definition}
\end{framed}
We now show that the Bayesian uncertainty network satisfies the local independence property as well as the global indepdence property. Furthermore, we prove an equivalence between a collection of uncertainty variables constrained by either local independence property or global independence property and the Bayesian uncertainty network.
\begin{framed}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:indep_baynet}
Let $G = (V, E)$ be a DAG and $X_V$ denote a collection of uncertainty variables. The following three statements are equivalent.
\noindent (1)~$(X_V, G)$ is a Bayesian uncertainty network and Assumption~\ref{ass:0} is satisfied
\noindent (2)~$X_V$ satisfies the local independence properties with respect to $G$
\noindent (3)~$X_V$ satisfies the global independence properties with respect to $G$
\end{theorem}
\end{framed}
\begin{IEEEproof}
The fact that condition (3) implies (2) is straight forward, and can be seen by noting that $A = \{i\}$ and $B = \NonDes{i}$ are d-separated by $C = \pa{i}$ for all $i \in V$. We prove (1) implies (3) in Appendix~\ref{pf:thm:indep_baynet_1imp3} and (2) implies (1) in Appendix~\ref{pf:thm:indep_baynet_2imp1}.
\end{IEEEproof}
This theorem implies that the conditional independence properties of the Bayesian network also hold for the Bayesian uncertainty network. We discuss two simple Bayesian uncertainty networks, namely, Naive Bayes' and Kalman filtering in Appendix~\ref{app:naive_bayes} and~\ref{app:kf}, respectively. The analysis affirms the triangulation filtering principle proposed in~\cite{laValle_2012_sensing_filtering}.
In the next section, we define the notion of a point estimate. Although the idea can be generalized, we define it over a Bayesian uncertainty network. We show that if the uncertainty sets $U_{X_i}$, for $i \in R$, and the conditional uncertainty maps $P_{X_i|X_{\pa{i}}}$, for $i \in V\backslash R$, are canonical, corresponding to some distribution functions, then the defined point estimate equals to the maximum aposteriori estimate.
\section{Point Estimates}
\label{sec:pt_estimate}
In practice, we are generally interested in point estimates. For example, in the robotic estimation problem, we would like to learn the true trajectory of a robot along with the location of landmarks in its surrounding. In the regression or the classification problem, we would like to estimate the model parameters.
In this section, we define point estimate for a Bayesian uncertainty network. In the Bayesian uncertainty network, we have some uncertainty variables that we observe, and some others which we want to estimate, given the observed variables.
Let $\mathcal{BN} = (X_V, G)$ be a Bayesian uncertainty network, where $G = (V,E)$ is a DAG. Let the joint uncertainty set for $X_V$ be given by~\eqref{eq:joint_uv_baynet}. Let $J \subset V$ denote the set of nodes, which correspond to the observed data. Namely, we have $x_j = y_j$ for all $j \in J$, and that we know $y_J$. Let $I \subset V$ be the set of nodes, which correspond to the uncertainty variables that are of interest to us, and we would like to estimate. We assume $I$ and $J$ to be disjoint, and that $I \cup J = V$.
From the joint uncertainty set, we can compute the posteriori uncertainty map $P_{X_I|X_J}(x_J)$ by projection; see Theorem~\ref{thm:law_of_projections}. Evaluating $P_{X_I|X_J}(x_J)$ at the observed data $x_J = y_J$, yields a posteriori uncertainty set for $X_I$, given $X_J = y_J$. This set is given by
\begin{align}
&P_{X_I|X_J}(y_J) \\
&~~~~~= \Pi_{X_I}\left[ U_{X_V}\bigcap \{ X_J = y_J\}\right], \\
&~~~~~= \left\{ x_{I} \in D_{X_I}~\Bigg|~ \begin{array}{c}
H_{i}(x_i, x_{\pa{i}}) \leq h_i~\forall~i \in V\backslash R, \\
H_{i}(x_i) \leq h_i~\forall~i \in R, x_J = y_J
\end{array}\right\}. \label{eq:posti_set}
\end{align}
This set gives us a sense of how uncertain we are about the variables of interest, namely $X_I$. However, it is generally required to come up with a point estimate. We define a point estimate by introducing a \emph{scaling variable} for each constraint in the posteriori set~\eqref{eq:posti_set}. These scaling variable adjust the size of each set, so as to yield an estimate. The point estimate for $X_I$, given $X_J = y_J$, is defined as
\begin{align}
\label{def:point_estimate}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{x}_I(y_{J}) =&~~\underset{x_{I},~\beta_{V}}{\text{arg min}} && \sum_{i \in V} \beta_i, \\
&~~\text{subject to} && H_{i}(x_i, x_{\pa{i}}) \leq \beta_i h_i~\forall~i \in V\backslash R, \\
&&& H_{i}(x_i) \leq \beta_i h_i~\forall~i \in R, \\
&&& x_J = y_J~\text{and}~\beta_i \geq 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
The optimization problem in~\eqref{def:point_estimate} is over all the variables $x_{I}$ and the scaling variables $\beta_V$. However, as the output of the argminimization, we have only shown a subset of these variables, namely $x_I$, for notational convenience.
To illustrate the point estimate generated by the optimization problem~\eqref{def:point_estimate}, and the result of scaling variables $\beta_i$, we consider a simple example. Consider a Bayesian uncertainty network of four variables $X_{1:4}$ shown in Figure~\ref{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig1}. Here, $X_i = (\mathbb{R}^2, U_{X_i})$ for all $i$. The uncertainty set for $X_1$ is $U_{X_1} = \mathbb{R}^2$, and the conditional uncertainty maps $P_{X_i|X_1}(x_1) = \text{SQ}_{2}(x_1, a)$ for all $x_1 \in \mathbb{R}^2$, where $\text{SQ}_{2}(z, a)$ denotes a square centered at $z \in \mathbb{R}^2$ with side length $a$. The true value of the uncertainty $X_1$, namely, $x^{\ast}_1$ and the set $P_{X_i|X_1}(x^{\ast}_1) = \text{SQ}_{2}(x^{\ast}_1, a)$ is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig1}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{Example_PtEstimate_Fig1}
\caption{A Bayesian uncertainty network of four variables $X_{1:4}$. Here, $X_1 = (\mathbb{R}^2, U_{X_1} = \mathbb{R}^2)$, and the conditional uncertainty map $P_{X_i|X_1}(x^{\ast}_1) = \text{SQ}_{2}(x^{\ast}_1, a)$ is illustrated. Also, shown is the true value $x_{1}^{\ast}$ of $X_1$, and the observations $y_{2:4}$ of $X_{2:4}$.}
\label{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{Example_PtEstimate_Fig3}
\caption{Illustration of the posteriori invertibility set $P_{X_1|X_{2:4}}(y_{2:4})$ as the intersection of three sets, one for each observation.}\label{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{Example_PtEstimate_Fig4}
\caption{Shows the point estimate $\hat{x}_{1}(y_{2:4})$ at the intersection of new, minimally scaled rectangles, obtained by solving~\eqref{def:point_estimate}.}\label{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig4}
\end{figure}
We do not know the true value $x^{\ast}_1$ for $X_1$, and wish to estimate it by observing the variables $X_{2:4}$. Let $y_{2:4}$ be the observations of the uncertainty variables $X_{2:4}$. Using these, we can construct a posteriori uncertainty set for $X_1$, by evaluating the posteriori uncertainty map $P_{X_1|X_{2:4}}(x_{2:4})$ at $x_{2:4} = y_{2:4}$. This gives the dark-red region shown in Figure~\ref{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig3}, which is the posteriori uncertainty set.
To obtain the point estimate we introduce scaling parameters $\beta_i$s, which scale the size of each of the red-colored rectangles in Figure~\ref{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig3}, so that they intersect only at the boundary points. The estimate $\hat{x}_{1}(y_{2:4})$ is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:Example_PtEstimate_Fig4}. We see that the rectangle corresponding to the one `far away' observation is enlarged, where as those corresponding to the other observations, that are more closer to one another, are shrunk. This is a process implicit in the definition of the point estimate~\eqref{def:point_estimate}, by which, in computing the point estimate, it weighs more in favor of observations that are closer to one another, than the one that is farther away.
Next, we show a relation between the point estimate and the MAP estimate. Before we proceed, we note that the point estimate defined in~\eqref{def:point_estimate} is not unique, and depends on the functions $H_i$ used to represent the conditional uncertainty maps $P_{X_{i}|X_{\pa{i}}}$. For example, consider the specific case in which $H_i(x_i, x_{\pa{i}}) \in \mathbb{R}$ and $h_i \in \mathbb{R}$ for all $i \in V$. Let $\Psi: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be any increasing function. Then, the posteriori uncertainty set in~\eqref{eq:posti_set} can also be written as
\begin{align}
&P_{X_I|X_J}(y_J) \\
&~~= \Pi_{X_I}\left[ U_{X_V}\bigcap \{ X_J = y_J\}\right], \\
&~~= \left\{ x_{I} \in D_{X_I}\!\!~\Bigg|~\!\!\! \begin{array}{c}
\Psi(H_{i}(x_i, x_{\pa{i}})) \leq \Psi(h_i)~\forall~i \in V\backslash R, \\
\Psi(H_{i}(x_i)) \leq \Psi(h_i)~\forall~i \in R, x_J = y_J
\end{array}\!\!\!\right\}.
\end{align}
Thus, the point estimate will now equal
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{x}_I(y_{J}) =&~~\underset{x_{I},~\beta_{V}}{\text{ArgMinimize}} && \sum_{i \in V} \beta_i, \\
&~~\text{subject to} && \Psi(H_{i}(x_i, x_{\pa{i}})) \leq \beta_i \Psi(h_i)\\
&&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\forall~i \in V\backslash R, \\
&&& \Psi(H_{i}(x_i)) \leq \beta_i \Psi(h_i)~\forall~i \in R, \\
&&& x_J = y_J~\text{and}~\beta_i \geq 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
which is different from~\eqref{def:point_estimate}. The choice of the functions $H_i$, and $\Psi$, will have direct implication for the computational complexity of the estimate as well as the accuracy and robustness of the estimate. Several functions have been used in the literature to ensure robustness or risk-sensitivity~\cite{1981_Whittle_Risk_Sensitive_LQGC, 2019_Vasileios_OutlierRejection, 2002tac_risk_sensitive_filtering, 1997tac_risk_sensitive_filtering_smoothing}. We leave a deeper investigation into this for our future work.
In the next section, we show a relation between the point estimate defined here, for a Bayesian uncertainty network, and the MAP estimate of a canonical Bayesian network.
\subsection{Relation with MAP}
\label{sec:map_ml}
In this section, we show a relation between the MAP and ML estimate of a Bayesian network, and the point estimate. A Bayesian network $\mathcal{B} = (\bar{X}_V, G)$ is a tuple of a collection of random variables $\bar{X}_V$ and a DAG $G = (V, E)$. For each $i \in V$, is associated a unique random variable $\bar{X}_i$ in $\bar{X}_V$. Further, for each $i \in V$, a conditional probability density\footnote{We will restrict here to the case of continuous distributions for the ease of presentation. However, these results can be extended to discrete valued random variables as well.} function $Q_{\bar{X}_i|\bar{X}_{\pa{i}}}(x_i~|~x_{\pa{i}})$ is defined. The joint density function for $\bar{X}_V$ is given by the product factorization
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:baynet_product_prob}
Q_{\bar{X}_V}(x_V) = \prod_{i \in V}Q_{\bar{X}_i|\bar{X}_{\pa{i}}}(x_i~|~x_{\pa{i}}).
\end{equation}
In what follows, we will use $Q$ to denote the probabilities.
For a given Bayesian network $\mathcal{B} = (\bar{X}_V, G)$, defined over the collection of random variables, we construct a \emph{canonical Bayesian uncertainty network} $\mathcal{BN} = (X_V, G)$, such that the underlying DAG is the same, and the functions $H_i$ and $h_i$ in~\eqref{eq:joint_uv_baynet} are given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:canonical_fun}
H_i(x_i, x_{\pa{i}}) = -\log \left( Q_{\bar{X}_i|\bar{X}_{\pa{i}}}(x_i~|~x_{\pa{i}}) \right),
\end{equation}
and $h_i = \eta \in \mathbb{R}$, for all $i \in V$. Note that for all $i \in R$, $\pa{i} = \emptyset$, and therefore $H_i$ reduces to a function of just $x_i$.
We now show that the point estimate for the canonical Bayesian uncertainty network, equals the MAP estimate for the corresponding Bayesian network.
\begin{framed}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:map}
For the canonical Bayesian uncertainty network $\mathcal{BN} = (X_V, G)$,
\begin{equation}
\hat{x}_I(y_J) = \arg\max_{x_I} Q_{\bar{X}_I|\bar{X}_J}(x_I|y_J),
\end{equation}
where $Q_{\bar{X}_I|\bar{X}_J}(x_I|y_J)$ denotes the probability density function of $\bar{X}_I$ given $\bar{X}_J$.
\end{theorem}
\end{framed}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Note that for the canonical Bayesian uncertainty network $\mathcal{BN} = (X_V, G)$, the inequality constraints in~\eqref{def:point_estimate} take the form:
\begin{equation}
-\log\left( Q_{\bar{X}_i|\bar{X}_{\pa{i}}}(x_i|x_{\pa{i}}) \right) \leq \beta_i \eta,
\end{equation}
for all $i \in V$. Furthermore, at optimality, all these constraints must be satisfied with equality. As otherwise, $\beta_i$ can be reduced to yield a smaller value of the objective function in~\eqref{def:point_estimate}. Therefore, for optimality, we have
\begin{equation}
\beta_i = -\frac{1}{\eta}\log\left( Q_{\bar{X}_i|\bar{X}_{\pa{i}}}(x_i|x_{\pa{i}}) \right),
\end{equation}
for all $i \in V$. Substituting this in~\eqref{def:point_estimate}, the optimization problem reduces to
\begin{align}
\label{pf:thm:map_eq1}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{x}_I(y_{J}) =&~~\underset{x_{I}}{\text{ArgMinimize}} \!\!\!\! && -\frac{1}{\eta}\!\sum_{i \in V} \! \log\left( Q_{\bar{X}_i|\bar{X}_{\pa{i}}}(x_i|x_{\pa{i}}) \right), \\
&~~\text{subject to} && x_J = y_J.
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Taking the sum inside the $\log$, as a product, and using~\eqref{eq:baynet_product_prob} we see that the objective function equals $- \frac{1}{\eta}\log\left( Q_{\bar{X}_V}(x_V)\right)$. Thus,~\eqref{pf:thm:map_eq1} equals
\begin{align}
\label{pf:thm:map_eq2}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{x}_I(y_{J}) =&~~\underset{x_{I}}{\text{ArgMaximize}} && Q_{\bar{X}_V}(x_I, x_J = y_J).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Since $Q_{\bar{X}_V}(x_I, x_J = y_J) = Q_{\bar{X}_I|\bar{X}_J}(x_I|y_J) Q_{\bar{X}_J}(y_J)$. Substituting this in~\eqref{pf:thm:map_eq2}, and removing $Q_{\bar{X}_J}(y_J)$ from the objective function, as it is a constant, yields the result.
\end{IEEEproof}
This result shows that the point estimate indeed equals the MAP estimate for a canonically defined Bayesian uncertainty network.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conc}
We developed a new framework of uncertainty variables to model uncertainty in the real world.
We proved Bayes' law and the law of total probability equivalents for uncertainty variables, and showed how this could be used in computing the posteriori uncertainty maps.
We defined a notion of independence, conditional independence, and pairwise independence for a given collection of uncertainty variables. We showed that this new notion of independence preserves the properties of independence defined over random variables.
In the second part, we developed a graphical model over a collection of uncertainty variables, namely the Bayesian uncertainty network. This was motivated by the Bayesian network defined over a collection of random variables. A Bayesian network satisfies certain natural conditional independence properties, derived out of the graph structure. We showed that all the natural conditional independence properties, expected out of a Bayesian network, hold also for the Bayesian uncertainty network.
We defined a notion of point estimate and showed its relation with the maximum a posteriori estimate.
In a follow up work, we will apply this theory to develop new algorithms for problems in robotic perception and planning.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:int}
X-ray pulsars are rotating, highly magnetized neutron stars that accrete gas from a stellar companion via Roche lobe overflow or stellar outflows (e.g.\ \citealt{nagase2001}). The gas falls gravitationally in a disk toward the pulsar until it reaches the magnetosphere, where magnetic pressure exceeds the ram pressure from the disk and forces accretion along the neutron star's dipole field onto the magnetic poles. If the magnetic axis is misaligned from the rotation axis, the accretion columns will rotate with the neutron star and cause bright beams of X-ray radiation to sweep across space. While this general picture is widely accepted, the fundamentals of magnetically-dominated accretion are still unclear. Understanding accretion within magnetic fields is essential to the study of accreting white dwarfs and young stellar objects, as well as X-ray pulsars. Magnetohydrodynamic simulations of accreting neutron stars have begun to explore the possible structures of magnetized accretion flows around neutron stars (e.g.\ \citealt{romanova2002,romanova2003,romanova2004}), however observational constraints on these flows are needed to fully develop our understanding of magnetically dominated accretion.
X-ray pulsars that display periodic or quasi-periodic superorbital variability are unique systems in which to observationally probe the nature of magnetically-dominated accretion and the structure of the inner accretion disk. Superorbital variabilities in some X-ray pulsars such as LMC X-4, SMC X-1, and Her X-1 are attributed to warped inner accretion disks that precess around the pulsar, causing fluctuations in luminosity on the order of tens of days (e.g.\ \citealt{gerend1976,heemskerk1989,wojdowski1998}). As the pulsar rotates, the neutron star's beam irradiates the warped disk, which reprocesses this emission into softer X-rays (\citealt{hickoxvrtilek2005}, hereafter HV05). The reprocessed pulsations exhibit a different pulse shape and phase from the hard X-ray emission, which is dominated by the pulsar beam (e.g.\ \citealt{neilsen2004,zane2004}). HV05 developed an irradiated warped disk model that used differences between the hard and soft pulsations to constrain the beam and disk geometry. However, the model requires both hard and soft X-ray coverage to fully constrain emission from both the pulsar beam and the disk.
\begin{figure*}
\plottwo{lmcx4lc_update.pdf}{smcx1lc_update.pdf}
\caption{One day averaged 2--20 keV MAXI (\citealt{matsuoka2009}) light curves of LMC X-4 (left) and SMC X-1 (right) during the period of observations. The red dashed lines mark the times of joint \xmm\ and \nustar\ observations.}
\label{fig:solc}
\end{figure*}
\begin{deluxetable*} {cccccc}
\tablecolumns{6}
\tablecaption{Description of LMC X-4 Observations}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Date} & \colhead{$\phi_{SO}$} & \colhead{Observation ID} & \colhead{Observatory} & \colhead{Telescope Mode}
& \colhead{Exposure (ks)} }
\startdata
30 Oct.\ 2015 & 0.0 & 30102041002 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 24.6 \\
30 Oct.\ 2015 & 0.0 & 0771180101 & \xmm\ & Small Window & 20.7 \\
04 Nov.\ 2015 & 0.17 & 30102041004 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 21.9 \\
04 Nov.\ 2015 & 0.17 & 0771180201& \xmm\ & Small Window & 19.7 \\
11 Nov.\ 2015 & 0.4 & 30102041006 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 23.0 \\
11 Nov.\ 2015 & 0.4 & 0771180301 & \xmm\ & Small Window & 22.9 \\
27 Nov.\ 2015 & 1.0 & 30102041008 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 20.3 \\
27 Nov.\ 2015 & 1.0 & 0771180401 & \xmm\ & Small Window & 20.1
\enddata
\label{tab:lmcdat}
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{deluxetable*} {cccccc}
\tablecolumns{6}
\tablecaption{Description of SMC X-1 Observations}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Date} & \colhead{$\phi_{SO}$} & \colhead{Observation ID} & \colhead{Observatory} & \colhead{Telescope Mode}
& \colhead{Exposure (ks)} }
\startdata
8 Sept.\ 2016 & 0.1 & 30202004002 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 22.5 \\
8 Sept.\ 2016 & 0.1 & 0784570201 & \xmm\ & Fast Timing Mode & 20.9 \\
19 Sept.\ 2016 & 0.3 & 30202004004 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 21.1 \\
19 Sept.\ 2016 & 0.3 & 0784570301& \xmm\ & Fast Timing Mode & 20.9 \\
1 Oct.\ 2016 & 0.5 & 30202004006 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 20.4 \\
1 Oct.\ 2016 & 0.5 & 0784570401 & \xmm\ & Fast Timing Mode & 22.9 \\
24 Oct.\ 2016 & 1.1 & 30202004008 & \nustar\ & \nodata & 20.8 \\
24 Oct.\ 2016 & 1.1 & 0784570501 & \xmm\ & Fast Timing Mode & 22.9
\enddata
\label{tab:smcdat}
\end{deluxetable*}
The current era of X-ray astronomy offers a new opportunity to apply the HV05 warped disk model with sensitive hard X-ray coverage thanks to \nustar, which can constrain X-rays between 3 and 79 keV (\citealt{harrison2013}). In this paper, we use the hard X-ray sensitivity of \nustar\ combined with the soft X-ray coverage of \xmm\ to analyze the spectral and geometrical changes associated with disk precession in LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 within a single disk precession cycle.
Previous works have examined the effect of superorbital cycle on pulse shape in LMC X-4 and SMC X-1, however these analyses lacked either the hard X-ray sensitivity necessary to constrain the pulsar beam or complete coverage of a single superorbital cycle. \cite{hung2010} used \textit{Suzaku} to observe LMC X-4 three times during the superorbital high state, however due to scheduling constraints these observations did not occur within a single superorbital cycle and thus cannot prove that changes in pulse profile shape are periodic with respect to superorbital phase. Additionally, the \textit{Suzaku} observations used in this work had poorer high energy sensitivity compared to \textit{NuSTAR}. \cite{neilsen2004} and HV05 used \textit{Chandra} and \xmm\ to observe changes in pulse profile shape in SMC X-1, however these observations did not occur within a single superorbital cycle and used \textit{XMM-Newton} and \textit{Chandra}, which did not probe above 10 keV. We therefore present the first broad-band X-ray observations of LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 spanning a complete superorbital cycle and re-sampling the first phase.
LMC X-4 is a high mass X-ray binary in the Large Magellanic Cloud first detected by UHURU (\citealt{giacconi1972}). The binary contains a $1.57 \pm 0.11$ M$_\sun$ neutron star and its $18 \pm 1$ M$_\sun$ O8 giant companion (\citealt{kelley1983, falanga2015}). LMC X-4 is an eclipsing binary where the pulsar orbits its companion with a period of 1.4 d and rotates once every 13.5 s (\citealt{white1978}). Additionally, the binary has a superorbital period of 30.4 d (\citealt{lang1981, molkov2015}). LMC X-4 has a typical X-ray luminosity of $\sim$ 2 $\times 10^{38}$ erg s$^{-1}$, which is slightly less than the Eddington limit for neutron stars; however, this source exhibits frequent X-ray flares capable of reaching super-Eddington luminosities of a few $10^{39}$ erg s$^{-1}$ (e.g.\ \citealt{kelley1983,levine1991,moon2003,brumback2018b}).
SMC X-1 is an X-ray pulsar located in the Small Magellanic Cloud also discovered by UHURU (\citealt{leong1971}). The compact object is a 1.21 \msun\ (\citealt{falanga2015}) pulsar with a spin period of 0.7 s (\citealt{lucke1976}). The stellar companion is a B0 supergiant star and the binary orbit is 3.9 d (\citealt{schreier1972,webster1972, liller1973}). SMC X-1's superorbital period varies quasi-periodically between 40 to 60 days (\citealt{wojdowski1998, clarkson2003}). SMC X-1 is a bright binary, with a high state X-ray luminosity of $\sim$ 3 $\times 10^{38}$ erg s$^{-1}$.
In Section \ref{sec:data} of this work we will describe the joint \textit{XMM-Newton}\ and \nustar\ observations of LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 and their respective analysis procedures. We also describe the analysis of phase-averaged and phase-resolved spectroscopy and a timing analysis to extract pulse profiles. In Section \ref{sec:results} we introduce the HV05 warped disk model and use it to simulate our observed pulse profiles. We discuss the implication of these results in Section \ref{sec:disc}.
\section{Observations and Data Analysis} \label{sec:data}
\subsection{Observations}
\begin{figure*}
\plotone{lmcx4_lc_all.pdf}
\caption{\nustar\ 3--79 keV (black) and \xmm\ 0.2--12 keV (red) light curves of the four joint LMC X-4 observations. All \textit{XMM-Newton} light curves have been offset by a count rate of 20 for clarity, except for Observation L1 which has been offset by 120. We have excluded bright accretion flares from the light curves in Observations L1 and L4; excluded time intervals are shown with reduced opacity.}
\label{fig:lmclc}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\plotone{smcx1_lc_all_nubin150.pdf}
\caption{\nustar\ 3--79 keV (black) and \xmm\ 0.2--12 keV (red) light curves of the four joint SMC X-1 observations. The y-axis has the same scale to show the low count rates in Observation S3. In Observation S3 only, the \textit{XMM} light curve has been offset by a count rate of 20 for clarity. In Observation S2, we only used the first part of the \nustar\ observation (black) in this analysis due to pulsation shape changes later in the observation. This pulsation change is energy dependent and only affects the \nustar\ pulse profile, so therefore we use the full \xmm\ observation. The full \nustar\ observation is shown with reduced opacity.}
\label{fig:smclc}
\end{figure*}
The observations used in this analysis consist of two distinct data sets. \nustar\ and \xmm\ observed LMC X-4 jointly at four different epochs between 30 October 2015 and 27 November 2015. Table \ref{tab:lmcdat} lists the observation ID numbers, dates, and exposure times for the LMC X-4 observations. \nustar\ and \xmm\ also observed SMC X-1 jointly at four epochs between 8 September 2016 and 24 October 2016, and Table \ref{tab:smcdat} contains the observation information for these observations. Figure \ref{fig:solc} shows the one day averaged MAXI light curves for LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 during the time of observations and indicates the time of observations. For both sources, our observations sample a single superorbital phase.
\subsubsection{LMC X-4 Data Analysis}
We reduced the \nustar\ data for LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 using version 1.8.0 of the NuSTARDAS pipeline and CALDB v20170727. For the \xmm\ data, we used version 14.0.0 of XMMSAS, with an updated leap second data file.
For each \nustar\ observation, we used DS9 to select circular source regions with a radius of 120 arcseconds centered on the source coordinates. A background region of the same size was selected away from the source. The \xmm\ observations were taken with EPIC-pn in Small Window Mode to minimize pile up, and we exclusively used the EPIC-pn instrument and not EPIC-MOS for the best timing resolution. In these observations, the source was positioned close to the edge of the chip and we detected small amounts of pile up using the XMMSAS tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont epatplot}. To mitigate both of these effects, we selected annular source regions with an inner radius set to minimize pileup and the outer radius remaining on the chip. We found typical inner and outer radii for the annular source regions of 13 arcseconds and 42 arcseconds, respectively. We selected \xmm\ background regions from circular regions of radius 60 arcseconds, located away from the source area. We filtered all EPIC-pn data to contain only single and double events. We applied a barycentric correction to both the \nustar\ and \xmm\ data sets using the NuSTARDAS tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont barycorr} and the XMMSAS tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont barycen}, respectively. We also corrected the pulse arrival times using the LMC X-4 ephemeris described in \cite{levine2000}.
We show the light curves for the LMC X-4 observations in Figure \ref{fig:lmclc}, where the 0.2--12 keV \textit{XMM-Newton} light curves have been arbitrarily offset from the 3--79 keV \nustar\ light curves for clarity. Several bright accretion flares appear in observations L1 and L4. \cite{brumback2018b} found that these flares contain changes in pulse strength, shape, and phase, which could complicate the relative phase mapping presented in this analysis. For this reason, all flares have been removed from the light curve and only times of direct simultaneous observation between \textit{XMM-Newton}\ and \nustar\ have been used.
\subsubsection{SMC X-1 Data Analysis}
We used the same versions of NuSTARDAS and XMMSAS mentioned in the LMC X-4 data analysis to reduce the SMC X-1 data. For each \nustar\ observation, we used DS9 to select circular source regions of 120 arcseconds centered on the source coordinates. We selected background regions of the same size away from the source. For the \xmm\ observations, we used data from the EPIC-pn instrument in Timing Mode for the best timing resolution. We selected the source region from a column 20 pixels wide, centered on the source. The XMMSAS tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont epatplot} revealed slight amounts of pileup, and so we excised the brightest central pixel of the source to minimize this effect. We filtered the EPIC-pn data to contain only single and double events. We applied a barycentric correction to both data sets using the NuSTARDAS tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont barycorr} and the XMMSAS tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont barycen}, respectively. We also corrected for the pulse arrival times using the SMC X-1 ephemeris described in \cite{falanga2015}.
Figure \ref{fig:smclc} shows the \nustar\ 3--79 keV and \xmm\ 0.2--12 keV light curves for the SMC X-1 observations. The light curve from Observation S3 has a very low count rate, indicating that the source was weakly detected. As seen in Figure \ref{fig:solc}, the superorbital period sampled during our four SMC X-1 observations had a different amplitude and period from the preceding superorbital periods. The variable behavior of SMC X-1's superorbital phase has been previously monitored (e.g.\ \citealt{hu2011, hu2013, dage2019}) and could be caused by an instability in the accretion disk's radiation driven warp (\citealt{ogilvie2001}) The variation in superorbital phase occuring during our observations caused Observation S3 to occur during the low state of the superorbital cycle. We did not detect pulsations during this observation, and we therefore exclude it from further analysis. We also excluded part of the \nustar\ observation for Observation S2, which exhibited changes in pulse behavior not covered simultaneously by \xmm. This pulsation change is energy dependent and only affects the \nustar\ pulse profile, so therefore we use the full \xmm\ observation. The data used in this analysis is plotted in black in Figure \ref{fig:smclc}, and the full \nustar\ observation is shown with reduced opacity.
\subsection{Timing Analysis}
We used epoch folding, via the function {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont epfold} found in the Remeis observatory ISISscripts, to find the best period of each LMC X-4 observation, and a Monte Carlo simulation of 500 light curves to find the uncertainties. We used the \nustar\ data in the epoch folding analysis because it was more strongly pulsed than the \xmm\ data. The best pulse periods are listed in Table \ref{tab:lmcperiod}.
Before creating pulse profiles, we filtered the event files by energy so that the \nustar\ data probed the hard pulsar beam emission (8--60 keV) and the \xmm\ data captured the soft reprocessed emission (0.5--1 keV). We created energy resolved pulse profiles using the folding technique in the FTOOL {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont efold}, which folds the light curve of each observation by the best period for that observation (see Figure \ref{fig:lmcpp}). We used 20 bins per phase for these pulse profiles.
\begin{deluxetable} {cc}
\tablecolumns{2}
\tablecaption{Best Fit Spin Periods for LMC X-4 Observations}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Observation} & \colhead{Spin Period (s)} }
\startdata
L1 & 13.5033 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\
L2 & 13.5028 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\
L3 & 13.50135 $\pm$ 0.0001 \\
L4 & 13.5003 $\pm$ 0.0009
\enddata
\label{tab:lmcperiod}
\end{deluxetable}
We found that the Monte Carlo error analysis that we employed for LMC X-4 was not practical for determining uncertainties in the SMC X-1 spin period because of the timing resolution needed to evaluate the $\sim$0.7 s period. To make the analysis less computationally expensive, we employed the epoch folding technique found in the HENDRICS software (\citealt{hendrics}) tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont folding\_search}. This epoch folding tool searches the spin frequency and frequency first derivative simultaneously and returns a distribution of $Z^{2}_{4}$ statistics (\citealt{buccheri1983}). To estimate the 1$\sigma$ level uncertainty, we fitted this distribution 2-dimensional Gaussian using the Astropy model {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont Gaussian2D} and a Levenberg-Marquardt least squares fitting routine.
We confirmed that this epoch folding analysis is consistent with the Monte Carlo analysis from LMC X-4 by using {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont folding\_search} on LMC X-4 observations with high signal to noise. We found the results from each method to be consistent, and therefore do not believe that the difference in method will affect our measured pulse periods. The best pulse periods for the SMC X-1 data are listed in Table \ref{tab:smcperiod}.
We filtered the SMC X-1 data by energy in the same way as the LMC X-4 data so that our \nustar\ pulse profile captures the hard X-ray component and our \textit{XMM-Newton}\ data covers the soft component. We then made pulse profiles with 20 bins per phase (Figure \ref{fig:smcpp}) using the Stingray (\citealt{stingray}) software tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont fold\_events} and the measured period and period derivative.
\begin{deluxetable} {ccc}
\tablecolumns{3}
\tablecaption{Best Fit Spin Periods for SMC X-1 Observations}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Observation} & \colhead{Spin Period (ms)} & \colhead{$\dot{P}$ (ss$^{-1}$) } }
\startdata
S1 & 699.65 $\pm$ 0.03 & (-1 $\pm$ 3)$\times10^{-9}$ \\
S2 & 699.59 $\pm$ 0.04 &(1 $\pm$ 3)$\times10^{-10}$ \\
S4 & 699.60 $\pm$ 0.03 & (3 $\pm$ 3)$\times10^{-10}$
\enddata
\label{tab:smcperiod}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{obs1_jointpp_nuhigh_xmmlow_bigtext.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{obs2_jointpp_nuhigh_xmmlow_bigtext.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{obs3_jointpp_nuhigh_xmmlow_bigtext.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{obs4_jointpp_nuhigh_xmmlow_bigtext.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Joint pulse profiles for the four LMC X-4 observations. Relative phase shifts are apparent between the \nustar\ 8--60 keV pulse profile (blue) and the \xmm\ 0.5--1 keV pulse profile (red). The change in relative phase from out of phase in Observations L1 and L2, to in phase in L3, and out of phase again in L4 is consistent with covering a complete precession cycle of the inner accretion disk.}
\label{fig:lmcpp}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{smcx1_obs1_jointpp_nuhigh_xmmlow_bigtext_leapsec_phaseshifted_newreftime_frdot.pdf} & \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{smcx1_obs2int123_jointpp_nuhigh_xmmlow_bigtext_newleap_phaseshifted_newreftime_frdot.pdf} \\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{smcx1_obs4_jointpp_nuhigh_xmmlow_bigtext_leapsec_phaseshifted_newreftime_frdot.pdf} }
\end{tabular}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:lmcpp} for the three SMC X-1 observations with detected pulsations. The pulse profiles for Observations S1 and S4 are almost identical, which is consistent with covering a complete precession cycle of the inner accretion disk.}
\label{fig:smcpp}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Spectral Analysis}
\subsubsection{Phase-averaged Spectroscopy}
For both data sets, we extracted spectra from the source and background regions described above using appropriate NuSTARDAS and XMMSAS selection tools. However, we did not select background spectra for the \xmm\ observations of SMC X-1 because the source flux dominates the EPIC-pn Timing Mode CCD (e.g.\ \citealt{ng2010}).
We grouped all \nustar\ spectra into bins with a signal to noise ratio of 18 and all \xmm\ spectra with a minimum of 100 counts per bin, which produced good statistics. We fitted the phase-average spectra in the range of 0.6--50 keV.
We modeled the spectra in Xspec version 12.9.1 (\citealt{arnaud1996}). If possible, we wished to apply the same continuum model to both LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 spectra to allow for a direct comparison. We tested continuum models including Negative and Positive EXponential (NPEX, e.g.\ \citealt{mihara1998}), a power law with a Fermi-Dirac cutoff (FDCut, \citealt{tanaka1986}), and a power law with a high energy cutoff (\citealt{white1983}). We found that the FDCut and high energy cutoff had slightly higher reduced $\chi^{2}$ values and large residuals at high energies. For these reasons, we selected NPEX as our best continuum model. In Xspec, our NPEX model was defined as
$$ f(E) = n_{1}(E^{-\alpha_{1}} + n_{2}E^{-\alpha_{2}}) e^{-E/kT},$$
where we fixed $\alpha_{2} = -2$.
In addition to NPEX, our spectral model also included an absorbing column (tbnew), a blackbody with $kT \sim 0.17$ keV, and several Gaussian emission lines at 6.4 keV (Fe K$\alpha$), 1.02 keV (Ne X Ly$\alpha$), 0.91 keV (Ne IX), and 0.65 keV (O VIII Ly$\alpha$). Each of these emission lines has been previously detected in LMC X-4 spectra with the \textit{Chandra} High Energy Transmission Grating Spectrometer (\citealt{neilsen2009}) and in SMC X-1 spectra with the \textit{Chandra} ACIS instrument (\citealt{vrtilek2001,vrtilek2005}). To reduce degeneracy in the blackbody model components, we fixed the widths of the Ne X Ly$\alpha$, Ne IX, and O VIII Ly$\alpha$ lines to the values found by \cite{neilsen2009}. In all observations, we found the Fe K$\alpha$ line was quite broad and that a 0.5 keV line width provided a good fit. However, in Observation S4 the spectrum also required a narrow (0.1 keV) component, as also seen by \cite{neilsen2009}.
To reduce degeneracies between the absorption and the blackbody component, we fixed the absorbing column density to the Galactic value in the direction of our sources, which we calculated using the HI4PI Map (\citealt{hi4pi2016}) via the HEASARC \nh\ calculator. These values were 1$\times 10^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$ for LMC X-4 and 3$\times 10^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$ for SMC X-1.
For the LMC X-4 spectra, we used the elemental abundances described in \cite{hanke2010} to account for the LMC's lower metallicity relative to Galactic abundances. The SMC X-1 spectral fits were performed using abundances from \cite{wilms2000}. For both sources, we used the cross sections from \cite{verner1996}.
The phase averaged spectra and the residuals to the model fit for both data sets are shown in Figures \ref{fig:lspec} and \ref{fig:sspec}. The spectral parameters and their uncertainties are given in Tables \ref{tab:lnpexparams} and \ref{tab:snpexparams}. We chose not to model \xmm\ and \nustar\ in overlapping energy ranges to improve the model fit by minimizing differences in the response functions from these two observatories.
For all LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 spectra, we fit the models jointly to the \textit{XMM-Newton}, \nustar\ FPMA and FPMB spectra. The parameters in the \nustar\ spectra are tied to those in the \textit{XMM-Newton}\ spectrum via a cross-calibration constant that accounts for differences in observed flux between the telescopes. The constants for \nustar\ FPMA and FPMB are in good agreement in all spectra. However, as can be seen in Tables \ref{tab:lnpexparams} and \ref{tab:snpexparams}, there is a discrepancy between the \textit{XMM-Newton}\ and \nustar\ calibration constants, with the \nustar\ constants being 2--3 the \textit{XMM-Newton}\ constant (when $c_{XMM}=1$). This issue was even more pronounced for the SMC X-1 spectra, where \xmm\ was in Timing Mode. We investigated the cross normalization in detail, and found our choice of wide \xmm\ source extraction regions and non-overlapping energy when fitting drove the cross normalization unrealistically high. We verified that changes in source extraction region did not impact the spectral or pulse profile shapes. We modeled the joint \nustar\ and \xmm\ spectra in the overlapping 3--10 keV range and found that the \nustar\ and \xmm\ flux in this energy range agreed within 10\%. A full exploration of the cross normalization is outside the scope of this work, however we are confident that the values shown in Tables \ref{tab:lnpexparams} and \ref{tab:snpexparams} are a reflection of our analysis steps and do not reflect the relative fluxes measured by \xmm\ and \nustar.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.73]{l1_4gaus.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{l2_4gaus.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{l3_4gaus.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{l4_4gaus.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Joint \xmm\ (red) and \nustar\ (FPMA - blue, FPMB - black) spectra for the four LMC X-4 observations. The \xmm\ spectrum is modeled from 0.6--3 keV while the \nustar\ spectra are modeled from 3--50 keV. The ratios of data to model are plotted below each spectra. Spectral parameters for all four observations are located in Table \ref{tab:lnpexparams}. }
\label{fig:lspec}
\end{figure*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcccc}
\tablecolumns{5}
\tablecaption{LMC X-4 phase-averaged spectral parameters\tablenotemark{a}}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Observation L1} & \colhead{Observation L2} & \colhead{Observation L3} & \colhead{Observation L4} }
\startdata
$kT_{\text{BB}}$ (keV) & 0.168 $\pm$ 0.006 &0.168 $\pm$ 0.006 & 0.161 $\pm$ 0.004 & 0.160 $\pm$ 0.006\\
$A_{\text{BB}}$ (keV) & (5.2 $\pm$ 0.3)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(7.0 $\pm$ 0.4)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (2.27 $\pm$ 0.09)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (3.2 $\pm$ 0.2)$\times 10^{-4}$\\
$\alpha_{1}$ & 0.55 $\pm$ 0.03 &0.41 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.55 $\pm$ 0.06 & 0.66 $\pm$ 0.04\\
$A_{\alpha_{2}}$ & (2.3 $\pm$ 0.1)$\times 10^{-3}$ & (4.2 $\pm$ 0.1)$\times 10^{-3}$ & (5.5 $\pm$ 0.3)$\times 10^{-3}$ & (2.9 $\pm$ 0.1) $\times 10^{-3}$\\
$kT_{\text{fold}}$ (keV) & 6.1 $\pm$ 0.1 &6.26 $\pm$ 0.05 & 5.81 $\pm$ 0.07 & 6.21 $\pm$ 0.07\\
log$_{10}$($F_{3-40 \text{ keV}}$) & -9.49 $\pm$ 0.01 &-9.38 $\pm$ 0.01 & -9.97 $\pm$ 0.02 & -9.66 $\pm$ 0.01\\
E$_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 6.4 &6.4 & 6.4 & 6.4\\
$\sigma_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.5 &0.5 & 0.5 & 0.5\\
$A_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$}}$ & (3.3 $\pm$ 0.3)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(2.2 $\pm$ 0.2)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (1.04 $\pm$ 0.09)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (1.3 $\pm$ 0.2)$\times 10^{-4}$\\
$E_{\text{Ne X Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 1.02 & 1.02 & 1.02 & 1.02 \\
$\sigma_{\text{Ne X Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.003 & 0.003 & 0.003 & 0.003 \\
$A_{\text{Ne X Ly$\alpha$}}$ &(7 $\pm$ 1)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(4 $\pm$ 2)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(1.2 $\pm$ 0.4)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(1.9 $\pm$ 0.7)$\times 10^{-4}$ \\
$E_{\text{Ne IX}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.91 &0.91 & 0.91 & 0.91\\
$\sigma_{\text{Ne IX}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.003 &0.003 & 0.22 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.20 $\pm$ 0.01\\
$A_{\text{Ne IX}}$ & (3 $\pm$ 2)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (1 $\pm$ 2)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (8 $\pm$ 5)$\times 10^{-5}$ & (2.2 $\pm$ 0.8)$\times 10^{-4}$\\
$E_{\text{O VIII Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.65 & 0.65 & 0.65 & 0.65 \\
$\sigma_{\text{O VIII Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.003 & 0.003 & 0.003 & 0.003 \\
$A_{\text{O VIII Ly$\alpha$}}$ &(1.0 $\pm$ 0.4)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(1.1 $\pm$ 0.6)$\times 10^{-3}$ & (5 $\pm$ 1)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(7 $\pm$ 2)$\times 10^{-4}$ \\
$c_{\text{EPIC-pn}}$ (fixed) & 1 &1 & 1 & 1\\
$c_{\text{FPMA}}$ & 2.10 $\pm$ 0.07 &2.58 $\pm$ 0.08 & 3.0 $\pm$ 0.1 & 2.99 $\pm$ 0.09\\
$c_{\text{FPMB}}$ & 2.13 $\pm$ 0.07 &2.65 $\pm$ 0.09 & 3.1 $\pm$ 0.1 & 3.09 $\pm$ 0.09 \\
\chisq\ & 483.05 &941.03 & 478.50 & 612.03\\
Degrees of Freedom & 440 &908 & 425 & 568
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{For the continuum model {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont constant * tbnew * (cflux * npex + bbody + gauss + gauss + gauss + gauss)}. All errors are 90\% confidence intervals.}
\label{tab:lnpexparams}
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.73]{s1_4gaus.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{s2_4gaus.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{s4_4gaus.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Joint \xmm\ (red) and \nustar\ (FPMA - blue, FPMB - black) spectra for the three SMC X-1 observation. The \xmm\ spectrum is modeled from 0.6--3 keV while the \nustar\ spectra are modeled from 3--50 keV. These spectra did not require the Ne IX emission line at 0.91 keV, and so we removed it from the model. Observation S4 contained both a broad and narrow Fe K$\alpha$ line. The spectral parameters for these observations can be found in Table \ref{tab:snpexparams}.}
\label{fig:sspec}
\end{figure*}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lccc}
\tablecolumns{4}
\tablecaption{SMC X-1 phase-averaged spectral parameters\tablenotemark{a}}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Observation S1} & \colhead{Observation S2} & \colhead{Observation S4} }
\startdata
$kT_{\text{BB}}$ (keV) & 0.182 $\pm$ 0.001 &0.179 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.184 $\pm$ 0.001 \\
$A_{\text{BB}}$ (keV) & (1.45 $\pm$ 0.01)$\times 10^{-3}$ &(8.50 $\pm$ 0.09)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (2.06 $\pm$ 0.01)$\times 10^{-3}$ \\
$\alpha_{1}$ & 0.402 $\pm$ 0.007 &0.44 $\pm$ 0.02 & 0.397 $\pm$ 0.007 \\
$A_{\alpha_{2}}$ & (1.01 $\pm$ 0.07)$\times 10^{-3}$ &(1.9 $\pm$ 0.2)$\times 10^{-3}$ & (1.18 $\pm$ 0.08)$\times 10^{-3}$ \\
$kT_{\text{fold}}$ (keV) & 5.64 $\pm$ 0.07 &5.2 $\pm$ 0.1 & 5.56 $\pm$ 0.07 \\
log$_{10}$($F_{3-40 \text{ keV}}$) & -9.260 $\pm$ 0.003 &-9.450 $\pm$ 0.006 & -9.119 $\pm$ 0.003 \\
E$_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$, broad}}$ (keV, fixed) & 6.4 &6.4 & 6.4 \\
$\sigma_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$, broad}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.5 &0.5 & 0.5 \\
$A_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$, broad}}$ & (3.3$\pm$ 0.5)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(2.4 $\pm$ 0.3)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (3.6 $\pm$ 0.6)$\times 10^{-4}$ \\
E$_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$, narrow}}$ (keV, fixed) & N/A &N/A & 6.4 \\
$\sigma_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$, narrow}}$ (keV, fixed) & N/A & N/A & 0.1 (fixed) \\
$A_{\text{Fe K$\alpha$, narrow}}$ & N/A &N/A & (2 $\pm$ 3)$\times 10^{-5}$ \\
$E_{\text{Ne X Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 1.02 &1.02 & 1.02 \\
$\sigma_{\text{Ne X Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.003 &0.003 & 0.003\\
$A_{\text{Ne X Ly$\alpha$}}$ & (2.2 $\pm$ 0.7)$\times 10^{-4}$ &(1.3 $\pm$ 0.5)$\times 10^{-4}$ & (2.0 $\pm$ 0.8)$\times 10^{-4}$ \\
$E_{\text{O VIII Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.65 &0.65 &0.65 \\
$\sigma_{\text{O VIII Ly$\alpha$}}$ (keV, fixed) & 0.003 &0.003 &0.003 \\
$A_{\text{O VIII Ly$\alpha$}}$ & (3.1$\pm$ 0.2)$\times 10^{-3}$ &(1.7 $\pm$ 0.5)$\times 10^{-3}$ & (4.3 $\pm$ 0.3)$\times 10^{-3}$ \\
$c_{\text{EPIC-pn}}$ (fixed) & 1 &1 & 1 \\
$c_{\text{FPMA}}$ & 3.21 $\pm$ 0.02 &3.40 $\pm$ 0.05 & 2.63 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
$c_{\text{FPMB}}$ & 3.26 $\pm$ 0.03 &3.48 $\pm$ 0.05 & 2.68 $\pm$ 0.02 \\
\chisq\ & 1317.43 &725.34 & 1452.61 \\
Degrees of Freedom & 963 &614 & 973
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{For the continuum model {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont constant * tbnew * (cflux * npex + bbody + gauss + gauss + gauss + gauss)}. All errors are 90\% confidence intervals.}
\label{tab:snpexparams}
\end{deluxetable*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.73]{l3pps_fluxbb.pdf} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Left: Power law flux (3--40 keV, blue points) plotted together with the \nustar\ 8--60 pulse profile for Observation L3. Right: Blackbody normalization (red points) plotted against the \xmm\ 0.5--1 pulse profile for Observation L3. In both figures, the spectral parameters are in good agreement with their respective pulse profiles. We find similarly good agreement in all LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 observations, but merely show this observation as an example. The agreement of the blackbody and power law spectral parameters with their respective energy resolved pulse profiles indicates that the pulse profiles are a suitable proxy for these spectral parameters in our warped disk model.}
\label{fig:ppsfluxbb}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Phase-resolved Spectroscopy}
We also performed phase-resolved spectroscopy for all LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 observations. The phase-averaged spectra were filtered into 8 equal phase bins by using the HENDRICS tool {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont HENphasetag} to calculate spin phase for each photon. The \nustar\ spectra were filtered using {\fontfamily{qcr}\selectfont xselect} and the \xmm\ spectra were filtered using XMMSAS. All spectra were grouped to have a minimum of 100 counts per spectral bin. We fitted the phase-resolved spectra in the range of 0.6--40 keV.
We used the same model as for the phase-average spectra when fitting the phase-resolved spectra; however, to reduce the number of free parameters we fixed the blackbody temperatures to their respective phase-averaged values. We also found that the O VIII, Ne IX, and Ne X emission lines were not required and poorly constrained by the lower resolution phase-resolved spectra. We removed these lines from the phase-resolved model spectra.
Other than these changes to the spectral model, the phase-resolved spectra were fit using the same methods, abundances, and energy ranges specified for the phase-averaged spectroscopy.
\section{Results} \label{sec:results}
\subsection{Pulse Profiles}
The LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 pulse profiles shown in Figures \ref{fig:lmcpp} and \ref{fig:smcpp} show changes in shape and phase over the course of a single superorbital cycle.
For LMC X-4, the hard (8--60 keV) and soft (0.5--1 keV) pulse profiles from Observations L1 and L2 are out of phase. In Observation L1 the soft pulses are slightly less than 180\degree\ out of phase, while in Observation L2 they appear to be closer to 180\degree\ out of phase. By contrast, the hard and soft pulse profiles in Observation L3 are almost completely in phase. The pulse profiles, and in particular the hard pulses, in Observation L4 are weakly detected due to the pulse dropout phenomenon that occurred during this observation (see \citealt{brumback2018b}). Despite this, we observe that the hard and soft pulsations appear out of phase.
Independent of pulse dropout behaviors, we also observe changes in pulse shape with superorbital phase in LMC X-4. The hard pulse profiles in Observations L1 and L3 are relatively smooth single peaks, while the hard pulse profile in Observation L2 has become broad and flat. In general, the soft pulse shapes in all LMC X-4 observations are rounded single peaks. We also observe a shift in relative strength between hard and soft pulsations in Observation L2, apparently driven by a change in the hard pulsed fraction.
The pulse profile for SMC X-1 is double peaked. With the energy-resolved pulse profiles for SMC X-1, we find that the profiles for Observations S1 and S4 are extremely consistent in shape and relative phase; both hard and soft profiles are in phase with each other and both show two peaks of approximately equal strength in both the hard and soft pulses. These shapes are different than those seen in Observation S3, where the hard pulses show one strong and one weak peak, while the soft pulses have merged into a broad single peak.
Because the hard pulsations are caused by the pulsar beam and the soft pulsations originate from accretion disk reprocessing (e.g.\ \citealt{hickox2004}), the consistency in pulse phase between observations from the same superorbital phase, particularly Observations S1 and S4, shows that we have observed a complete precession cycle of the inner accretion disk.
\subsection{Spectroscopy}
Our spectroscopic analysis of these data indicates that the broad-band X-ray spectra of LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 are well described by an absorbed power law and a soft blackbody component. In both sources, the blackbody temperature changes very little with superorbital phase. In SMC X-1, we also find very little variation in the $\alpha_{1}$ parameter with superorbital phase. There is, however, some variation in the strength of the second power law ($A_{\alpha_{2}}$) which indicates that the overall shape of the hard continuum is changing slightly with superorbital phase. In LMC X-4, we observe changes in power law shape through variation in both $\alpha_{1}$ and $A_{\alpha_{2}}$.
We would expect that Observations S1 and S4 would have generally the same spectral shape since these observations were taken at the same superorbital phase, and the same applies to Observations L1 and L4. We do find good agreement between the spectral parameters in Observations S1 and S4, where the only notable differences are a slightly stronger second power law normalization and the presence of a narrow Fe K$\alpha$ feature in Observation S4. We find less good agreement between the spectral parameters in Observations L1 and L4; however, we do not consider these discrepancies to be problematic considering that these two observations sample different accretion and pulse behaviors (\citealt{brumback2018b}). In Observation L1, our phase-averaged spectrum reflects a strongly pulsed time interval between bright accretion flares, whereas in Observation L4 our spectrum is drawn from a weakly pulsed pre-flare interval. The hardness ratios vary between these two states, implying that the shape of the spectrum changes (see Fig. 1 in \citealt{brumback2018b}). In \cite{brumback2018b} we suggest that these different pulse behaviors could be driven by changing emission geometries during the accretion flares. If this is indeed the case, we would expect to see differences in the spectral shape during this process.
\begin{deluxetable*} {ccccc}
\tablecolumns{5}
\tablecaption{Disk Model Parameters}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablehead{ \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{LMC X-4} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SMC X-1} \\
\cmidrule(lr){2-3} \cmidrule(lr){4-5} \\
\colhead{Parameter} & \colhead{Pencil Beam} & \colhead{Fan Beam} & \colhead{Pencil Beam} & \colhead{Fan Beam} }
\startdata
$r_{\text{in}}$ (10$^{8}$ cm) & 0.8 & 0.8 & 0.8 & 0.8 \\
$r_{\text{out}}$ (10$^{8}$ cm) & 1 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
Inner tilt $\theta_{\text{in}}$ (\degree) & 10 & 10 & 10 & 10\\
Outer tilt $\theta_{\text{out}}$ (\degree) & 45 & 45 & 45 & 45\\
Twist angle $\phi_{\text{tw}}$ (\degree) & -130 & -130 & -130 & -130\\
Beam$_{1}$ angle from rotational plane $\theta_{\text{b}1}$ (\degree) & 60\tablenotemark{b,c,d}, 75\tablenotemark{a} & 60\tablenotemark{c}, 70\tablenotemark{b,d}, 75\tablenotemark{a} & 60\tablenotemark{e,g}, -50\tablenotemark{f} & 60\tablenotemark{e,g}, -40\tablenotemark{f}\\
Beam$_{2}$ angle from rotational plane $\theta_{\text{b}2}$ (\degree) & 60\tablenotemark{b,d}, 65\tablenotemark{a}, -60\tablenotemark{c} & 60\tablenotemark{a}, 70\tablenotemark{b,d}, -60\tablenotemark{c}, & 60\tablenotemark{e,f,g} & 60\tablenotemark{e,f,g}\\
Beam$_{1}$ azimuth $\phi_{\text{b}1}$ (\degree) & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
Beam$_{2}$ azimuth $\phi_{\text{b}2}$ (\degree) & 110\tablenotemark{a}, 130\tablenotemark{b,d}, 160\tablenotemark{c} & 110\tablenotemark{a},120\tablenotemark{b,d}, 160\tablenotemark{c} &180\tablenotemark{e,g}, 185\tablenotemark{f} & 180\tablenotemark{e,f,g} \\
Beam half-width $\sigma_{\text{b}}$ (\degree) & 30\tablenotemark{a}, 45\tablenotemark{b,d}, 60\tablenotemark{c} & 30 & 60 & 30 \\
Fan beam opening angle $\theta_{\text{fan}}$ (\degree) & 0 & 15\tablenotemark{a}, 20\tablenotemark{c}, 25\tablenotemark{b,d} & 0 & 30\tablenotemark{e,f,g}\\
Observer elevation $\theta_{\text{obs}}$ (\degree) & 40 & 40 & 20 & 20
\enddata
\tablenotetext{a}{This value required for Observation L1}
\tablenotetext{b}{This value required for Observation L2}
\tablenotetext{c}{This value required for Observation L3}
\tablenotetext{d}{This value required for Observation L4}
\tablenotetext{e}{This value required for Observation S1}
\tablenotetext{f}{This value required for Observation S2}
\tablenotetext{g}{This value required for Observation S4}
\label{tab:diskpar}
\end{deluxetable*}
In our phase-resolved analysis, the parameters allowed to vary within each spectrum were the blackbody normalization, the overall flux of the power law, the primary power law index $\alpha_{1}$, the secondary power law normalization, the power law folding energy, and the Fe K$\alpha$ line normalization. Across the phase-resolved spectra for both LMC X-4 and SMC X-1, we only find clear, coherent changes with pulse phase in the blackbody normalization, the power law flux, and the Fe K$\alpha$ line normalization. The other parameters ($\alpha_{1}$, folding temperature, and second power law normalization) are either consistent with being constant, or show variations that are difficult to describe physically due to degeneracies within the model and reduced signal to noise in the spectra.
An example of the smooth variations in power law flux and blackbody normalization are shown in Figure \ref{fig:ppsfluxbb} for Observation L3, where the variation in power law flux is overplotted with the hard \nustar\ pulse profile, and the blackbody normalization is overplotted with the soft \xmm\ pulse profile. The other LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 observations show similarly good agreement between these two spectral parameters and the pulse profiles, and so for the sake of brevity we do not show them here. The agreement of these parameters with their respective pulse profiles is significant because it indicates that the pulse profiles (measured in count rates) are reasonable proxy for the spin-resolved power law and blackbody flux. This agreement allows us to directly fit the energy resolved \nustar\ and \xmm\ pulse profiles in our warped disk model and assume that the pulse profiles are following the changes in strength of the power law and blackbody.
\subsection{Modeling the Warped Inner Disk}
\cite{hickox2004} found that disk reprocessing is a ubiquitous feature of bright X-ray pulsars. HV05 used a simple warped disk model to describe the differences in shape and phase between the hard and soft pulsations in SMC X-1 as they vary across the superorbital cycle. \cite{hung2010} used the same model to qualitatively describe the pulse profiles in LMC X-4. While these previous works demonstrated the success of the HV05 disk model, neither used observations within a single disk precession cycle to examine the periodicity of the disk and determine if this model can describe pulse behavior over a complete disk cycle.
We seek to verify whether the HV05 model can reproduce the changes in pulse shape and phase seen over a complete disk precession cycle in both LMC X-4 and SMC X-1. The warped disk model used in this analysis is the same as that presented by HV05 and used by \cite{hung2010}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.61]{modelschematic.pdf}
\caption{A schematic diagram of the disk geometry used in the HV05 model, adapted from Figure 7 in HV05. The inset shows a schematic diagram of the neutron star beam geometry, where a single beam is shown for clarity.}
\label{fig:modelschem}
\end{figure}
HV05 describes the warped inner region of the accretion disk as a series of concentric circles that are inclined and rotated relative to each other. This geometry is based on the well-constrained disk of the bright X-ray binary Her X-1 (\citealt{scott2000,leahy2002}). The precise geometry of this disk is set by the radii of the inner and outer circles and their respective inclination angles ($r_{\text{in}}$, $r_{\text{out}}$, $\theta_{\text{in}}$, $\theta_{\text{out}}$). We provide a schematic diagram of the HV05 disk and beam geometries in Figure \ref{fig:modelschem}.
We also use two simple beam geometries, a pencil and a fan beam, to model the neutron star's beam geometry. In both cases, the beams are modeled as two-dimensional Gaussians with width $\sigma_{\text{b}}$. The location of the beam on the neutron star surface is defined by the angle out of the plane of rotation and the azimuthal angle ($\theta_{\text{b}}$, $\phi_{\text{b}}$). We define the coordinate system such that the poles align with the rotation axis and $\theta = 0$ lies along the equator, and the neutron star's rotation is parallel to the disk axis. In the fan beam model, we also define a beam opening angle ($\theta_{\text{fan}}$), which is set to 0 in the pencil model. For simplicity, the fan beam model is a pure fan beam, without an embedded pencil beam.
In this model, the observer is set at a fixed angle ($\theta_{\text{obs}}$) which, if the neutron star rotates within its orbital plane, is related to the inclination angle for the system by $i = 90$\degree $-\theta_{\text{obs}}$. The beam pattern is then rotated and the regions of the disk visible from the neutron star are illuminated. The disk is assumed to be opaque and it immediately reradiates the absorbed emission as a blackbody spectrum. This assumption requires that the light crossing time and disk cooling time be shorter than the neutron star pulse period. The light crossing time for a disk surface at approximately 10$^{8}$ cm is $\sim$ 10 ms. For the cooling time, \cite{endo2000} suggested that this timescale can be estimated as the thermal energy of the disk divided by the luminosity. For general parameters such as a Compton thick disk, a blackbody temperature of $kT_{\text{BB}}=0.18$ keV, and a soft X-ray luminosity of 10$^{37}$ erg s$^{-1}$, HV05 estimate the cooling time as $\sim10^{-5}$ s. Both the light crossing time and the cooling time are shorter than the pulse periods of LMC X-4 and SMC X-1, and therefore we assume immediate reprocessing by the disk.
Emission seen by the observer is calculated at 30 pulse phases and 8 equally spaced disk phase intervals, where disk phase zero is defined as when the neutron star first emerges from behind the disk, consistent with the start of the superorbital high state. For each beam geometry and disk rotation phase the luminosity of the beam and the luminosity of the disk regions visible to the observer are calculated and simulated hard (beam) and soft (disk) pulse profiles are made. The HV05 model does not include the effects of light bending on the emission viewed by the observer.
In our model we constrain the disk surface between an inner radius of 0.8 $\times 10^{8}$ cm and an outer radius of 1 $\times 10^{8}$ cm, which HV05 found reproduced the observed SMC X-1 black body temperature. We initially set the observer angle to 20\degree because this agrees with orbital inclination estimates of $\sim$ 70\degree\ for both SMC X-1 and LMC X-4 (\citealt{reynolds1993,vandermeer2007}). While this value worked well for the SMC X-1 models, we found that we could not reproduce the Observation L3 pulse profiles with an observer angle of 20\degree. We tested a range of observer angles from 5--40\degree and found that the Observation L3 pulse profiles could only be reproduced with an observer angle of 40\degree. We set the outer disk angle to be 45\degree\ for both sources; this is within the disk inclination range of 25\degree--58\degree\ estimated for SMC X-1 by \cite{lutovinov2004}, and we found this angle necessary to reproduce the observed LMC X-4 pulse profiles. Our outer disk angle also agrees with hydrodynamic simulations that \cite{larwood1996} used to find stable precession in tilted accretion disks with outer disk angles of 45\degree. We fixed the inner disk angle to a smaller value of 10\degree. We found that a beam half-width of 30\degree\ fit all observations well. While the disk geometry was allowed to vary between LMC X-4 and SMC X-1, we used the same disk parameters to describe the observations from each source, but allowed the beam parameters to change between observations.
When fitting the pulse profiles to data, we allow the overall intensity of the simulated pulses to vary so that the intensity matches that of the observed hard pulsations.
\subsection{Disk Models Output}
To simulate pulse profiles for both the pencil and fan beam models of LMC X-4, we began fitting pulse profiles with the brightest observation in the data set: Observation L3. We first simulate the hard pulse profile shape to match the observed data and then adjusted the disk parameters until we found reasonable agreement in the soft pulse profiles. We then kept the disk parameters the same for the other three LMC X-4 observations and varied the beam height and azimuth ($\theta_{\text{b}}$, $\phi_{\text{b}}$), which was necessary to match the other pulse shapes in the observation series. We note that these changes in beam location do not necessarily represent physical changes in the accretion column, but rather reflect the varying effects of light bending or other phenomena not included in the HV05 model. For each observation, we allowed the disk to precess and calculate pulse profiles for each precession phase. We fit the three SMC X-1 observations in the same way. The best fit parameters for both the pencil and fan beam configurations are listed in Table \ref{tab:diskpar}.
To find the best fit to the soft pulses, we estimated the goodness of fit between the simulated pulse profiles produced at different precession phases and the observed pulse profile by calculating $r=\sum(P_{\text{obs}}(\phi_{\text{spin}}) - P_{\text{sim}}(\phi_{\text{spin}})) / \overline{P_{\text{obs}}}$, where $P_{\text{obs}}$ is the observed pulse profile and $P_{\text{sim}}$ is the simulated pulse profile, and identifying the disk phases with the lowest $r$ value. These best fit disk phases are highlighted in green in Figures \ref{fig:ldisksimpp} and \ref{fig:sdisksimpp}.
In LMC X-4, the HV05 model is able to describe the shape of the hard pulsations with the exception of Observation L4, which has extremely weak pulsations. The lack of pulsations in this observation is possibly due to pulsation dropout in association with super-Eddington accretion flares, and the timing properties of this observation are discussed in \cite{brumback2018b}. For the purposes of this analysis, the effect of weak pulsations in Observation L4 results in poor constraints on the beam profile.
By allowing the disk to precess, the HV05 model successfully reproduces the shape of most of the LMC X-4 soft pulsations in at least one disk phase. However, for the soft pulsations in Observation L3 (which are nearly in phase with the observed hard pulsations), the HV05 model struggles to reproduce the phase of the soft pulsations. This is most likely because of the broad beam parameters necessary to create single peaked pulse profiles. We indicate the best fit disk phases for the fan beam configuration in Figure \ref{fig:ldisksimpp}, however we note that this is likely not a valid constraint on the disk precession phase. The pencil beam configuration produced similar results to those shown in Figure \ref{fig:ldisksimpp}, and so we do not include these figures for the sake of conciseness.
We also find good fits to the observed hard pulse profiles for SMC X-1. We show the results of the fan beam configuration in Figure \ref{fig:sdisksimpp}, and again do not show the similar results from the pencil beam configuration for the sake of space. We found that the HV05 model struggled to reproduce the soft pulses observed in Observation S2. The challenges in simulating these pulse profiles likely arise from the hard pulsations having a double peaked profile; when the hard profile was double peaked the model strongly preferred a soft profile that was double peaked as well. We found that for a double peaked hard profile, the HV05 model was not able to return a single peaked soft profile as broad as the observed profile.
Despite modeling challenges presented by Observations L3 and S2, we find that in both LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 the disk phase values corresponding to our best fit soft pulse profiles are consistent with a complete precession cycle of the inner accretion disk (Figures \ref{fig:ldiskim} and \ref{fig:sdiskim}).
Our simulation of the hard and soft profiles confirmed general conclusions made by \cite{hickoxvrtilek2005}, including that the pulse profile shape is more dependent on the beam geometry than the disk geometry, and that the double and single peaked pulse profiles seen in these sources strongly prefer non-antipodal beam geometry. This preference can be seen in Table \ref{tab:diskpar}, where negative values of $\theta_{\text{b}1}$ and $\theta_{\text{b}2}$ are only found in Observation L3 and Observation S2.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{lmcx4fan_disksimpp_12.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{lmcx4fan_disksimpp_34.pdf}
\caption{Observed hard (blue) and soft (red) pulse profiles compared with simulated (black) pulse profiles from the HV05 fan beam model for the four LMC X-4 observations. For the soft pulses, the simulated pulse profiles from the eight modeled disk rotation phases are shown to demonstrate the effect of disk rotation on pulse shape and phase. The best fit disk rotation phases are highlighted in green.}
\label{fig:ldisksimpp}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{smcfan_disksimpp.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:ldisksimpp} for SMC X-1. The best fit disk rotation phases are consistent with a complete disk rotation.}
\label{fig:sdisksimpp}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{diskim_lmcfan_all_simmatch.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Disk models for the four best fit disk precession phases from the LMC X-4 Observations, showing the possible disk geometry of a complete disk precession cycle. Units are 10$^{8}$ cm.}
\label{fig:ldiskim}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{diskim_smc_all.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Disk models for the three best fit disk precession phases from the SMC X-1 Observations, showing the possible disk geometry of a complete disk precession cycle. Units are 10$^{8}$ cm.}
\label{fig:sdiskim}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion} \label{sec:disc}
Changes in pulse shape as a function of superorbital phase have been previously examined in LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 by \cite{hickoxvrtilek2005}, \cite{neilsen2004}, and \cite{hung2010}. These works, and several of the references therein, strongly imply that the relative changes between hard and soft pulse profiles is caused by reprocessed emission from a warped, precessing inner disk. However, none of these previous analysis of these two X-ray binaries include broadband X-ray coverage over a single superorbital cycle. The joint campaigns carried out by \xmm\ and \nustar\ that are presented in this work represent the first sampling of a complete superorbital cycle with full hard X-ray coverage in these sources.
The joint observations of LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 were carried out so that the first and fourth observation in each series occurred at the same superorbital phase. In these observations, we would expect to see similarities in spectral shape and pulse shape. The results of our spectral and timing analyses for LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 confirm these expectations: in SMC X-1 the pulse profiles and phase-averaged spectra of Observations S1 and S4 are consistent. In LMC X-4 the results are complicated by instances of pulse dropout within Observations L1 and L4. This resulted in different spectral shapes between these two observations and significantly weaker pulsations in Observation L4. However, even though the Observation L4 pulsations are weak, the hard and soft pulses are approximately 180\degree\ out of phase, which is also seen in Observation L1.
The HV05 warped disk model offers an opportunity to simulate pulse profiles for a simplified source geometry of either a pencil or fan beam that irradiates a warped inner disk. We found that both pencil and fan beam geometries can reproduce observed pulse profiles in LMC X-4 and SMC X-1, and thus we cannot conclusively say that one beam geometry is preferred over another. Regardless of beam geometry, we found that pulse profiles where the hard and soft pulsations were out of phase generally preferred non-antipolar beam geometries. This geometry preference agrees with those found by HV05.
By allowing the inner disk to precess in the HV05 model, we found disk precession phases which best described the phase of soft pulses relative to the hard ones. For both LMC X-4 and SMC X-1, our best fit disk precession phases for each observation indicate a smoothly rotating disk. We also find that the disk precession phases are periodic with superorbital phase, meaning the first and last observation in each series shows the disk returning to its approximate initial position. The success of this model further confirms that disk precession can reproduce the observed changes in pulse profiles.
In order to fit the observed pulse profiles, especially of LMC X-4 which vary significantly in relative phase and strength, it was necessary to allow the beam geometry to change between observations. Rather than suggesting that the beam parameters change significantly with superorbital phase, these changes likely represent the effects of varying height in the accretion column, which in turn influence the light bending or other relativistic phenomena that are not included in the HV05 model. One way to further constrain the beam geometries within the HV05 model is to use a source with a highly constrained accretion disk geometry. The ideal target for such further analysis is Hercules X-1, whose 35 day superorbital cycle has been modeled by \cite{leahy2002}. With firm constraints on the disk geometry inputs to the HV05 model, we could possibly see whether a pencil or fan beam geometry is preferred, and compare the results to those presented in this work (\citealt{brumbackprep}).
The geometries included in the HV05 warped disk model are quite simple and likely not a complete representation of the complexities of the inner accretion flow and accretion column structure (e.g.\ \citealt{miyasaka2013}). Future work could update the beam geometries with more complex beam structures (e.g.\ \citealt{koliopanos2018, iwakiri2019}) or physically motivated accretion column models (e.g.\ \citealt{sokolovaprep}) and include the effects of light bending (e.g.\ \citealt{falknersuba}; \citealt{falknersubb}). Despite the simplified nature of the HV05 model, the success of the HV05 model suggests that tomography is a viable method of probing the structure of magnetized accretion flows in neutron star binaries, which can be difficult to resolve observationally. Constraining the warped disk and beam geometry in pulsars with superorbital modulation can shed light on interactions between the accretion disk and the pulsar magnetosphere.
\section{Summary} \label{sec:summary}
In this work we perform a broad band spectral and timing analysis of the X-ray binaries LMC X-4 and SMC X-1 within a single superorbital period. Both of these sources display superorbital periods that are attributed to warped precessing inner accretion disks. We observed each source jointly with \xmm\ and \nustar\ at four epochs during a single superorbital cycle, and found that the pulse profiles and phase-averaged spectra display the periodicity expected from sources with precessing inner disks. We also apply the HV05 warped disk model and find that these observed changes in pulse profiles can be modeled by reflection off of a simple precessing disk. Modeling the geometry of the inner disk and neutron star beam offers a way to observationally examine magnetic accretion flows around neutron stars.
\acknowledgements
We would like to thank the anonymous referee for their comments, which improved the manuscript. We would like to thank the \textit{NuSTAR} Galactic Binaries Science Team and G. Vasilopoulos for comments and contributions. MCB acknowledges support from NASA grant numbers NNX15AV32G and NNX15AH79H. This research made use of NuSTARDAS, developed by ASDC (Italy) and Caltech (USA), XMM-SAS developed by ESA, ISIS functions (ISISscripts) provided by
ECAP/Remeis observatory and MIT (http://www.sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de/isis/), and the MAXI data provided by RIKEN, JAXA and the MAXI team.
\pagebreak
|
\section{Introduction}
This paper is a sequel to \cite{Morand:2017fnv} which proposed to classify all the possible geometries of Double Field Theory (DFT)~\cite{Siegel:1993xq,Siegel:1993th,Hull:2009mi,Hull:2009zb,Hohm:2010jy,Hohm:2010pp} by two non-negative integers, $(n,{\bar{n}})$. The outcome ---which we shall review in section~\ref{SECnbrn}--- is that only the case of $(0,0)$ corresponds to conventional supergravity based on Riemannian geometry. Other generic cases of ${(n,{\bar{n}})\neq(0,0)}$ do not admit any invertible Riemannian metric and hence are \textit{non-Riemannian} by nature. Strings propagating on these backgrounds become chiral and anti-chiral over $n$ and $\bar{n}$ dimensions respectively.
The non-Riemannian property is a point-wise or local statement~\cite{Lee:2013hma,Park:2014una,Ko:2015rha,Berman:2019izh,Sakatani:2019jgu} and differs from the global notion of `non-geometry'~\cite{Obers:1998fb, Hull:2004in, Hull:2005hk, DallAgata:2007egc, Blumenhagen:2011ph} which is also well described by DFT~\cite{Andriot:2011uh, Andriot:2012an, Blumenhagen:2012nt, Dibitetto:2012rk, Malek:2013sp, Hassler:2014sba, Cederwall:2014opa,Bakhmatov:2016kfn, Heller:2016abk, Lee:2016qwn, Chatzistavrakidis:2018ztm, Marotta:2018myj, Plauschinn:2018wbo, Deser:2018flj,Otsuki:2019owg}. Possible examples of non-Riemannian geometries include Newton--Cartan geometry~\cite{Cartan:1923zea,Kuenzle:1972zw,Duval:1984cj} as $(1,0)$, stringy Newton--Cartan~\cite{Andringa:2012uz} as $(1,1)$, (wonderland) Carroll geometry~\cite{Henneaux79,Duval:2014uoa} as $({D-1},0)$, and non-relativistic Gomis--Ooguri string theory~\cite{Gomis:2000bd} as $(1,1)$. These are of continuous interest, \textit{e.g.}~\cite{Milne:1934,Duval:1993pe,Christensen:2013lma,Bekaert:2014bwa,
Bekaert:2015xua,Bergshoeff:2016lwr,Hartong:2016yrf,Bergshoeff:2018yvt,
Hansen:2018ofj,Harmark:2018cdl,Bergshoeff:2018vfn,Morand:2018tke,
Gomis:2019zyu,Hansen:2019svu,Gallegos:2019icg,Harmark:2019upf,
Bergshoeff:2019pij,Blair:2019qwi,Pereniguez:2019eoq}. Further, the fully $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetric vacua of Double Field Theory turn out to be `maximally' non-Riemannian, being of either $(D,0)$ or $(0,D)$ type, compelling string to be completely chiral or anti-chiral. A remarkable insight from \cite{Berman:2019izh} is that, the ordinary Riemannian spacetime arises after spontaneous symmetry breaking of these fully $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetric vacua while identifying the Riemannian metric, $g_{\mu\nu}$, as a Nambu--Goldstone boson.
In this work we attempt to explore the dynamics of the generic $(n,{\bar{n}})$ sector in Double Field Theory. We analyze with care the relevant variational principle and recognize a nontrivial subtlety: when $n{\bar{n}}\neq0$, the resulting Euler--Lagrangian equations of motion depend whether the variations of the action keep the values of $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed or not. This rather unexpected subtle discrepancy contrasts DFT with the traditional approaches to the various non-Riemannian gravities. \\
\noindent The organization of the present paper is as follows. \\
In the remaining of this Introduction, to put the present work into context and set up notation, we describe DFT as the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ completion of General Relativity along with a relevant doubled string action. \\
In section~\ref{SECnbrn}, we review the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ classification of the non-Riemannian DFT geometries from \cite{Morand:2017fnv}. \\
In section~\ref{SECVP}, we revisit the variational principle in DFT and confirm that the known Euler--Lagrangian equations, or `Einstein Double Field Equations'~(\ref{EDFE}) are still valid for non-Riemannian sectors. \\
In section~\ref{SECfix}, now keeping $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed, we reanalyze the variational principle and show that the full Einstein Double Equations are not necessarily implied when $n{\bar{n}}\neq0$. We explain the discrepancy, and further propose a non-Riemannian differential tool kit as a `bookkeeping device' to expound the equations.\\
We conclude in section~\ref{SECconclusion}, followed by Appendix~\ref{SECProof} \& \ref{SECDerivation}.
\subsection{Double Field Theory as the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ completion of General Relativity}
While the initial motivation of Double Field Theory was to reformulate supergravity in an $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ manifest manner~\cite{Siegel:1993xq,Siegel:1993th,Hull:2009mi,Hull:2009zb,Hohm:2010jy,Hohm:2010pp} (\cite{Aldazabal:2013sca,Berman:2013eva,Hohm:2013bwa} for reviews), through subsequent further developments~\cite{Jeon:2010rw,Jeon:2011cn,Hohm:2011si,Angus:2018mep}, DFT has evolved and can be now identified as a pure gravitational theory that string theory seems to predict foremost\footnote{At least formally let alone its phenomenological validity,~\textit{c.f.~}\cite{Ko:2016dxa,Park:2017snt}.} and may differ from General Relativity as it is capable of describing non-Riemannian geometries~\cite{Morand:2017fnv}. Specifically, DFT is the string theory based, $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ completion of General Relativity (GR): taking the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetry as the first principle, DFT geometrises not merely the Riemannian metric but the whole massless NS-NS sector of closed string as the fundamental gravitational multiplet, hence `completing' GR. Further, the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetry principle fixes its coupling to other superstring sectors (R-R~\cite{Rocen:2010bk,Hohm:2011zr,Hohm:2011dv,Jeon:2012kd}, R-NS~\cite{Jeon:2011vx}, and heterotic Yang-Mills~\cite{Hohm:2011ex,Hohm:2014sxa,Cho:2018alk}). Having said that, regardless of supersymmetry, it can also couple to various matter fields which may appear in lower dimensional effective field theories~\cite{Jeon:2011kp,Jeon:2011vx,Bekaert:2016isw}, just as GR does so. In particular, supersymmetric extensions have been completed to the full (\textit{i.e.~}quartic) order in fermions for ${D=10}$ cases powered by
`1.5 formalism'~\cite{Jeon:2011sq,Jeon:2012hp}, and the pure Standard Model without any extra physical degrees of freedom can easily couple to DFT in an $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetric manner~\cite{Choi:2015bga}.
Schematically, governed by the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetry principle, DFT may couple to generic matter fields, say collectively $\Upsilon$, which should be also in $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ representations:
\begin{equation}
\int~\textstyle{\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\,e^{-2d}\So+\cL_{{{\rm{matter}}}}(\Upsilon, {\nabla}_{A}\Upsilon)\,.
\label{ACTION}
\end{equation}
Here, $d$ is the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ singlet DFT-dilaton, $\So$ is the DFT scalar curvature, and ${\nabla}_{A}\Upsilon$ denotes the covariant derivative of a matter field.
To manifest the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetry, the action is equipped with an $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ invariant metric,
\begin{equation}
\cJ_{AB}={\tiny{\mathbf{{\left(\begin{array}{cc}\bf{0}&\bf{1}\\\bf{1}&\bf{0}\end{array}\right)}\,}}},
\label{cJ}
\end{equation}
which, with its inverse $\cJ^{AB}$, is going to be always used to lower and raise the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ vector indices (Latin capital letters). It splits the doubled coordinates into two parts, $x^{A}=(\tilde{x}_{\mu},x^{\nu})$ and $\partial_{A}=(\tilde{\partial}^{\mu},\partial_{\nu})$. Note that the doubling of the coordinates is crucial to manifest the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetry in DFT. Like GR, the General Covariance (DFT-diffeomorphisms) of the action~(\ref{ACTION}) naturally gives rise to the definitions of the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ completions of the Einstein curvature, $G_{AB}$~\cite{Park:2015bza} and also the Energy-Momentum tensor, $T_{AB}$~\cite{Angus:2018mep}, of which the former and the latter are respectively off-shell and on-shell conserved. Equating the two, they comprise the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ completion of the Einstein field equations, or the Einstein Double Field Equations (EDFEs)~\cite{Angus:2018mep,Park:2019hbc},
\begin{equation}
G_{AB}=8\pi G\,T_{AB}\,.
\label{EDFE}
\end{equation}
We summarize the basic geometrical notation of DFT in Table~\ref{TableDFT}\footnote{The expression of $S_{AB}$ in Table~\ref{TableDFT} is newly derived from \cite{Jeon:2011cn} using
$\Gamma_{ACD}\Gamma^{CBD}=\Gamma^{BCD}\Gamma_{CAD}
={{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\Gamma_{ACD}\Gamma^{BCD\,}$ and $
\Gamma_{CAD}\Gamma^{DBC}=\Gamma_{CAD}\Gamma^{CBD}
-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\Gamma_{ACD}\Gamma^{BCD\,}$ which hold due to the symmetric properties, $\Gamma_{[ABC]}=0$ and $\Gamma_{A(BC)}=0$.
}, while the DFT-diffeomorphisms are generated by the so-called generalized Lie derivative~\cite{Siegel:1993th,Hohm:2010pp}: acting on a tensor density with weight $\omega_{\scriptscriptstyle{T}}$,
\begin{equation}
\delta_{\xi}T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}=\hcL_{\xi}T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}=
\xi^{B}\partial_{B}T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}+\omega_{{\scriptscriptstyle{T}}}\partial_{B}\xi^{B}\,T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}
+\sum_{j=1}^{n}(\partial_{A_{j}}\xi_{B}-\partial_{B}\xi_{A_{j}})T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{j-1}}{}^{B}{}_{A_{j+1}\cdots A_{n}}\,.
\label{gLie}
\end{equation}
In particular, being a scalar density with weight one (${\omega_{{\scriptscriptstyle{T}}}=1}$), the exponentiation $e^{-2d}$ is the integral measure of DFT.
\begin{center}
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\hline
{Integral measure}
& $e^{-2d}$\quad(\textit{weight one scalar density})\\
\begin{tabular}{c}
{Projectors} \\
~
\end{tabular}
& $\begin{array}{c}
P_{AB}=P_{BA}={{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} (\cJ_{AB}+\cH_{AB})\,,\qquad{\bar{P}}_{AB}={\bar{P}}_{BA}={{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} (\cJ_{AB}-\cH_{AB})\\
P_{A}{}^{B}P_{B}{}^{C}=P_{A}{}^{C}\,,\qquad
{\bar{P}}_{A}{}^{B}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{C}={\bar{P}}_{A}{}^{C}\,,\qquad
P_{A}{}^{B}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{C}=0
\end{array}$ \\
\begin{tabular}{l}
{Christoffel symbols} \\
~
\end{tabular}
&\!\!\! ${\begin{array}{lll}\Gamma_{CAB}&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!2\left(P\partial_{C}P{\bar{P}}\right)_{[AB]}
+2\left({{{\bar{P}}}_{[A}{}^{D}{{\bar{P}}}_{B]}{}^{E}}-{P_{[A}{}^{D}P_{B]}{}^{E}}\right)\partial_{D}P_{EC}\\
{}&{}&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
{{-4\left(\textstyle{\frac{1}{P_{M}{}^{M}-1}}P_{C[A}P_{B]}{}^{D}+\textstyle{\frac{1}{{\bar{P}}_{M}{}^{M}-1}}{\bar{P}}_{C[A}{\bar{P}}_{B]}{}^{D}\right)\!}}\left(\partial_{D}d+(P\partial^{E}P{\bar{P}})_{[ED]}\right)\end{array}}$ \\
{Covariant derivatives}& $~
P_{A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{D}{\nabla}_{C}V_{D}$, \qquad ${\bar{P}}_{A}{}^{C}P_{B}{}^{D}{\nabla}_{C}V_{D}$,\qquad$P^{AB}{\nabla}_{A}V_{B}$,\qquad${\bar{P}}^{AB}{\nabla}_{A}V_{B}$\\
{Semi-covariant derivative}&$~{\nabla}_{C}V_{D}=\partial_{C}V_{D}
-\omega_{\scriptscriptstyle{V}}\Gamma^{E}{}_{EC}V_{D}
+\Gamma_{CD}{}^{E}V_{E}$\\
{Compatibility}&${\nabla}_{C}P_{AB}={\nabla}_{C}{\bar{P}}_{AB}={\nabla}_{C}\cJ_{AB}=0$,\qquad ${\nabla}_{C}d=-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} e^{2d}{\nabla}_{C}\left(e^{-2d}\right)=0$\\
{Scalar curvature}& $\So=\cH^{AB}S_{AB}$\\
{Ricci curvature}&$(PS{\bar{P}})_{AB}=P_{A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{D}S_{CD}$\\
{Einstein curvature}& $G_{AB}=4P_{[A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B]}{}^{D}S_{CD}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\cJ_{AB}\So$\\
{Semi-covariant curvature}&$~S_{AB}=2\partial_{A}\partial_{B}d-e^{2d\,}\partial_{C}\left(e^{-2d\,}\Gamma_{(AB)}{}^{C}\right)+
{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\Gamma_{ACD}\Gamma_{B}{}^{CD}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\Gamma_{CDA}\Gamma^{CD}{}_{B}$\\
{Variational\, property}&$\delta S_{AB}={\nabla}_{[A}\delta\Gamma_{C]B}{}^{C}+{\nabla}_{[B}\delta\Gamma_{C]A}{}^{C}$\\
{Energy-Momentum tensor}&
$T^{AB}=e^{2d}\left(8
{\bar{P}}^{[A}{}_{C}P^{B]}{}_{D\,}\frac{\delta\cL_{{\rm{matter}}}}{\delta\cH_{CD}}-\frac{1}{2}\cJ^{AB\,}\frac{\delta\cL_{{\rm{matter}}}}{\delta d}\right)$\\
{Conservation}&${\nabla}_{A}G^{AB}=0$\quad (\textit{off-shell})\,,\qquad
${\nabla}_{A}T^{AB}=0$\quad (\textit{on-shell})\\
{EDFEs}& $G_{AB}=8\pi G\,T_{AB}$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{{\bf{Geometric notation for DFT.}} For latest exposition see \textit{e.g.~}section 2 of \cite{Angus:2018mep}. }
\label{TableDFT}
\end{table}
\end{center}
It is noteworthy and relevant to this work that, all the geometrical notation of the covariant derivative, ${\nabla}_{A}$, and the curvatures, $\So,G_{AB}$, can be constructed strictly in terms of $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ covariant field variables, notably the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ invariant DFT-dilaton, $d$, and the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ covariant DFT-metric, $\cH_{AB}$ (``generalized metric"), or more powerfully $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ covariant DFT-vielbeins, without necessarily referring to conventional, undoubled $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ breaking supergravity variables. Similarly, a doubled string action can be constructed in terms of $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ covariant objects as we review below.
\begin{comment}
\begin{center}
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\hline
{Integral measure}
& $e^{-2d}$\quad(\textit{weight one scalar density})\\
\begin{tabular}{c}
{Projectors} \\
~
\end{tabular}
& $\begin{array}{c}
P_{AB}=P_{BA}={{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} (\cJ_{AB}+\cH_{AB})\,,\qquad{\bar{P}}_{AB}={\bar{P}}_{BA}={{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} (\cJ_{AB}-\cH_{AB})\\
P_{A}{}^{B}P_{B}{}^{C}=P_{A}{}^{C}\,,\qquad
{\bar{P}}_{A}{}^{B}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{C}={\bar{P}}_{A}{}^{C}\,,\qquad
P_{A}{}^{B}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{C}=0
\end{array}$ \\
\begin{tabular}{l}
{Christoffel symbols} \\
~
\end{tabular}
&\!\!\! ${\begin{array}{lll}\Gamma_{CAB}&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!2\left(P\partial_{C}P{\bar{P}}\right)_{[AB]}
+2\left({{{\bar{P}}}_{[A}{}^{D}{{\bar{P}}}_{B]}{}^{E}}-{P_{[A}{}^{D}P_{B]}{}^{E}}\right)\partial_{D}P_{EC}\\
{}&{}&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!
{{-4\left(\textstyle{\frac{1}{P_{M}{}^{M}-1}}P_{C[A}P_{B]}{}^{D}+\textstyle{\frac{1}{{\bar{P}}_{M}{}^{M}-1}}{\bar{P}}_{C[A}{\bar{P}}_{B]}{}^{D}\right)\!}}\left(\partial_{D}d+(P\partial^{E}P{\bar{P}})_{[ED]}\right)\end{array}}$ \\
{Covariant derivatives}& $~
P_{A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{D}{\nabla}_{C}V_{D}$, \qquad ${\bar{P}}_{A}{}^{C}P_{B}{}^{D}{\nabla}_{C}V_{D}$,\qquad$P^{AB}{\nabla}_{A}V_{B}$,\qquad${\bar{P}}^{AB}{\nabla}_{A}V_{B}$\\
{Semi-covariant derivative}&$~{\nabla}_{C}V_{D}=\partial_{C}V_{D}
-\omega_{\scriptscriptstyle{V}}\Gamma^{E}{}_{EC}V_{D}
+\Gamma_{CD}{}^{E}V_{E}$\\
{Compatibility}&${\nabla}_{C}P_{AB}={\nabla}_{C}{\bar{P}}_{AB}={\nabla}_{C}\cJ_{AB}=0$,\qquad ${\nabla}_{C}d=-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} e^{2d}{\nabla}_{C}\left(e^{-2d}\right)=0$\\
{Scalar curvature}& $\So=\cH^{AB}S_{AB}$\\
{Ricci curvature}&$(PS{\bar{P}})_{AB}=P_{A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B}{}^{D}S_{CD}$\\
{Einstein curvature}& $G_{AB}=4P_{[A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B]}{}^{D}S_{CD}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\cJ_{AB}\So$\\
{Semi-covariant curvature}&$~S_{AB}=2\partial_{A}\partial_{B}d-e^{2d\,}\partial_{C}\left(e^{-2d\,}\Gamma_{(AB)}{}^{C}\right)+
{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\Gamma_{ACD}\Gamma_{B}{}^{CD}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\Gamma_{CDA}\Gamma^{CD}{}_{B}$\\
{Variational\, property}&$\delta S_{AB}={\nabla}_{[A}\delta\Gamma_{C]B}{}^{C}+{\nabla}_{[B}\delta\Gamma_{C]A}{}^{C}$\\
{Energy-Momentum tensor}&
$T^{AB}=e^{2d}\left(8
{\bar{P}}^{[A}{}_{C}P^{B]}{}_{D\,}\frac{\delta\cL_{{\rm{matter}}}}{\delta\cH_{CD}}-\frac{1}{2}\cJ^{AB\,}\frac{\delta\cL_{{\rm{matter}}}}{\delta d}\right)$\\
{Conservation}&${\nabla}_{A}G^{AB}=0$\quad (\textit{off-shell})\,,\qquad
${\nabla}_{A}T^{AB}=0$\quad (\textit{on-shell})\\
{EDFEs}& $G_{AB}=8\pi G\,T_{AB}$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{{\bf{Geometric notation for DFT.}} For latest exposition see \textit{e.g.~}section 2 of \cite{Angus:2018mep}. }
\label{TableDFT}
\end{table}
\end{center}
\end{comment}
\subsection{Doubled but at the same time gauged string action}
One of the characteristics of DFT is the imposition of the `section condition': acting on arbitrary functions in DFT, say $\Phi_{r}$, and their products like $\Phi_{s}\Phi_{t}$, the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ invariant Laplacian should vanish
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
\partial_{A}\partial^{A}=0&~~~:&~~~
\partial_{A}\partial^{A}\Phi_{r}=0\,,~~~&~~~
\partial_{A}\Phi_{s}\partial^{A}\Phi_{t}=0\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
We remind the reader that the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ indices are raised with $\cJ^{AB}$.
Upon imposing the section condition, the generalized Lie derivative~(\ref{gLie}) is closed by commutators~\cite{Siegel:1993th,Hohm:2010pp},
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\left[\hcL_{\zeta},\hcL_{\xi}\right]=\hcL_{\left[\zeta,\xi\right]_{\rm{C}}}\,,
\quad&\qquad
\left[\zeta,\xi\right]^{M}_{\rm{C}}= \zeta^{N}\partial_{N}\xi^{M}-\xi^{N}\partial_{N}\zeta^{M}+{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} \xi^{N}\partial^{M}\zeta_{N}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} \zeta^{N}\partial^{M}\xi_{N}\,.
\end{array}
\label{closeda}
\end{equation}
The section condition is mathematically equivalent to the following translational invariance~\cite{Park:2013mpa,Lee:2013hma},
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\Phi_{r}(x)=\Phi_{r}(x+\Delta)\,,\qquad&\qquad\Delta^{A}\partial_{A}=0\,,
\end{array}
\label{invariance}
\end{equation}
where the shift parameter, $\Delta^{A}$, is \textit{derivative-index-valued}, meaning that its superscript index should be identifiable as a derivative index, for example $\Delta^{A}=\Phi_{s}\partial^{A}\Phi_{t\,}$. This insight on the section condition may suggest that the doubled coordinates of DFT are in fact gauged by an equivalence relation,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
x^{A}\quad\sim\quad x^{A}+\Delta^{A}\,,\qquad&\qquad \Delta^{A}\partial_{A}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{gauging}
\end{equation}
Each gauge orbit, \textit{i.e.~}equivalence class, represents a single physical point. As a matter of fact in DFT, the usual infinitesimal one-form of coordinates, ${\rm d} x^{A}$, is not DFT-diffeomorphism covariant,
\begin{equation}
\delta({\rm d} x^{A})={\rm d}(\delta x^{A})={\rm d}\xi^{A}={\rm d} x^{B}\partial_{B}\xi^{A}\neq{\rm d} x^{B}(\partial_{B}\xi^{A}-\partial^{A}\xi_{B})\,.
\end{equation}
However, if we gauge the one-form by introducing a derivative-index-valued connection, we can have a DFT-diffeomorphism covariant one-form, provided that the gauge potential transforms appropriately,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
{\rm D} x^{A}={\rm d} x^{A}-\cA^{A}\,,\quad&\quad \cA^{A}\partial_{A}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\delta({\rm D} x^{A})={\rm D} x^{B}(\partial_{B}\xi^{A}-\partial^{A}\xi_{B})\,,\quad&\quad
\delta \cA^{A}={\rm D} x^{B}\partial^{A}\xi_{B}\,.
\end{array}
\label{rmDxcA}
\end{equation}
It is also a singlet of the coordinate gauge symmetry~(\ref{gauging}): $\delta x^{A}=\Delta^{A},\, \delta\cA^{A}={\rm d}\Delta^{A},\, \delta({\rm D} x^{A})=0$. The gauged one-form then naturally allows to construct a perfectly symmetric doubled string action~\cite{Hull:2006va},\cite{Lee:2013hma},
\begin{equation}
{\textstyle{\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha^{\prime}}}}{\displaystyle{\int}}{\rm d}^{2}\sigma~\left[
-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\sqrt{-h}h^{\alpha\beta}{\rm D}_{\alpha}x^{A}{\rm D}_{\beta}x^{B}\cH_{AB}
-\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}{\rm D}_{\alpha}x^{A}\cA_{\beta A}\right]\,,
\label{stringaction}
\end{equation}
which enjoys symmetries like global $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$, target spacetime DFT-diffeomorphisms, worldsheet diffeomorphisms, Weyl symmetry, and the coordinate gauge symmetry.\footnote{See also \cite{Park:2016sbw} for Green--Schwarz doubled superstring, \cite{Ko:2016dxa} for doubled point particle, and \cite{Arvanitakis:2017hwb,
Arvanitakis:2018hfn} for `exceptional' extensions.} All the background information is encoded in the DFT-metric, $\cH_{AB}\,$.
\section{Review of \cite{Morand:2017fnv}: Classification of the non-Riemannian DFT geometries \label{SECnbrn}}
The section condition can be generically solved, up to $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ rotations, by enforcing the tilde coordinate independency: $\tilde{\partial}^{\mu}\equiv0~\Rightarrow~ \partial_{A}\partial^{A}=2\partial_{\mu}\tilde{\partial}^{\mu}\equiv0$. Choosing $\Delta^{A}=c_{\mu}\partial^{A}x^{\mu}=(c_{\mu},0)$ for (\ref{gauging}) and similarly $\cA^{A}=A_{\mu}\partial^{A}x^{\mu}=(A_{\mu},0)$, we note that
the tilde coordinates are indeed gauged: $(\tilde{x}_{\mu},x^{\nu})\,\sim\,(\tilde{x}_{\mu}+c_{\mu},x^{\nu})$, ${\rm D} x^{A}=({\rm d}\tilde{x}_{\mu}-A_{\mu},{\rm d} x^{\nu})$. With respect to this choice of the section, the well-known parametrization of the DFT-metric and the DFT-dilaton in terms of the conventional massless NS-NS field variables~\cite{Giveon:1988tt,Duff:1989tf},
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\cH_{AB}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}g^{\mu\nu}&-g^{\mu\sigma}B_{\sigma\lambda}\\
B_{\kappa\rho}g^{\rho\nu}& g_{\kappa\lambda}-B_{\kappa\rho}g^{\rho\sigma}B_{\sigma\lambda}\end{array}\right),
\qquad&\qquad e^{-2d}=e^{-2\phi}\sqrt{\left|g\right|}\,,
\end{array}
\label{Riemannian}
\end{equation}
reduces DFT to supergravity. In this case, the single expression of the EDFEs~(\ref{EDFE}) unifies all the equations of motion of the three fields, $\{g_{\mu},B_{\mu\nu},\phi\}$. Further, after Gaussian integration of the auxiliary gauge potential, $A_{\mu}$, the doubled-yet-gauged string action~(\ref{stringaction}) reproduces the standard undoubled string action.
Yet, this is not the full story. The above parametrization~(\ref{Riemannian}) is merely one particular solution to the defining relations of the DFT-metric:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\cH_{AB}=\cH_{BA}\,,\qquad&\qquad\cH_{A}{}^{C}\cH_{B}{}^{D}\cJ_{CD}=\cJ_{AB}\,.
\end{array}
\label{defining}
\end{equation}
DFT and the doubled-yet-gauged string action work well, provided these conditions are fulfilled. For example, instead of (\ref{Riemannian}), we may let the DFT-metric coincide with the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ invariant metric,
\begin{equation}
\cH_{AB}={\tiny{\mathbf{{\left(\begin{array}{cc}\bf{0}&\bf{1}\\\bf{1}&\bf{0}\end{array}\right)}\,}}},
\label{MAX}
\end{equation}
such that $\cH_{A}{}^{B}=\delta_{A}{}^{B}$. This is a vacuum solution to DFT, or to the `matter-free' EDFEs, $G_{AB}=0$~(\ref{EDFE}), which is very special in several aspects. Firstly, compared with (\ref{Riemannian}), there cannot be any associated Riemannian metric~$g_{\mu\nu}$ and hence it does not allow any conventional or Riemannian interpretation at all. It is maximally non-Riemannian. Secondly, it is fully $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetric, being one of the two most symmetric vacua of DFT, $\cH_{AB}=\pm\cJ_{AB}$. Thirdly, it is moduli-free since it does not admit any infinitesimal fluctuation, $\delta\cH_{AB}=0$~\cite{Cho:2018alk}.\footnote{Put $\cH_{A}{}^{B}=\delta_{A}{}^{B}$ in (\ref{twoCON}).} And lastly but not leastly, upon this background, the auxiliary gauge potential, $A_{\mu}$, appears linearly rather than quadratically in the doubled-yet-gauged string action~(\ref{stringaction}). Consequently it serves as a Lagrange multiplier to prescribe that all the untilde target spacetime coordinates should be chiral~\cite{Lee:2013hma} (\textit{c.f.~}\cite{Siegel:2015axg,Casali:2017mss}),
\begin{equation}
\partial_{\alpha}x^{\mu}+\textstyle{\frac{1}{\sqrt{-h}}}\epsilon_{\alpha}{}^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}x^{\mu}=0\,.
\end{equation}
An intriguing insight from \cite{Berman:2019izh} is then that, the usual supergravity fields in (\ref{Riemannian}) would be the Nambu--Goldstone modes of the perfectly $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetric vacuum~(\ref{MAX}).
Given the Riemannian and maximally non-Riemannian backgrounds, (\ref{Riemannian}) \textit{v.s.}~(\ref{MAX}), one may wonder about the existence of more generic non-Riemannian geometries (\textit{c.f.~}\cite{Lee:2013hma,Ko:2015rha} for other examples and also \cite{Malek:2013sp} for `timelike' duality rotations). This question was answered in \cite{Morand:2017fnv}: the most general solutions to the defining properties of the DFT-metric~(\ref{defining}) can be classified by two non-negative integers, $(n,{\bar{n}})$,
\begin{equation}
\cH_{AB}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}H^{\mu\nu}&
-H^{\mu\sigma}B_{\sigma\lambda}+Y_{i}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\lambda}-
{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\lambda}\\
B_{\kappa\rho}H^{\rho\nu}+X^{i}_{\kappa}Y_{i}^{\nu}
-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\kappa}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu}\quad&~~
~~K_{\kappa\lambda}-B_{\kappa\rho}H^{\rho\sigma}B_{\sigma\lambda}
+2X^{i}_{(\kappa}B_{\lambda)\rho}Y_{i}^{\rho}
-2{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{(\kappa}B_{\lambda)\rho}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}
\end{array}\right),
\label{cHFINAL}
\end{equation}
where $i,j=1,2,\cdots, n$, $\bar{\imath},\bar{\jmath}=1,2,\cdots, {\bar{n}}$ \,and\, $0\leq n+{\bar{n}}\leq D$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textit{(i)}] While the $B$-field is skew-symmetric as usual, $H^{\mu\nu}$ and $K_{\mu\nu}$ are symmetric tensors
whose kernels are spanned by linearly independent vectors, $\big\{X^{i}_{\mu},{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}\big\}$ and $\big\{Y_{j}^{\mu},{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\jmath}}\big\}$, respectively,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
H^{\mu\nu}X^{i}_{\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad
H^{\mu\nu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}=0\,,~\quad&~\quad
K_{\mu\nu}Y_{j}^{\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad
K_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\nu}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{HXX}
\end{equation}
\item[\textit{(ii)}]
A completeness relation must be satisfied
\begin{equation}
H^{\mu\rho}K_{\rho\nu}
+Y_{i}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\nu}+{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}
=\delta^{\mu}{}_{\nu}\,.
\label{COMP}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
From the linear independency of the zero-eigenvectors, $\left\{X^{i}_{\mu}, {\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}\right\}$, orthogonal/algebraic relations follow
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lllll}
Y^{\mu}_{i}X_{\mu}^{j}=\delta_{i}{}^{j}\,,\quad&\,
{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\jmath}}=\delta_{\bar{\imath}}{}^{\bar{\jmath}}\,,\quad&\,
Y^{\mu}_{i}{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\jmath}}=
{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}X_{\mu}^{j}=0\,,\quad&\,
H^{\rho\mu}K_{\mu\nu}H^{\nu\sigma}=H^{\rho\sigma}\,,\quad&\,
K_{\rho\mu}H^{\mu\nu}K_{\nu\sigma}=K_{\rho\sigma}\,.
\end{array}
\label{complete}
\end{equation}
Intriguingly, the $B$-field (hence `Courant algebra') is universally present regardless of the values of $(n,{\bar{n}})$, and contributes to the DFT-metric through an $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ adjoint action:
\begin{equation}
\cH_{AB}=\cB_{A}{}^{C}\cB_{B}{}^{D}\twist{\cH}_{CD}\,,
\label{DECOMP}
\end{equation}
where $\twist{\cH}$ corresponds to the `$B$-field-free' DFT-metric,
\begin{equation}
\twist{\cH}_{AB}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}H~&~
Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\\
X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\quad~&~\quad K
\end{array}\right),
\label{mcH}
\end{equation}
and $\cB$ is an $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ element containing the $B$-field,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\cB_{A}{}^{B}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\delta^{\mu}{}_{\sigma}&0\\B_{\rho\sigma}&~\delta_{\rho}{}^{\tau}\end{array}\right),
\qquad&\qquad
\cB_{A}{}^{C}\cB_{B}{}^{D}\cJ_{CD}=\cJ_{AB}\,.
\end{array}
\label{cB}
\end{equation}
It is also worth while to note the `vielbeins' or `square-roots' of $K_{\mu\nu}$ and $H^{\mu\nu}$\,:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
K_{\mu\nu}=K_{\mu}{}^{a}K_{\nu}{}^{b}\eta_{ab}\,,\qquad&\qquad
H^{\mu\nu}=H^{\mu}{}_{a}H^{\nu}{}_{b}\eta^{ab}\,,\qquad&\qquad
K_{\mu}{}^{a}H^{\mu}{}_{b}=\delta^{a}{}_{b}\,,\qquad&\qquad
K_{\mu a}H^{\nu a}=K_{\mu\rho}H^{\rho\nu}\,,
\end{array}
\label{KHroots}
\end{equation}
where $a,b$ are $(D-n-{\bar{n}})$-dimensional indices subject to a flat metric, say $\eta_{ab}\,$, whose signature is arbitrary. Essentially, $\big\{K_{\mu}{}^{a},X_{\mu}^{i},{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\imath}}\big\}$ form a $D\times D$ invertible square matrix whose inverse is given by $\big\{H^{\mu}{}_{a},Y^{\mu}_{i},{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}\big\}$ as
\begin{equation}
K_{\mu}{}^{a}H^{\nu}{}_{a}+X_{\mu}^{i}Y^{\nu}_{i}+{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=\delta_{\mu}{}^{\nu}\,.
\label{vcomp}
\end{equation}
In fact, the analysis of the DFT-vielbeins corresponding to the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ DFT-metric~(\ref{cHFINAL}) carried out in \cite{Morand:2017fnv} shows that the local Lorentz symmetry group, \textit{i.e.~}spin group is
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{Spin}(t+n,s+n)\times\mathbf{Spin}(s+{\bar{n}},t+{\bar{n}})\,.
\label{LLS}
\end{equation}
Here $(t,s)$ is the arbitrary signature of $\eta_{ab}$ or the nontrivial signature of $H^{\mu\nu}$ and $K_{\mu\nu}$ satisfying $t+s+n+{\bar{n}}=D$. Of course, once the spin group of any given theory is specified, it is fixed once and for all. Thus, each sum, $t+n$, $s+n$, $s+{\bar{n}}$, and $t+{\bar{n}}$, should be constant. For example, the Minkowskian $D=10$ maximally supersymmetric DFT~\cite{Park:2016sbw} and the doubled-yet-gauged Green-Schwarz superstring action~\cite{Jeon:2012hp}, both having the local Lorentz group of $\mathbf{Spin}(1,9)\times\mathbf{Spin}(9,1)$, can accommodate $(0,0)$ Riemannian and $(1,1)$ non-Riemannian sectors only (see \cite{Sakatani:2019jgu} for examples of supersymmetric non-Riemannian backgrounds). Nevertheless, we may readily relax the Majorana--Weyl condition therein~\cite{Jeon:2012hp,Park:2016sbw} and impose the Weyl condition only on spinors, such that the local Lorentz group can take any of $\mathbf{Spin}(\hat{t},\hat{s})\times\mathbf{Spin}(\hat{s},\hat{t})$ with $\hat{t}+\hat{s}=10$. The allowed non-Riemannian geometries will be then $(n,n)$ types with ${n={\bar{n}}}$ running from zero to ${\textrm{min}}(\hat{t},\hat{s})$~\cite{Morand:2017fnv}. On the other hand, bosonic DFT does not care about spin groups and hence
should be free from such constraints. It can admit more generic $(n,{\bar{n}})$ non-Riemannian geometries.
Crucially, the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ parametrization of the DFT-metric~(\ref{cHFINAL}) possesses two local symmetries, namely $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ rotations and Milne-shift transformations. The $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ symmetry rotates the $i,j,\cdots$ and $\bar{\imath},\bar{\jmath},\cdots$ indices of the component fields: with infinitesimal local parameters, $w_{i}{}^{j}$ and ${\bar{w}}_{\bar{\imath}}{}^{\bar{\jmath}}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{cccc}
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} X^{i}_{\mu}=X^{j}_{\mu\,}w_{j}{}^{i}\,,\quad&\quad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} Y_{i}^{\mu}=-w_{i}{}^{j\,}Y_{j}^{\mu}\,,\quad&\quad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} {\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\mu}={\bar{X}}^{\bar{\jmath}}_{\mu\,}{\bar{w}}_{\bar{\jmath}}{}^{\bar{\imath}}\,,\quad&\quad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} {\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}=-{\bar{w}}_{\bar{\imath}}{}^{\bar{\jmath}\,}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\mu}\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} d=0\,,\quad&\quad\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} H^{\mu\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} K_{\mu\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} B_{\mu\nu}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{deltaw}
\end{equation}
The Milne-shift symmetry generalizes the so-called `Galilean boost' in the Newtonian gravity literature~\cite{Milne:1934,Duval:1993pe}. It acts with infinitesimal local parameters, $V_{\mu i}$ and ${\bar{V}}_{\mu\bar{\imath}}$,\footnote{Through exponentiations, finite Milne-shift transformations can be achieved, which turn out to get truncated at finite orders, for example $e^{\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}}Y_{i}^{\mu}=Y_{i}^{\mu}+H^{\mu\nu}V_{\nu i}\,$. See Eq.(2.16) of \cite{Morand:2017fnv} for the full list.}
\begin{comment}
\[
\begin{array}{l}
e^{\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}}H^{\mu\nu}=H^{\mu\nu}\,,\quad\qquad
e^{\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}}Y_{i}^{\mu}=Y_{i}^{\mu}+H^{\mu\nu}V_{\nu i}\,,\quad\qquad
e^{\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}={\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}+H^{\mu\nu}{\bar{V}}_{\nu\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
e^{\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}}B_{\mu\nu}= B_{\mu\nu}
-2X^{i}_{[\mu}V_{\nu]i}+2{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{[\mu}{\bar{V}}_{\nu]\bar{\imath}}
+2X^{i}_{[\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu]}\left(Y_{i}^{\rho}{\bar{V}}_{\rho\bar{\imath}}
+{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}V_{\rho i}+V_{\rho i}H^{\rho\sigma}{\bar{V}}_{\sigma\bar{\imath}}\right),\\
e^{\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}}K_{\mu\nu}= K_{\mu\nu}-2X^{i}_{(\mu}K_{\nu)\rho}H^{\rho\sigma}V_{\sigma i}-2{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{(\mu}K_{\nu)\rho}H^{\rho\sigma}{\bar{V}}_{\sigma\bar{\imath}}+(X_{\mu}^{i}V_{\rho i}+{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{V}}_{\rho\bar{\imath}})H^{\rho\sigma}(X_{\nu}^{j}V_{\sigma j}+{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\jmath}}{\bar{V}}_{\sigma\bar{\jmath}})\,.
\end{array}
\]
\end{comment}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c}
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} Y^{\mu}_{i}=H^{\mu\nu}V_{\nu i}\,,\quad\qquad\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}=H^{\mu\nu}{\bar{V}}_{\nu\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} K_{\mu\nu}=-2X^{i}_{(\mu}K_{\nu)\rho}H^{\rho\sigma}V_{\sigma i}-2{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{(\mu}K_{\nu)\rho}H^{\rho\sigma}{\bar{V}}_{\sigma\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}
B_{\mu\nu}=
-2X^{i}_{[\mu}V_{\nu]i}+2{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{[\mu}{\bar{V}}_{\nu]\bar{\imath}}
+2X^{i}_{[\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu]}\left(Y_{i}^{\rho}{\bar{V}}_{\rho\bar{\imath}}
+{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}V_{\rho i}\right),\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} d=0\,,\quad\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} X^{i}_{\mu}=0\,,\quad\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\mu}=0\,,\quad\qquad \delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} H^{\mu\nu}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{MS}
\end{equation}
Remarkably, both transformations, (\ref{deltaw}) and (\ref{MS}), leave the DFT-metric invariant,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}} \cH_{AB}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\cH_{AB}=0\,,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
as the two local symmetries are actually parts of the underlying local Lorentz symmetries~(\ref{LLS}).
Upon the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ background, the doubled-yet-gauged worldsheet string action~(\ref{stringaction}) reduces to
\begin{equation}
{\textstyle{\frac{1}{2\pi\alpha^{\prime}}}}{\displaystyle{\int}}{\rm d}^{2}\sigma~\left[
-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\sqrt{-h}h^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}x^{\mu}\partial_{\beta}x^{\nu}
K_{\mu\nu}
+{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}\partial_{\alpha}x^{\mu}
\partial_{\beta}x^{\nu}B_{\mu\nu}+{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\epsilon^{\alpha\beta}
\partial_{\alpha}\tilde{x}_{\mu}\partial_{\beta}x^{\mu}\right]\,,
\end{equation}
which should be supplemented by the chiral and anti-chiral constraints over the $n$ and ${\bar{n}}$ directions,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
X^{i}_{\mu}\left(\partial_{\alpha}x^{\mu}+\textstyle{\frac{1}{\sqrt{-h}}}\epsilon_{\alpha}{}^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}x^{\mu}\right)=0\,,
\quad&\quad
{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\mu}\left(\partial_{\alpha}x^{\mu}-\textstyle{\frac{1}{\sqrt{-h}}}\epsilon_{\alpha}{}^{\beta}\partial_{\beta}x^{\mu}\right)=0\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
These constraints are prescribed by the integrated-out auxiliary gauge potential~$\cA^{A}$~(\ref{rmDxcA}).\\
~\\
\noindent\textbf{Comment 1.} Matching with the content of the non-Riemannian component fields,
\begin{equation}
\{H^{\mu\nu},K_{\rho\sigma},X_{\mu}^{i},{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}},Y^{\rho}_{j},{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\jmath}},B_{\mu\nu}\}\,,
\end{equation}
and the undoubled string worldsheet action resulting from (\ref{stringaction}), one can identify the original Newton--Cartan~\cite{Cartan:1923zea,Kuenzle:1972zw,Duval:1984cj} as $(1,0)$, Stringy Newton--Cartan~\cite{Andringa:2012uz} as $(1,1)$, Carroll~\cite{Henneaux79,Duval:2014uoa} as $(D{-1},0)$, and Gomis--Ooguri~\cite{Gomis:2000bd} as $(1,1)$: see \cite{Morand:2017fnv,Berman:2019izh,Blair:2019qwi} for the details of the identifications. Further, the isometry of the $(1,1)$ flat DFT-metric matches with the non-relativistic symmetry algebra such as Bargmann algebra~\cite{Ko:2015rha}, while the notion of T-duality persists to make sense in the non-relativistic string theory~\cite{Bergshoeff:2018yvt}. These all seem to suggest that DFT may be the \textit{home}, \textit{i.e.~}the unifying framework, to describe various known as well as yet-unknown non-Riemannian gravities.\footnote{Similarly, inequivalent parametrizations of the DFT-vielbeins, or U-duality-covariant generalized metric, correspond to the conventional distinctions between IIA and IIB~\cite{Jeon:2012hp,Park:2016sbw}, or IIB and M-``theories"~\cite{Blair:2013gqa}.}
Having said that there are also a few novel ingredients from DFT, such as the local $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ symmetry~(\ref{deltaw}), the notion of `Milne-shift covariance' as we shall discuss below~(\ref{Mcov}), (\ref{Mcov2}), and the very existence of the DFT-dilaton of which the exponentiation, $e^{-2d}$, gives the integral measure in DFT being a scalar density with weight one,
\begin{equation}
\delta_{\xi}d=-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} e^{2d}\cL_{\xi}\left(e^{-2d}\right)=-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} e^{2d}\partial_{\mu}\left(\xi^{\mu}e^{-2d}\right)
=\xi^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}d-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\partial_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}\,.
\end{equation}
\noindent\textbf{Comment 2.} It is worth while to generalize the decomposition~(\ref{DECOMP}) to an arbitrary DFT tensor,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\twist{T}_{A_{1}A_{2}\cdots A_{n}}:=(\mcB^{-1})_{A_{1}}{}^{B_{1}}(\mcB^{-1})_{A_{2}}{}^{B_{2}}\cdots(\mcB^{-1})_{A_{n}}{}^{B_{n}}T_{B_{1}B_{2}\cdots B_{n}}\,,\quad&~~
T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}=\mcB_{A_{1}}{}^{B_{1}}\cdots\mcB_{A_{n}}{}^{B_{n}}\twist{T}_{B_{1}\cdots B_{n}}\,.
\end{array}
\label{gDCMP}
\end{equation}
Under diffeomorphisms, while the DFT tensor $T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}$ is surely subject to the generalized Lie derivative~(\ref{gLie}), the circled quantity, $\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}$, is now governed by the undoubled ordinary Lie derivative which can be conveniently obtained as the truncation of the generalized Lie derivative by choosing the section, $\tilde{\partial}^{\mu}\equiv0$, and setting the parameter, $\xi^{A}=(0,\xi^{\mu})$ as $\tilde{\xi}_{\nu}\equiv0$:
\begin{equation}
\delta_{\xi}\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}=\cL_{\xi}\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}=
\xi^{\mu}\partial_{\mu}\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}+\omega_{{\scriptscriptstyle{T}}}\partial_{\mu}\xi^{\mu}\,\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}
+\sum_{j=1}^{n}(\partial_{A_{j}}\xi_{B}-\partial_{B}\xi_{A_{j}})\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{j-1}}{}^{B}{}_{A_{j+1}\cdots A_{n}}\,.
\label{oLie}
\end{equation}
Further, by construction, a DFT tensor is Milne-shift \textit{invariant}. Yet, the circled one is Milne-shift \textit{covariant} in the following manner,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} T_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} \twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}=\dis{\sum_{j=1}^{n}}-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\cB_{A_{j}}{}^{B}\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{j-1}BA_{j+1}\cdots A_{n}}\,.
\end{array}
\label{Mcov}
\end{equation}
Explicitly, for a DFT vector, $V_{A}=\cB_{A}{}^{B}\twist{V}_{B}$, we have (\textit{c.f.~}\cite{Jeon:2011kp,Hull:2014mxa})
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\delta_{\xi}\twist{V}_{A}=
\left(\begin{array}{c}\delta_{\xi}\twist{V}^{\mu}\\\delta_{\xi}\twist{V}_{\nu}\end{array}\right)=
\left(\begin{array}{c}\cL_{\xi}\twist{V}^{\mu}\\\cL_{\xi}\twist{V}_{\nu}\end{array}\right)
=\xi^{\rho}\partial_{\rho}\twist{V}_{A}+\omega_{\scriptscriptstyle{V}}\partial_{\rho}\xi^{\rho}\,\twist{V}_{A}
+(\partial_{A}\xi_{B}-\partial_{B}\xi_{A})\twist{V}^{B}
=\cL_{\xi}\twist{V}_{A}\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{V}_{A}=
\left(\begin{array}{c}\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{V}^{\mu}\\\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{V}_{\nu}\end{array}\right)=
\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\nu\rho}\twist{V}^{\rho}\end{array}\right)
=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\cB_{A}{}^{B}\twist{V}_{B}\,.
\end{array}
\label{xMV}
\end{equation}
That is to say, the circled quantities, $\twist{T}_{A_{1}\cdots A_{n}}$, $\twist{V}_{A}$, are `$B$-field free', subject to the ordinary Lie derivative, and Milne-shift covariant rather than invariant. More specifically, the undoubled lower Greek indices are Milne-shift covariant, while the upper ones are invariant: from (\ref{mcH}), (\ref{MS}), (\ref{xMV}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{V}_{\nu}=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\nu\rho}\twist{V}^{\rho}\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{V}^{\mu}=0\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} K_{\mu\nu}=\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{\cH}_{\mu\nu}
=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\mu\rho}\twist{\cH}^{\rho}{}_{\nu}-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\nu\rho}\twist{\cH}_{\mu}{}^{\rho}
=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\mu\rho}(Y_{i}^{\rho}X^{i}_{\nu}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu})-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\nu\rho}(Y_{i}^{\rho}X^{i}_{\mu}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\mu})\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} (Y_{i}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\nu}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu})=
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{\cH}^{\mu}{}_{\nu}
=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\nu\rho}\twist{\cH}^{\mu\rho}=\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{\cH}_{\nu}{}^{\mu}=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\nu\rho}\twist{\cH}^{\rho\mu}
=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\nu\rho}H^{\mu\rho}\,,\\
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} H^{\mu\nu}=\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} \twist{\cH}^{\mu\nu}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{Mcov2}
\end{equation}
For consistency, we also note for the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ invariant metric,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\cJ_{AB}=\twist{\cJ}_{AB}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\twist{\cJ}_{AB}=-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} \cB_{A}{}^{C}\twist{\cJ}_{CB}-\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} \cB_{B}{}^{C}\twist{\cJ}_{AC}=0\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\newpage
\section{Variational Principle around non-Riemannian backgrounds \label{SECVP}}
Here we revisit with care the variational principle for a general DFT action coupled to matter~(\ref{ACTION}) especially around non-Riemannian backgrounds. While the variations of the matter fields lead to their own Euler--Lagrange equations of motion, the variations of the DFT-metric and the DFT-dilaton give~\cite{Angus:2018mep}
\begin{equation}
\delta\dis{\int}\textstyle{\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\,e^{-2d}\So+\cL_{{{\rm{matter}}}}
=\textstyle{\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\!\dis{\int}e^{-2d}\Big[\delta\cH_{AB}\big\{
(PG{\bar{P}})^{AB}-8\pi G(PT{\bar{P}})^{AB}\big\}+\textstyle{\frac{2}{D}}\delta d(G_{A}{}^{A}-8\pi GT_{A}{}^{A})\Big]\,.
\label{AV}
\end{equation}
Here $G_{AB}$ and $T_{AB}$ are respectively the stringy or $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ completions of the Einstein curvature~\cite{Park:2015bza} and the Energy-Momentum tensor~\cite{Angus:2018mep}, as summarized in Table~\ref{TableDFT}. The above result is easy to obtain once we neglect a boundary contribution arising from a total derivative~\cite{Jeon:2011cn}:
\begin{equation}
\textstyle{\frac{1}{16\pi G}}e^{-2d\,}\cH^{AB}\delta S_{AB}=\partial_{A}\left(e^{-2d}\textstyle{\frac{1}{8\pi G}}\cH^{B[A}\delta\Gamma_{CB}{}^{C]}\right)\,,
\label{POWER}
\end{equation}
and take into account a well-known identity which the infinitesimal variation of the DFT-metric should satisfy~\cite{Hohm:2010pp,Jeon:2010rw,Berkeley:2014nza},
\begin{equation}
\delta\cH_{AB}=2P_{(A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B)}{}^{D}\delta\cH_{CD}\,.
\label{deltacH0}
\end{equation}
Eq.(\ref{POWER}) holds due to the nice variational property of the semi-covariant curvature, $\delta S_{AB}={\nabla}_{[A}\delta\Gamma_{C]B}{}^{C}+{\nabla}_{[B}\delta\Gamma_{C]A}{}^{C}$, and the compatibility of the derivative, ${{\nabla}_{A}\cJ_{BC}=0}$, ${{\nabla}_{A}\cH_{BC}=0}$, ${{\nabla}_{A}d=0}$, see Table~\ref{TableDFT}. Eq.(\ref{deltacH0}) holds because the DFT-metric is constrained to be a symmetric $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ element~(\ref{defining}), see also (\ref{twoCON}) below. This is the reason why in the variation of the action~(\ref{AV}) $\delta\cH_{AB}$ is contracted with a projected quantity, \textit{i.e.~}$(PG{\bar{P}})^{AB}-8\pi G(PT{\bar{P}})^{AB}$. Eq.(\ref{AV}) is then supposed to give the EDFEs, $G_{AB}=8\pi GT_{AB}$ (\ref{EDFE})~\cite{Angus:2018mep}, as the two variations, $\delta\cH_{AB}$ and $\delta d$, give the projected part and the trace part separately,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
(PG{\bar{P}})_{AB}=8\pi G(PT{\bar{P}})_{AB}\,,
\qquad&\qquad
G_{A}{}^{A}=8\pi GT_{A}{}^{A}\,,
\end{array}
\label{PGtr}
\end{equation}
which comprise the full EDFEs. While there is no issue on the equation of motion of the DFT-dilaton, \textit{i.e.~}the trace part in (\ref{PGtr}), there might be some ambiguity on the DFT-metric variation especially around a non-Riemannian background. For example, let us take one of the two maximally non-Riemannian, fully $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetric vacua, as ${\cH_{AB}=\cJ_{AB}}$. Because it does not allow any infinitesimal variation or moduli, ${\delta\cH_{AB}=0}$~\cite{Cho:2018alk}, the induced variation of the action is null and therefore it should not generate any nontrivial Euler--Lagrange equation of motion. Nevertheless, in this case the `barred' projector vanishes automatically, ${{\bar{P}}_{AB}=0}$, and the projected part of the EDFEs in (\ref{PGtr}) is satisfied rather trivially. It appears that we have a slightly puzzling situation for the non-Riemannian background, ${\cH_{AB}=\cJ_{AB}}$: it allows no infinitesimal variation~$\delta\cH_{AB}=0$ and hence one may expect that the variation of the action should be trivial and there should be no nontrivial Euler--Lagrange equation of motion of the DFT-metric. This is all true, but nevertheless the full EDFEs are still valid! (though in a trivial manner as ${\bar{P}}=0$).
Below, through sections~\ref{SECvDFTm} and \ref{SECpG}, we shall rigorously revisit the variational principle of DFT around a generic non-Riemannian background. Basically, we are questioning whether it is really safe from (\ref{deltacH0}) to put $\delta\cH_{AB}=2P_{(A}{}^{C}{\bar{P}}_{B)}{}^{D}\cM_{CD}$ and read off the Euler--Lagrange equation of motion of the DFT-metric as if $\cM_{CD}$ is a generic symmetric matrix. To answer this, we shall directly identify the truly independent degrees of freedom in the infinitesimal fluctuations of an arbitrary $(n,{\bar{n}})$ non-Riemannian DFT-metric, as (\ref{indep}). We shall confirm that the full Einstein Double Field Equations are still valid for non-Riemannian sectors, either trivially due to projection properties or nontrivially from the genuine variational principle.
\subsection{Variations of the DFT-metric around a generic $(n,{\bar{n}})$ background\label{SECvDFTm}}
Here we shall identify the most general form of the infinitesimal fluctuations around a generic $(n,{\bar{n}})$ DFT-metric~(\ref{cHFINAL}). The fluctuations must respect the defining properties of the DFT-metric~(\ref{defining}) and hence satisfy
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta\cH_{AB}=\delta\cH_{BA}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta\cH_{A}{}^{B}\cH_{B}{}^{C}+
\cH_{A}{}^{B}\delta\cH_{B}{}^{C}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{twoCON}
\end{equation}
It follows that $\delta\cH_{A}{}^{B}=-\cH_{A}{}^{C}\delta\cH_{C}{}^{D}\cH_{D}{}^{B}$, and hence equivalent (\ref{deltacH0}) holds. In particular, $\delta\cH_{A}{}^{B}$ is traceless,
\begin{equation}
\delta\cH_{A}{}^{A}=0\,.
\label{deltatrace}
\end{equation}
That is to say, the trace of the DFT-metric, $\cH_{A}{}^{A}=2(n-{\bar{n}})$, is invariant under continuous deformations.
Without loss of generality, like (\ref{DECOMP}), we put
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\delta\cH_{AB}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1&0\\B&1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cr}\alpha~&~
\gamma\\
\gamma^{T}~&~ \beta
\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1&-B\\0&1\end{array}\right),\quad&\quad\alpha=\alpha^{T}\,,\quad&\quad\beta=\beta^{T}\,.
\end{array}
\label{deltahcHabg}
\end{equation}
With this ansatz, the former condition in (\ref{twoCON}) is met and the latter gives
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\gamma Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}-\gamma {\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}+\alpha K+
Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}\gamma-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\gamma+H\beta=0\,,\\
\beta Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}-\beta {\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}+\gamma^{T}K+
K\gamma+X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}\beta-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\beta=0\,,\\
\gamma H+\alpha X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}-\alpha{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}+Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}\alpha- {\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\alpha+H\gamma^{T}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{threecon}
\end{equation}
We need to solve these three constraints. For this, we utilize the completeness relation~(\ref{vcomp}), and decompose each of $\{\alpha,\beta,\gamma\}$ into mutually orthogonal pieces,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\alpha^{\mu\nu}&=&H^{\mu}{}_{a}H^{\nu}{}_{b}\alpha^{ab}+
Y^{\mu}_{i}Y^{\nu}_{j}\alpha^{ij}+{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\jmath}}\alpha^{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}+
2H^{(\mu}{}_{a}Y^{\nu)}_{i}\alpha^{ai}
+2H^{(\mu}{}_{a}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu)}_{\bar{\imath}}\alpha^{a\bar{\imath}}+
2Y^{(\mu}{}_{i}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu)}_{\bar{\imath}}\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\beta_{\mu\nu}&=&K_{\mu}{}^{a}K_{\nu}{}^{b}\beta_{ab}+
X_{\mu}^{i}X_{\nu}^{j}\beta_{ij}+{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\jmath}}\beta_{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}+
2K_{(\mu}{}^{a}X_{\nu)}^{i}\beta_{ai}
+2K_{(\mu}{}^{a}{\bar{X}}_{\nu)}^{\bar{\imath}}\beta_{a\bar{\imath}}+
2X_{(\mu}{}^{i}{\bar{X}}_{\nu)}^{\bar{\imath}}\beta_{i\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\gamma^{\mu}{}_{\nu}&=&H^{\mu}{}_{a}K_{\nu}{}^{b}\gamma^{a}{}_{b}
+
H^{\mu}{}_{a}X_{\nu}^{i}\gamma^{a}{}_{i}
+H^{\mu}{}_{a}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}\gamma^{a}{}_{\bar{\imath}}
+Y^{\mu}_{i}K_{\nu}{}^{a}\gamma^{i}{}_{a}+
Y^{\mu}_{i}X_{\nu}^{j}\gamma^{i}{}_{j}
+Y^{\mu}_{i}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\jmath}}\gamma^{i}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}\\
{}&{}&
+{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}K_{\nu}{}^{a}\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{a}
+{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}X_{\nu}^{j}\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{j}
+{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\jmath}}\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}\,,
\end{array}
\label{abg}
\end{equation}
where, since $\alpha,\beta$ are symmetric,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llllll}
\alpha^{ab}=\alpha^{ba}\,,\quad&\quad
\alpha^{ij}=\alpha^{ji}\,,\quad&\quad
\alpha^{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}=\alpha^{\bar{\jmath}\bar{\imath}}\,,\quad&\quad
\beta_{ab}=\beta_{ba}\,,\quad&\quad
\beta_{ij}=\beta_{ji}\,,\quad&\quad
\beta_{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}=\beta_{\bar{\jmath}\bar{\imath}}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
We remind the readers that, using the $(D-n-{\bar{n}})$-dimensional flat metric, $\eta_{ab}$, we freely raise or lower the indices, $a,b$. Now, with the decomposition~(\ref{abg}), it is straightforward to see that (\ref{threecon}) implies
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rrrr}
\alpha_{a}{}^{i}+\gamma^{i}{}_{ a}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\alpha_{a}{}^{\bar{\imath}}-\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{a}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\beta_{a i}+\gamma_{a i}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\beta_{a\bar{\imath}}-\gamma_{a\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\\
\alpha_{ab}+\beta_{ab}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma_{ab}+\gamma_{ba}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\alpha^{ij}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\alpha^{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}=0\,,\\
\beta_{ij}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\beta_{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma^{i}{}_{j}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{abgresult}
\end{equation}
Thus, the independent degrees of freedom for the fluctuations consist of
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ccccc}
\alpha_{(ab)}=-\beta_{(ab)}\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma_{[ab]}\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma^{a}{}_{i}=-\beta^{a}{}_{i}\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma^{a}{}_{\bar{\imath}}=\beta^{a}{}_{\bar{\imath}}\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma^{i}{}_{a}=-\alpha_{a}{}^{i}\,,\\
\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{a}=\alpha_{a}{}^{\bar{\imath}}\,,\quad&\quad
\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}\,,\quad&\quad
\beta_{j\bar{\jmath}}\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma^{i}{}_{\bar{\imath}}\,,\quad&\quad
\gamma^{\bar{\jmath}}{}_{j}\,.
\end{array}
\label{indep}
\end{equation}
In total, as counted sequently as
\begin{equation}
{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}(D-n-{\bar{n}})(D-n-{\bar{n}}+1)+
{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}(D-n-{\bar{n}})(D-n-{\bar{n}}-1)+
2(D-n-{\bar{n}})(n+{\bar{n}})+4n{\bar{n}}=D^{2}-(n-{\bar{n}})^{2}\,,
\label{idcH}
\end{equation}
there are $D^{2}-(n-{\bar{n}})^{2}$ number of degrees of freedom which matches precisely the dimension of the underlying coset~\cite{Berman:2019izh},
\begin{equation}
\frac{\mathbf{O}(D,D)}{\mathbf{O}(t+n,s+n)\times\mathbf{O}(s+{\bar{n}},t+{\bar{n}})}\,.
\label{COSET}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, if we employ the DFT-vielbeins,\footnote{The only required property of the DFT-vielbeins is $\,V_{Ap}V_{B}{}^{p}+{\bar{V}}_{A{\bar{p}}}{\bar{V}}_{B}{}^{{\bar{p}}}=\cJ_{AB}$. See \cite{Cho:2018alk} for a related discussion.} $V_{Ap}, {\bar{V}}_{A{\bar{p}}}$, the projected part of the EDFEs~(\ref{PGtr}) is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\left[(PG{\bar{P}})_{AB}-8\pi G(PT{\bar{P}})_{AB}\right]V^{A}{}_{p}{\bar{V}}^{B}{}_{{\bar{p}}}=0\,.
\label{vPG}
\end{equation}
As the local Lorentz vector indices $p$ and ${\bar{p}}$ run from one to ${D+n-{\bar{n}}}$ and ${D-n+{\bar{n}}}$ respectively, there are in total $(D+n-{\bar{n}})\times(D-n+{\bar{n}})=D^{2}-(n-{\bar{n}})^{2}$ number of components in (\ref{vPG}) which coincides with the total number of independent fluctuations of the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ DFT-metric~(\ref{idcH}). As the number of the equations and the fluctuations are the same, we may well expect that the former should be implied by the variational principle generated by the latter. Below, we confirm this directly through explicit computation, without using the DFT-vielbeins.
\subsection{Einstein Double Field Equations still hold for non-Riemannian sectors \label{SECpG}}
Now, we proceed to organize the variation of the action induced by that of the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ DFT-metric~(\ref{AV}) in terms of the independent degrees of freedom for the fluctuations~(\ref{indep}).
We apply the prescription~(\ref{gDCMP}) and write a pair of circled `$B$-field-free' symmetric projectors,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\twist{P}_{AB}=\twist{P}_{BA}=(\cB^{-1})_{A}{}^{C}(\cB^{-1})_{B}{}^{D}P_{CD}
=
\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}H&
HK+2Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}\\
KH+2X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}&\quad K
\end{array}\right),\\
\twist{\brP}_{AB}=\twist{\brP}_{BA}=(\cB^{-1})_{A}{}^{C}(\cB^{-1})_{B}{}^{D}{\bar{P}}_{CD}
=
\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}-H&
HK+2{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\\
KH+2{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}&\quad -K
\end{array}\right),
\end{array}
\label{circled}
\end{equation}
which satisfy $\twist{P}_{A}{}^{B}+\twist{\brP}_{A}{}^{B}=\delta_{A}{}^{B}$\,, $\,\twist{P}_{A}{}^{B}\twist{\brP}_{B}{}^{C}=0$\,, and useful identities,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
K_{\mu a}\twist{P}^{\mu}{}_{A}=H^{\mu}{}_{a}\twist{P}_{\mu A}\,,\qquad&\qquad
{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\imath}}\twist{P}^{\mu}{}_{A}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad {\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}\twist{P}_{\mu A}=0\,,\\
K_{\mu a}\twist{\brP}^{\mu}{}_{A}=-H^{\mu}{}_{a}\twist{\brP}_{\mu A}\,,\qquad&\qquad
X_{\mu}^{i}\twist{\brP}^{\mu}{}_{A}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad Y^{\mu}_{i}\twist{\brP}_{\mu A}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{uptouse}
\end{equation}
We also introduce a shorthand notation for the Einstein Double Field Equations,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
E_{AB}:=G_{AB}-8\pi GT_{AB}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\hE_{AB}:=(\cB^{-1})_{A}{}^{C}(\cB^{-1})_{B}{}^{D}E_{CD}\,.
\end{array}
\label{hE}
\end{equation}
Hereafter, hatted quantities contain generically the $\Hf$-flux,
\begin{equation}
\Hf_{\lambda\mu\nu}=\partial_{\lambda}B_{\mu\nu}+\partial_{\mu}B_{\nu\lambda}
+\partial_{\nu}B_{\lambda\mu}\,,
\end{equation}
but, like the circled ones, there is no apparent bare $B$-field in them.
It is now straightforward to compute the variation in (\ref{AV}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\delta\cH_{AB}(PE{\bar{P}})^{AB}\\
=\,2\gamma^{a}{}_{i}X_{\mu}^{i} (\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}H^{\nu}{}_{a}
+2\gamma^{a}{}_{\bar{\imath}}H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}
-2\gamma^{i}{}_{a}Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}H^{\nu a}
+2\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{a}H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}\\
\quad\,+\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}
+\gamma^{i}{}_{\bar{\imath}}Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}
+\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{i}X_{\mu}^{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}
+\beta_{i\bar{\imath}}X_{\mu}^{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}\\
\quad\,+2\left(\alpha^{(ab)}-\gamma^{[ab]}\right)H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}H^{\nu}{}_{b}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Each term is independent and thus, from the variational principle, should vanish individually on-shell,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rrr}
X_{\mu}^{i} (\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}H^{\nu}{}_{a}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}H^{\nu}{}_{a}=0\,,\\
H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\\
X_{\mu}^{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\quad&\quad
X_{\mu}^{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\quad&\quad
H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}H^{\nu}{}_{b}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{nine}
\end{equation}
In total, as counted sequently as,
\begin{equation}
2(D-n-{\bar{n}})(n+{\bar{n}})+4n{\bar{n}}+(D-n-{\bar{n}})^{2}=D^{2}-(n-{\bar{n}})^{2}\,,
\label{countEDFEs}
\end{equation}
there is ${D^{2}-(n-{\bar{n}})^{2}}$ number of independent on-shell relations, or EDFEs, in consistent with (\ref{idcH}).
Up to the completeness relations~(\ref{COMP}), (\ref{vcomp}), and the identities~(\ref{uptouse}),
the first and the seventh in (\ref{nine}),
the first and the eighth,
the third and the fifth,
the third and the sixth,
the second and the last,
the fourth and the last imply respectively,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{cc}
X_{\mu}^{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}=0\,,\qquad\quad
X_{\mu}^{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}=0\,,\qquad&\quad
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}=0\,,\qquad\quad
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=0\,,\\
H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=K_{\mu a}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad
H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}=K_{\mu a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}=0\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Finally, the first and the last, the second and the fifth, the third and the last, the fourth and the fifth give
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}=0\,,\qquad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}=0\,,\qquad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}=0\,,\qquad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{EDFE2}
\end{equation}
In this way, all the components of $(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{AB}$ vanish and the full EDFEs persist to be valid universally for arbitrary $(n,{\bar{n}})$ backgrounds. \\
\noindent\textbf{Comment.} From (\ref{uptouse}), off-shell relations hold among the components of the EDFEs,
\begin{equation}{{
\begin{array}{cc}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=K_{\mu\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\rho\nu}+X^{i}_{\mu}Y_{i}^{\rho}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho}{}^{\nu}\,,\qquad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}=-(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\rho}K_{\rho\nu}+
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\rho}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{\!\!\!\!\!(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}=
-K_{\mu\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\rho\sigma}K_{\sigma\nu}+
K_{\mu\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\rho}{}_{\sigma}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\sigma}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}
-X^{i}_{\mu}Y_{i}^{\rho}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho}{}^{\sigma}K_{\sigma\nu}+
X^{i}_{\mu}Y_{i}^{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\sigma}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}\,,
}
\end{array}}}
\label{offshell}
\end{equation}
such that the full EDFEs are satisfied if
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lllll}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}=0\,,\qquad&\quad
Y_{i}^{\mu}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=0\,,\qquad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu}=0\,,\qquad&\quad
Y_{i}^{\mu}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\qquad&\quad\hE_{A}{}^{A}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{EDFEconciseS}
\end{equation}
\section{What if we keep $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed once and for all\,?\label{SECfix}}
As it is a outstandingly hard problem to construct an action principle for non-Riemannian gravity~(\textit{c.f.~}\cite{Bergshoeff:2016lwr,Hartong:2016yrf,Hansen:2018ofj} for recent proposals), we may ask if the DFT action restricted to a fixed $(n,{\bar{n}})$ sector might serve as the desired target spacetime gravitational action, \textit{c.f.~}(\ref{Sofixed}). In this section, seeking for the answer to this question, we reanalyze the variational principle of DFT, crucially keeping $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed. To our surprise, we obtain a subtle discrepancy with the previous section where the most general variations of the DFT-metric were analyzed. We shall see that, when the values of $(n,{\bar{n}})$ are kept fixed and $n{\bar{n}}\neq0$, not all the components of the EDFEs~(\ref{EDFEconciseS}) are implied by the variational principle.
\subsection{Variational principle with fixed $(n,{\bar{n}})$}
We start with (\ref{AV}) which gives the variation of the general DFT action induced by the DFT-metric. With fixed $(n,{\bar{n}})$, the variation of the DFT-metric therein should comprise the variations of the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ component fields:
\begin{equation}
\!\!\delta\cH=\cB{\small{\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\delta H&-H\delta B+
\delta\!\left[Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]\\
\delta B H+
\delta\!\left[X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]
&~~
\delta K+
\delta B\left[Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]
-\left[(X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]\delta B
\end{array}\right)\!\cB^{T}\,.}}
\label{deltacH}
\end{equation}
Further, from their defining relations, (\ref{HXX}), (\ref{COMP}), the variations of the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ component fields are not entirely independent. They must meet
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\delta Y^{\mu}_{i}=-H^{\mu\rho}\delta K_{\rho\sigma}Y^{\sigma}_{i}-Y^{\mu}_{j}\delta X^{j}_{\rho}Y^{\rho}_{i}-{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\jmath}}\delta{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\jmath}}_{\rho}Y^{\rho}_{i}\,,\\
\delta {\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}=-H^{\mu\rho}\delta K_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}-Y^{\mu}_{j}\delta X^{j}_{\rho}{\bar{Y}}^{\rho}_{\bar{\imath}}-{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\jmath}}\delta{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\jmath}}_{\rho}{\bar{Y}}^{\rho}_{\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\delta X_{\mu}^{i}=-K_{\mu\rho}\delta H^{\rho\sigma}X_{\sigma}^{i}-X_{\mu}^{j}\delta Y_{j}^{\rho}X_{\rho}^{i}-{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\jmath}}\delta {\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\rho}X_{\rho}^{i}\,,\\
\delta{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\imath}}=-K_{\mu\rho}\delta H^{\rho\sigma}{\bar{X}}_{\sigma}^{\bar{\imath}}-X_{\mu}^{j}\delta Y_{j}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}_{\rho}^{\bar{\imath}}-{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\jmath}}\delta {\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}_{\rho}^{\bar{\imath}}\,,
\end{array}
\label{GIV1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\delta H^{\mu\nu}=-H^{\mu\rho}\delta K_{\rho\sigma}H^{\sigma\nu}-2Y_{i}^{(\mu}H^{\nu)\rho}
\delta X^{i}_{\rho}-2{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{(\mu}H^{\nu)\rho}
\delta{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\,,\\
\delta K_{\mu\nu}=-K_{\mu\rho}\delta H^{\rho\sigma}K_{\sigma\nu}-2\delta Y_{i}^{\rho}K_{\rho(\mu}X^{i}_{\nu)}-2\delta {\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}K_{\rho(\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu)}\,.
\end{array}
\label{GIV2}
\end{equation}
From (\ref{KHroots}), we also note
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta K_{\mu\nu}=2K_{(\mu}{}^{a}\delta K_{\nu) a}\,,
\qquad&\qquad
\delta H^{\mu\nu}=2H^{(\mu}{}_{a}\delta H^{\nu) a}\,,
\end{array}
\label{deltaKH}
\end{equation}
which imply in particular,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta K_{\mu\nu}Y^{\mu}_{i}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta H^{\mu\nu}X_{\mu}^{i}{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{deltaKH2}
\end{equation}
It is then evident from (\ref{GIV1}), (\ref{GIV2}), and (\ref{deltaKH}) that we have freedom to choose either $\left\{\delta K_{\mu}{}^{a},\delta X^{i}_{\rho},\delta{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\sigma}\right\}$ or $\left\{\delta H^{\mu}{}_{a},\delta Y_{i}^{\rho},\delta{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\sigma}\right\}$ as independent variations. Each of them has (formally) $D^{2}$ number of degrees of freedom.
Now, we substitute (\ref{deltacH}) into (\ref{AV}), and utilize (\ref{GIV1}), (\ref{GIV2}), (\ref{deltaKH}), (\ref{deltaKH2}) to obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\delta\dis{\int}\textstyle{\frac{1}{16\pi G}}\,e^{-2d}\So+\cL_{{{\rm{matter}}}}\\
=\dis{\int}
\textstyle{\frac{1}{4\pi G}}\,e^{-2d}\left[
2\delta K_{\nu a}K_{\mu}{}^{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{(\mu\nu)}
+Y_{i}^{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho}{}^{\mu}\delta X^{i}_{\mu}
-\delta{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\mu}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\rho}{\bar{Y}}^{\rho}_{\bar{\imath}}
-\delta B_{\mu\nu}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}
\right]\\
=\dis{\int}
\textstyle{\frac{1}{4\pi G}}\,e^{-2d}\left[
2\delta H^{\nu a} H^{\mu}{}_{a}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{(\mu\nu)}
+X^{i}_{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\rho}{}_{\mu}\delta Y_{i}^{\mu}
-\delta{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\mu}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}_{\rho}^{\bar{\imath}}
-\delta B_{\mu\nu}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}
\right].
\end{array}
\label{apEL}
\end{equation}
The variational principle implies either from the second line of (\ref{apEL}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
K_{\mu\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\rho\nu}+(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\nu\rho}K_{\rho\mu}= 0\,,\quad&\quad\!
Y_{i}^{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho}{}^{\mu}= 0\,,\quad&\quad\!
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\rho}{\bar{Y}}^{\rho}_{\bar{\imath}}= 0\,,\quad&\quad\!
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{[\mu\nu]}= 0\,,
\end{array}
\label{KPSsym}
\end{equation}
or alternatively from the third line of (\ref{apEL}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
H^{\mu\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho\nu}+(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\nu\rho}H^{\rho\mu}= 0\,,\quad&\quad\!
X^{i}_{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\rho}{}_{\mu}= 0\,,\quad&\quad\!
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}_{\rho}^{\bar{\imath}}= 0\,,\quad&\quad\!
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{[\mu\nu]}= 0\,.
\end{array}
\label{HPSsym}
\end{equation}
Although (\ref{KPSsym}) and (\ref{HPSsym}) appear seemingly different, they are ---as should be--- equivalent. In fact, they are both equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=0\,,\quad&\quad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}=X_{\mu}^{i}Y_{i}^{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}\,,
\end{array}
\label{nbrnEDFE}
\end{equation}
which are, from (\ref{offshell}), further equivalent to more concise ones,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}=0\,,\quad&\qquad
(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\quad&\qquad
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=0\,.
\end{array}
\label{nbrnEDFEconcise}
\end{equation}
Appendix~\ref{SECProof} carries our proof.
The surprise which is manifest in (\ref{nbrnEDFE}) is that, when $n{\bar{n}}\neq0$ the variational principle with fixed $(n,{\bar{n}})$ does not imply the full EDFEs~(\ref{EDFEconciseS}): it does not constrain $\,Y_{i}^{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}$. However, as we have shown in the previous section, within the DFT frame they should vanish on-shell, $\,Y_{i}^{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}=0$, and the full EDFEs should hold. We shall continue to discuss and conclude in the final section~\ref{SECconclusion}.
\subsection{Difference between keeping $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed or not}
In order to understand the discrepancy in the resulting Euler--Lagrangian equations, (\ref{EDFE2}) \textit{vs.} (\ref{nbrnEDFE}), here we investigate how the infinitesimal variations of the component fields of the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ DFT-metric~(\ref{deltacH}),
\begin{equation}
\big\{\delta H^{\mu\nu}\,,\,\delta K_{\rho\sigma}\,,\,\delta X^{i}_{\mu}\,,\,\delta Y^{\nu}_{j}\,,\,\delta {\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\,,\,\delta{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\jmath}}\,,\,\delta B_{\mu\nu}\big\}\,,
\label{nnfield}
\end{equation}
contribute actually to the $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ variables defined in the generic variation of the DFT-metric~(\ref{deltahcHabg}),
\begin{equation}
\!\!\!{\small{\left(\!\begin{array}{cr}\alpha~&~
\gamma\\
\gamma^{T}~&~ \beta
\end{array}\!\right)
=\left(\!\!\begin{array}{cc}
\delta H&-H\delta B+
\delta\!\left[Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]\\
\delta B H+
\delta\!\left[X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]
&
\delta K+
\delta B\left[Y_{i}(X^{i})^{T}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]
-\left[(X^{i}(Y_{i})^{T}-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}})^{T}\right]\delta B
\end{array}\!\!\right).}}
\end{equation}
With (\ref{abg}), one can identify the contributions thoroughly:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\alpha_{ab}=-H^{\mu}{}_{a}H^{\nu}{}_{b}\delta K_{\mu\nu}=-2\delta K_{\rho(a}H^{\rho}{}_{b)}\,,\qquad
&\qquad
\beta_{ab}=-\alpha_{ab}=-2K_{\rho(a}\delta H^{\rho}{}_{b)}=-K_{\mu a}K_{\nu b}\delta H^{\mu\nu}\,,\\
\alpha^{a i}=-H^{\rho a}\delta X^{i}_{\rho}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\beta_{a i}=-K_{\rho a}\delta Y^{\rho}_{i}+H^{\rho}{}_{a}\delta B_{\rho\sigma}Y^{\sigma}_{i}\,,\\
\alpha^{a\bar{\imath}}=-H^{\rho a}\delta{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\beta_{a\bar{\imath}}=-K_{\rho a}\delta{\bar{Y}}^{\rho}_{\bar{\imath}}-
H^{\rho}{}_{a}\delta B_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}\,, \\
\alpha^{ij}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad \beta_{ij}=0\,,\\
\alpha^{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}=0\,,
\qquad&\qquad \beta_{\bar{\imath}\bar{\jmath}}=0\,,\\
\!\!\!\begin{boxed}{\,
{\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}=0\,,}\,}
\end{boxed}
\qquad&\qquad\beta_{i\bar{\imath}}=-2Y_{i}^{\rho}\delta B_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}\,,
\end{array}
\label{alphavanish}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\gamma^{a}{}_{i}=K_{\rho}{}^{a}\delta Y_{i}^{\rho}-H^{\rho a}\delta B_{\rho\sigma}Y^{\sigma}_{i}=-\beta^{a}{}_{i}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\gamma^{a}{}_{\bar{\imath}}=-K_{\rho}{}^{a}\delta{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}-H^{\rho a}\delta B_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}=\beta^{a}{}_{\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\gamma^{i}{}_{a}=-X^{i}_{\rho}\delta H^{\rho\sigma} K_{\sigma a}=-\alpha_{a}{}^{i}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{a}={\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\delta H^{\rho\sigma} K_{\sigma a}=\alpha_{a}{}^{\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
\gamma^{i}{}_{j}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}=0\,,\\
\gamma^{i}{}_{\bar{\imath}}=-X^{i}_{\rho}\delta{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\gamma^{\bar{\imath}}{}_{i}={\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\delta Y_{i}^{\rho}\,,\\
\gamma_{ab}=-\gamma_{ba}=-H^{\rho}{}_{a}H^{\sigma}{}_{b}\delta B_{\rho\sigma}\,.\qquad&\qquad {}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
This is consistent with the general result of (\ref{abgresult}). However, one surprise is that $\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}$ must be trivial when the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ component fields~(\ref{nnfield}) are varied while keeping $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed.
To identify the significance of the $\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}$ parameter, we focus on the induced transformation of $H^{\mu\nu}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
H^{\mu\nu}~&~\longrightarrow~&~H^{\prime\mu\nu}\simeq
H^{\mu\nu}+2Y^{(\mu}_{i}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu)}_{\bar{\imath}}\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Geometrically the deformation of $2Y^{(\mu}_{i}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu)}_{\bar{\imath}}\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}$ is `orthogonal' to $H^{\mu\nu}$, and thus we expect it should reduce the kernel of $H^{\mu\nu}$. To verify this explicitly, we solve for the eigenvectors of $H^{\prime\mu\nu}$ with zero eigenvalue,
\begin{equation}
H^{\prime\mu\nu}\cX_{\nu}=0\,.
\label{kernelcX}
\end{equation}
Without loss of generality, utilizing the completeness relation, $K_{\mu a}H^{\nu a}+X_{\mu}^{i}Y^{\nu}_{i}+{\bar{X}}_{\mu}^{\bar{\imath}}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}=\delta_{\mu}{}^{\nu}$, we decompose the zero-eigenvector,
\begin{equation}
\cX_{\nu}=K_{\nu a}c^{a}+X^{i}_{\nu}c_{i}+{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}\bar{c}_{\bar{\imath}}\,,
\end{equation}
substitute this ansatz into (\ref{kernelcX}), and acquire the conditions the coefficients should satisfy,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
c^{a}=0\,,\quad&\quad
\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}c_{i}=0\,, \quad&\quad\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}\bar{c}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
This shows that there are in total $(n-\mbox{rank\,}[\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}])+({\bar{n}}-\mbox{rank\,}[\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}])=n+{\bar{n}}-2\times \mbox{rank\,}[\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}]$ number of zero-eigenvectors. Moreover, from the invariance, ${\delta\cH_{A}{}^{A}=0}$~(\ref{deltatrace}), we note that the deformation by the $\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}$ parameter actually changes the type of the `non-Riemannianity' as
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
(n,{\bar{n}})~&~\longrightarrow~&~\left(n-\mbox{rank\,}[\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}]\,,\,{\bar{n}}-\mbox{rank\,}[\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}]\right).
\end{array}
\label{changenbrn}
\end{equation}
This essentially explains why $\alpha^{i\bar{\imath}}$ vanishes in (\ref{alphavanish}) where the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ component field variables are varied with fixed values of $(n,{\bar{n}})$, or fixed `non-Riemannianity'. It is intriguing to note that the deformation makes the DFT-metric always \textit{less} non-Riemannian.\footnote{In a way, on the space of full DFT geometries, the $(0,0)$ Riemannian geometry corresponds to an open set as $\det(H^{\mu\nu})\neq 0$, while the genuine non-Riemannian geometries form a closed set, $\det(H^{\mu\nu})= 0$. Infinitesimally, it is impossible to leave an open set but possible to leave a closed set. }\\
\subsection{Non-Riemannian differential geometry as bookkeeping device\label{SECtool}}
\begin{center}\textit{This subsection is the last one before Conclusion, and is somewhat out of context. At first reading, \\ readers may glimpse (\ref{Sofixed}) in comparison with (\ref{SoRiemann}), and skip to the final section~\ref{SECconclusion}. }\end{center}
While the various $(n,{\bar{n}})$ non-Riemannian geometries are universally well described by DFT through $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ covariant tensors ---as summarized in Table~\ref{TableDFT}--- it may be desirable in practical computations to break the manifest $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetry spontaneously by fixing the section, $\tilde{\partial}^{\mu}\equiv0$, and dismantle the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ covariant tensors or curvatures into smaller \textit{modules} which should be still covariant under undoubled ordinary diffeomorphisms, $B$-field gauge symmetry, and $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ local rotations. We remind the readers that in the case of the $(0,0)$ Riemannian sector, the $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ singlet DFT scalar curvature reduces to four modules (\textit{c.f.~}\cite{Andriot:2013xca,Blair:2014zba,Lee:2016qwn}):
\begin{equation}
\left.\So\right|_{(0,0)~{\rm{Riemannian}}}=
R_{g}
-\textstyle{\frac{1}{12}}\Hf^{\lambda\mu\nu}\Hf_{\lambda\mu\nu}
+4\Box\phi-4\partial^{\mu}\phi\partial_{\mu}\phi\,.
\label{SoRiemann}
\end{equation}
Here in this last subsection, we propose an undoubled non-Riemannian differential tool kit, such as covariant derivative and curvature, for an arbitrary $(n,{\bar{n}})$ sector. It descends from the DFT geometry, or the so-called ``semi-covariant formalism"~\cite{Jeon:2011cn}, and generalizes the standard Riemannian geometry underlying (\ref{SoRiemann}) in a consistent manner. It breaks the manifest $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ symmetry spontaneously, but preserves the ordinary diffeomorphisms, $B$-field gauge symmetry, and the $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ local symmetries as desired. In particular, it enables us to extend the Riemannian expression of (\ref{SoRiemann}) in a way `continuously' to the generic $(n,{\bar{n}})$ non-Riemannian case,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rcl}
\So\Big|_{(n,{\bar{n}})~\rm{fixed}}\!&\!\!=&\!
R-\textstyle{\frac{1}{12}}H^{\lambda\rho}H^{\mu\sigma}H^{\nu\tau}\Hf_{\lambda\mu\nu}\Hf_{\rho\sigma\tau}
-\Hf_{\lambda\mu\nu}H^{\lambda\rho}\!\left(Y^{\mu}_{i}\mathds{D}^{\nu}X^{i}_{\rho}
-{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}\mathds{D}^{\nu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\right)\\
{}&{}&+4K_{\mu\nu}\!
\left(\mathds{D}^{\mu}\mathds{D}^{\nu}d-\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\,\mathds{D}^{\nu}d\right).
\end{array}
\label{Sofixed}
\end{equation}
We commence our explanation. First of all, $\mathds{D}^{\mu}$ is our proposed `upper-indexed' covariant derivative:
\begin{equation}
\mathds{D}^{\mu}=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}+\Omega^{\mu}+\Upsilon^{\mu}+{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu}\,,
\label{MD}
\end{equation}
which preserves both the undoubled diffeomorphisms~(\ref{oLie}) and the $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ local symmetries~(\ref{deltaw}) as is equipped with proper connections: for undoubled ordinary diffeomorphisms,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}&=&-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\partial_{\lambda}H^{\mu\nu}
- H^{\rho[\mu}\partial_{\rho}H^{\nu]\sigma}K_{\sigma\lambda}
-H^{\rho[\mu}\partial_{\rho}Y_{i}^{\nu]}X^{i}_{\lambda}-H^{\rho[\mu}\partial_{\rho}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu]}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\lambda}\\
{}&{}&
+\left(2
H^{\rho[\mu}Y_{i}^{\nu]}\partial_{[\tau}X^{i}_{\rho]}
-2H^{\rho[\mu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu]}\partial_{[\tau}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho]}
\right)\!\left(Y_{j}^{\tau}X_{\lambda}^{j}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\tau}{\bar{X}}_{\lambda}^{\bar{\jmath}}\right),
\end{array}
\label{Omega}
\end{equation}
and for $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ rotations,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\Upsilon^{\mu\, i}{}_{j}
=-2H^{\mu\rho}Y^{\sigma}_{j}\partial_{[\rho}X^{i}_{\sigma]}
\,,\qquad&\qquad
{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu\,\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}
=-2H^{\mu\rho}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\jmath}}\partial_{[\rho}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\sigma]}\,.
\end{array}
\label{Upsilon}
\end{equation}
We also denote a diffeomorphism-only preserving covariant derivative by
\begin{equation}
\fD^{\mu}=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}+\Omega^{\mu}\,,
\label{deffD}
\end{equation}
and write for (\ref{MD}) and (\ref{Upsilon}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\mathds{D}^{\mu}
=\fD^{\mu}+\Upsilon^{\mu}+{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu}\,,\qquad&\quad
\Upsilon^{\mu\, i}{}_{j}=X^{i}_{\rho}\fD^{\mu}Y_{j}^{\rho}
=-Y_{j}^{\rho}\fD^{\mu}X^{i}_{\rho}\,,\qquad&\quad
{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu\,\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}
={\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\fD^{\mu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\rho}=-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\rho}
\fD^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\,.
\end{array}
\label{MDUU}
\end{equation}
Taking care of both spacetime and $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ indices,
$\mathds{D}^{\mu}$ acts on general tensor densities in a standard manner:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\mathds{D}^{\lambda}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}&=&H^{\lambda\rho}\partial_{\rho}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}-\omega_{{\scriptscriptstyle{T}}}\Omega^{\lambda\rho}{}{}_{\rho}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}
+\Omega^{\lambda\mu}{}_{\rho}T^{\rho i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}
-\Omega^{\lambda\rho}{}_{\nu}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\rho j\bar{\jmath}}\\
{}&{}&
+\Upsilon^{\lambda i}{}_{k}T^{\mu k\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}
+{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\lambda\bar{\imath}}{}_{{\bar{k}}}T^{\mu i{\bar{k}}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}
-\Upsilon^{\lambda k}{}_{j}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu k\bar{\jmath}}
-{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\lambda{\bar{k}}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j{\bar{k}}}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, $\fD^{\mu}$ cares only the spacetime indices and ignores any $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ indices,
\begin{equation}
\fD^{\lambda}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}=H^{\lambda\rho}\partial_{\rho}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}-\omega_{{\scriptscriptstyle{T}}}\Omega^{\lambda\rho}{}{}_{\rho}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}
+\Omega^{\lambda\mu}{}_{\rho}T^{\rho i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\nu j\bar{\jmath}}
-\Omega^{\lambda\rho}{}_{\nu}T^{\mu i\bar{\imath}}{}_{\rho j\bar{\jmath}}\,.
\end{equation}
For example, we have explicitly
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\mathds{D}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\nu}=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}X^{i}_{\nu}-X^{i}_{\rho}\Omega^{\mu\rho}{}_{\nu}+\Upsilon^{\mu i}{}_{j}X^{j}_{\nu}=H^{\mu\rho}(KH)_{\nu}{}^{\sigma}\partial_{[\rho}X^{i}_{\sigma]}\,,\\
\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}
=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}-{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\Omega^{\mu\rho}{}_{\nu}+{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\jmath}}_{\nu}=H^{\mu\rho}(KH)_{\nu}{}^{\sigma}\partial_{[\rho}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\sigma]}\,.
\end{array}
\label{MDX}
\end{equation}
It is instructive to see that the far right resulting expressions in (\ref{MDX}) are clearly covariant under both diffeomorphisms and $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ local rotations, as the $\rho$, $\sigma$ indices therein are skew-symmetrized and also contracted with $H^{\mu\rho}$, $(KH)_{\nu}{}^{\sigma}$. However, without the $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ connections, we note
\begin{equation}
\fD^{\mu}X^{i}_{\nu}
=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}X^{i}_{\nu}-\Omega^{\mu\rho}{}_{\nu}X^{i}_{\rho}
=H^{\mu\rho}\!\left[(KH)_{\nu}{}^{\sigma}+2X_{\nu}^{j}Y_{j}^{\sigma}\right]\partial_{[\rho}X^{i}_{\sigma]}\,,
\end{equation}
and this breaks the $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ local symmetry.
Further, for the DFT-dilaton we should have
\begin{equation}
\mathds{D}^{\mu}d=\fD^{\mu}d=-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} e^{2d\,}\fD^{\mu}\!\left(e^{-2d}\right)=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}d+{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\Omega^{\mu\rho}{}_{\rho}\,,
\end{equation}
where we have explicitly
\begin{equation}
\Omega^{\mu\rho}{}_{\rho}=H^{\mu\nu}\!\left({{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} H^{\rho\sigma}\partial_{\nu}K_{\rho\sigma}+ Y_{i}^{\rho}\partial_{\rho}X^{i}_{\nu}+{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}\partial_{\rho}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}\right)
=-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} K_{\rho\sigma} \partial^{\mu}H^{\rho\sigma}
+K_{\rho\sigma}\partial^{\sigma}H^{\mu\rho}-\partial_{\rho}H^{\mu\rho}\,.
\end{equation}
Because $H^{\mu\nu}$ and $K_{\rho\sigma}$ are generically degenerate, the conventional relation~(\ref{Riemannian}) between the DFT-dilaton, $d$, and the string dilaton, $\phi$, cannot hold. We stick to use the DFT-dilaton all the way.\footnote{We tend to believe that the conventional string dilaton, $\phi$, is an artifact of the $(0,0)$ Riemannian geometry and the DFT-dilaton, $d$, is more fundamental as being an $\mathbf{O}(D,D)$ singlet.}
The connections do the job as they transform properly under the diffeomorphisms~(\ref{oLie}), (\ref{xMV}) and the $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ local rotations~(\ref{deltaw}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta_{\xi}\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}=\cL_{\xi}\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}+H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}\partial_{\lambda}\xi^{\nu}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}}\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}=0\,,\\
\delta_{\xi}\Upsilon^{\mu i}{}_{j}=\cL_{\xi}\Upsilon^{\mu i}{}_{j}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}}\Upsilon^{\mu i}{}_{j}=\Upsilon^{\mu k}w_{k}{}^{i}-w_{j}{}^{k}\Upsilon^{\mu i}{}_{k}-H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}w_{j}{}^{i}\,,\\
\delta_{\xi}{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu \bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}=\cL_{\xi}{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu \bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})}}{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu \bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}={{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu {\bar{k}}}{\bar{w}}_{{\bar{k}}}{}^{\bar{\imath}}-{\bar{w}}_{\bar{\jmath}}{}^{{\bar{k}}}{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu \bar{\imath}}{}_{{\bar{k}}}-H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}{\bar{w}}_{\bar{\jmath}}{}^{\bar{\imath}}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
In particular, $X^{i}_{\mu}\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}$,
${\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\mu}\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}$, and $H^{\rho[\lambda}\Omega^{\mu]\nu}{}_{\rho}$ are covariant tensors which might be viewed as ``torsions".
Finally, we define an upper-indexed Ricci curvature,
\begin{equation}
R^{\mu\nu}:=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}\Omega^{\sigma\nu}{}_{\sigma}
-H^{\sigma\rho}\partial_{\rho}\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\sigma}
+\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\rho}\Omega^{\sigma\rho}{}_{\sigma}-
\Omega^{\sigma\mu}{}_{\rho}\Omega^{\rho\nu}{}_{\sigma}
+2\left(Y_{i}^{\sigma}\mathds{D}^{\mu} X^{i}_{\rho}
+{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\sigma}\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\right)\Omega^{\rho\nu}{}_{\sigma}\,,
\label{Ricci}
\end{equation}
which is diffeomorphism and $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ covariant, as it comes from the following commutator relation that is clearly also covariant,
\begin{equation}
\left[\mathds{D}^{\mu},\mathds{D}^{\nu}\right]
T_{\nu}+4\left(Y_{i}^{\sigma}\mathds{D}^{\mu} X^{i}_{\rho}
+{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\sigma}\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\right)H^{\rho\nu}
\partial_{[\sigma}T_{\nu]}
+2\left(
Y_{i}^{\nu}\mathds{D}^{\mu} X^{i}_{\rho}
+{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu}\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\right)\mathds{D}^{\rho}T_{\nu}
=-R^{\mu\nu}T_{\nu}\,.
\end{equation}
A scalar curvature follows naturally,
\begin{equation}
R:=K_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu}\,,
\label{scalarR1}
\end{equation}
which debuted in (\ref{Sofixed}).\\
Our covariant derivative is ``compatible" with the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ component fields in a generalized fashion:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\mathds{D}^{\lambda}H^{\mu\nu}+2Y_{i}^{(\mu}H^{\nu)\rho}\mathds{D}^{\lambda}X^{i}_{\rho}+
2{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{(\mu}H^{\nu)\rho}\mathds{D}^{\lambda}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}=0\,,\qquad&\qquad
Y_{i}^{\rho}\mathds{D}^{\mu}X^{j}_{\rho}=0\,,
\qquad{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\rho}\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\jmath}}_{\rho}=0\,, \\
\mathds{D}^{\lambda}K_{\mu\nu}+2X^{i}_{(\mu}K_{\nu)\rho}\mathds{D}^{\lambda}Y^{\rho}_{i}
+2{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{(\mu}K_{\nu)\rho}\mathds{D}^{\lambda}{\bar{Y}}^{\rho}_{\bar{\imath}}=0\,,\qquad&\quad\mathds{D}^{\lambda}\delta_{\mu}{}^{\nu}=0\,,\qquad
\mathds{D}^{\lambda}\delta_{i}{}^{j}=0\,,\qquad \mathds{D}^{\lambda}\delta_{\bar{\imath}}{}^{\bar{\jmath}}=0
\,.
\end{array}
\label{COMP1}
\end{equation}
Another characteristic is that, if we add one more torsion linear in the $\Hf$-flux to the $\Omega$-connection,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\widehat{\Omega}^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}:=\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}
+{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} H^{\mu\rho}H^{\nu\sigma}\Hf_{\rho\sigma\tau}
\!\left(Y_{j}^{\tau}X_{\lambda}^{j}-{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\tau}{\bar{X}}_{\lambda}^{\bar{\jmath}}\right),\qquad&\quad \widehat{\frak{D}}^{\mu}:=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}+\widehat{\Omega}^{\mu}\,,
\end{array}
\label{hOmega}
\end{equation}
the hatted new connection becomes Milne-shift covariant as well, in the sense of (\ref{MS}), (\ref{xMV}), (\ref{Mcov2}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\widehat{\Omega}^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}=-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}} B_{\lambda\rho}\hH^{\mu\nu\rho}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\hH^{\lambda\mu\nu}=0\,,
\end{array}
\label{MhOhH}
\end{equation}
where $\hH^{\lambda\mu\nu}$ is a diffeomorphism covariant, $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ invariant, and Milne-shift invariant $\Hf$-flux,
\begin{equation}
\hH^{\lambda\mu\nu}=\hH^{[\lambda\mu\nu]}:=
H^{\lambda\rho}H^{\mu\sigma}H^{\nu\tau}H_{\rho\sigma\tau}
+6H^{\rho[\lambda}Y^{\mu}_{i}\mathds{D}^{\nu]}X^{i}_{\rho}
-6H^{\rho[\lambda}{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}\mathds{D}^{\nu]}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\,.
\label{hHdef}
\end{equation}
The $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ connections~(\ref{MDUU}) are inert to the addition of the $\Hf$-flux-valued-torsion~(\ref{hOmega}) as
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\Upsilon^{\mu\, i}{}_{j}=X^{i}_{\rho}\fD^{\mu}Y_{j}^{\rho}
=X^{i}_{\rho}\widehat{\frak{D}}^{\mu}Y_{j}^{\rho}=\widehat{\Upsilon}{}^{\mu\,i}{}_{j}\,,\qquad&\quad
{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu\,\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}
={\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\fD^{\mu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\rho}={\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}
\widehat{\frak{D}}^{\mu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\jmath}}^{\rho}=\widehat{{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}}{}^{\mu\,\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}\,,
\end{array}
\label{inert}
\end{equation}
while they transform under the Mine-shift as $\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\Upsilon^{\mu i}{}_{j}=
-2H^{\rho\sigma}V_{\rho j}\mathds{D}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\sigma\,}$,
$\,\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}=-2H^{\rho\sigma}{\bar{V}}_{\rho\bar{\jmath}}\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\sigma\,}$.
\begin{comment}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}\Upsilon^{\mu i}{}_{j}=
-2H^{\rho\sigma}V_{\rho j}\mathds{D}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\sigma}\,,\qquad&\qquad
\delta_{\scriptscriptstyle{\rm{M}}}{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}^{\mu\bar{\imath}}{}_{\bar{\jmath}}=-2H^{\rho\sigma}{\bar{V}}_{\rho\bar{\jmath}}\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\sigma}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\end{comment}
After all, in terms of a hatted covariant derivative,
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\mu}:=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}
+\widehat{\Omega}^{\mu}+\widehat{\Upsilon}{}^{\mu}+\widehat{{{\bar{\Upsilon}}}}{}^{\mu}\,,
\label{hMDdef}
\end{equation}
we can dismantle the DFT curvatures into {\darkblue{a $\Hf$-flux-free (circled) term}} and evidently $\Hf$-flux-valued ones:
\begin{equation}
\!\!\begin{array}{rcl}
\So\!\!&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!
{\darkblue{\twist{S}_{\scriptscriptstyle{{(0)}}}}}
-\textstyle{\frac{1}{12}}H^{\lambda\rho}H^{\mu\sigma}H^{\nu\tau}\Hf_{\lambda\mu\nu}\Hf_{\rho\sigma\tau}
-\Hf_{\lambda\mu\nu}H^{\lambda\rho}
\left(Y^{\mu}_{i}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\nu}X^{i}_{\rho}-{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\nu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\rho}\right),\\
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hS\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}\!\!&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!
{\darkblue{ Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\twist{S}\twist{\brP})_{\mu}{}^{\nu}}}
+Y^{\mu}_{i}\!\left[\Hf_{\mu\rho\sigma}\!\left({\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{[\rho}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\nu]}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\lambda}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}
Y^{\rho}_{j}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\nu}X^{j}_{\lambda}\right)\!H^{\lambda\sigma}+{{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}} H^{\nu\sigma}e^{2d}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\rho}\left(e^{-2d}\Hf_{\rho\sigma\mu}\right)
\right],\\
(\twist{P}\hS\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu}\!\!&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!
{\darkblue{(\twist{P}\twist{S}\twist{\brP})^{\mu}{}_{\nu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu} }}
+\left[\Hf_{\rho\sigma\nu}\!\left(Y_{i}^{[\rho}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\mu]}X^{i}_{\lambda}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}
{\bar{Y}}^{\rho}_{\bar{\jmath}}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\jmath}}_{\lambda}\right)\!H^{\lambda\sigma}
+{{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}} H^{\mu\sigma}e^{2d}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\rho}\left(e^{-2d}\Hf_{\rho\sigma\nu}\right)
\right]\!{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}\,,\\
Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hS\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu}\!\!&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!\!
{\darkblue{Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\twist{S}\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu} }}
+ {{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} Y^{\mu}_{i}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\nu}\Big[e^{2d}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\rho}\left(e^{-2d}\Hf_{\rho\mu\nu}\right)+
{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}} H^{\alpha\beta}H^{\gamma\delta}\Hf_{\mu\alpha\gamma}\Hf_{\nu\beta\delta}\Big]\,,\\
(\twist{P}\hS\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}\!\!&\!\!\!=&\!\!\!
{\darkblue{(\twist{P}\twist{S}\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}}}
-\textstyle{\frac{1}{8}}e^{2d}\partial_{\lambda}(e^{-2d}\hH^{\lambda\mu\nu})
+\textstyle{\frac{1}{16}}H^{\mu\rho}H^{\nu\sigma}H^{\alpha\beta}H^{\gamma\delta}
\Hf_{\rho\alpha\gamma}\Hf_{\sigma\beta\delta}\\
{}&{}&~+\textstyle{\frac{3}{8}}\Big[
H^{\mu\rho}\!\left(H^{\lambda[\nu}Y_{i}^{\sigma}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\tau]}X^{i}_{\lambda}
-H^{\lambda[\nu}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\sigma}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\tau]}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\lambda}\right)
~+~(\mu~\leftrightarrow~\nu)~
\Big]\Hf_{\rho\sigma\tau}\,,
\label{SEPARATE}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where, as it should be obvious from our notation, we set $\hS_{AB}:=(\cB^{-1})_{A}{}^{C}(\cB^{-1})_{B}{}^{D}S_{CD}$, and the circled quantities are all $\Hf$-flux free: from Table~\ref{TableDFT} or \cite{Jeon:2011cn,Angus:2018mep},
\begin{equation}
\twist{S}_{AB}=2\partial_{A}\partial_{B}d-e^{2d\,}\partial_{C}\left(e^{-2d\,}\twist{\Gamma}_{(AB)}{}^{C}\right)+
{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\twist{\Gamma}_{ACD}\twist{\Gamma}_{B}{}^{CD}-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\twist{\Gamma}_{CDA}\twist{\Gamma}^{CD}{}_{B}\,,
\label{mSAB}
\end{equation}
and, with (\ref{circled}),
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lrl}
\twist{\Gamma}_{CAB}&:=&2(\twist{P}\partial_{C}\twist{P}\twist{\brP})_{[AB]}
+2({{\twist{\brP}}_{[A}{}^{D}{\twist{\brP}}_{B]}{}^{E}}-{\twist{P}_{[A}{}^{D}\twist{P}_{B]}{}^{E}})\partial_{D}\twist{P}_{EC}\\
{}&{}&-4\left(\textstyle{\frac{1}{\twist{\brP}_{G}{}^{G}-1}}\twist{\brP}_{C[A}\twist{\brP}_{B]}{}^{D}+\textstyle{\frac{1}{\twist{P}_{G}{}^{G}-1}}\twist{P}_{C[A}\twist{P}_{B]}{}^{D}\right)\left(\partial_{D}d
+(\twist{P}\partial^{E}\twist{P}\twist{\brP})_{[ED]}\right).
\end{array}
\label{mGamma}
\end{equation}
While we organize the $\Hf$-flux-valued parts in terms of the hatted covariant derivative, like (\ref{inert}), we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\nu}=\mathds{D}^{\mu}X^{i}_{\nu}\,, \qquad&\quad\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}=\mathds{D}^{\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu}\,,\qquad&\quad \widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\mu}d=\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\,,\qquad&\quad\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\mu}\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\nu}d=\mathds{D}^{\mu}\mathds{D}^{\nu}d\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
The only nontrivial distinction lies in
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\mathds{D}}^{\rho}\left(e^{-2d}\Hf_{\rho\mu\nu}\right)=
\mathds{D}^{\rho}\left(e^{-2d}\Hf_{\rho\mu\nu}\right)+
H^{\rho\alpha}H^{\sigma\beta}H_{\rho\sigma\tau}\!\left(
H_{\alpha\beta[\mu}X^{i}_{\nu]}Y_{i}^{\tau}-
H_{\alpha\beta[\mu}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\nu]}{\bar{Y}}_{\bar{\imath}}^{\tau}\right).
\end{equation}
Since $e^{-2d}\hH^{\lambda\mu\nu}$ carries a unit weight, its contraction with the ordinary derivative, $\partial_{\lambda}(e^{-2d}\hH^{\lambda\mu\nu})$, is also by itself diffeomorphism covariant. In this way, every single term in (\ref{SEPARATE}) is symmetric under both undoubled diffeomorphisms and $\mathbf{GL}(n)\times\mathbf{GL}({\bar{n}})$ local rotations. On the other hand, as we have singled out the $\Hf$-flux-valued terms from the $\Hf$-flux-free parts, each individual term is not necessarily Milne-shift covariant.
As advertised in (\ref{Sofixed}), we may further dismantle $\twist{S}_{\scriptscriptstyle{{(0)}}}$ as well as $(\twist{P}\twist{S}\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}$ into more elementary modules:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rcl}
\twist{S}_{\scriptscriptstyle{{(0)}}}\!\!&\!\!=&\!\!\!
R+4K_{\mu\nu}\left(\mathds{D}^{\mu}\mathds{D}^{\nu}d-\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\,\mathds{D}^{\nu}d\right),\\
(\twist{P}\twist{S}\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}\!\!&\!\!=&\!\!\!
-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}} R^{(\mu\nu)}
-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{4}}}\big(Y^{\mu}_{i}\mathds{D}^{\rho}X^{i}_{\sigma}-
{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}\mathds{D}^{\rho}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\imath}}_{\sigma}\big)
\big(Y^{\nu}_{j}\mathds{D}^{\sigma}X^{j}_{\rho}-
{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\jmath}}\mathds{D}^{\sigma}{\bar{X}}^{\bar{\jmath}}_{\rho}\big)-{{\textstyle\frac{1}{2}}}\mathds{D}^{(\mu}\mathds{D}^{\nu)}d\,.
\end{array}
\label{furtherdismantle}
\end{equation}
From (\ref{EDFEconciseS}), vanishing of all the five quantities in (\ref{SEPARATE}) characterizes the $(n,{\bar{n}})$ \textit{vacuum} geometry of DFT.\\
\noindent\textbf{Comment 1.} It is worth while to note
\begin{equation}
e^{-2d}K_{\mu\nu}\left(\mathds{D}^{\mu}\mathds{D}^{\nu}d-2\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\,\mathds{D}^{\nu}d\right)=\partial_{\mu}\left(e^{-2d}\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\right)\,,
\end{equation}
and rewrite the `kinetic term' of the DFT-dilaton in (\ref{Sofixed}),
\begin{equation}
4e^{-2d}K_{\mu\nu}\left(\mathds{D}^{\mu}\mathds{D}^{\nu}d-\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\,\mathds{D}^{\nu}d\right)=
4e^{-2d}K_{\mu\nu}\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\,\mathds{D}^{\nu}d+4\partial_{\mu}\left(e^{-2d}\mathds{D}^{\mu}d\right).
\label{Sofixed2}
\end{equation}
\noindent\textbf{Comment 2.} Especially when $n+{\bar{n}}=D$, \textit{i.e.~}in the maximally non-Riemannian cases, all the quantities like $H^{\mu\nu},K_{\rho\sigma},\Omega^{\lambda\mu}{}_{\nu},
\hH^{\lambda\mu\nu},\mathds{D}^{\mu}d, R^{\mu\nu},\So, (\twist{P}\hS\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}$ are trivial except the term of interest,
$Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hS\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}$.
\noindent\textbf{Comment 3.} Restricted to the $(0,0)$ Riemannian case, we have
$K_{\mu\nu}=g_{\mu\nu\,}$, $\,H^{\mu\nu}=g^{\mu\nu}$, $\,K_{\mu\rho}H^{\rho\mu}=\delta_{\mu}{}^{\nu}$,
\begin{comment}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
K_{\mu\nu}=g_{\mu\nu}\,,\qquad&\qquad H^{\mu\nu}=g^{\mu\nu}\,,\qquad&\qquad K_{\mu\rho}H^{\rho\mu}=\delta_{\mu}{}^{\nu}\,,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\end{comment}
and the vectors, $\{X_{\mu}^{i},{\bar{X}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}},Y^{\rho}_{j},{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\jmath}}\}$, are trivially absent. Both the $\Omega$ and $\widehat{\Omega}$ connections~(\ref{Omega},\ref{hOmega}) coincide with nothing but the standard Christoffel symbols with one index raised by the Riemannian metric,
\begin{equation}
\widehat{\Omega}^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}\equiv\Omega^{\mu\nu}{}_{\lambda}\equiv g^{\mu\rho}{\left\{{}^{\,\,\,\nu\,}_{\rho~\lambda}\right\}}\,.
\end{equation}
Consequently, the proposed covariant derivative~(\ref{deffD}) and Ricci curvature~(\ref{Ricci}) reduce to the standard covariant derivative and Ricci curvature in Riemannian geometry,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\fD^{\mu}\equiv g^{\mu\nu}{\bigtriangledown}_{\nu}=g^{\mu\nu}\big(\partial_{\nu}+
\left\{{}^{\,\,~\cdot\,}_{\nu~~\cdot}\right\}\big)\,,\qquad&\qquad
R^{\mu\nu}\equiv g^{\mu\rho}g^{\nu\sigma}R^{{\bigtriangledown}}_{\rho\sigma}\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
\noindent\textbf{Comment 4.} Besides $(\twist{P}\twist{S}\twist{\brP})^{\mu\nu}$, we have not been able to dismantle other circled $\Hf$-flux-free DFT Ricci curvatures which carry at least one lower index. In addition to $\fD^{\mu}=H^{\mu\rho}\partial_{\rho}+\Omega^{\mu}$, separate type of covariant derivatives containing $Y^{\mu}_{i}\partial_{\mu}$ or ${\bar{Y}}^{\mu}_{\bar{\imath}}\partial_{\mu}$ might help, \textit{c.f.~}(\ref{YDT}).
\noindent\textbf{Comment 5.} Appendix~\ref{SECDerivation} sketches how we have arrived at the above proposal of the non-Riemannian differential tool kit starting from the semi-covariant formalism of DFT. In any case, our proposal is meant to provide a bookkeeping device to expound the EDFEs into smaller modules and to single out the $\Hf$-fluxes. The actual computation of the variations of the action, even with $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed, are still powered by the semi-covariant formalism, specifically (\ref{POWER}).\\
\newpage
\section{Conclusion\label{SECconclusion}}
The very gravitational theory string theory predicts may be the Double Field Theory with non-Riemannian surprises, rather than General Relativity based on Riemannian geometry. The underlying mathematical structure of DFT unifies supergravity with various non-Riemannian gravities including (stringy) Newton--Cartan geometry, ultra-relativistic Carroll geometry, and non-relativistic Gomis--Ooguri string theory. The non-Riemannian geometries of DFT can be classified by two non-negative integers, $(n,{\bar{n}})$~\cite{Morand:2017fnv}.
We have analyzed with care the variational principle. We have shown that the most general infinitesimal variations of an arbitrary $(n,{\bar{n}})$ DFT-metric have $D^{2}-(n-{\bar{n}})^{2}$ number of degrees of freedom, which matches with the dimension of the underlying coset~\cite{Berman:2019izh}, $ \frac{\mathbf{O}(D,D)}{\mathbf{O}(t+n,s+n)\times\mathbf{O}(s+{\bar{n}},t+{\bar{n}})}$ (\ref{COSET}). Through action principle, these variations imply the full Einstein Double Field Equations~(\ref{countEDFEs}), (\ref{EDFE2}). However, $n{\bar{n}}$ number of them change the value of $(n,{\bar{n}})$, \textit{i.e.~}the type of non-Riemannianity~(\ref{changenbrn}). Consequently, if we keep $(n,{\bar{n}})$ fixed once and for all, the variational principle gets restricted and fails to reproduce the full EDFEs: the specific part, $Y^{\mu}_{i}(PE{\bar{P}})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}$, does not have to vanish on-shell~(\ref{nbrnEDFE}).\footnote{As can be seen from (\ref{mSAB}), $\,Y_{i}^{\rho}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\rho\sigma}{\bar{Y}}^{\sigma}_{\bar{\imath}}$ contains a second order derivative of the DFT-dilaton along the $Y_{i}^{\mu}$ and ${\bar{Y}}_{\nu}^{\bar{\imath}}$ directions, \textit{i.e.}~$\,Y^{\mu}_{i}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}\partial_{\mu}\partial_{\nu}d\,$. }
The EDFEs are supposed to arise as the string worldsheet beta-functions~\cite{Berman:2007xn,Copland:2011wx}. For the doubled-yet-gauged string action~(\ref{stringaction}) upon an arbitrarily chosen $(n,{\bar{n}})$ background, the $(n,{\bar{n}})$-changing variations of the DFT-metric would correspond to marginal deformations. We must stress that these deformations could not be realized by merely varying the background component fields with fixed $(n,{\bar{n}})$~(\ref{alphavanish}), \textit{c.f.~}\cite{Gomis:2019zyu,Gallegos:2019icg,Bergshoeff:2019pij}. Nevertheless, it is natural to expect that $n{\bar{n}}$ number of $Y^{\mu}_{i}(\twist{P}\hE\twist{\brP})_{\mu\nu}{\bar{Y}}^{\nu}_{\bar{\imath}}$ arise as the corresponding beta-functions too. That is to say, at least for $n{\bar{n}}\neq0$, the quantum consistency with the worldsheet string theory seems to forbid us to fix $(n,{\bar{n}})$ rigidly. We conclude that the various non-Riemannian gravities should be identified as different solution sectors of Double Field Theory rather than viewed as independent theories. Quantum consistency of the non-Riemannian geometries calls for thorough investigation, which may enlarge the scope of the string theory landscape far beyond Riemann.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank David Berman, Chris Blair, and Kevin Morand for helpful discussions. Parts of computations are assisted by a computer algebra system, \textit{Cadabra}~\cite{Peeters:2007wn}. This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea through the Grant, NRF-2016R1D1A1B01015196.
|
\section{Introduction}
The ability to generalize the meaning of domain-specific terms is essential for many NLP applications. However, building taxonomies by hand for a new domain is time-consuming. This drives the requirement to develop automatic systems that are able to identify \textit{hypernymy} relationships (i.e.\ \emph{is-a} relations) from text.
Hypernymy relation is reflexive and transitive but not symmetric \cite{george1990introduction,hearst1992automatic}. For example, if \emph{Wittgenstein} $\prec$ \emph{philosopher} and \emph{philosopher} $\prec$ \emph{person}, where $\prec$ means \emph{is-a}, it follows that \emph{Wittgenstein} $\prec$ \emph{person} (\emph{transitivity}). In addition, it also follows that both \emph{philosopher} $\nprec$ \emph{Wittgenstein} and \emph{person} $\nprec$ \emph{philosopher} (\emph{asymmetry}). Absence of self-loops within taxonomies (e.g.\ WordNet \cite{george1990introduction}) emphasizes that reflexivity (e.g.\ \emph{person} $\prec$ \emph{person}) does not add any new information.
In \emph{order theory}, a \texttt{partial order} is a binary relation that is transitive, reflexive and anti-symmetric. A \texttt{strict partial order} is a binary relation that is transitive, irreflexive and asymmetric. \emph{Strict partial orders} correspond more directly to \emph{directed acyclic graphs} (\texttt{DAGs}). In fact, hypernymy relation hierarchy in WordNet is a \emph{DAG} \cite{suchanek2008yago}. Therefore, we hypothesize that the \emph{Hypernymy} relations within a taxonomy can be better represented via \emph{strict partial order} relations.
In this paper we introduce \texttt{Strict Partial Order Networks (SPON)}, a neural network architecture comprising of \emph{non-negative} activations and \emph{residual} connections designed to enforce strict partial order as a soft constraint. We present an implementation of SPON designed to learn \emph{is-a} relations. The input of SPON is a list of \emph{is-a} pairs, provided either by applying Hearst-like patterns over a text corpus or via a list of manually validated pairs.
In order to identify hypernyms for out-of-vocabulary (OOV) terms, i.e. terms that are not seen by SPON during the training phase, we present an \textit{augmented} variant of SPON that can generalize type information learned for the in-vocabulary terms to previously unseen ones. The \textit{augmented} model does so by using normalized distributional similarity values as weights within a probabilistic model, the details of which are described in Section \ref{oovterms}.
The main contributions of this paper are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item We introduce the idea of Strict Partial Order Network (SPON), highlighting differences and similarities with previous approaches aimed at the same task.
\item A theoretical analysis shows SPON enforces asymmetry and transitivity requirement as soft constraints .
\item An \textit{augmented variant} of SPON to predict hypernyms for OOV is proposed.
\item Compared to previous approaches, we demonstrate that our system achieves and/or improves the state of the art (SOTA) consistently across a large variety of hypernymy tasks and datasets (multi-lingual and domain-specific), including supervised and unsupervised settings.
\end{itemize}
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section \ref{relatedwork} describes related work. SPON is introduced in Section \ref{SPON}, and theoretical analysis is provided in Section \ref{theoreticalanalysis}. In Section \ref{oovterms} we show how SPON can be \textit{augmented} for OOV terms in the test dataset. Section \ref{unsupervised} and \ref{supervised} describe the evaluation setup and results. Section \ref{conclusion} concludes the paper and highlights perspectives for future work.
\section{Related Work}\label{relatedwork}
Since the pioneering work of \citet{hearst1992automatic}, lexico-syntactic pattern-based approaches (e.g., ``NP$_y$ is a NP$_x$'') remains influential in subsequent academic and commercial applications. Some work tried to learn such patterns automatically~\cite{snow2005learning,shwartz2016improving} instead of using a predefined list of patterns.
Among other notable work, \citet{kruszewski2015deriving} proposed to map concepts into a boolean lattice. \citet{lin2002concept} approached the problem by clustering entities. \citet{dalvi2012websets} proposed to combine clustering with Hearst-like patterns. There also exist approaches \cite{weeds2004characterising,roller2016relations,shwartz2017hypernyms} inspired by the Distributional Inclusion Hypothesis (DIH) \cite{geffet2005distributional}.
\citet{fu2014learning} argued that hypernym-hyponym pairs preserve linguistic regularities such as $v(shrimp)-v(prawn)$
$\approx$ $v(fish)-v(goldfish)$, where $v(w)$ is the embedding of the word $w$. In other words, they claimed that a hyponym word can be projected to its hypernym word learning a transition matrix $\Phi$. \citet{tan2015usaar} proposed a deep neural network based approach to learn \emph{is-a} vectors that can replace $\Phi$.
Recently, \citet{roller2018hearst} showed that exploitation of matrix factorization (MF) on a Hearst-like pattern-based system's output vastly improved their results (for different hypernymy tasks; in multiple datasets) with comparison to that of both distributional and non-MF pattern-based approaches.
Another thread of related work involves the use of graph embedding techniques for representing a hierarchical structure. Order-embeddings \cite{Vendrov:2016} encode text and images with embeddings, preserving a \emph{partial order} (i.e. $x \preceq y$, where x is a specific concept and y is a more general concept) over individual embedding dimensions using the \textit{Reversed Product Order} on $\mathbb{R}^N_+$. In contrast, our proposed neural network based model encodes a \emph{strict partial order} through a composition of \textit{non-linearities} and \textit{residual} connections. This allows our model to be as \textit{expressive} as possible, all the while maintaining strict partial order.
\citet{LiXiang:2017} extended the work of \citet{Vendrov:2016} by augmenting distributional co-occurrences with order embeddings. In addition, hyperbolic embeddings model tree structures using non-euclidean geometries, and can be viewed as a continuous generalization of the same \cite{nickel2017poincare}. Other recent works have induced hierarchies using box-lattice structures \cite{vilnis2018probabilistic} and Gaussian Word Embeddings \cite{athiwaratkun2018hierarchical}.
Regarding the recent SOTA, for unsupervised setting where manually annotated (i.e. gold standard) training data is not provided, \citet{le2019Hyperbolic} proposed a new method combining hyperbolic embeddings and Hearst-like patterns, and obtained significantly better results on several benchmark datasets.
For supervised setting, during the SemEval-2018 hypernymy shared task \cite{camacho-collados-etal-2018-semeval}, the \texttt{CRIM} system \cite{bernier2018crim} obtained best results on English datasets (General English, Medical and Music). This system combines supervised projection learning with a Hearst-like pattern-based system's output. In the same shared task, for Italian, the best system, \texttt{300-sparsans}, was a logistic regression model based on sparse coding and a formal concept hierarchy obtained from word embeddings \cite{berend2018300}; whereas for Spanish, the best system, \texttt{NLP\_HZ} was based on the nearest neighbors algorithm \cite{qiu2018nlp_hz}.
In Sections \ref{unsupervised} and \ref{supervised} we compare our approach with all of the above mentioned recent SOTA in both unsupervised and supervised settings, respectively.
\section{Strict Partial Order Networks}
\label{SPON}
The goal of SPON is to estimate the probability for a distinct pair of elements $x,y \in \mathcal{E}$ to be related by a strict partial order $x \prec y$. A specific instance of this problem is the hypernym detection problem, where $\mathcal{E}$ is a vocabulary of terms and $\prec$ is the \emph{is-a} relation. In this section, we present a SPON implementation, while a theoretical analysis of how the proposed architecture satisfies transitive and asymmetric properties is described in the next section.
An implementation of a SPON is illustrated in Figure \ref{architecture}.
Each term $x \in \mathcal{E}$ is represented via a vector $\vec{x} \in \mathbb{R}^d$. In the first step, we perform an element-wise multiplication with a weight vector $w_1$ and then add to a bias vector $b_1$. The next step consists of a standard \textit{ReLU} layer, that applies the transformation $ReLU(v) = max(0, v)$. Let us denote these transformations by a smooth function $g$,
\begin{equation} \label{reludesc}
g(\vec{x}) = ReLU(w_1 \otimes \vec{x} + b_1)
\end{equation}
where $\otimes$ denote element-wise multiplication.
The final step, as depicted in Figure~\ref{architecture}, consists of a residual connection, i.e.
\begin{equation} \label{resconn}
f(\vec{x}) = \vec{x}+g(\vec{x})
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[
roundnode/.style={circle, draw=black!60, very thick, minimum size=7mm},
squarednode/.style={rectangle, draw=black!60, very thick, minimum size=5mm},
point/.style={circle, draw=black!5, ultra thin, minimum size=0.1mm},
on grid
]
\node[squarednode] (inpvector) {Input vector $\vec{x}$};
\node[roundnode] (elemmul) [above=12mm of inpvector] {\bf{$\otimes$}};
\node[roundnode] (elemadd) [above=12mm of elemmul] {\bf{+}};
\node[squarednode] (bias) [left=20mm of elemadd] {Bias Vector $b_1$};
\node[squarednode] (relu) [above=12mm of elemadd] {ReLU Layer};
\node[squarednode] (wmatrix) [left=20mm of elemmul] {Weight Vector $w_1$};
\node[roundnode] (elemadd2) [above=12mm of relu] {\bf{+}};
\node[squarednode] (loss) [above=12mm of elemadd2] {Loss Layer};
\node[point] (p1) [right=20mm of inpvector] {};
\node[point] (p2) [right=20mm of elemadd2] {};
\draw[->] (inpvector.north) -- (elemmul.south);
\draw[->] (elemmul.north) -- (elemadd.south);
\draw[->] (elemadd.north) -- (relu.south);
\draw[->] (bias.east) -- (elemadd.west);
\draw[->] (wmatrix.east) -- (elemmul.west);
\draw[->] (relu.north) -- (elemadd2.south);
\draw[->] (elemadd2.north) -- (loss.south);
\draw[-] (inpvector.east) -- (p1.west) -- (p2.west);
\draw[->] (p2.west) -- (elemadd2.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Simple SPON architecture.}
\label{architecture}
\end{figure}
We encode the \textit{loss layer} to capture the \textit{distance-to-satisfaction} $\psi$ for a given candidate hyponym-hypernym pair ($x,y$), defined as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{per_instance_loss}
\psi (x,y) = \sum_{i=1}^d max(0, \epsilon + f(\vec{x})_i - \vec{y}_i)
\end{equation}
where the sum is taken over all the components of the participating dimensions, and $\epsilon$ is a scalar hyper-parameter.
The network is trained by feeding positive and negative examples derived from a training set $\mathcal{T}$ containing \emph{is-a} relations and their corresponding scores. Each positive training instance consists of a pair $(x, \mathcal{H}_x)$, where $\mathcal{H}_x$ is the set of candidate hypernyms of $x$ in the training data. Negative instances for a given term $x$, denoted by $\mathcal{H}^{\prime}_x$, are generated by selecting terms uniformly at random from $\mathcal{E}$.
More formally, for a given candidate hyponym term $x$, let
\begin{equation} \label{cand-hyp-terms}
\mathcal{H}_x = \{e \in \mathcal{E} \;| \;(x, e, s) \in \mathcal{T}\}
\end{equation}
denote all the candidate hypernym terms of $x$, and let
\begin{equation} \label{neg-hyp-samples}
\mathcal{H}^{\prime}_x = \{e \in \mathcal{E} | (x, e, .) \notin \mathcal{T}\}
\end{equation}
denote negative hypernym samples for $x$.
Negative hypernym terms are sampled at random from $\mathcal{E}$, and as many negative samples are generated that satisfy $|\mathcal{H}_x| + |\mathcal{H}^{\prime}_x| = k$, a constant (hyper-parameter for the model).
The probability of ($x, y$) being a true hyponym-hypernym pair is then calculated using an approach analogous to \textit{Boltzmann distribution} as follows,
\begin{equation}\label{probability}
p(x,y) = \frac{e^{-\psi (x,y)}}{\sum_{z \in \mathcal{H}_x \cup \mathcal{H}^{\prime}_x} e^{-\psi (x, z)}}
\end{equation}
Equation \ref{probability} is used for training, while during scoring, the probability that a pair $(x,y)$ exhibits \textit{hypernymy} relationship is given by,
\begin{equation}
p(x,y) = \frac{e^{-\psi (x,y)}}{\sum_{z \in \mathcal{H}} e^{-\psi (x,z)}}
\end{equation}\label{scoring}
whereas, the most likely hypernym term $y^*$ for a given hyponym term $x$ is given by,
\begin{equation}
y^* = \argmax_{y \in \mathcal{H}} \frac{e^{-\psi (x,y)}}{\sum_{z \in \mathcal{H}} e^{-\psi (x,z)}}
\end{equation}
Here, $\mathcal{H}$ denotes the list of all hypernym terms observed in the training set $\mathcal{T}$.
Finally, we define the loss function $\mathcal{J}$ using a weighted negative log-likelihood criterion (w-NLL) defined as follows,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J} = - \sum_{(x,y,s) \in \mathcal{T}} s \log p(x,y)
\end{equation}
where $s$ represents the relative importance of the loss associated with pair $(x,y) \in \mathcal{T}$.
\section{Theoretical Analysis}
\label{theoreticalanalysis}
\textit{Hypernymy} relations within a taxonomy satisfy two properties: \textit{asymmetry} and \textit{transitivity}. The \textit{asymmetry} property states that given two distinct terms $x, y \in \mathcal{E}$, if $x \prec y$ then $y \nprec x$.
The \textit{transitive} property states that given three distinct terms $x,y,z \in \mathcal{E}$, if $x$ $\prec$ $y$ and $y$ $\prec$ $z$ then $x$ $\prec$ $z$.
In this section we analytically demonstrate that the neural network architecture depicted in Fig. \ref{architecture}, whose forward pass expressions are given by equations \ref{reludesc} and \ref{resconn}, satisfy \textit{asymmetry} and \textit{transitive} properties.
As described by equation \ref{per_instance_loss}, our proposed model assigns a zero loss for a given hyponym-hypernym pair $(x,y)$ if the learned model satisfies $f(\vec{x}) < \vec{y}$ element-wise. This formulation of the \emph{loss layer} puts forth the following constraint that defines our model,
\begin{equation} \label{modelineq}
x \prec y \iff f(\vec{x})_i < \vec{y}_i, \; \forall i
\end{equation}
In other words, the relation $\prec$ is satisfied if and only if $f(\vec{x}) < \vec{y}$, component-wise.
In the rest of this section, we show that under the assumption of [\ref{modelineq}], our proposed model for \emph{hypernymy} relation satisfies \emph{asymmetry} and \emph{transitivity}.
\begin{theorem}
Expression \ref{modelineq} satisfies asymmetry.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $x \prec y$. Then, it follows expression \ref{modelineq} that $f(\vec{x}) < \vec{y}$ component wise. We need to show that $y \nprec x$. Using the definition of equation \ref{modelineq}, it is enough to show $f(\vec{y}) \geq \vec{x}$ component wise.
Now, using equation \ref{resconn}, we have $f(\vec{y}) = \vec{y}+g(\vec{y})$. From the definition of function $g$, it is clear that $g(\vec{x}) \geq 0$ component wise. Thus, applying this inequality to the previous expression, we have $f(\vec{y}) \geq \vec{y}$ component wise. On similar lines, we can also show that
\begin{equation} \label{asymmetry_proof}
f(\vec{x}) \geq \vec{x} \;\; \forall x \in \mathcal{E}
\end{equation}
component wise.
We now have $f(\vec{y}) \geq \vec{y} > f(\vec{x}) \geq \vec{x}$ component wise. The middle inequality holds, since we assume $x \prec y$; in other words, $f(\vec{x}) < \vec{y}$ holds component wise. Thus expression \ref{modelineq} satisfies asymmetry.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
Expression \ref{modelineq} satisfies transitivity.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $x \prec y$ and $y \prec z$. Then, it follows from expression \ref{modelineq} that $f(\vec{x}) < \vec{y}$ and $f(\vec{y}) < \vec{z}$, component wise. We need to show that $x \prec z$ or, alternatively, that $f(\vec{x}) < \vec{z}$.
Generalizing equation \ref{asymmetry_proof}, we have,
$\forall e \in \mathcal{E}, f(\vec{e}) \geq \vec{e}$ component wise. Using this observation, we have $f(\vec{x}) < \vec{y} \leq f(\vec{y})< \vec{z}$ component wise. Note that the middle inequality holds from the aforementioned observation. This proves that Expression \ref{modelineq} satisfies transitivity.
\end{proof}
\section{Generalizing SPON to OOV} \label{oovterms}
The proposed SPON model is able to learn embedding for terms appearing in the training data (extracted either using Hearst-like patterns or provided via a manually labelled training set). However, for tasks wherein one needs to induce \textit{hypernymy} relationships automatically from a text corpus, Hearst-like patterns usually are not exhaustive.
Yet, there is often a practical requirement in most applications to assign
OOV to their most likely correct type(s). Designing a system that fulfills this requirement is highly significant since it allows the creation of \textit{hypernymy} relationships from a given text corpus, avoiding the problem of sparsity that often characterizes most knowledge bases. The basic idea is to use an \textit{augmented} SPON approach that leverages distributional similarity metrics between words in the same corpus. This is formally described as follows.
For a given domain, let $\mathcal{I}^{trial}$ and $\mathcal{O}^{trial}$ denote the in-vocabulary and OOV input trial hyponym terms; and let $\mathcal{I}^{test}$ and $\mathcal{O}^{test}$ denote the in-vocabulary and OOV input test hyponym terms respectively. Let $\mathcal{E}^{train}$ denote all the terms observed in the list of training \textit{hyponym-hypernym} pairs, and let $\mathcal{H}^{train}$ denote the list of known hypernyms obtained from the list of training pairs. The hyponym terms from $\mathcal{I}^{trial}$ and $\mathcal{I}^{test}$ are handled by our proposed SPON model, i.e. top-ranked hypernyms for each hyponym term are generated via our model.
The rest of this section deals with how to generate top ranked hypernyms for each hyponym term within $\mathcal{O}^{trial}$ and $\mathcal{O}^{test}$ respectively. Let $Y_x$ be the random variable denoting the hypernym assignment for an OOV term $x \in \mathcal{O}^{test}$ (Similar approach holds for OOV terms from $\mathcal{O}^{trial}$). The probability of the random variable $Y_x$ taking on the value $c \in \mathcal{H}^{train}$ is then given by,
\begin{multline*}
P(Y_x = c | x) = \sum_{h \in \mathcal{E}^{train}} P(Y_x=c, h | x) \\
= \sum_{h \in \mathcal{E}^{train}} P(Y_x=c|h,x).P(h|x) \numberthis \label{oov_eq1}
\end{multline*}
The first equality in the above expression is a direct consequence of \textit{Marginalisation} property in probability, whereas the second equality merely represents the \textit{marginal} probability in terms of \textit{conditional} probability. \newline
We now make a \textit{conditional independence} assumption, i.e. $Y_x \ci x \;|\; h $, or in other words, ignoring the subscript for brevity we have, $P(Y_x = c |h,x) = P(Y=c|h)$. Using this assumption, we can rewrite Equation \ref{oov_eq1} as,
\begin{align*}
P(Y_x = c | x) &= \sum_{h \in \mathcal{E}^{train}} P(Y=c|h).P(h|x) \\
&\approx \sum_{h \in S^{p}_x} P(Y=c|h).f(h|x) \numberthis \label{oov_eq2}
\end{align*}
where $f$ is a scoring function that provides a score between $[0,1]$, and $S^{p}_x$ contains \textit{p-terms} from $\mathcal{E}^{train}$ that provide top-k largest values for the scoring function $f$. In practice, we first normalize the values of $f(h|x)$ where $ h \in S^{p}_x$ using a \textit{softmax} operation, before computing the weighted sum, as per Equation \ref{oov_eq2}. Also, note that $p$ is a hyper-parameter in this model.
Looking back at Equation \ref{oov_eq2}, we notice that the first part of the summation, i.e. $P(Y=c|h)$, can be obtained directly from our proposed SPON model, since $h \in \mathcal{E}^{train}$. In addition, we model the function $f(h|x)$ as cosine-similarity between the vectors for the term $h$ and $x$, wherein the vectors are trained via a standard Word2Vec model pre-built on the corresponding tokenized corpus for the given benchmark dataset.
Summarizing, given a query OOV term within the \emph{trial} or \emph{test} fold of any dataset, our proposed model follows the aforementioned strategy to generate a list of \emph{hypernym} terms that have been ranked using the formula in Equation \ref{oov_eq2}.
It should be \emph{clearly} pointed out that our aforementioned proposed OOV strategy is not a stand-alone strategy, rather its performance is inherently \emph{dependent} of SPON.
\section{Unsupervised Benchmarks and Evaluation}
\label{unsupervised}
SPON is intrinsically supervised because it requires example \emph{is-a} pairs for training. However, it can also be applied to unsupervised hypernymy task, provided that example \emph{is-a} pairs are generated by an external unsupervised process such as Hearst-like patterns.
\subsection{Benchmarks}
In the unsupervised setting, no gold training data is provided and the system is supposed to assess the validity of test data, provided as a set of pairs of words. A small validation dataset is also provided which is used for tuning hyper-parameters.
We evaluated our approach on two tasks. The first one is \emph{hypernym detection} where the goal is to classify whether a given pair of terms are in a hypernymy relation. The second task is \emph{direction prediction}, i.e. to identify which term in a given pair is the hypernym. We use the \textit{same datasets, same settings, same evaluation script and same evaluation metrics} as \citet{roller2018hearst}. Table \ref{UnsupervisedDataSets} shows the dataset statistics for unsupervised benchmarks, wherein the split into validation/test folds is already given.\footnote{The only exception to this is BIBLESS dataset comprising of 1669 pairs, for which the split is not provided a priori.}
For detection, Average Precision is reported on 5 datasets, namely BLESS \cite{baroni2011we}, LEDS \cite{baroni2012entailment}, EVAL \cite{santus2015evalution}, WBLESS \cite{weeds2014learning} and SHWARTZ \cite{shwartz2016improving}. While for direction, Average Accuracy is reported on 3 datasets, which are BIBLESS \cite{kiela2015exploiting}, BLESS and WBLESS. We refer the readers to \citet{roller2018hearst} for details about these datasets.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\hline
Dataset & Valid & Test \\ \hline \hline
BLESS & 1,453 & 13,089 \\
EVAL & 736 & 12,714 \\
LEDS & 275 & 2,495 \\
SHWARTZ & 5,236 & 47,321 \\
WBLESS & 167 & 1,501 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Statistics for benchmark datasets used in unsupervised \emph{hypernym detection} and \emph{direction prediction} tasks. The columns represent the number of \emph{hyponym-hypernym} pairs within the \emph{validation} and \emph{test} folds respectively.}
\label{UnsupervisedDataSets}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|p{2cm}|p{2cm}|}
\hline
& \small English & \small Italian/Spanish & \small Music/Medical \\ \hline \hline
Train & 1500 & \centering 1000 & 500 \\ \hline
Trial & 50 & \centering 25 & 15 \\
Test & 1500 & \centering 1000 & 500 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Number of hyponyms in different datasets within SemEval 2018 \emph{hypernym discovery} task.}
\label{tab:SemEval18_dataset}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{9092_semeval18_testsetbreakdown}
\caption{Breakdown of hyponym terms within the test fold for each dataset in the hypernym discovery task. By \emph{Invocab} we mean hyponym terms within \textit{test} fold that have been observed while training SPON, whereas by OOV we mean new hyponym terms that have been exclusively observed for the first time in \textit{test} fold and not seen during \textit{training}.}
\label{oov}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{p{3cm}|c|c|c|c|c||c|c|c}
\hline
& \multicolumn{5}{c|}{Detection (Average Precision)} & \multicolumn{3}{|c}{Direction (Average Accuracy)} \\ \hline
& \small BLESS & \small EVAL & \small LEDS & \small SHWARTZ & \small WBLESS & \small BLESS & \small WBLESS & \small BIBLESS \\ \hline \hline
Count based p(x,y) & .49 & .38 & .71 & .29 & .74 & .46 & .69 & .62 \\
ppmi(x,y) & .45 & .36 & .70 & .28 & .72 & .46 & .68 & .61 \\
SVD ppmi(x,y) & .76 & .48 & .84 & .44 & .96 & .96 & .87 & .85 \\
HyperbolicCones & \bf .81 & \bf .50 & .89 & \bf .50 & \bf .98 & .94 & .90 & .\bf 87 \\ \hline
Proposed SPON & \bf .81 & \bf .50 & \bf .91 & \bf .50 & \bf .98 & \bf .97 & \bf .91 & \bf .87 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results on the unsupervised \emph{hypernym detection} and \emph{direction prediction} tasks. The first three rows of results are from \citet{roller2018hearst}. The \textit{HyperbolicCones} results were reported by \citet{le2019Hyperbolic}. The improvements in LEDS and BLESS benchmark are statistically significant with \emph{two-tailed p values} being 0.019 and $\leq$ 0.001 respectively.}
\label{ResultsTable}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
& \small BLESS & \small EVAL & \small LEDS & \small WBLESS \\ \hline \hline
\small \emph{RELU}+\emph{Residual} & \bf .81 & \bf .50 & \bf .91 & \bf .98 \\
\small \emph{RELU} Only & .73 & .49 & .82 & .96 \\
\small \emph{Tanh}+\emph{Residual} & .79 & .49 & .90 & \bf .98 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Ablation tests reporting \emph{Average Precision} values on the unsupervised \emph{hypernym detection} task, signifying the choice of \emph{layers} utilized in our proposed SPON model. The first row represents SPON i.e.\ a \emph{RELU} layer followed by a \emph{Residual} connection. The second row removes the \emph{Residual} connection, whereas the third row substitutes the \emph{non-negative} activation layer \emph{RELU} with \emph{Tanh} that can take negative values.}
\label{tab:Ablation1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\hline
Method & Average Precision \\ \hline
OE \cite{Vendrov:2016} & 0.761 \\
Smoothed Box \cite{li2018smoothing} & 0.795 \\
SPON (Our Approach) & \bf 0.811 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results on the unsupervised \emph{hypernym detection} task for BLESS dataset. With 13,089 test instances, the improvement in Average Precision values obtained by SPON as compared against Smoothed Box model is statistically significant with \emph{two-tailed p value} equals $0.00116$.}
\label{tab:compareWithICLRPubs}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c||c|c|c||c|c|c}
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\bf English} & \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\bf Spanish} & \multicolumn{3}{|c}{\bf Italian} \\ \hline
& \small MAP & \small MRR & \small P@5 & \small MAP & \small MRR & \small P@5 & \small MAP & \small MRR & \small P@5 \\ \hline \hline
CRIM & 19.78 & 36.10 & 19.03 & -- & -- & -- & -- & -- & -- \\ \hline
NLP\_HZ & 9.37 & 17.29 & 9.19 & 20.04 & 28.27 & 20.39 & 11.37 & 19.19 & 11.23 \\ \hline
300-sparsans & 8.95 & 19.44 & 8.63 & 17.94 & 37.56 & 17.06 & 12.08 & 25.14 & 11.73 \\ \hline \hline
SPON & \bf 20.20 & \bf 36.95 & \bf 19.40 & \textbf{32.64} & \textbf{50.48} & \textbf{32.76}& \textbf{17.88} &\textbf{29.80} & \textbf{17.95} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results on SemEval 2018 General-purpose hypernym discovery task. \texttt{CRIM}, \texttt{NLP\_HZ}, and \texttt{300-sparsans} are the corresponding best systems on English, Spanish and Italian datasets (see Section \ref{relatedwork}).}
\label{tab:results_general}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\bf Music} \\ \hline
& \small MAP & \small MRR & \small P@5 \\ \hline
CRIM & 40.97 & 60.93 & 41.31 \\ \hline
SPON & \textbf{54.70} & \textbf{71.20} & \textbf{56.30} \\ \hline
& \multicolumn{3}{|c|}{\bf Medical} \\ \hline
& \small MAP & \small MRR & \small P@5 \\ \hline
CRIM & \textbf{34.05} & \textbf{54.64} & \textbf{36.77} \\ \hline
SPON & 33.50 & 50.60 & 35.10 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results on SemEval 2018 Domain-specific hypernym discovery task. \texttt{CRIM} is the best system on the domain specific datasets.}
\label{tab:results_domain}
\end{table}
We adopted the approach of \citet{roller2018hearst} where a list $\mathcal{L}$ of hyponym-hypernym pairs $(x, y)$ is extracted using a Hearst-like pattern-based system. This system consists of 20 Hearst-like patterns applied to a concatenation of Wikipedia and Gigaword corpora, to generate $\mathcal{L}$.
Each pair within $\mathcal{L}$ is associated with a count $c$ (how often $(x, y)$ has been extracted). Positive Mutual Information (PPMI) \cite{bullinaria2007extracting} for each \emph{(x, y)} is then calculated. Let the size of $\mathcal{E}$ be $m$ and let $M \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times m}$ be the PPMI matrix. We use a similar scoring strategy as \citet{roller2018hearst}, i.e. truncated SVD approach to generate term embeddings, and score each pair using cosine similarity. This creates a modified list $\mathcal{T}$, which is the input for SPON (as mentioned in Section \ref{SPON}).
In order to be directly comparable to \citet{roller2018hearst} and \citet{le2019Hyperbolic}, we used the \emph{same input file} of \citet{roller2018hearst} containing candidate hyponym-hypernym-count triples, i.e.\ a total of 431,684 triples extracted using Hearst-like patterns from a combination of Wikipedia and Gigaword corpora.
We used the following hyper-parameter configuration for the \emph{rank} parameter of the SVD based models: 50 for BLESS, WBLESS, and BIBLESS; 25 for EVAL, 100 for LEDS and 5 for SHWARTZ. Optimal hyper-parameter configurations for our proposed SPON model were determined empirically using validation fold for the benchmark datasets.
For each experiment, the embedding dimensions \emph{d} were chosen out of \{100, 200, 300, 512, 1024\}, whereas the $\epsilon$ parameter was chosen out of $\{10^{-1}, 10^{-2}, 10^{-3}, 10^{-4}\}$.
$k$ is set to 1000 for all experiments. For example, in Table \ref{ResultsTable}, the SPON model used the following hyper-parameters on BLESS dataset: $d=300, \epsilon=0.01$.
In addition, we used $L_1$ regularization for model weights, and also used \emph{dropout} with \emph{probability} of $0.5$. Adam optimizer was used with default settings. In addition, the term vectors in our model were initialized uniformly at random, and are constrained to have unit $L_2$ norm during the entire training procedure. Furthermore, an early stopping criterion of 20 \emph{epochs} was used.
\subsection{Evaluation}
We use the same evaluation script as provided by \citet{roller2018hearst} for evaluating our proposed model. Table \ref{ResultsTable} shows the results on the unsupervised tasks of \emph{hypernym detection} and \emph{direction predictions}, reporting average precision and average accuracy, respectively.
The first row titled \emph{Count based} (in Table \ref{ResultsTable}) depicts the performance of a Hearst-like Pattern system baseline, that uses a \emph{frequency} based threshold to classify candidate hyponym-hypernym pairs as positive (i.e.\ exhibiting \emph{hypernymy}) or negative (i.e.\ not exhibiting \emph{hypernymy}). The \emph{ppmi} approach in Table \ref{ResultsTable} builds upon the \emph{Count based} approach by using Pointwise Mutual Information values for classification. \emph{SVD ppmi} approach, the main contribution from \citet{roller2018hearst} builds low-rank embeddings of the PPMI matrix, which allows to make predictions for unseen pairs as well.
\emph{HyperbolicCones} is the SOTA \cite{le2019Hyperbolic} in both these tasks. The final row reports the application of SPON (on the input provided by SVD ppmi) which is an original contribution of our work. Results clearly show that SPON achieves SOTA results on all datasets. In fact, on three datasets, SPON outperforms \emph{HyperbolicCones}. Furthermore, improvements in LEDS and BLESS benchmarks are statistically significant with \emph{two-tailed p values} being 0.019 and $\leq$ 0.001 respectively.
A plausible explanation for this improved performance might be due to the fact that \emph{hypernymy} relationships are better represented as \emph{Directed Acyclic Graphs} (DAGs) rather than trees \cite{suchanek2008yago}, and we believe that SPON is more suitable to represent \emph{hypernymy} relationships as opposed to \emph{HyperbolicCones} in which the constant negative curvature strongly biases the model towards trees.
\paragraph{Ablation Tests.} The \emph{analysis} in Section \ref{theoreticalanalysis} which shows that our choice of function $f$ satisfies \emph{asymmetry} and \emph{transitive} properties, holds true because $f$ satisfies $f(\vec{x}) \geq \vec{x}$ component-wise. We have chosen to define $f$ as a non-negative activation function \emph{RELU} followed by a \emph{Residual} layer. In this section, we perform \emph{two} sets of ablation experiments, \emph{first} where we remove the \emph{Residual} connections altogether, and \emph{second} where we replace the non-negative activation function \emph{RELU} with \emph{Tanh} that can take on negative values.
Table \ref{tab:Ablation1} shows the results for each of these ablation experiments, when evaluated on the unsupervised \emph{hypernym detection} task across \emph{four} datasets chosen randomly. Removing the \emph{Residual} layer and using \emph{RELU} activation function only, violates the aforementioned component-wise inequality $f(\vec{x}) \geq \vec{x}$, and has the worst results out of the three. On the other hand, using \emph{Residual} connections with \emph{Tanh} activations may not violate the aforementioned inequality, since, it depends upon the \emph{sign} of the activation outputs. This \emph{argument} is supported by the results in Table \ref{tab:Ablation1}, wherein using \emph{Tanh} activations instead of \emph{RELU} almost provides \emph{identical} results, except for the BLESS dataset.
Nevertheless, the results in Table \ref{tab:Ablation1} show that encouraging \emph{asymmetry} and \emph{transitive} properties for this \emph{task}, in fact improves the results as opposed to not doing the same.
Furthermore, Table \ref{tab:compareWithICLRPubs} illustrates the results on the unsupervised \emph{hypernym detection} task for BLESS dataset, wherein we compare our proposed SPON model to other supervised SOTA approaches for hypernym prediction task, namely Order Embeddings (OE) approach as introduced by \cite{Vendrov:2016}, and Smoothed Box model as introduced by \cite{li2018smoothing}. We run the OE and Smoothed Box experiments using the codes provided with those papers.
In addition, we used the validation fold within BLESS dataset to empirically determine optimal hyper-parameter configurations, and settled on the following values: For OE, we used an embedding dimensions of 20, margin parameter of 5, generated \emph{one} negative example for every positive instance using so-called \emph{contrastive} approach. For Smoothed Box model, we used an embedding dimensions of 50 and generated \emph{five} negatives per training instance. In either case, we observed that using the entire set of \emph{is-a} pairs extracted by the Hearst-like patterns (without employing a frequency based cutoff) for training provided the best performance.
From Table \ref{tab:compareWithICLRPubs}, it is clear that SPON performs much better (by atleast 1.6\%) as compared to Smoothed Box model as well as Order Embedding model in an Unsupervised benchmark dataset.
\begin{table}
\centering
\resizebox{.95\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\hline
\bf {Term} & \textbf{Predicted hypernyms} \\ \hline \hline
dicoumarol & \small \underline{drug}, carbohydrate, acid, person, ... \\
Planck & \small \textbf{person}, \underline{particle}, physics, \underline{elementary particle}, ... \\
Belt Line & \small main road, \textbf{infrastructure}, expressway, ... \\
relief & \small service, assistance, resource, ... \\ \hline
honesty & \small \underline{virtue}, ideal, moral philosophy, ... \\
shoe & \small \textbf{footwear}, shoe, \textbf{footgear}, overshoe, ... \\
ethanol & \small \textbf{alcohol}, \underline{fuel}, person, \textbf{fluid}, resource, ... \\
ruby & \small \underline{language}, \underline{precious stone}, \underline{person}, ... \\
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Examples of ranked predictions (from left-to-right) made by our system on a set of eight \emph{randomly} selected test queries from SemEval 2018 English dataset. The top four query terms are OOV, while the bottom ones are In-vocabulary. Hypernyms predicted by SPON that matches the gold annotations are highlighted in \textbf{bold}, while we use \underline{underline} for predictions that we judge to be correct but are missing in the gold standard expected hypernyms.}
\label{tab:SemEval18_analysis}
\end{table}
\section{Supervised Benchmarks and Evaluation}
\label{supervised}
In the supervised setting, a system has access to a large corpus of text from where training, trial, and test \emph{is-a} pairs are extracted, and labeled manually.
\subsection{Benchmarks}
We used the benchmark of \textit{SemEval 2018 Task on Hypernym Discovery}. The task is defined as \textit{``given an input term, retrieve its hypernyms from a target corpus"}. For each input hyponym in the test data, a ranked list of candidate hypernyms is expected. The benchmark consists of five different subtasks covering both general-purpose (multiple languages -- English, Italian, and Spanish) and domain-specific (Music and Medicine domains) hypernym discovery .
\subsection{Experimental Settings}\label{exp_settings}
This subsection describes the technical solution we implemented for the SemEval tasks, more specifically, the strategies for training dataset augmentation, handling OOV terms, and the hyperparameter optimization.
For the corpora in English, we augmented the training data using automatically extracted pairs by an unsupervised Hearst-like Pattern (HP) based system, following an approach similar to that described by \citet{bernier2018crim}, the best system in English, Medical and Music hypernymy subtasks in SemEval 2018. Henceforth, we refer to our pattern-based approach as the \texttt{HP} system.
The HP system uses a fixed set of Hearst-like patterns (e.g. \emph{``y such as x''}, \emph{``y including than $x_1$, $x_2$''}, etc) to extract pairs from the input corpus. Then, it filters out any of these pairs where either \emph{x} (hyponym) or \emph{y} (hypernym) is not seen in the corresponding vocabulary provided by the organizers of the shared task. It also discards any pair where \emph{y} is not seen in the corresponding gold training data.
Following that, the HP system makes a directed graph by considering each pair as an edge and the corresponding terms inside pair as nodes. The weight of each edge is the count/frequency of how often \emph{(x, y)} has been extracted by the Hearst-like patterns.
It also excludes any cycle inside the graph; e.g. if \emph{(x, y)}, \emph{(y, z)} and \emph{(z, x)} then all these edges (i.e. pairs) were discarded. Finally, it discards any edge that has a value lower than a frequency threshold, \emph{ft}. We set \emph{ft}=10 for \emph{English}. For \emph{Medical} and \emph{Music}, we set \emph{ft}=2.
The \emph{is-a} pairs obtained from HP system are then merged with the corresponding training gold pairs (i.e. treated them equally) to form a larger training set for English, Medical and Music datasets. As a result of this step, the number of total unique training pairs for English, Medical and Music increased to 17,903 (from 11,779 training gold pairs), 4,593 (from 3,256) and 6,282 (from 5,455) correspondingly.
The dataset statistics for the \textit{general-purpose} and \textit{domain-specific} hypernym discovery tasks are mentioned in Table \ref{tab:SemEval18_dataset}. It is evident that a significant fraction of the terms in the Trial/Test fold is OOV (see Figure~\ref{oov}), therefore SPON is not able to make any assessment about them. Therefore, in order to handle OOV cases, we represent all terms in the dictionary provided by the SemEval organizers via Word2Vec vectors acquired from the given text corpus.
The \textit{dimensions} $d$ for SPON model was chosen from $\{50, 100, 200\}$, whereas the parameter $p$ (for handling OOV terms) was chosen from $\{2,3,5,8,10\}$. Parameter $k$ (from Equation \ref{neg-hyp-samples}) was chosen from $\{100,200,500\}$. The \textit{regularization}, \textit{dropout} and \textit{initialization} strategies are exactly similar to Section \ref{exp_settings}. An early stopping criterion of \textit{50 epochs} was used.
\subsection{Evaluation}
We use the \emph{scorer} script provided as part of \emph{SemEval-2018} Task 9 for evaluating our proposed model. Table~\ref{tab:results_general} shows the results on the three general purpose domains of English, Spanish, and Italian respectively. For brevity, we compare only with the SOTA, \textit{i.e.}, the best system in each task. Performances of all the systems that participated in \textit{SemEval 2018 Task} on Hypernym Discovery can be found in \cite{camacho-collados-etal-2018-semeval}. Similarly, Table~\ref{tab:results_domain} shows the results on the two domain-specific tasks of music and medical domain corpora. SPON outperforms the SOTA systems in all tasks except for the medical domain in which it achieves comparable results. It is worthwhile to notice that SPON is fully domain-agnostic, \textit{i.e.}, it neither uses any domain-specific approaches, nor any domain-specific external knowledge.
We provide an illustration of the output of our system in Table \ref{tab:SemEval18_analysis}, showing a sample of randomly selected terms and their corresponding ranked predictions.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}
\label{conclusion}
In this paper, we introduced SPON, a novel neural network architecture that models \textit{hypernymy} as a strict partial order relation. We presented a materialization of SPON, along with an \textit{augmented} variant that assigns \textit{types} to OOV \textit{terms}. An extensive evaluation over several widely-known academic benchmarks demonstrates that SPON largely improves (or attains) SOTA values across different tasks.
There are so many benchmark datasets for hypernymy prediction task with different evaluation settings (supervised and unsupervised). None of the recent approaches choose to report results on all of them which makes it difficult to decide whether any one of them performs consistently well over others. Our paper fills this void.
In the future, we plan to explore how to extend SPON in two directions. On the one hand, we plan to analyze how to use SPON for the taxonomy construction task (\textit{i.e.}, constructing a hierarchy of hypernyms instead of flat \emph{is-a} pairs). On the other hand, we plan to generalize our work to relations other than \emph{is-a}.
\small
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:in}
Complex Networks have a wide variety of applications in many domains including economics, business, transportation, and natural, social and computer sciences, to name a few. Examples of such networks include online social networks, biological networks, technological networks, scientific collaboration networks, citation networks and many more. The complex structure of these networks has remained the main focus of studies in the past. Many studies claim that these networks are scale-free networks. However, contrary to this common belief, recent studies show that scale-freeness is rare in real-world networks \cite{SF_rare}. Generally, a network is scale-free if the fraction of nodes with degree $k$ follows a power-law distribution $k^{-\gamma}$, where $\gamma >$ 1. Typically, it is believed that the $\gamma \in [2,3]$ or in other words the degree distribution of such networks follows a preferential attachment, i.e., the rich-get-richer mechanism. In order to understand these networks in detail, many generative models have been proposed to artificially generate such networks. In a recent study \cite{SF_rare} the authors test the universality of the scale-free structure by applying different statistical tools to a large corpus of nearly 1000 network data sets drawn from social, biological, technological, and informational sources. They observe that only 4\% of real-world networks show strong evidence of scale-free structure. Furthermore, they find that social networks are at best weakly scale-free, while only a handful of technological and biological networks can be called strongly scale-free.
There are several studies, e.g., \cite{Barabasi,PA1,PA2,PA3, PA4, PA6} to generate scale-free networks such that the value of $\gamma \in [2,3]$. However, to the best of our knowledge, there has been no work to generate weakly scale-free networks. We define a weakly scale-free network as a network that has the power-law exponent $\gamma >$ 3 for $k > k_{min}$ and a flattish distribution of degree of nodes for $k < k_{min}$. In this paper, we aim to generate weakly scale-free networks with a two step approach. In the first step, named node-step, a new node enters the network and connects to an existing node using the preferential attachment method. While in the second step, named edge-step, we iteratively add a certain number of edges between existing nodes at random. This adds the desired flatness in the network before $k_{min}$ and the generated network follows the scale-free structure after $k_{min}$ with $\gamma >$ 3. Two mechanisms for creating edges are discussed. In the first mechanism, a fixed number of edges are created during the edge-step and the resulting model generates weakly scale-free network having the distribution satisfying the power-law with exponent $\gamma \in (3, \infty)$ corresponding to this fixed number in the range $[1, \infty)$. While in the second mechanism, the number of edges to be added is proportional to the fraction of the total number of existing edges by the number of nodes, we get $m(t) \propto t^\beta $ (see Appendix \ref{Appendix B}). Moreover, we choose $\beta > 1$ to further investigate network evolution when a large number of edges are added at random in each time step. The growth of the resultant network is accelerated growth. We have found a non-stationary degree distribution for this case. The average degree, in this case, is proportional to $t^{\beta-1}$ and grows over time $t$.
For each method of adding edges, we have performed a fully detailed analysis in the discrete domain ($k$ and $t$ as discrete variables). During the edge-step, edges are added iteratively and we update the number of nodes marked by degree $k$ after each iteration. A detailed formulation for each step derived in this paper depicts the process fully. An exact recurrence relation is formulated that models the network transition from one state to another. It describes the change in degree distribution from the node-step to the edge-step. It also models the transition from the state at the previous time stamp to the next time stamp when both the node- and edge- steps have been accomplished.
The idea of adding edges between existing nodes for the network evolution is not a new one. The authors in the paper \cite{D1} extended the Barabasi-Albert (BA) model and presented the undirected network evolution based on this idea. They proposed the model in which a new incoming node preferentially connects to $m$ existing nodes of the network. Then, simultaneously $cm, c>0$ edges appear between existing nodes. The selection of nodes for these new edges is also made preferentially. For a new edge, a pair of nodes is selected with the probability proportional to the product of their degrees. They used the continuous approximation (considering $t$ and $k$ as continuous variables, \cite{D4}) and found that the degree-distribution satisfies the power-law $k^{-\gamma}$ with $\gamma = 2 + \frac{1}{1+2c}$. This approach was proved to describe quite well the degree distributions of networks growing under the mechanism of preferential linking. \cite{D4}) discussed another method of growing directed networks through mixing preferential and random linking. A new vertex with $n$ incoming edges enters the network, at each time step. The target ends of $m$ new edges are simultaneously distributed among vertices through the preferential linking rule. The probability to select a node is proportional to $q+A$, with $q$ is the in-degree of the nodes and $A$ is a constant with value $A > -n - n_r$. Besides, the target ends of $n_r$ new edges are attached to randomly chosen vertices with source ends of each edge may be anywhere. The in-degree $P(q)$ of these nodes satisfies the relation $q^{-\gamma}$ with $\gamma = 2 + \frac{n_r + n + A}{m}$. These were kind of non-equilibrium growing networks. The average degree for networks having the exponent $\gamma > 2$ tends to some constant value. The total degree of the network is a linear function of the number of nodes at time $t$. When the average degree does not approach a constant value but grows over time(total degree grows at least super-linearly), these networks are called networks with accelerated growth\cite{D2}. In general, the total number of edges in networks with accelerated growth is $m(t) \propto t^\beta$ for $\beta > 1$. In \cite{D3} authors present a network with acceleration growth in which $ct$ number of edges emerge among old vertices at each time step. This behavior is found in the Internet, collaboration networks, the World Wide Web, and many other networks.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we present a two-step model for generating weakly scale-free networks. In section 3, we provide a comprehensive mathematical analysis of our model and drive recurrence relation for both the node- and edge- steps. In section 4, we compare the graphs generated by our model with real-world networks. In section 5, we discuss related work and conclude the paper in section 6.
\section{Weakly Scale-free Model} \label{sec:first}
In this section, we formally present our model called Weakly Scale-free Model (WSM). WSM generates undirected graphs and can be run for any period of time $t (t > 0)$, given an initiator graph at $t = 0$, that could be any connected graph, e.g., a connected triplet. We represent a network as an undirected graph $G = (V, E)$ where $V$ is the set of nodes and $E$ is the set of edges. We represent nodes in the graph as $\{v_1,v_2,v_3, ..., v_n \}$ and edges as $\{e_1, e_2, e_3, ..., e_m\}$, furthermore, $|V|=n$ and $|E|=m$. In this model, a network evolves over time and at any instant of time $t$, there are $|V_t|=n_t$ nodes and $|E_t|=m_t$ edges in the network. Let $G_t (V_t , E_t )$ be the graph at time $t$ . In a single time stamp, we perform two steps namely node-step and edge-step.\\
\textbf{Node Step:} A new node $x$ arrives and connects to an existing node $y$ via one edge such that
\begin{equation}
n_{t+1} = n_t + 1
\end{equation}
we call it the node equation. The probability $P_y$ of selecting node $y$ is proportional to its degree $d_{y}$ i.e.,
\begin{equation}
P_y = \frac{d_y}{\sum_{i=1}^{n} d_i}
\end{equation}
This equation suggests that a high degree node attracts more nodes and helps the network to follow a power-law for its degree distribution.\\
\textbf{Edge Step:} In the edge-step, we add $\Delta m_t$ number of edges in the network at each time stamp such that
\begin{equation}
m_{t+1} = {m_t} + \Delta m_t +1
\end{equation}
We call it the edge equation. Here, $+1$ corresponds to the edge added in the node-step. We add edges between existing nodes at random. In order to add an edge, we select two nodes $x$ and $y$ uniformly at random from the graph $G_t$ and adds an edge between them. we repeat this process $\Delta m_t$ times. Here, $\Delta m_t$ is a natural number that can have any positive values, $\Delta m_t \in [0,1,2,3, ...]$. In other words, we add a {fixed number of edges} in the edge-step. However, a formulation for the variable number of edges is also presented in the appendix. To account for both of these two cases, we used a more generic term $\Delta m_t$ to represent the number of added edges during the edge-step. When $\Delta m_t=0$, our model generates a standard Barabasi-Albert network and when $\Delta m_t > 0$, we add random links in the network and as a result we generate weakly scale-free networks.
\section{Mathematical Analysis}
In this section, we present the mathematical analysis of WSM in detail. For analysis, let's assume that the network starts with a single node at time $t=1$. It grows over time through two steps, namely the node-step and edge-step as described above. During the edge-step, $\Delta m_t$ number of edges are created. For the creation of each edge, two nodes from the network are selected according to the uniform probability distribution function. A recurrence relation for degree distribution is formulated that incorporates both node and edge steps and describes overall network evolution through time.
More formally, let $\{v_1, v_2, v_3, ..., v_n\}$ represents nodes in the network and $\{e_1, e_2, e_3, ..., e_m\}$ edges. The network evolves from a single node at time $t=1$. For ease of analysis, time $t$ also refers to the total number of nodes in the network, i.e., at time $t$ there are a total of $t$ nodes in the network. The degree of a node is represented as $k$. The network evolves in two steps. In the first step, a new node is added that connects with an existing node via one edge. In the second step, we add an edge between two randomly selected nodes. This step is repeated until $\Delta m_t$ new edges are created in the network. For creating edges, we consider a simple scenario in which $\Delta m_t$ is a fixed positive integer $\alpha$. Formulation keeps a record of the number of nodes of degree $k$ at each time step $t$. $N_{k,t}$ is the number of nodes in a group marked by degree $k$ at the completion of time step $t$. After the node-step, wherein $(t+1)$th node connects to the network, number of nodes in the group becomes $N_{k,t+1,0}$. $N_{k,t+1,l}$ represents nodes count of $k-th$ degree during the edge-step. The subscript $l \in [1,\Delta m_t]$ tells that $l$ number of edges have been added during the edge-step. The network state at the completion of both steps is represented by $N_{k,t+1, \Delta m_t}$, which is also the initial configuration $N_{k,t+1}$ for the next time step. The same process is repeated for the next time step. To analyze the network behavior over time, the rank of nodes marked by degree $k$, define as $P_{k,t} = \frac{N_{k,t}}{t}$, is more helpful than just keeping a record of actual count of these nodes. $P_{k,t}$ represents fraction of nodes of degree $k$.
Briefly, two consecutive stages through which network grows, for each time step,
\begin{enumerate}
\item (Node-step): At time $t+1$, $(t+1)$-th node arrives and connects to an member node via one edge. The older node is picked with probability proportional to its degree $k$.
\item (Edge-step): At time $(t+1)$, after the node-step, two nodes are selected randomly (with uniform probability) and an edge is created between them. This step is repeated $\Delta m_t$ number of times. $\Delta m_t$ edges are added during the edge-step.
\end{enumerate}
First, we describe the model that incorporates the node-step only, and later we extend it to include the edge-step.
\subsection{The Standard BA Model}
Our network is an undirected graph. In an undirected graph, $\sum_{n=1}^{t}k_{n} = 2m_t$ where $k_n$ is the degree of $n$-th node and $m_t$ is the total number of edges in the graph at the completion of time step $t$. In the case where network evolution does not include the edge-step, it is described by the BA model. The network has $t-1$ edges at time step $t$.
The standard BA model gives following recurrence relation for the degree distribution,
\begin{equation} \label{intro2}
P_{1} = \frac{2}{3}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{intro1}
P_{k} = P_{k-1}.\frac{k-1}{k+2}
\end{equation}
In a closed form,
\begin{equation}\label{intro3}
P_{k} = \frac{4}{k(k+1)(k+2)} \approx \frac{c}{k^3} ~(\text{ for large } k \text{'s})
\end{equation}
\subsection{Edge Equation}
In our work, the network configuration changes through two steps. First, through the node-step when a new node is added to the network as described above. Secondly, through the edge-step, when new edges are added between existing pairs of nodes in the network. During the edge-step, we select two nodes at random with uniform probability from the network and create an edge between them. This step is repeated to add a total of $\Delta m_t$ number of edges at the time step $t+1$.
Following events may occur during the edge creation:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $E^{k,t+1,l}_{1}$ is the event that exactly one node is selected from the group marked by the degree $k$. $p(E^{k,t+1,l}_{1})$ is the probability of this event. The occurrence of this event reduces the population of nodes of degree $k$ by 1. \\
\item $E^{k,t+1,l}_{2}$ is the event that exactly two node are selected from the group of nodes marked by the degree $k$. $p(E^{k,t+1,l}_{2})$ is the probability of this event. The occurrence of this event reduces the population of nodes of degree $k$ by 2. \\
\item $E^{k-1,t+1,l}_{1}$ is the event that exactly one node is selected from the group of nodes marked by the degree $k-1$. $p(E^{k-1,t+1,l}_{1})$ is the probability of this event. The occurrence of this event increases the population of nodes of degree $k$ by 1. \\
\item $E^{k-1,t+1,l}_{2}$ is the event that exactly two nodes are selected from the group of nodes marked by the degree $k-1$. $p(E^{k-1,t+1,l}_{2})$ is the probability of this event.The occurrence of this event increases the population of nodes of degree $k$ by 2. \\
\end{enumerate}
$N_{k,t}$ describes the network state at the completion of time step $t$. Each time step consists of the node-step and edge-step, in order. $N_{k,t}$ is also the initial configuration for the next time step $t+1$. We call $N_{k,t+1,0}$ the expected number of nodes of degree $k$ after the completion of the node-step and prior to the edge-step. The network at this stage has $t+1$ nodes. $N_{k,t+1,1}$ be the expected number of nodes of degree $k$ after adding one edge in the edge-step. The two network configurations could be related as, for $k>1$,
\begin{equation}\label{GenEdge1}
\begin{aligned}
N_{k,t+1,1} = N_{k,t+1,0} - 1.p(E^{k,t+1,0}_{1}) - 2.p(E^{k,t+1,0}_{2})+1.p(E^{k-1,t+1,0}_{1})\\
+ 2.p(E^{k-1,t+1,0}_{2}) - 0.p( E^{k-1,t+1,0}_{1} \cap E^{k,t+1,0}_{1}).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
And, in general,
\begin{equation}\label{GenEdgem}
\begin{aligned}
N_{k,t+1,l} = N_{k,t+1,l-1} - 1.p(E^{k,t+1,l-1}_{1}) - 2.p(E^{k,t+1,l-1}_{2})+1.p(E^{k-1,t+1,l-1}_{1})\\
+ 2.p(E^{k-1,t+1,l-1}_{2}) - 0.p( E^{k-1,t+1,l-1}_{1} \cap E^{k,t+1,l-1}_{1}).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For the sake of brevity, $N_{k,t+1,\Delta m_t}$ will be represented as $N_{k,t+1}$.
Since, during the edge-step no node enters into the group marked by the degree $1$, in the above relation (\ref{GenEdgem}) truncating terms involving $k-1$ and replacing $k$ by $1$, we get following recurrence relation for $N_{1,t+,l}$,
\begin{equation}\label{GenEdgem1}
N_{1,t+1,l} = N_{1,t+1,l-1} - 1.p(E^{1,t+1,l-1}_{1}) - 2.p(E^{1,t+1,l-1}_{2}).
\end{equation}
The total number of edges in the network varies during the node- and edge- steps. At the completion of $t$-th time step when the $t$-th nodes is connected to the network and $\alpha$ edges have been created, total number of edges of the network are $m_t = (t-1) + \alpha(t-1)= (\alpha+1)(t-1)$. When $(t+1)$th nodes arrives and connects, the number is increased by $1$, i.e. $m_t+1$. And during the edge-step, when $l$ edges have been created, number of edges become $m_t + 1+ l$. During edge creation, each node has equal chance of selection.
\begin{equation}\label{UniformPm1}
p(E^{k,t+1,l}_{1})=2 \bigl(\frac{N_{k,t+1,l}}{t+1}\bigr) \bigl(\frac{t+1- N_{k,t+1,l}}{t}\bigr) = \frac{2(N_{k,t+1,l})(t+1- N_{k,t+1,l})}{t^2+t}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{UniformPm2}
p(E^{k,t+1,l}_{2})= \bigl(\frac{N_{k,t+1,l}}{t+1}\bigr) \bigl(\frac{ N_{k,t+1,l}-1}{t}\bigr) = \frac{({ N_{k,t+1,l})}^2 - N_{k,t+1,l}}{t^2+t}
\end{equation}
This probability formula is valid for all $l$'s and for all $k$'s. Next, we formulate the edge- and node- steps. \newline
\textbf {Edge-step} \newline
For $k > 1$,\newline
Substituting probability functions given by (\ref{UniformPm1}) and (\ref{UniformPm2}) in (\ref{GenEdge1}) and simplifying the expression, we get
\[
N_{k,t+1,1} = N_{k,t+1,0} + \frac{2}{t+1}[N_{k-1,t+1,0}-N_{k,t+1,0}].
\]
This relation describes addition of the first edge, i.e. $l=1$. Rewriting it in the following form,
\[
N_{k,t+1,1} = \bigl(1-\frac{2}{t+1}\bigr)N_{k,t+1,0} + \frac{2}{t+1}N_{k-1,t+1,0},
\]
Similarly for general $l$,
\begin{equation}\label{EdgekM}
N_{k,t+1,l} = \bigl(1-\frac{2}{t+1}\bigr)N_{k,t+1,l-1} + \frac{2}{t+1}N_{k-1,t+1,l-1}.
\end{equation}
For $k = 1$
\begin{equation}\label{Edgek1}
N_{k,t+1,l} = \bigl(1-\frac{2}{t+1}\bigr)N_{k,t+1,l-1}.
\end{equation}
\textbf {Node-step} \newline
The node step is carried through preferential attachment and is given by following relationships,\newline
For $k > 1$,
\[
N_{k,t+1,0} = N_{k,t} + N_{k-1,t}\frac{k-1}{2m_t} - N_{k,t}\frac{k}{2m_t},
\]
or re-writing in the form
\begin{equation}\label{Nodek}
N_{k,t+1,0} =\bigl(1-\frac{k}{2m_t} \bigr) N_{k,t} + N_{k-1,t}\frac{k-1}{2m_t}.
\end{equation}
And for $k =1 $
\begin{equation}\label{Nodek1}
N_{k,t+1,0} = \bigl(1-\frac{k}{2m_t} \bigr) N_{k,t} + 1
\end{equation}
\subsection{Derivation of the Recurrence relation for $\Delta m_t = \alpha$}
A general form of the recurrence relation describing the network evolution through time, incorporating both the node- and edge- steps, is presented. (See appendix \ref{Appendix A} for the detailed formulation and derivation).
For $k=1$, the recurrence relations gives $P_{k,t+1}$ in term of $P_{k,t}$,
\begin{equation}\label{Genk1}
(t+1)P_{k,t+1} = \bigl(1-\frac{2}{t+1}\bigr)^{\Delta m_t}\bigl[tP_{k,t} + 1 - \frac{k}{2m_t}tP_{k,t} \bigr].
\end{equation}
For $k>1$, the recurrence relations gives $P_{k,t+1}$ in term of $P_{k-n,t}$'s with $n=0,1,\dots $,
\begin{equation}\label{Genk}
(t+1)P_{k,t+1} = \sum_{n=0}^{q} tC_{k-n,\Delta m_t}P_{k-n,t}\\
\end{equation}
Coefficients $C_{k-n,\Delta m_t}$'s and $q$ are defined in the appendix \ref{Appendix A}.\newline
The stationary degree distribution for nodes is obtained on replacing $\Delta m_t$ by $\alpha$ and applying the limit $t \to \infty$, .\newline
\textbf{For $k=1$ }
\begin{equation}\label{UEdgeEqnM4}
P_{1} = \frac{2(\alpha+1)}{ 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +3}.
\end{equation}
\newline
\textbf{In general, for $k > 1$}
\begin{equation}\label{UEdgeEqnM2}
P_{k} = \frac{k+ 4\alpha^2 + 4\alpha -1}{k + 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +2}P_{k-1}.
\end{equation}
$P_{k}$ can also be written in the closed form:
\[
P_{k} = \frac{(4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +3)(4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +2)\dots(4\alpha^2 + 4\alpha +1)}{ (k + 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +2)(k + 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +1) \dots(k + 4\alpha^2 + 4\alpha )} \frac{2(\alpha+1)}{ 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +3},
\]
or
\begin{equation}\label{UEdgeEqnM3}
P_{k} = \frac{(4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +2)\dots(4\alpha^2 + 4\alpha +1)}{ (k + 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +2)(k + 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +1) \dots(k + 4\alpha^2 + 4\alpha )} {2(\alpha+1)}.
\end{equation}
If $\alpha$ is replaced with $0$ in the equation (\ref{UEdgeEqnM2}), equation (\ref{intro1}) is obtained which is the recurrence relation when only the node-step is used. Similarly, equation (\ref{UEdgeEqnM4}) reduces to equation (\ref{intro2}).
The degree distribution $P_k$ follows the power-law $k^{-(2\alpha+3)}$, but only for very large values of $k$. For large $\alpha$ and small $k$'s, distribution is almost uniform, i.e., $P_{k}\approx P_{k-1}$. Also, the expression for $P_{1}$ approaches to $0$ as $\alpha$ becomes large and large. To prove the claim about distribution slopes formally, let $\delta_{\alpha,k} \text{ for } k> 1$ represents the slope of the $\log(P_k)\text{ vs. } \log(k)$ graph, then
\begin{equation}\label{SlopeMain}
\begin{aligned}
\delta_{\alpha,k} = \frac{ \log {P_k}-\log {P_{k-1}}}{\log {k}-\log {(k-1)}} = \frac{\log {(k+ 4\alpha^2 + 4\alpha -1)}- \log{(k + 4\alpha^2 + 6\alpha +2)}} {\log {k}-\log {(k-1)}}\\
=\frac {\log{( {1 - \frac{2\alpha+3}{k+4\alpha^2+6\alpha+2}})}} {\log{(1 + \frac{1}{k-1}})}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For further analysis, let's expand $\log$ terms to the first order,
\[
\delta_{\alpha,k} \approx -\frac{(2\alpha+3)(k-1)}{k+4\alpha^2+6\alpha+2}.
\]
Now, as $\alpha$ is a fixed constant value, for very large $k$, say, $k \gg 4\alpha^2+6\alpha+2$, expression becomes,
\begin{equation}\label{USlopeEqn1}
\delta_{\alpha,k} \approx -\frac{(2\alpha+3)(k-1)}{k}\approx -(2\alpha+3).
\end{equation}
For small $k$'s, we get,
\begin{equation}\label{USlopeEqn2}
\delta_{\alpha,k} \approx -\frac{(2\alpha+3)(k-1)}{4\alpha^2+6\alpha+2} \approx -\epsilon(k-1)
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon$ very small positive quantity of order $\mathcal{O} (\frac{1}{\alpha})$. Informally, in the beginning when $k$ is small, slope is very small.
We compare theoretical equations and practical results in Figure~\ref{TP_fig}. For theoretical results, we implement equation ~\ref{UEdgeEqnM2} for different values of $\alpha = 1,3, 5$. For practical results, we implement the node- and edge- steps of the WS model. We draw the degree of nodes again their frequency. We see in Figure~\ref{TP_fig} that both the graphs overlap and this proves the correctness of our mathematical analysis.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{Th_vs_Pr.png}
\centering
\caption{Theoretical vs. Practical Degree Distribution for $\alpha=1,3,5$}
\label{TP_fig}
\end{figure}
\section{Experimental Results}
In this section, we provide an overview of real datasets or graphs that we will use for comparison with the networks generated by our model. All the real networks are publicly available at \cite{konect}. We use the following six citation networks, two peer-to-peer networks and four social networks. An overview of these datasets is available in Table~\ref{Tab1}.
\begin{itemize}
\item DBLP: This is the citation network of DBLP, a database of scientific publications such as papers and books. Each node in the network is a publication, and each edge represents a citation of a publication by another publication.
\item HepTh: This is a citation network of authors of scientific papers from the arXiv’s High Energy Physics (Theory) section.
\item Cora: This is the cora citation network. Nodes represent scientific papers. An edge between two nodes indicates that the one node cites the other node.
\item HepPh: This is a citation network of scientific papers from the arXiv’s High Energy Physics (Phenomenology) section.
\item CiteSeer: This is the citation network extracted from the CiteSeer digital library. Nodes are publications and the edges denote citations.
\item Patents: This is the citation network of patents registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Each node is a patent and an edge represents a citation.
\item Gnutella1: This is a network of Gnutella hosts from 2002. The nodes represent Gnutella hosts, and the edges represent connections between them.
\item Gnutella2: This is a network of Gnutella hosts from 2002. The nodes represent Gnutella hosts and the edges represent connections between them.
\item Facebook: This is a friendship network of facebook. The nodes are users and an edge between two users shows a friendship relation between them.
\item Prosperloans: These are loans between users of the Prosper.com website. The network denotes who loaned money to whom.
\item Amazon: This is the network of items on Amazon that have been mentioned by Amazon's "People who bought X also bought Y" function. Nodes in the network are products, and an edge from A to B denotes that product A is frequently co-purchased with product B.
\item Pokec: This is the friendship network from the Slovak social network Pokec. Nodes are users of Pokec and directed edges represent friendships.
\end{itemize}
For comparison, we compare our model with the standard Barabasi–Albert Model \cite{Barabasi}. The Barabasi–Albert (BA) Model is a method for generating scale-free networks using a preferential attachment mechanism. Since our model also applies preferential attachment mechanism so it would be interesting to compare it with the basic BA Model. In the very basic form of the BA Model, the network begins with a small connected network of $w_0$ nodes. New nodes are added one-by-one at each time stamp and connect to $w < w_0$ existing nodes with a probability that is proportional to the number of links that the existing nodes already have. In our implementation, we start with a small connected network and connect the new nodes with $w$ number of existing nodes using the preferential attachment method described in \cite{Barabasi} where the value of $w$ is adjusted such that the resulting graph has nearly the same number of edges as that of an original graph.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption {Real-world datasets used in the experiments}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{1.8cm}|p{1.5cm}|p{1.5cm}|p{1.5cm}|}
\hline
\textbf{Datasets} &\textbf{Total Nodes} &\textbf{Total Edges} &\textbf{Value of $\alpha$ (see section 4)} \\ \hline
DBLP & 12,591 & 49,620 & 4 \\
HepTh & 22,908 & 2,444,798 & 106 \\
Cora & 23,166 & 89,157 & 4 \\
HepPh & 28,093 & 3,148,447 & 112 \\
CiteSeer & 384,413 & 1,736,145 & 4 \\
Patents & 3,774,768 & 16,518,947 & 4 \\
Gnutella1 & 36,682 & 88,328 & 2 \\
Gnutella2 & 62,586 & 147,892 & 2 \\
Facebook & 63,731 & 817,035 & 12 \\
Prosperloans & 89,269 & 3,330,022 & 237 \\
Amazon & 403,394 & 2,443,408 & 6 \\
Pokec & 1,632,803 & 22,301,964 & 13 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{Tab1}
\end{table}
We implement our model and generate networks corresponding to each real-network of Table~\ref{Tab1}. We set the value of $\Delta m_t=\alpha$ such that we have nearly the same number of edges in our network as that of in the original graph. It would be interesting to mention that if we apply the formula $m_t = (\alpha+1)(t-1)$ to find $\alpha$, where, $t$ is the number of nodes and $m_t$ is the number of edges, then the number of nodes and edges will be same for theoretical and practical networks. We generate networks and plot the Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) of the degree of the original networks along with the networks generated by our model and Barrabasi-Albert model. The results are presented in Figure~\ref{Result_Fig}. First, these real-networks do not strictly follow the power-law degree distribution as clear from the initial part of the curve for small degree nodes. Second, we see that our model fits better than the BA model as we follow the distribution curve more than the BA model. It shows that we need to add some randomness in the graph for generating a weakly scale-free network. However, we believe that this randomness should be limited so that the degree distribution of the generated graph follows the original graph more precisely.
We apply the method presented in \cite{PL_Test} and give the values of power-law exponent and $k_{min}$ of original and generated graphs in Table~\ref{Tab2}. We also calculate the slope before $k_{min}$ for the original and generated graphs of WSM. We see that $\gamma >$ 3 for all the networks. It has already been observed in \cite{Cite1,Cite2} that $\gamma$ for citation networks fall in the range [3, 4], i.e., $\gamma \in $ [3,4] for citation networks. The table shows that $\gamma$ is almost equal to 3 for all the networks for the BA model whereas WSM can generate networks with varying values of $\gamma$.
The degree distribution over logarithm scales ($\log(N_{k,t}) ~\text{ versus } \log(k)$) of chosen weakly scale-free networks starts with small slope (in magnitude) for low-degree nodes and becomes more and more sharp for high-degree nodes. After a particular degree value, say $k_{min}$, the distribution almost acquires a fixed sharp slope. Our model for a small choice of $\alpha$, generates weakly scale-free networks and the distribution given by the proposed model behaves similarly. The model gives degree distribution starting with a small slope, which becomes sharper, until at the $k_{min}(\alpha)$, it almost acquires a sharp fixed slope $-(2\alpha +3)$. Slope variation of the distribution is depicted in the Figure~\ref{fig:slopes}. In the beginning, the slope is small (in magnitude), which gradually becomes sharper and finally acquires the fixed value of $-9$. The BA model does not fit the first portion of the curve corresponding to low degrees. This initial section of the distribution is more uniform and cannot be obtained through preferential attachment alone. One possible solution to obtain this uniformity lies in blending randomness to preferential attachment, which can be obtained through the edge-step described in the model. When we apply the edge-step to the network which initially follows the power-law distribution, there is a high probability of nodes being chosen from groups marked by low degrees (see Figure~\ref{fig:uniform}). This is because each node has the same probability of selection and low-degree nodes are more in number. As a result, these chosen nodes will move into the next higher degree node group, increasing the rank of next higher-degree nodes and making the degree distribution more uniform. The portion of the curve which tends to have uniform distribution depends on the number $\alpha$. When '$\alpha$' increases, $k_{min}$ shifts towards the right and the slope of portion after $k_{min}$ sharpens more, while the first portion characterized by flatness stretches rightwards. For generating these networks, the value of $\alpha$ is chosen as a small integer fixed for all time steps. Constant value gives the desired result and makes the formulation simple. A larger value makes a larger portion of the degree distribution uniform. So, choosing an appropriate value of $\alpha$ is desired.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\includegraphics[width=140mm, height=120mm]{Real_Nets.png}
\centering
\caption{Degree distribution of generated and original graphs. The value of $\alpha$ used for each dataset is given in the last column of Table 1.}
\label{Result_Fig}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Values of power-law exponent $\gamma$ and $k_{min}$ of original and generated graphs.}
\begin{tabular}{ |p{1.5cm}|p{0.9cm}|p{0.9cm}|p{0.9cm}|p{0.9cm}|p{0.9cm}|p{0.9cm}|p{0.8cm}|p{0.8cm}|}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Dataset} &
\multicolumn{3}{c|}{Original} &
\multicolumn{3}{c|}{WSM} &
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{BA} \\ \cline{2-9}
& \textbf{$\gamma$} & $k_{min}$ & Slope before $k_{min}$ & $\gamma$ & $k_{min}$ & Slope before $k_{min}$ & $\gamma$ & $k_{min}$ \\ \hline
DBLP & 3.35 & 25 & 1.14 & 5.23 & 22 & 1.12 & 2.97 & 11 \\
HepTh & 3.41 & 1244 & 0.97 & 5.46 & 895 & 0.77 & 2.95 & 109 \\
Cora & 3.32 & 30 & 1.48 & 7.58 & 32 & 1.57 & 3.01 & 11 \\
HepPh & 4.04 & 3226 & 0.91 & 5.48 & 953 & 0.72 & 2.96 & 111 \\
CiteSeer & 3.05 & 74 & 1.95 & 7.47 & 51 & 1.75 & 3.07 & 19 \\
Patents & 4.01 & 49 & 1.71 & 6.97 & 47 & 1.66 & 3.09 & 29 \\
Gnutella1 & 4.92 & 11 & 1.44 & 5.89 & 18 & 1.39 & 3.32 & 15 \\
Gnutella2 & 4.82 & 13 & 1.12 & 7.28 & 24 & 1.23 & 3.25 & 14 \\
Facebook & 4.39 & 157 & 1.35 & 6.56 & 112 & 1.27 & 2.99 & 38 \\
Pros.loans & 3.07 & 445 & 1.08 & 5.91 & 323 & 1.15 & 2.97 & 61 \\
Amazon & 3.39 & 53 & 0.89 & 7.01 & 66 & 1.05 & 3.06 & 31 \\
Pokec & 5.06 & 291 & 0.77 & 6.84 & 144 & 0.53 & 3.03 & 73 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{Tab2}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{ModelSlopes.png}
\centering
\caption{Model generated slopes for $\alpha = 3$. Settling slope for ($\log(P_k) ~\text{ versus } \log(k)$) distribution is $-9$. }
\label{fig:slopes}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{egesAddition.jpg}
\centering
\caption{Network is evolved using BA model first and then different number of edges edges added using the edge-step. Number of nodes used are $10000$. A portion of the graph is truncated. Graph marked by $0$, shows the distribution obtained by BA model. Graphs marked by $2000$, $4000$ and $8000$ are distributions obtained through adding different number of edges. Addition of edges flattens the first part of the degree distribution.($\log(P_k) ~\text{ versus } \log(k)$) distribution.}
\label{fig:uniform}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Discussion}
We have implemented a two step approach to network evolution. The preferential attachment used in the node-step tends to make the nodes distribution follow the power-law. The edge creation probability function gives uniform probability to each node, which tends the network to acquire uniform degree distribution, especially the portion for low-degree nodes. In the case when $\Delta m_t$ varies during each time step $t$, the edge-step dominates the node-step and the distribution becomes uniform, implying that the network is no longer a scale-free network, rather, is a random network. We see in Figure~\ref{Result_Fig} that our model closely follows the original networks, better than the BA model but not perfectly. We argue that our model fits the overall trend of the degree distribution, however, it needs tweaking for matching the fine details of a distribution. In the future, we would like to invest in this direction and also consider other metrics for comparing our model with the real networks.
\section{Related Work}
There have been many studies \cite{PL1, PL2, PL3, PL4, PL5, PL6, PL7, PL8, PL9} to explore the structure of complex online networks. For example, the authors in \cite{PL6, PL7} study the properties of real networks by analyzing large scale Online Social Networks (OSNs) and discover link symmetries, scale-free degree distributions, clustering phenomena, and community formations. Golder et al. \cite{PL8} analyze the Facebook network by studying the messaging pattern between friends and report that the degree distribution of the Facebook network follows a power-law. Kumar et al. \cite{PL9} study the structure and dynamics of Online Social Networks over time and proposes a generative model for OSNs. However, a very recent study \cite{SF_rare} analyzes many real-world networks and concludes that scale-free networks are rare and only a small number of real-world graphs follow a power-law degree distribution. The study also finds that a majority of real networks are weakly scale-free. In \cite{D4} authors presented a method of growing directed networks through mixing preferential and random linking. Preferential linking is used to connect a new node to the network. Then, the edges emerge in the network and nodes for these edges are chosen through the preferential attachment method. In the last step, the edges are created with end-nodes selected at random.
Generative models for complex networks produce graphs that typically satisfy the scale-free degree distribution. For example, the preferential attachment model \cite{Barabasi}, one of the best-known models for scale-free networks, simulates this property. Real-world modeling instances motivated the proposal of generalizations of the preferential attachment model, e.g., \cite{PA1,PA2, PA3, PA4, PA5, PA6, PA7, PA8, PA9, PA10, PA11, PA12}. A common characteristic of many of these models is the presence of the same attachment rule for all the nodes of the network. However, this hypothesis is not always realistic and the graphs generated by these models do not follow a weakly scale-free degree distribution. In \cite{PA10_Win1}, Magner et al. introduced a model in which new vertices choose the nodes for their links within time-based windows. Inspired by the idea of introducing windows, the authors in \cite{PA11_Win2} formulate their idea. They apply the preferential attachment rule to any node but re-enforce this rule with a uniform choice for the most recent nodes added to the network.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we propose a generative model for generating weakly scale-free networks. The model generated degree distribution is similar in trend with real network data for the whole range of degree values $k>0$. We provide a comprehensive mathematical analysis of the model in the discrete domain. We compare the model with real networks and find that our graphs closely match with the original graphs in their degree distribution.
\nocite{*}
\bibliographystyle{abbrvnat}
|
\section{\label{sec:into}INTRODUCTION\protect\\}
\indent The primary goal of GlueX is to map out a spectrum of hybrid exotic mesons. An important early step to accomplish this goal is to measure observables, which are the angular distributions of final state particles. The $\Sigma$ beam asymmetry is one such observable that provides insight into the production mechanism of pseudoscalar mesons. The production of pseudoscalar mesons at 9 GeV is expected to be described by the Regge Model~\cite{BARKER1975347,PhysRevD.92.074004}. The photoproduction of $\pi^0$, $\eta$ and $\eta'$ involves the t-channel exchange of Reggeons with allowed quantum numbers $J^{PC}=1^{--}$ or $J^{PC}=1^{+-}$~\cite{PhysRevD.95.034014}. The measurement of $\Sigma$ provides insight into the contributions of the natural exchange, $J^{PC}=1^{--}$, and the unnatural exchange, $J^{PC}=1^{+-}$, to the production mechanism. While $\Sigma_{\eta}$ and $\Sigma_{\eta'}$ provide valuable information on their own, the ratio of the two can shed light on the contributions of hidden strangeness exchange ($s\bar{s}$) states such as the $\phi$ and $h'$ and axial vector meson ($b$ and $h$) exchange~\cite{2017362}.
\indent There have been several experiments to make high precision measurements of $\Sigma_{\eta}$~\cite{Vartapetian:1980cn, PhysRevLett.81.1797, Elsner2007, Bartalini2007, PhysRevC.78.015203, COLLINS2017213} and a limited set of measurements of $\Sigma_{\eta'}$~\cite{COLLINS2017213,LeviSandri2015} at beam energies of less than 2 GeV . In this energy regime $\Sigma$ provides insight into the nucleon resonances. Experiments have measured $\Sigma$ and the other 15 pseudoscalar meson polarization observables to apply constraints to the models of the helicity amplitudes of the excited nucleon states. GlueX runs with a beam energy of 9 GeV and is therefore insensitive to the nucleon resonance spectrum. However, the t-channel component of the model extends from the low energy regime up to the GlueX energy. A precise measurement of $\Sigma$ by GlueX could apply new constraints to the t-channel component of the model and be extrapolated back to the low energy regime to help understand the nucleon resonance spectrum.
\indent The only previous measurement at high-energy of $\Sigma_{\eta}$ was made by GlueX~\cite{PhysRevC.95.042201} for only the $\eta\rightarrow2\gamma$ mode. The analysis presented here improves the precision of the same decay mode and also utilizes the $\eta\rightarrow\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ and $\eta\rightarrow3\pi^0$ decay modes to improve the precision on measuring $\Sigma$ for the $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta p$ reaction. The first high-energy measurement of $\Sigma$ for the $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta' p$ reaction using the $\eta'\rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-\eta$ decay is also presented here. The data that are presented represents a total of 20.8$pb^{-1}$ and were collected at Thomas Jefferson National Lab by the GlueX experiment. More details of this analysis were recently submitted for publication~\cite{Adhikari:2019gfa}.
\section{\label{sec:GXDetector}GlueX DETECTOR}
The GlueX spectrometer is a nearly 4$\pi$ hermetic detector that is capable of detecting neutral and charged particles along with performing robust particle identification. The Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) provides an electron beam that is incident on a thin diamond radiator and converted to a 9 GeV linearly-polarized photon beam via Bremsstrahlung radiation. The photon beam is measured to have an average polarization of around 35\% in the coherent peak region by a Triplet Polarimeter~\cite{Dugger:2017zoq}. The scattered electrons have their energy tagged in order to determine the energy of the photon beam allowing for exclusive reconstruction of events. The general organization of the many components of the GlueX spectrometer can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:gluex_detector}. Surrounding the target is a Start Counter~\cite{Pooser:2019rhu} used for particle identification (PID). The Central Drift Chamber envelops the Start Counter; immediately downstream of the Central Drift Chamber is a Forward Drift Chamber ~\cite{Pentchev:2017omk}. The drift chambers provide charged particle tracking. They are surrounded by a barrel electromagnetic calorimeter~\cite{Beattie:2018xsk}, which, in conjunction with the planar Forward Calorimeter, is responsible for detecting neutral particles. In front of the Forward Calorimeter is a Time-of-Flight detector responsible for PID measurements. The Barrel Calorimeter sits inside a solenoid magnet that applies a 2T magnetic field along the direction of the incoming beam.
\indent The data were collected with four different orientations of the diamond comprising two sets of data containing two orientations each. Two of the orientations set the linear polarization plane parallel and perpendicular to the floor ($x-z$ plane), referred to as PARA and PERP, respectively. These two orthogonal orientations comprise one set of data. The other set of data introduces a +45$^{\circ}$ azimuthal offset to both the PARA and PERP orientations. This results in two independent sets of data each with orthogonal directions of polarization. The orthogonality of the polarization directions simplifies the extraction of the beam asymmetry, $\Sigma$. The two independent sets of data allows for systematic studies between the two.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{cartoon_GlueX.png}
\caption{\label{fig:gluex_detector} GlueX Detector}
\end{figure}
\section{\label{sec:method}Method}
\indent In order to extract $\Sigma$ a clean sample is needed, the invariant mass distributions are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:masses}. These are produced by reconstructing exclusive events with a kinematic fit performed. The kinematic fit conserves energy and momentum, constrains the event vertex and constrains the mass of of the $\pi^0$ ($\eta$) in the $\eta\rightarrow\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ ($\eta'\rightarrow\pi^+\pi^-\eta$) decays.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{MENU_masses.png}
\caption{\label{fig:masses} Invariant mass distributions after the event selection criteria are applied.}
\end{figure}
\indent $\Sigma$ is extracted experimentally by measuring the angle of the reaction plane, $\phi$, while keeping the polarization angle, $\phi_\gamma$, fixed, see Fig.~\ref{fig:asym_diag}. When the reaction plane is perpendicular to the polarization plane the natural parity exchange will contribute positively to $\Sigma$. When the reaction plane is parallel to the polarization plane the unnatural parity exchange will contribute negatively to $\Sigma$, as shown in Eq.~\ref{eqn:Sigma_def}. If the pseudoscalar meson production mechanism is dominated by the natural exchange then $\Sigma$ will be consistent with +1; if the production mechanism is dominated by the unnatural exchange then $\Sigma$ will be consistent with -1.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{Asym_diag.png}
\caption{\label{fig:asym_diag} Illustration to display how the relevant angles are defined in the LAB frame.}
\end{figure}
\indent For the photoproduction of pseudoscalar mesons with a linearly polarized photon beam and an unpolarized target, the polarized cross section is given by~\cite{BARKER1975347}
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{pol}(\phi, \phi^{lin}_{\gamma}) = \sigma_{unpol} \left[ 1 - P_\gamma\Sigma \cos\left(2(\phi - \phi^{lin}_{\gamma})\right)\right],
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{unpol}$ is the unpolarized cross section, $P_\gamma$ is the magnitude of the photon beam polarization, $\phi$ is the azimuthal angle of the production plane, $\phi^{lin}_{\gamma}$ is the azimuthal angle of the photon beam linear polarization plane and $\Sigma$ is the beam asymmetry observable of interest. Therefore the $\Sigma$ beam asymmetry can be constructed as
\begin{equation}
\Sigma = \frac{\sigma_\perp - \sigma_\parallel}{\sigma_\perp + \sigma_\parallel}.
\label{eqn:Sigma_def}
\end{equation}
\noindent where
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:sigma_para}
\sigma_\parallel(\phi) &= \sigma_{pol}(\phi, \phi^{lin}_{\gamma}=0) = \sigma_{unpol} (1 - P_\parallel \Sigma \cos2\phi)\\
\label{eqn:sigma_perp}
\sigma_\perp(\phi) &= \sigma_{pol}(\phi, \phi^{lin}_{\gamma}=90) = \sigma_{unpol} (1 + P_\perp \Sigma \cos2\phi)
\end{align}
\noindent and $P_\parallel$ and $P_\perp$ are the magnitude of the photon beam polarization in the PARA and PERP orientations, respectively.
The GlueX detector is designed to be symmetric in $\phi$ and thus have a uniform acceptance and efficiency, but here we consider the general case of some arbitrary $\phi$-dependent detector acceptance and define the methods for extracting $\Sigma$ which cancel this detector acceptance. In the absence of background, one can define a polarization-dependent yield asymmetry, $S(\phi)$ as
\begin{equation}
S(\phi) = \frac{Y_\perp(\phi) - F_R Y_\parallel(\phi)}{Y_\perp(\phi) + F_R Y_\parallel(\phi)} = \frac{\sigma(\phi)_\perp A(\phi) - \sigma(\phi)_\parallel A(\phi)}{\sigma(\phi)_\perp A(\phi) + \sigma(\phi)_\parallel A(\phi)}
\label{eqn:asym}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $F_R$ is the flux ratio between $Y_{\perp}$ and $Y_{\parallel}$. The measured yield asymmetry $S(\phi)$ can be fit to a function of the following form:
\begin{equation}
\frac{Y(\phi)_\perp - F_RY(\phi)_\parallel}{Y(\phi)_\perp + F_RY(\phi)_\parallel} = \frac{(P_\perp + P_\parallel) \Sigma \cos2(\phi-\phi_0)}{2 + (P_\perp - P_\parallel) \Sigma \cos2(\phi-\phi_0)}.
\label{eqn:asym_fit}
\end{equation}
\noindent Therefore with independent measurements of the flux, the polarization plane offsets ($\phi_0$) and polarization magnitudes for PARA and PERP datasets, one can determine $\Sigma$ independently of any $\phi$-dependent detector acceptance effects. $\Sigma$ remains as the only free parameter in the fit and is extracted directly. An example distribution and fit to extract $\Sigma$ for the $\eta\rightarrow2\gamma$ mode can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:fit_ex}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\textwidth]{Asym_example.png}
\caption{\label{fig:fit_ex} Top left shows the azimuthal yield with the diamond in the PERP (90$^{\circ}$) orientation. The lower left shows the azimuthal yield with the diamond in the PARA (0$^{\circ}$) orientation. Top right shows the fractional asymmetry distribution from Eq.~\ref{eqn:asym} with the fit to extract $\Sigma$ using Eq.~\ref{eqn:asym_fit}.}
\end{figure}
\indent There is a significant background contribution in the signal mass region for the $\eta\rightarrow2\gamma$, $\eta\rightarrow\pi^{+}\pi^{-}\pi^{0}$ and $\eta'\rightarrow\pi^{+}\pi^{-}\eta$ reactions. An asymmetry measurement due to the background will generally have a different value than the asymmetry of the signal process and could affect the value of the beam asymmetry for the process of interest. The signal asymmetry can be corrected for the background contribution using the following expression
\begin{equation}
\Sigma_{signal} = \frac{\Sigma_{peak} - f\Sigma_{SB}}{1-f}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $f$ is the fraction of background events in the signal mass window, $\Sigma_{peak}$ is the measured asymmetry in the signal mass window and $\Sigma_{SB}$ is the background asymmetry from a sideband region. $\Sigma_{SB}$ is measured by selecting events with higher mass than the signal region where the background is present and fitting the asymmetry using the same method described above. The observed background asymmetry from the sideband regions ends up being opposite in sign to the peak asymmetry for these channels.
\section{Results}
The results of the measured $\Sigma$ as a function of momentum transfer, -t, are compared with the previous GlueX results and several theoretical predictions. The data points are positioned at the mean value of the t-distribution in each bin and the length of each horizontal error bar is the rms of the t-distribution in that bin. The height of each vertical error bar is equal to the total error while the height of the shaded box is equal to the systematic uncertainty associated with the measurement. The width of the shaded boxes is arbitrary for illustrative purposes.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{pi0_asym_MENU.png}
\caption{\label{fig:pi0_asym} Measured beam asymmetry, $\Sigma$, as a function of -t for the $\gamma p \rightarrow \pi^0 p, \pi^0 \rightarrow 2\gamma$ reaction. There is a relative uncertainty of 2.1\% due to the polarization measurement.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{eta3decay_Sigma_MENU.png}
\caption{\label{fig:pi0_asym} Measured beam asymmetry, $\Sigma$, as a function of -t for the $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta p$ reaction for the three most dominant decay modes of $\eta$. There is a relative uncertainty of 2.1\% due to the polarization measurement.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{etap_sigma_MENU.png}
\caption{\label{fig:pi0_asym} Measured beam asymmetry, $\Sigma$, as a function of -t for the $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta' p, \eta' \rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-\eta, \eta \rightarrow 2\gamma$ reaction. There is a relative uncertainty of 2.1\% due to the polarization measurement.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{Sigma_ratio_MENU.png}
\caption{\label{fig:pi0_asym} Measured beam asymmetry ratio between $\eta$ and $\eta'$ as a function of -t.}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
For each of the three reactions: $\gamma p \rightarrow \pi^0 p$, $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta p$ and $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta' p$, the value of $\Sigma$ is close to unity across the measured t-range, indicating that both production mechanisms are dominated by natural exchange, $J^{PC} = 1^{--}$. These are the first measurements of $\Sigma$ in this energy range for $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta' p$ and for multiple decay modes of $\eta$ in $\gamma p \rightarrow \eta p$. The ratios of these asymmetries are consistent with the predictions made by JPAC. This analysis will be continued with the full data set from the GlueX Phase 1 running which will increase the statistics by a factor of 4. The cross-sections for both reactions are currently being analyzed.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The work of the Medium Energy Physics group at Carnegie Mellon University was supported by DOE Grant No. DE-FG02-87ER40315. This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Nuclear Physics under contract DE-AC05-06OR23177.
\end{acknowledgments}
\nocite{*}
|
\section{The problem with football data}
Across the physical and social sciences, the gold standard for identifying causes and effects of certain behaviors, therapies, or interventions is the randomized experiment. Randomization is attractive because subjects that receive one treatment are, in expectation, comparable to those that receive another treatment. When examining an outcome of interest in a randomized trial, one can be confident that there are no underlying and unmeasurable differences (e.g, confounding variables) that would be responsible for causing said results. Succinctly – randomized designs ensure that apples are compared to apples.
Analyzing football data is like that, except the opposite. That is, all virtually all football data is observational, which means that any study of athlete or team behavior is potentially confounded by other variables linked to the game or player. Because of this, it is often quite difficult to rule out whether extraneous factors related to players and games are responsible for findings. In football, we rarely get to compare apples to apples.
Consider the well-established argument in NFL analytics circles that teams should pass more and run less \citep{kovash2009professionals, fivethirtyeightpass}. Unlike what would happen in randomized designs, teams don’t flip a coin to decide if they’ll attempt a pass. Instead, coaches call a pass play based on, among other factors, quarterback skill, game situation, and opposing defense, many of which are traits that likely differ from settings that call for run plays. Certain drivers of play choice, including down, distance needed for a first down, and score differential, are known prior to a play. But several other variables, such as quarterback health, defensive formation and personnel, and pre-snap movement, are both (i) likewise linked to whether or not a team attempts a pass, and (ii) difficult to quantify.
Not only are there several factors that go into NFL play-calling, but many cannot be measured using traditional data. An artifact of the NFL's historical data collection is that the hundreds of player movements and decisions in a play are reduced to one observation, one row in a data set. Worse, at least in terms of public data, most of the 22 players on the field at a given time aren't even recorded as being there \citep{schatz2005football}. At around 160 plays per game, it is feasible to look at play-level outcomes such as win probability, expected points, run/pass strategy, and fourth down behavior, while conditioning on what we know about plays before they happen. But both before and within a play, events in football are reactionary. Substitutions by one team lead to changes in personnel by the other. Formations by the defense lead to audibles by the offense. Motion from the slot back spurs a new defensive coverage scheme. And even after the play, hip placement of defensive backs creates new cuts from wide receivers and a lineman's first step signals an opposing linebacker's read. Under this complex interplay, nothing is as simple as whether or not a team's coach called a passing play, which makes trying to untangle the marginal effect of passing versus running exceedingly difficult. Thus, even when conditioning on several variables, such as \cite{fivethirtyeightpass}, which includes number of defenders near the line-of-scrimmage and other play and game-level characteristics, we are likely not accounting for something else.
Why do these differences matter? The answer lies in how we leverage analytical insight to impact the game. It means one thing to find that passing results in better outcomes (yards per play, expected yards per play, win probability added) than run plays. Analysis is often improved by conditioning on traits such as down, distance, and formation. But it means substantially more to find that among teams that ran the ball, they’d have been better off had they passed more often. This is a tricky but important distinction. This second claim is a causal one, and cannot be made with certitude unless we are able to condition on all relevant football variables. Researchers are unable to condition on variables we do not have, which jeopardizes any attempt to establish causality in football.
Beginning in 2016, those 160 observations per game turned into roughly 300,000. That season, each player was equipped with radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips in each of his shoulder pads, observations that provide the location of each player and the football at roughly 10 frames-per-second, wherever he goes on the field. From player movement, it is straightforward to calculate speed, angle, and acceleration. These data are termed the NFL's "Next Gen Stats" (see $https://nextgenstats.nfl.com/$ for more insight and summary metrics). For the first time, analysts can dig beyond play-level analyses to better understand the game. Variables that used to only show up in scouting reports -- ones such as route type, running back space, or defensive back coverage -- can now be estimated directly from data. Soon, analysts will be breaking down a game before their coaches have even watched the film.
Given the novelty of player tracking data, much remains unknown about the questions that can be answered from it. But for statisticians, the goal should be clear – how can we leverage this data to ensure we are comparing apples to apples?
\section{The importance of unmeasured confounding: a unique example}
Over the last several years, the lowest hanging fruit among NFL analytics enthusiasts has been team behavior on fourth down. Authors as far back as \cite{carter1978note}, and including more recent work from \cite{romer2006firms}, \cite{NYT4Bot}, and the author of this manuscript (\cite{yamlost}), have argued that teams are too passive on fourth down. Roughly, it has been argued that a more aggressive strategy is worth 0.4 wins per year \citep{romer2006firms, yamlost}. In a limited 16-game season, that fractional gain takes on an added importance.
Traditional fourth-down analyses has compared play outcomes (such as success rates, expected points, or win probability) before and after potential conversion attempts. The crux of these works requires some level of extrapolation regarding the outcomes for teams that did not go for it, if they were instead to have gone for it. For example, \cite{romer2006firms} used success rate, \cite{NYT4Botconstruction} used expected points, and \cite{yamlost} used win probability, all to imply that teams that did not go for it would have been better off going for it.
Each fourth-down analysis framework mentioned above assumed some level of equipoise between teams that did not go for it and those that did. \cite{yamlost} went as far as using propensity-score based matching techniques to ensure that teams that did not go for it were compared to similar teams that did go for it. But even the most novel of matching techniques designed for observational data cannot get around the limitation of unmeasured confounding. That is, what if there was an unmeasured characteristic of teams that went for it that fundamentally differed from those that did not go for it, one that simultaneously impacted both coaches’ decisions and play outcomes?
Turns out, there is one – the precise distance needed for a first down.
\subsection{How precise distance impacts fourth-down strategy}
In the gathering and disseminating of play-by-play data, NFL game-day assistants assign an integer value to each distance needed for a first down. All distances between 0 and 2 yards (not inclusive) are supposed to be listed as 4th-and-1’s, with successive buckets consisting of one-yard intervals. So, both 4th-and-0.1 inches and 4th-and-71.9 inches are listed as 4th-and-1’s. Likewise, distances of 4th-and-72 inches to 4th-and-107.9 inches are intended to be listed as 4th-and-2's.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{dist_v2.pdf}
\caption{Exact distances needed for a first down, split by team decision (Go for it, FG/Punt) and NFL play-by-play yard line categorization (4th-and-1, 4th-and-2). Teams that went for it were closer to the line to gain.}
\label{fig:my_label1}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:my_label1} shows two pairs of density plots showing the distributions of precise yards needed for a first down. Precise yardage was identified by comparing the football location on fourth down to the line to gain, with the latter obtained by using the football location on first down.\footnote{On goal-to-go plays, the goal line is used as the line to gain.} The chart is split by the integer categorization in the NFL play-by-play data (either a 4th-and-1 or a 4th-and-2). Fourth down plays from the 2017 through 2019 regular seasons are used.
Teams that went for it on 4th-and-1 were typically 0.70 yards away from the line to gain; teams that did not go for it, meanwhile, were 0.98 yards away. On 4th-and-2 plays, teams that went for it did so from a median distance of 1.98 yards away, compared to 2.06 yards away for teams that did not go for it.\footnote{We also used a second data wrangling strategy, where we compared the distance on the RFID chip embedded in the football to the RFID chip in the sideline chain that demarks the first down line. Differences in the numbers provided were negligible.}
The precise distance needed for a first down impacts both the attempt rate (among all teams) and the success rate (among teams that went for it), as shown in Figure \ref{fig:my_label2}. The left side of Figure \ref{fig:my_label2} provides estimates from a generalized additive model (GAM) of attempt rate (Did teams go for it (Y/N), conditional on the precise distance needed for a first down). Teams facing 4th-and-inches went for it about 70\% of the time, while teams in *long* 4th-and-1 situations went for it about 30\% of the time. The right side of Figure \ref{fig:my_label2} highlights how the rate of success varied based on precise distance needed for a first down, using estimates from a separate GAM (Did teams gain a first down (Y/N), conditional on the precise distance needed). On 4th-and-inches, teams converted roughly 79\% of the time, while in *long* 4th-and-1 situations, they converted around 55\% of the time.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{succ_v2.pdf}
\caption{Likelihood of going for it (left side) on 4th-down, and likelihood of a successful conversion (right side) on 4th-down. Each line shows the estimates from a generalized additive model of outcome (either going for it, or of successfully going for it) given the precise distance needed for a first down. Teams with shorter distances are more likely to go for it and to convert.}
\label{fig:my_label2}
\end{figure}
What does this imply?
Because they had further to go for a first down, teams that did not go for it did not have the same chances for success as the teams that did go for it. Thus, findings that inferred success rates, expected points, or win probability outcomes from teams that went for it almost assuredly overestimated the benefit of going for it on fourth down. For years, we failed to compare apples to apples.
Interestingly, although the GAM's in Figure \ref{fig:my_label2} allow for a non-linear relationship between distance and each outcome, each curve looks somewhat linear. If we instead fit a line using the integer categorization of distance, we would see roughly the same figure. That is, even though we were able to use more precise data, our results still matched how we could have predicted coaches to behave using only static data.
Replicating the approach of \cite{yamlost} can help approximate what this means as far as the value of 4th-down aggressiveness. While those authors used data from prior to the 2016 season, we use the 2017 through 2019 seasons only, with an identical approach and code provided at $https://github.com/statsbylopez/nfl-fourth-down/tree/master/Code$. We replicate under two scenarios. First, we use the play-by-play distance category to check results over the past three seasons. Second, we use the more precise distance that the offense needed in place of the integer distance. As in \cite{yamlost}, we only use plays in the ``go for it'' range of the 4th-down-bot \citep{NYT4Bot}.
Using the play-by-play distance category (4th-and-1, 4th-and-2, etc), we find that an aggressive fourth-down strategy would have been worth, in expectation, an extra 0.35 wins per-team per-year from 2017 to 2019. Among teams that did not go for, we find an estimated 3.8\% difference in win probability added per-play had they instead gone for it (95\% CI, 2.6\% to 4.9\%). This is somewhat in line with the original findings, with a slight drop perhaps driven by recent upticks in team aggressiveness on fourth down \citep{slate_4th}.
When accounting for the precise distance needed for a first down (instead of the integer distance), the benefit of an aggressive fourth-down strategy drops to an extra 0.22 wins per year. Alternatively, the average difference in win probability added per-play is estimated at 2.2\% (95\% CI, 0.6\% to 3.4\%). For both per-play win probability and per-team benefit in terms of wins-added per-year, roughly 40\% of the benefit to an aggressive fourth down strategy is negated when accounting for actual distance needed for a first down, a previously unmeasured variable.
Limitations in standard fourth down analysis are further broadened in Figure \ref{fig:my_label3}. In Figure \ref{fig:my_label3}, the precise distance on each 4th-and-1 play from tracking data is shown on the y-axis, relative to the estimated probability that the offense went for it (x-axis). This probability is calculated using play-by-play data only (we use the \cite{yamlost} model that includes 17 variables such as yard line, time, score, timeouts remaining, and pre-play win probability). Two smoothed trend curves are shown in Figure \ref{fig:my_label3} -- one apiece for teams that went for it (in blue) and for teams that did not go for it (red). Across nearly the entirety of go-for-it probability, the differences in precise distance needed for a first down between the two curves are larger than the aggregated difference (0.28 yards) shown in Figure \ref{fig:my_label1}, a result akin to Simpson's Paradox. For example, among teams with a low probability of going for it, teams that went for it were more than half a yard closer to the line to gain relative to teams that did not go for it. In other words, by conditioning on play-by-play data, the differences in tracking data distance between teams that went for it and those that did not go for it actually grew more extreme. From a causal inference perspective, by matching on observed covariates but not an unobserved one, \cite{yamlost} exacerbated the imbalance in the precise distance teams needed for a first down, potentially worsening the bias in the estimated effect. This phenomenon is known as squeezing the balloon \citep{brooks2013squeezing}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{dist_v4.pdf}
\caption{Exact distance (using tracking data) needed for a first down on 4th-and-1 plays, split by team decision (Go for it, FG/Punt) and compared to go-for-it probability (estimated using play-by-play data). Teams that went for it were closer to the line to gain for all levels of go-for-it probability. This chart highlights that when conditioning on observed variables (in this example, using play-by-play data), differences in previously unobserved variables (in this example, tracking data distance) can grow more extreme. In Figure \ref{fig:my_label1}, the difference in distance needed for a first down on 4th-and-1 plays was 0.28 yards, which is less than the difference between the blue and red curves above.}
\label{fig:my_label3}
\end{figure}
Though an attenuation of the effect size matches our intuition that going for it on fourth down is generally less advisable from longer distances, the primary lesson here extends beyond 4th-down strategy. Indeed, there could be other reasons why the benefit of aggressive approach remains underestimated \citep{romer2006firms}. Instead, we aim to highlight the surprising insight that tracking data can provide. Repeated analyses of something in the game of football, in this case, fourth downs, had told us that coaches should ``stop being stupid'' with how they were acting \citep{apex}. But there was more to the story, in this case something intrinsically different about teams that went for it and teams that did not, which was responsible for at least part of the original findings.
Indeed, in football, there's almost always more to the story.
\section{Crowdsourcing insight into player tracking data}
Each of the six papers included in this special issue on player tracking data in the National Football League use data from the Big Data Bowl, an event originating from the NFL league office designed to crowdsource public insight into tracking data, inspire analytically-inclined fans, curate ideas for team staffers, and spur data-driven innovation in football. The homepage for the 2019 event can be found at \url{https://operations.nfl.com/the-game/big-data-bowl/2019-big-data-bowl/}. Big Data Bowl participants were given full, raw player tracking data from the first six weeks of the 2017 regular season, as well as game, play, and player characteristics. More than 1800 participants signed up for the contest.
The papers in this special issue each highlight the multitude of ways in which football analysts can better understand movement, tendencies, and the spatial constructs underpinning football. Moreover, and in linking to the introductory fourth down example, tracking data has allowed each of the authors to make more apples-to-apples comparisons than is possible with play-level information.
We'll start with two papers on the principal movement of NFL wide receivers, a passing route. Chu, Reyers, Thomson, and Wu -- winners in the College section of the 2019 Big Data Bowl -- derive passing routes using model-based clustering, while Kinney matches receiver movement to the traditional NFL passing tree. In addition to making route labeling instantaneous (which would save coaches a tremendous amount of time), the intention behind both Chu et al and Kinney is to find similarity in movement. There's insight in both comparing one route to another (e.g, which routes create the most separation from defenders), but also in looking within routes themselves (e.g, which player breaks the quickest on a comeback, or how fast to players get downfield on a post).
Ventura and Dutta likewise look for similarity on passing plays, but instead focus on defensive coverages schemes. As in the wide receiver examples, common movement patterns emerge from the tracking data, representing cornerback coverage in each of zone and man defensive schemes. Defensive tendencies also play a role in Mallepalle, Yurko, Pelechrinis, and Ventura's paper that both (i) provides an approach for extracting raw NGS data from images and (ii) contrasts completion percentages for quarterbacks and defenses across field locations.
The final pair of papers take a more omniprescent approach to the entirety of a football play. First, Evans and Deshpande consider unobserved passing outcomes via Bayesian Additive Regression Trees. By being able to estimate receiver catch probabilities across an entire route, Deshpande and Evans open the door for identifying which coach called the best play, which quarterback made the best decision, or which wide receiver was most easily able to get open. Finally, Yurko, Matano, Richardson, Granered, Pospisil, Pelechrinis, and Ventura look frame by frame within a play to better understand the value of each player movement. Long short-term memory neural networks, in combination with conditional density estimation, allow for real-time estimates of, as an example, where a running back is likely to be tackled.
Figure 10 of the Yurko et al paper perhaps best exemplifies the value of tracking data in football for analyzing player ability. In this example, ball carrier Cordarelle Patterson received the handoff near midfield on a 2nd-and-short. By using the speed and movements of players on the field, Yurko et al estimate an expectation that Patterson would gain 15 yards. When cross referencing play-by-play data, however, only about 5\% of 2nd-and-short running plays near midfield are that successful. That is, before Patterson has even made a move with the ball, we know better than to judge his success against similar 2nd-and-short plays, and instead can focus on other examples where ball carriers had such high expectations.
\section{Conclusion and next steps}
This manuscript highlights several use cases of NFL tracking data, including both old and new research questions. In particular, we return to one of the league's oldest findings -- that teams should be more aggressive on fourth down -- to suggest that previous work may have overestimated the effect of going for it. Specifically, given the precise distance needed for a first down, teams that went for it on fourth down tended to do so from shorter distances, even when conditioning on the play-by-play yardage category. More generally, we summarize how the articles in this JQAS special issue on player tracking data will help shape the future of NFL analytics work.
Although we explicate on the value of player tracking insight in the NFL, it is important to acknowledge that this data is not a panacea for all football problems. Given the complexity of the game, there will always be fundamental football questions that data alone cannot precisely answer. Additionally, player tracking data is more arduous to analyze when compared to traditional play-by-play data; anecdotally, nearly every entrant to the league's Big Data Bowl wished they could have had more time to refine their work. To wit, here is a list of best practices and caveats for working with tracking data in the NFL.
1. Tracking data contains the $x$ and $y$ coordinates for each player and the football, collected at roughly 10 frames-per-second. Locational information is provided by signals sent from radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips that are placed inside each player's shoulder pads and inside the football. Speed, orientation, and distance traveled are straightforward to calculate using the tracking information, and are provided by the NFL's Next Gen Stats group. The typical game can contain anywhere from 250,000 to 350,000 rows of data (1 row for each player on the field, on each play, at each time stamp) on which actual game action is occurring. Players are also tracked before and after plays (this information was not provided as part of the Big Data Bowl, and is generally seen as less pertinent). The $z$ coordinate is not measured (e.g, height of the player, or height of the ball), nor can the precise location of helmets, arms, and legs be verified or easily estimated.
2. The field coordinates are fixed at each NFL stadia, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:my_label3}. From left to right, the length of the field spans from $x$ = 0 to $x$ = 120 (units are in yards), while the width of the field spans $y$ = 0 to $y$ = 160/3. Often, the first step in any analysis of tracking data is to ensure offensive teams are moving in the same direction. This requires flipping roughly half of a game's offensive plays from one direction to the other, while creating new $x$ (subtracted from 120) and $y$ (subtracted from 160/3) coordinates. Additionally, standardizing by the play's line-of-scrimmage may be warranted.
3. Several play-specific traits remain unknown even when looking at tracking data. These include the initial play call, if the quarterback or coach called an audible, how the defense would have lined up if the offense used a different formation, if a wide receiver ran the correct route, etc. Each of these variables may be pertinent to more precisely estimate, as an example, the value of passing versus running. The absence of important play-level qualities highlights the need for analysts to work directly and cohesively with football experts in order to maximize the value of tracking data.
4. Some specifics about the data that researchers may want to be aware of. First, given updates to the RFID tags prior to the start of each season, small differences in speed measurements may exist from one year to the next. Additionally, the coordinates on the football are considered to be slightly less reliable than the coordinates on the players. Next, while analyzing maximum speed for players is often an easy-to-understand step, researchers should be wary that occasionally this maximum speed is reached while (or immediately after) a player is hit or tackled by an opponent. That said, tracking data is considered quite dependable; according to the Next Gen Stats group, location information is accurate to within +/- 12 inches, and reliable data has been collected on 99.999\% of the entirety of players and games over the last three seasons.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = \textwidth]{Fig1.png}
\caption{Coordinates for working with player tracking data. Each stadia is equipped such that the home and visiting team end zones are fixed throughout the game. However, the end zones that teams defend in a game are not determined until the start of each half, and those directions change at the conclusion of the first and third quarters.}
\label{fig:my_label3}
\end{figure}
\textbf{}
For years, data-driven innovation in the football was limited, and the NFL was, rightly or not, perceived to be trailing other leagues in terms of how teams used analytics. But insight lagged, in part, because so too did data. Behind player tracking insight, such excuses are no longer valid. The NFL's new data cannot tell us where exactly to look for insight, but it will allow us to both create new stories and to make old ones more complete.
\bibliographystyle{DeGruyter}
|
\section{Introduction}
Camassa-Holm equation (CHE) has the form
\begin{equation}
u_t+2\omega u_x-u_{xxt}+3uu_x=2u_xu_{xx}+uu_{xxx},
\end{equation}
where $u=u(x,t)$ is the fluid velocity in the $x$ direction and
$\omega=const$ is related to the critical shallow water wave
speed. This equation has several equivalent forms, for example, the following ones
\begin{eqnarray}
q_t+2u_xq+uq_x&=&0, \label{1.2}\\
q-u+u_{xx}-\omega&=&0, \label{1.3}
\end{eqnarray}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
\kappa_t+ (u\kappa)_x&=&0, \label{1.4}\\
u-u_{xx}+\omega-\nu\kappa^{2}&=&0. \label{1.5}
\end{eqnarray}
The CHE was
implicitly contained in the class of multi-Hamiltonian system
introduced by Fuchssteiner and Fokas \cite{1}. It explicitly derived
as a shallow water wave equation by Camassa and Holm \cite{2} and after their works, the CHE and its different modifications have been studied from
many kinds of views \cite{0811.2552}-\cite{ivanov}.
The CHE shares most of
the properties of the integrable system of KdV type and
possesses Lax representation (LR), the bi-Hamiltonian structure, smooth solitary wave solutions (as $\omega>0$). For example, the solitary wave solutions become piecewise smooth and
have cusps at their peaks when
$\omega\rightarrow 0$. When $\omega=0$, these kind of solutions are weak
solutions and are called "peakons".
Integrable Heisenberg ferromagnet type equations play important role in modern physics and mathematics (see, e.g., Refs. \cite{assem1}-\cite{G4}). Recently, integrable generalized Heisenberg ferromagnet equations which are equivalent to Camassa-Holm type equations were presented (see, e.g., refs. \cite{assem1}-\cite{bayan2}). In particular, it is shown that the CHE is (geometrically and gauge) equivalent to the following Myrzakulov-CIV (M-CIV) equation \cite{assem1}-\cite{1907.10910}
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{xt}+(uA_{x})_{x}+(uA_{x}^{2}+0.5\{A_{x},A_{t}\})A-\frac{1}{4\beta^{2}}[A,A_{x}]&=&0,\label{1.6}\\
tr(A_{x}^{2})+8\beta^{2}(u-u_{xx})&=&0 \label{1.7}
\end{eqnarray}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
(A_{t}+uA_{x})_{x}+(u_{xx}-u_{x}-2u)A-\frac{1}{4\beta^{2}}[A,A_{x}]&=&0,\label{1.8}\\
tr(A_{x}^{2})+8\beta^{2}(u-u_{xx})&=&0. \label{1.9}
\end{eqnarray}
Here
\begin{eqnarray}
A&=&\left(\begin{array} {cc} A_{3}& A^{-} \\
A^{+}&-A_{3}\end{array}\right), \quad A^{\pm}=A_{1}\pm iA_{2}, \quad A^{2}=I, \quad {\bf A}=(A_{1}, A_{2}, A_{3}), \quad {\bf A}^{2}=1, \label{1.10}\\
A_{x}^{2}&=&-4\beta^{2}qI, \quad \{A_{t},A_{x}\}=[(8\beta^{2}u-4)q-2(u_{x}+u_{xx})]I. \label{1.11}
\end{eqnarray}
There are many integrable generalizations of the CHE. One of such generalizations is the CHE with self-consistent sources (CHESCS) \cite{0811.2552}. Such type integrable equations with self-consistent sources have
attracted much attention in recent years \cite{r5}. They have important
applications in many branches of physics. For example, the nonlinear
Schr$\ddot{o}$dinger equation with self-consistent sources describes the nonlinear interaction of an electrostatic
high-frequency wave with the ion acoustic wave in a two component
homogeneous plasma. Another example is the KdV
equation with self-consistent sources. It describes the interaction of
long and short capillary-gravity waves. The famous KP equation with self-consistent
sources represents the nonlinear interaction of a long wave with a short wave
packet propagating on the $x$-$y$ plane at some angle to each other.
In this paper, we would like to study the M-CIV equation with self-consistent sources (M-CIVESCS) and its relation with the CHESCS.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present the M-CIVESCS and its Lax representation. In Section 3, the integrable motion of curves induced by the M-CIVESCS are constructed. The gauge equivalence between the M-CIVESCS and CHESCS is established in Section 4. The peakon (soliton) and pseudo-spherical surfaces induced by the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS are presented in Section 5 and in Section 6, respectively. In Section 7, the formulas of the one
peakon solution of the M-CIVESCS is presented.
The M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS with $N$ self-consistent sources is given in Section 8. In Section 9,
the conclusion is presented.
\section{M-CIV equation with self-consistent sources}
One of examples of the peakon spin systems is the following Myrzakulov-CIV equation with self-consistent sources (M-CIVESCS)
\begin{eqnarray}
[A,A_{xt}] +(u[A,A_{x}])_{x}-\frac{1}{\beta^{2}}A_{x}-\alpha(\omega[A,A_{x}])_{x}+\frac{2\alpha^{2}\chi}{\beta^{2}+\alpha}A_{x}+\frac{2\alpha\beta^{2}\chi_{x}}{\beta^{2}+\alpha}A &=&0, \label{2.12}\\
\psi_{1x}-(\frac{\alpha}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4})[(A^{+}_{x}A^{-}-A^{+}A^{-}_{x})\psi_{1}+2(A^{-}_{x}A_{3}-A^{-}A_{3x})\psi_{2}]&=&0, \label{2.13}\\
\psi_{2x}-(\frac{\alpha}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4})[2(A^{+}A_{3x}-A^{+}_{x}A_{3})\psi_{1}+(A^{+}A^{-}_{x}-A^{+}_{x}A^{-})\psi_{2}]&=&0.\label{2.14}
\end{eqnarray}
This equation can be written in the following equivalent form
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{xt}+uA_{xx}+(uA_{x}^{2}+0.5\{A_{x},A_{t}\})A +u_{1}A_{x}+u_{3}I+u_{2}[A,A_{x}] &=&0, \label{2.15}\\
\psi_{1x}-(\frac{\alpha}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4})[(A^{+}_{x}A^{-}-A^{+}A^{-}_{x})\psi_{1}+2(A^{-}_{x}A_{3}-A^{-}A_{3x})\psi_{2}]&=&0, \label{2.16}\\
\psi_{2x}-(\frac{\alpha}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4})[2(A^{+}A_{3x}-A^{+}_{x}A_{3})\psi_{1}+(A^{+}A^{-}_{x}-A^{+}_{x}A^{-})\psi_{2}]&=&0, \label{2.17}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\omega=\phi_{1}^{2}$, $\chi=\omega_{x}+\omega$, $\alpha, \beta=consts$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
u_{1}&=&u-\alpha\omega, \quad u_{2}=\frac{\alpha^{2}\chi}{\beta^{2}+\alpha}-
\frac{1}{4\beta^{2}},\quad u_{3}=\frac{\alpha\beta^{2}\chi_{x}}{\beta^{2}+\alpha}, \label{2.18}\\
A&=&\left(\begin{array} {cc} A_{3}& A^{-} \\
A^{+}&-A_{3}\end{array}\right), \quad A^{\pm}=A_{1}\pm iA_{2}, \quad A^{2}=I, \quad {\bf A}=(A_{1}, A_{2}, A_{3}), \quad {\bf A}^{2}=1.\label{2.19}
\end{eqnarray}
The LR of the M-CIVESCS reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi_{x}&=&U_{1}\Psi, \label{2.20}\\
\Psi_{t}&=&V_{1}\Psi.\label{2.21}
\end{eqnarray}
Here
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{1}&=&\left(\frac{\lambda}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4}\right)[A,A_{x}], \label{2.22}\\
V_{1}&=&\left(\frac{1}{4\beta^{2}}-\frac{1}{4\lambda^{2}}\right)A+\left[\frac{1}{8\beta\lambda}-\frac{1}{8\beta^{2}}-\left(\frac{\lambda}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4}\right)u\right][A,A_{x}]+\left(\frac{1}{2\lambda}-\frac{1}{2\beta}\right)Z,\label{2.23}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
Z=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{u_{x}+u_{xx}}{\beta}-\frac{\alpha\beta\chi_{x}}{\beta^{2}+\alpha}\right]^{-1}\left[A,A_{t}-\left(\frac{1}{2\beta}-u+\frac{\alpha\beta\omega}{\beta^{2}+\alpha}\right)A_{x}\right].\label{2.24}
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Integrable motion of space curves induced by the M-CIVESCS}
In this section, we consider the integrable motion of space curves induced by the M-CIVESCS. As usual, let us consider a smooth space curve ${\bf \gamma} (x,t): [0,X] \times [0, T] \rightarrow R^{3}$ in $R^{3}$. Let $x$ is the arc length of the curve at each time $t$. The corresponding Frenet-Serret equation and its temporal counterpart look like
\begin{eqnarray}
\left ( \begin{array}{ccc}
{\bf e}_{1} \\
{\bf e}_{2} \\
{\bf e}_{3}
\end{array} \right)_{x} = C
\left ( \begin{array}{ccc}
{\bf e}_{1} \\
{\bf e}_{2} \\
{\bf e}_{3}
\end{array} \right),\quad
\left ( \begin{array}{ccc}
{\bf e}_{1} \\
{\bf e}_{2} \\
{\bf e}_{3}
\end{array} \right)_{t} = G
\left ( \begin{array}{ccc}
{\bf e}_{1} \\
{\bf e}_{2} \\
{\bf e}_{3}
\end{array} \right), \label{3.25}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\bf e}_{j}$ are the unit tangent vector $(j=1)$, principal normal vector $(j=2)$ and binormal vector $(j=3)$ which given by ${\bf e}_{1}={\bf \gamma}_{x}, \quad {\bf e}_{2}=\frac{{\bf \gamma}_{xx}}{|{\bf \gamma}_{xx}|}, \quad {\bf e}_{3}={\bf e}_{1}\wedge {\bf e}_{2}, $
respectively.
Here
\begin{eqnarray}
C=
\left ( \begin{array}{ccc}
0 & \kappa_{1} & \kappa_{2} \\
-\kappa_{1} & 0 & \tau \\
-\kappa_{2} & -\tau & 0
\end{array} \right),\quad
G=
\left ( \begin{array}{ccc}
0 & \omega_{3} & \omega_{2} \\
-\omega_{3} & 0 & \omega_{1} \\
-\omega_{2} & -\omega_{1} & 0
\end{array} \right),\label{3.26}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\tau$, $\kappa_{1}, \kappa_{2}$ are the "torsion", "geodesic curvature" and "normal curvature" of the curve, respectively; $\omega_{j}$ are some functions. The compatibility condition of the equations (\ref{3.25}) reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
C_t - G_x + [C, G] = 0\label{3.27}
\end{eqnarray}
or in elements
\begin{eqnarray}
\kappa_{1t}- \omega_{3x} -\kappa_{2}\omega_{1}+ \tau \omega_2&=&0, \label{53} \\
\kappa_{2t}- \omega_{2x} +\kappa_{1}\omega_{1}- \tau \omega_3&=&0, \label{54} \\
\tau_{t} - \omega_{1x} - \kappa_{1}\omega_2+\kappa_{2}\omega_{3}&=&0. \label{55} \end{eqnarray}
We now assume ${\bf A}\equiv {\bf e}_{1}$. Let take place the following expressions
\begin{eqnarray}
\kappa_{1}=i, \quad \kappa_{2}=\lambda(q-1), \quad \tau=-i\lambda(q+1), \label{57}
\end{eqnarray}
where $q=0.5\lambda(\kappa_{2}+i\tau)$. Then we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_{1} & = &i[(0.5\lambda^{-1}-\lambda u)(q+1)+0.5\lambda^{-2}(u_{x}+u_{xx})],\label{58}\\
\omega_{2}&=& [(0.5\lambda^{-1}-\lambda u)(q+1)+0.5\lambda^{-1}(u_{x}+u_{xx})], \label{59} \\
\omega_{3} & = &i[0.5\lambda^{-2}-u-u_{x}]. \label{60}
\end{eqnarray}
Now Eqs.(\ref{53})-(\ref{55}) give us the following equations for $q, u, \phi_{1}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
q_t+2qu_x+uq_x-\omega_{x}+\omega_{xxx}&=&0,\label{3.35}\\
\phi_{1xx}-(\alpha^{2}q+\frac{1}{4})\phi_{1}&=&0 \label{3.36}
\end{eqnarray}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
q_t+2qu_x+uq_x-[(\phi_{1}^2)_x-(\phi_{1}^2)_{xxx}]&=&0,\\
\phi_{1xx}-(\alpha^{2}q+\frac{1}{4})\phi_{1}&=&0. \label{90}
\end{eqnarray}
It is nothing but the CHESCS \cite{0811.2552}-\cite{Iroda}.
So, we have proved that the M-CIVESCS is the Lakshmanan (geometrical) equivalent to the CHESCS.
\section{Gauge equivalence between the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS}
Above, we have shown that the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS are the geometrical (Lakshmanan) equivalent each to other. Now we consider the possible gauge equivalence between these equations \cite{gulmira1}. First, we note that from the results of the previous section and from the isomorphism $so(3)\approx su(2)$ follow the LR for the CHESCS of the form \cite{0811.2552}
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi_{x}&=&U_{2}\Phi,\label{4.39}\\
\Phi_{t}&=&V_{2}\Phi, \label{4.40}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi=\left( \begin{array}{c}
\phi_{1} \\
\phi_{2}
\end{array} \right), \quad U_{2}=\left ( \begin{array}{cc}
-0.5 & \lambda \\
\lambda q & 0.5
\end{array} \right), \quad
V_{2}=V_{20}+V_{2}^{'}.
\end{eqnarray}
Here
\begin{eqnarray}
V_{20}&=&\left ( \begin{array}{cc}
\frac{u_{x}+u_{xx}}{2}-\frac{1}{4\lambda^{2}} & \frac{1}{2\lambda} - u\lambda \\
\frac{u_{x}+u_{xx}+q}{2\lambda}-uq\lambda & \frac{1}{4\lambda^{2}}-\frac{u_{x}+u_{xx}}{2}
\end{array} \right), \\
V_{2}^{'}&=&-\frac{\alpha\lambda^{2}\chi}{2(\lambda^{2}+\alpha)}\sigma_{3}+\frac{\alpha\lambda^{3}\omega}{\lambda^{2}+\alpha}\left ( \begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
q & 0
\end{array} \right)-\frac{\alpha\lambda\chi_{x}}{2(\lambda^{2}+\alpha)}\Sigma
, \quad
\Sigma=\left( \begin{array}{cc}
0 & 0 \\
1 & 0
\end{array} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
The compatibility condition $\Phi_{xt}=\Phi_{tx}$ given by
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{2t}-V_{2x}+[U_{2},V_{2}]=0 \label{9}
\end{eqnarray}
is equivalent to the CHESCS (\ref{3.35})-(\ref{3.36}).
Consider the transformation
$\Psi=g^{-1}\Phi$, where $\Psi$ is the solution of the equations (\ref{2.20})-(\ref{2.21}) and $g=\Phi|_{\lambda=\beta}$. Then the Lax pairs of the M-CIVESCS and CHESCS is related by the following equations
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{1}=g^{-1}U_{2}g-g^{-1}g_{x}, \quad V_{1}=g^{-1}V_{2}g-g^{-1}g_{t}.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that these LR can be rewritten in the equivalent scalar forms. For example, the equivalent scalar form of the LR for the CHESCS is given by \cite{0811.2552}
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_{1xx}&=&(\lambda^{2} q+\frac{1}{4})\phi_{1},\\
\phi_{1t}&=&\left(\frac{1}{2\lambda^{2}}-u+\frac{\alpha\lambda^{2}\omega}{\lambda^{2}+\alpha}\right)\phi_{1x}+\left(\frac{1}{2}u_x-\frac{\alpha\lambda^{2}\omega_{x}}{2(\lambda^{2}+\alpha)}\right)\phi_{1}.
\end{eqnarray}
The compatibility condition $\phi_{1xxt}=\phi_{1txx}$ is equivalent to the CHESCS (\ref{3.35})-(\ref{3.36}).
Finally we present the following important relation between the solutions of the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS:
\begin{eqnarray}
tr(A_{x}^{2})=-8\beta^{2}q=-8\beta^{2}(u-u_{xx})
\end{eqnarray}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf A}_{x}^{2}=-4\beta^{2}q=-4\beta^{2}(u-u_{xx}).
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Peakon (soliton) surfaces}
\subsection{Peakon surfaces corresponding to the CHESCS}
As well-known, the Sym-Tafel formula gives an interesting connection between the classical geometry of manifolds immersed in $R^{n}$ and the integrable systems. Using the Sym-Tafel formula, here we want to construct the soliton (peakon) surface induced by the CHESCS and the M-CIVESCS. To this end, let us consider a $\lambda$-family of parametric surfaces given by the matrix $r=r(x,t,\lambda)$. According to the Sym-Tafel formula, this matrix defines as
\begin{eqnarray}
r=\Phi^{-1}\Phi_{\lambda}, \label{5.50}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Phi$ is the solution of the equations (\ref{4.39})-(\ref{4.40}). We have
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{x}=\Phi^{-1}U_{2\lambda}\Phi, \quad r_{t}=\Phi^{-1}V_{2\lambda}\Phi.\label{0}
\end{eqnarray}
Then the components of the metric tensor define as
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{ij}={\bf r}_{,i}\cdot{\bf r}_{,j}, \label{5.52}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\bf r}=(r_{1},r_{2},r_{3})$ is the position vector, ${\bf r}_{,1}\equiv{\bf r}_{x}, \quad {\bf r}_{,2}\equiv{\bf r}_{t}$. Then for example, the first fundamental form of the soliton surface is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
I=g_{ij}dx^{i}dx^{j}={\bf r}_{x}^{2}dx^{2}+2{\bf r}_{x}{\bf r}_{t}dxdt+{\bf r}_{t}^{2}dt^{2}, \label{0}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf r}_{x}^{2}=\frac{1}{2}tr(r_{x}^{2}), \quad {\bf r}_{x}{\bf r}_{t}=\frac{1}{2}tr(r_{x}r_{t}), \quad {\bf r}_{t}^{2}=\frac{1}{2}tr(r_{t}^{2}).\label{0}
\end{eqnarray}
For example,
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{11}={\bf r}_{x}^{2}=q. \label{0}
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly, we can construct the second fundamental form in the standard way (see, e.g., \cite{jan}).
\subsection{Peakon surfaces corresponding to the M-CIVESCS}
Let us now we present the main elements of the soliton (peakon) surfaces induced by the M-CIVESCS. In this case, the matrix $r$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
r=\Psi^{-1}\Psi_{\lambda}. \label{0}
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\Psi$ is the solution of the equations (\ref{2.20})-(\ref{2.21}). These equations give
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{x}=\Psi^{-1}U_{1\lambda}\Psi, \quad r_{t}=\Psi^{-1}V_{1\lambda}\Psi.\label{0}
\end{eqnarray}
Then the components of the metric tensor is given by the formula (\ref{5.52}).
For example,
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{11}=-\frac{1}{8\beta^{2}}tr(A_{x}^{2}). \label{5.55}
\end{eqnarray}
Now it is not difficult to construct the first and second fundamental forms of the peakon (soliton) surfaces that we can do in the standard way (see, e.g., \cite{jan}).
\section{Pseudo-spherical surfaces}
In this section, we briefly present the main facts on the pseudo-spherical surfaces induced by the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS.
\subsection{Pseudo-spherical surfaces related with the CHESCS}
Consider the following linear problem
\begin{eqnarray}
d\Phi=Y_{2}\Phi,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_{2}=\frac{1}{2}\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\omega^{2} & \omega^{1}-\omega^{3} \\
\omega^{1}+\omega^{3} & -\omega^{2}
\end{array} \right)= U_{2}dx+V_{2}dt.
\end{eqnarray}
The integrable condition of the 1-form $Y_{2}$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
d^{2}Y_{2}=(U_{2t}-V_{2x}+[U_{2},V_{2}])dt\wedge dx=0.
\end{eqnarray}
This means that the one-forms $\omega_{j}$ satisfy the following structure equations
\begin{eqnarray}
d\omega^{1}&=&\omega^{3}\wedge\omega^{2}, \\
d\omega^{2}&=&\omega^{1}\wedge\omega^{3}, \\
d\omega^{3}&=&\omega^{1}\wedge\omega^{2}.
\end{eqnarray}
These equations are equivalent to the CHESCS.
\subsection{Pseudo-spherical surfaces related with the M-CIVESCS}
We now return to the M-CIVESCS. To construct the pseudo-spherical surfaces induced by this equation, let us consider the linear problem
\begin{eqnarray}
d\Psi=Y_{1}\Psi,
\end{eqnarray}
where the 1-form $Y_{1}$ reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
Y_{1}=\frac{1}{2}\left( \begin{array}{cc}
\sigma^{2} & \sigma^{1}-\sigma^{3} \\
\sigma^{1}+\sigma^{3} & -\sigma^{2}
\end{array} \right)= U_{1}dx+V_{1}dt.
\end{eqnarray}
As in the previous subsection, we consider the integrable condition of the 1-form $Y_{1}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
d^{2}Y_{1}=(U_{1t}-V_{1x}+[U_{1},V_{1}])dt\wedge dx=0
\end{eqnarray}
which in components takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}
d\sigma^{1}&=&\sigma^{3}\wedge\sigma^{2}, \\
d\sigma^{2}&=&\sigma^{1}\wedge\sigma^{3}, \\
d\sigma^{3}&=&\sigma^{1}\wedge\sigma^{2}.
\end{eqnarray}
These equations is equivalent to the M-CIVESCS. Thus the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS describe some kind pseudo-spherical surfaces as their analogies without sources (see, e.g., refs. \cite{reyes1}-\cite{reyes2}).
\section{One peakon solution of the M-CIV ESCS}
As the integrable equation, the M-CIVESCS has all ingredients of integrable systems like LR, conservation laws, bi-Hamiltonian structure, soliton solutions and so on. In particular, it admits the peakon solutions. Here let us present a one peakon solution of the M-CIVESCS. To construct this 1-peakon solution, we use the corresponding 1-peakon solution of the CHESCS \cite{0811.2552}. The 1-peakon solution of the M-CIVESCS has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
A^{+}&=&\frac{2g_{1}g_{2}}{|g_{1}|^{2}+|g_{2}|^{2}}, \quad A_{3}=\frac{|g_{1}|^{2}-|g_{2}|^{2}}{|g_{1}|^{2}+|g_{2}|^{2}}, \\
\psi_{1}&=&\frac{\bar{g}_{1}\phi_{1}+\bar{g}_{2}\phi_{2}}{|g_{1}|^{2}+|g_{2}|^{2}}, \quad \psi_{2}=\frac{-g_{2}\phi_{1}+g_{1}\phi_{2}}{|g_{1}|^{2}+|g_{2}|^{2}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Here
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_{2}=\lambda^{-1}(\phi_{1x}+0.5\phi_{1}),\quad g_{j}=\phi_{j}|_{\lambda=\beta},
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_{1}=\sqrt{\sigma'(t)c}e^{-\frac{1}{2}|x-ct+\sigma(t)|}, \quad u=ce^{-|x-ct+\sigma(t)|}
\end{eqnarray}
is the 1-peakon solution of the CHESCS \cite{0811.2552}.
\section{Integrable self-consistent $N$ sources case}
In the previous sections, we have considered the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS with the one self-consistent source. In this section, we present, in short form, integrable generalizations of these equations with $N$ self-consistent sources.
\subsection{M-CIV equation with self-consistent $N$-sources}
The M-CIVE with $N$ self-consistent sources has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
[A,A_{xt}+(uA_{x})_{x}]-\frac{1}{\beta^{2}}A_{x}-\sum_{j=1}^{N}\left(\lambda_{j}(\omega_{j}[A,A_{x}])_{x}+\frac{2\lambda_{j}^{2}\chi_{j}}{\beta^{2}+\lambda_{j}}A_{x}+\frac{2\lambda_{j}\beta^{2}\chi_{jx}}{\beta^{2}+\lambda_{j}}A \right)&=&0, \label{21}\\
\psi_{1jx}-(\frac{\lambda_{j}}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4})[(A^{+}_{x}A^{-}-A^{+}A^{-}_{x})\psi_{1j}+2(A^{-}_{x}A_{3}-A^{-}A_{3x})\psi_{2j}]&=&0, \label{43}\\
\psi_{2jx}-(\frac{\lambda_{j}}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4})[2(A^{+}A_{3x}-A^{+}_{x}A_{3})\psi_{1j}+(A^{+}A^{-}_{x}-A^{+}_{x}A^{-})\psi_{2j}]&=&0, \label{43}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\omega_{j}=\phi_{1j}^{2}$, $\chi_{j}=\omega_{jx}+\omega_{j}$, $\alpha, \beta=consts$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
A=\left(\begin{array} {cc} A_{3}& A^{-} \\
A^{+}&-A_{3}\end{array}\right), \quad A^{\pm}=A_{1}\pm iA_{2}, \quad A^{2}=I, \quad {\bf A}=(A_{1}, A_{2}, A_{3}), \quad {\bf A}^{2}=1.
\end{eqnarray}
The LR of the M-CIVESCS reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi_{x}&=&U_{1}\Psi,\\
\Psi_{t}&=&V_{1}\Psi.
\end{eqnarray}
Here
\begin{eqnarray}
U_{1}&=&\left(\frac{\lambda}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4}\right)[A,A_{x}],\\
V_{1}&=&\left(\frac{1}{4\beta^{2}}-\frac{1}{4\lambda^{2}}\right)A+\left[\frac{1}{8\beta\lambda}-\frac{1}{8\beta^{2}}-\left(\frac{\lambda}{4\beta}-\frac{1}{4}\right)u\right][A,A_{x}]+\left(\frac{1}{2\lambda}-\frac{1}{2\beta}\right)\sum_{j=1}^{N}Z_{j},
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
Z_{j}=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{u_{x}+u_{xx}}{\beta}-\frac{\lambda_{j}\beta\chi_{jx}}{\beta^{2}+\lambda_{j}}\right]^{-1}\left[A,A_{t}-\left(\frac{1}{2\beta}-u+\frac{\lambda_{j}\beta\omega_{j}}{\beta^{2}+\lambda_{j}}\right)A_{x}\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{CHE with self-consistent $N$-sources}
The CHE with $N$ self-consistent sources has the form \cite{0811.2552}
\begin{eqnarray}
q_t+2qu_x+uq_x-\sum_{j=1}^N[(\varphi_j^2)_x-(\varphi_j^2)_{xxx}]&=&0,\\
\varphi_{j,xx}-(\lambda_j q+\frac{1}{4})\varphi_j&=&0.
\end{eqnarray}
Its LR reads as \cite{0811.2552}
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi_{xx}&=&(\frac{1}{4}+\lambda q)\phi,\\
\phi_{t}&=&\frac{u_{x}}{2}\phi+(\frac{1}{2\lambda
}-u)\phi_{x}+2 \sum\limits_{j=1}^{N}\frac{\lambda\lambda_{j}
\phi_{j}}{\lambda-\lambda_{j}}(\phi_{jx}\phi-\phi_{j}\phi_{x}),
\end{eqnarray}
which means that the CHESCS is Lax integrable \cite{0811.2552}.
\section{Conclusion}
The integrable generalized Heisenberg ferromagnet equation with self-consistent sources, namely, the M-CIVESCS is investigated. The integrable motion of space curves induced by the M-CIVESCS is constructed. Using this result, the geometrical equivalence between the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS is established. It is shown that the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS is gauge equivalent each to other. The simplest conservation law and the one peakon solution
are constructed. The peakon (soliton) surfaces induced by the M-CIVESCS and the CHESCS are presented.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported by the Ministry of Edication and Science of Kazakhstan under
grants 0118РК00935 and 0118РК00693.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away....\ \citep{StarWars}:\ in 1909 a pair of nova eruptions in the 2.5\,Mly distant Andromeda Galaxy (M\,31) were discovered and followed photographically by George \citet{1917PASP...29..210R}.
Fast forward a hundred years to the present day and we have discovered over 1,100 nova eruptions in M\,31, have studied novae in almost two dozen galaxies, and have gained tremendous insights into nova physics and evolution from dedicated multi-wavelength surveys of extragalactic nova populations. At the threshold of a new golden age of multi-messenger time-domain surveys, we present a detailed review of many of the lessons learnt on the road so far.
The last extensive review of extragalactic nova populations was presented by \citet{2014ASPC..490...77S}, but this predated major multi-wavelength surveys, the rise of amateur observers, and the discovery of the `rapid recurrent novae' (RRNe). \citet{2017ASPC..509..515D} presented a brief review of the prototype RRN M31N\,2008-12a, but much has been discovered since then. In this review we will summarise the last century of extragalactic nova work, focussing in more detail on the last decade. We will introduce the rapidly expanding field of extragalactic novae, particular the newly discovered RRN subgroup with recurrence periods $P_\mathrm{rec}\leq10$\,yrs, along with the annually erupting M31N\,2008-12a. We will end with a look forward to the next few decades.
\section{Prerequisites}\label{pre}
Here we briefly summarise those aspects of nova astrophysics that will not be covered in detail in this review, yet are a necessary foundation and context for understanding the following sections.
\subsection{Nova physics:\ interacting binaries}
A classical nova (CN) eruption is the result of a thermonuclear runaway (TNR) on the surface of an accreting white dwarf \citep[WD; see][for the early history and recent reviews]{1949AnAp...12..281S,1951AnAp...14..294S,1957IAUS....3...77G,1959ApJ...130..916C,1972ApJ...176..169S,1976IAUS...73..155S,Sta08,2016PASP..128e1001S,1978A&A....62..339P,Jos16}. The TNR occurs following the accumulation of hydrogen-rich material from a donor star onto the WD within a close binary system.
Novae are a class of cataclysmic variable \citep[CV; see][]{1949ApJ...109...81S,1954ApJ...120..377J,1964ApJ...139..457K,1995cvs..book.....W}, where the donor is typically a late-type main sequence star and mass transfer usually proceeds through an accretion disk surrounding the WD. There are (observationally) small sub-classes where magnetic accretion or accretion columns play a role, and systems with further evolved donors; sub-giants or red giants \citep{2012ApJ...746...61D}.
\subsection{Multi-wavelength emission}
The TNR drives the ejection of material from the WD's surface at relatively high velocities. The expanding pseudo-photosphere (PP) of the initially optically-thick ejecta results in a rapid increase in luminosity \citep[see][for anthologies of recent reviews]{2008clno.book.....B,2014ASPC..490.....W}. What one observes depends upon the structure and geometry of those ejecta, and the emission and absorption processes within. In general, the observed radio, infrared (IR), optical, and ultraviolet (UV) emissions reflect the characteristics of the ejected shell.
Following the TNR, nuclear burning continues on the WD surface in quasi-hydrostatic equilibrium, until the accreted fuel source is exhausted \citep{1978A&A....62..339P}. As the ejecta become optically thin, the PP recedes back to the WD, with peak emission migrating to shorter wavelengths. If the ejecta become fully transparent before the nuclear burning ceases, the underlying `super-soft X-ray source' (SSS) may be revealed \citep[see, for e.g.,][]{2006ApJ...651L.141H,2008ASPC..401..139K,2015JHEAp...7..117O}. Importantly, the visibility windows for the SSS emission are typically much longer (years to decades) than for the optical light \citep[weeks to months; see, for e.g.,][]{2014A&A...563A...2H}.
\subsection{Nova evolution and the supernova connection}
It is widely accepted that all novae inherently recur. Following each eruption the WD and donor remain (relatively) unscathed and accretion may soon reestablish -- allowing the cycle to begin anew. An observationally small sub-set, dubbed the recurrent novae (RNe), have been observed to undergo multiple eruptions. Observed values of $P_\mathrm{rec}$ range from 1\,yr \citep{2014A&A...563L...9D} up to 98\,yrs \citep{2009AJ....138.1230P}. It seems most likely that both ends of this scale are simply due to current observational limits.
Novae have long been heralded as one of the possible single-degenerate pathways toward type Ia supernovae \citep[SNe\,Ia; see, for e.g.,][]{1973ApJ...186.1007W,1999ApJ...522..487H,1999ApJ...519..314H,2000ARA&A..38..191H}, as, to be absolutely fair, have almost all scenarios that allow a WD to increase in mass. But a number of questions regarding the viability of the nova pathway have been posed:
Do the WDs in novae increase in mass? This is particularly important as only CO WDs grow to produce SNe\,Ia; their ONe cousins result in an accretion-induced collapse to a neutron star \citep{1996ApJ...459..701G}, once the \citet{1931ApJ....74...81C} mass is surpassed. Pioneering multi-cycle nova eruption models have now shown that the WDs do indeed increase in mass, with little or no tuning of the initial parameters \citep{2014MNRAS.437.1962H,2015MNRAS.446.1924H,2016ApJ...819..168H}. A number of other authors have arrived at similar results \citep[see, for e.g.,][]{2008NewAR..52..386H,2012BASI...40..419S,Sum19,doi:10.1063/1.4866984,2017ApJ...844..143K}.
Are the WDs in the RN systems -- those already close to the Chandrasekhar mass -- CO or ONe? To date, there remains no published evidence for super-Solar abundances of Ne in the ejecta of RNe \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2013A&A...556C...2M}.
Finally, are there simply enough novae, accreting at a high enough rate, to impart a measurable impact as a SN\,Ia pathway? We don't know (see Section~\ref{sec:rrne}). But, if novae do provide a significant channel then they hold an advantage over other progenitors, they are by far the most luminous, allowing their populations to be studied out to $\sim20$\,Mpc \citep[see, for e.g.,][]{2015ApJ...811...34C}, and beyond.
\subsection{The advantages and drawbacks of Galactic novae}
Novae in the Galaxy, and even in the Magellanic Clouds, have been studied individually in increasingly exquisite detail across the electromagnetic spectrum \citep[see, for e.g.,][]{2010ApJ...724..480H,2016ApJ...820..104H,2016ApJ...818..145B,2018MNRAS.474.2679A}. Even early-eruption $\gamma$-ray emission is now routinely observed from Galactic novae \citep[see, for e.g.,][]{2010Sci...329..817A,2014Sci...345..554A}, although the underlying mechanism is yet to be fully understood \citep[see][]{2014Natur.514..339C}. With current capabilities, any $\gamma$-rays can only be detected from nearby Galactic novae and hard X-ray detections from the eruptions (not to mention during quiescence) are almost exclusively restricted to Milky Way systems \citep[there is some evidence for early post-eruption hard X-ray emission from the 2016 eruption of the RN LMC 1968;][]{2016ATel.8587....1D,2019arXiv190903281K}.
Our {\it privileged} location within the spiral structure of the Milky Way (and the irregular nature of the LMC and SMC) severely limits the ability to undertake unbiased studies of the population(s) of Galactic or similarly nearby novae. While the second data release (DR2) from the {\it Gaia} mission \citep{2016A&A...595A...1G,2018A&A...616A...1G} may have removed some ambiguity from Galactic distance estimates (see the discussions in \citealt{2018MNRAS.481.3033S} and \citealt{2019A&A...622A.186S}), we must wait for at least the fourth release (DR4) until the potential systematics \citep[in part due to the orbital motion of the unresolved nova binaries; see, for e.g.,][]{2018A&A...616A...2L} can be investigated.
There remain uncertainties on the gas and dust columns toward each Galactic nova that severely impact their (individual and) population studies, with potentially only a small fraction of Galactic novae observable \citep[and even less observed;][]{2014AAS...22430604S,2017ApJ...834..196S}. The trials and tribulations of inferring the Galactic rate from a small spatially constrained sample has led to estimates that range from 11\,yr$^{-1}$ \citep{1990AJ.....99.1079C} to 260\,yr$^{-1}$ \citep{1972SvA....16...41S}. The most plausible estimate of the Galactic nova rate is perhaps the most recent (but relatively unconstrained) of $50^{+31}_{-23}\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ \citep{2017ApJ...834..196S}.
\section{Extragalactic novae}
To minimise the effects of distance and extinction uncertainties, we turn to the study of extragalactic nova populations. And while still far from ideal, the close to edge-on M\,31 \citep[$77^\circ$ inclination;][]{1958ApJ...128..465D} is the preferred laboratory for such studies. At a distance of $752\pm17$\,kpc \citep{2001ApJ...553...47F} and experiencing a foreground reddening of $E\left(B-V\right)\approx0.1$ \citep{1992ApJS...79...77S}, eruptions of the entire peak-luminosity range of M\,31 novae are readily accessible to professional and amateur astronomers alike. Techniques, such as narrowband H$\alpha$ imaging \citep{1987ApJ...318..520C}, or difference image analysis \citep{2010MNRAS.409..247K}, allow the recovery of transients down to the central $\sim\!10^{\prime\prime}$ ($\sim\!40$\,pc) of the bright M\,31 bulge.
\subsection{A century of M31 novae:\ surveys and nova rates}\label{M31cent}
As stated by Edwin \citet{1929ApJ....69..103H}, ``In 1885 interest in (M\,31) was stimulated by the appearance of a nova very close to the nucleus''. That `nova', S\,Andromedae \citep{1885AN....112..355H,1885AReg...23..242W}, turned out to be a SN explosion \citep[SN\,1885A; see discussion by][]{1985ApJ...295..287D}. While a handful of M\,31 nova candidates were retroactively found in 1909 data \citep{1917PASP...29..210R,1929ApJ....69..103H}, the first confirmed eruptions were a pair discovered (by Hubble) in 1932 and observed spectroscopically by Milton \citet{1932PASP...44..381H} from the Mount Wilson Observatory\footnote{From the description given in \citet{1932PASP...44..381H}, it is possible that M31N\,1925-09a may have been spectroscopically confirmed via a slit-less spectrum taken by that author.}. In the following century, the number of nova candidates in M\,31 has grown beyond 1,100\footnote{According to the on-line extragalactic nova database of \citet{2010AN....331..187P}:\ \url{http://www.mpe.mpg.de/~m31novae/index.php}}. The number of spectroscopically confirmed M\,31 novae now exceeds 200 \citep{2011ApJ...734...12S,Ransome2019}.
The most famous M\,31 nova survey was the first, but not due to the novae. Along with the first extragalactic nova sample, \citet {1929ApJ....69..103H} published the first catalogue of Cepheid variables in M\,31. The latter of course led directly to a distance determination toward M\,31 \citep{1929ApJ....69..103H} and ultimately the understanding of the scale of the Universe and the essence of galaxies --- settling the `Great Debate' of 1920 between Harlow Shapley and Heber Curtis \citep[see][for a transcript of that debate]{1921BuNRC...2..171S}. From the 85 nova candidates included in his catalogue, \citeauthor{1929ApJ....69..103H}\ estimated a global M\,31 rate of $\sim30\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$.
Subsequent surveys of novae in M\,31 are summarised in Table~\ref{nova_rate} together with the evolution of estimates of the galaxy-wide eruption rate. Around half the M\,31 nova candidates have been discovered by these surveys; the remainder by all-sky (particularly SN) surveys or by individuals. Special mention must be made of the exceptional efforts of Kamil Hornoch, and the amateur astronomer team of Koichi Nishiyama and Fujio Kabashima, who between them have discovered in excess of 200 M\,31 novae.
\begin{table}
\caption{A summary of the principal M\,31 nova surveys.\label{nova_rate}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\hline
{Survey} & {Novae} & {Rate} \\
{} & {} & {[yr$^{-1}$]} \\
\hline
\citet{1929ApJ....69..103H} & 85 & $\sim30$ \\
\citet{1956AJ.....61...15A} & 30 & $24\pm4$ \\
\citet{1989AJ.....97.1622C}$^{\dag}$ & 142 & $29\pm4$ \\
\citet{1987ApJ...318..520C,1990ApJ...356..472C} & 40 & \ldots \\
\citet{1991ApSS.180..273S,1992ApSS.190..119S} & 33 & \ldots \\
\citet{1992ApJS...81..683T} & 9 & \ldots \\
\citet{1999AAS...195.3608R} & 44 & \ldots \\
\citet{2001ApJ...563..749S} & 72 & $37^{+12}_{-8}$ \\
\citet{2004MNRAS.353..571D,2006MNRAS.369..257D}$^{\ddag}$ & 20 & $65^{+16}_{-15}$ \\
\citet{2005AJ....130...84F}$^{\ddag}$ & 19 & \ldots\\
\citet{2011ApJ...734...12S} & 44 & \ldots \\
\citet{2011ApJ...735...94K} & 6 & \ldots \\
\citet{2012ApJ...752..133C} & 29 & \ldots \\
\citet{2012AA...537A..43L} & 91 & \ldots \\
\citet{Ransome2019} & 180 & \ldots \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\setstretch{0.75}
{\footnotesize $^{\dag}${\citet{1989AJ.....97.1622C} presents a combined analysis of the three Asiago surveys \citep{1964AnAp...27..498R,1973A&AS....9..347R,1989AJ.....97...83R}.}} \\
{\footnotesize $^{\ddag}${\citet{2004MNRAS.353..571D,2006MNRAS.369..257D} and \citet{2005AJ....130...84F} reported independent analyses of the the POINT-AGAPE microlensing survey data \citep[see][]{2001ApJ...553L.137A}.}}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
The most recent observational determination of the M\,31 nova rate was produced by \citet{2004MNRAS.353..571D,2006MNRAS.369..257D}, who used a high-cadence, multi-colour survey to estimate a rate of $65^{+16}_{-15}$\,yr$^{-1}$ --- almost twice that of previous studies. Being the first to implement an `automated' nova survey, that exclusively used algorithms to detect and classify novae, \citeauthor{2006MNRAS.369..257D}\ found that the M\,31 nova distribution closely followed a combination of the bulge and disk light of the host. They also reported that while the novae were therefore clustered around the central bulge, the disk contribution to the overall population was also significant:\ with rates of $38^{+15}_{-12}$ (bulge)\footnote{Note that the reported bulge rate is similar to the M\,31-wide `bulge dominated' rate of \citet{2001ApJ...563..749S}.} and $27^{+19}_{-15}$ (disk), see Section~\ref{two_pops} for further discussion.
This high global rate is consistent with the large numbers of novae now routinely discovered each year in M\,31, particularly as larger area detectors and all-sky surveys have improved spatial and temporal coverage of the galaxy.
There are a number of reasons why the earlier surveys resulted in relatively low determined rates. \citet{1956AJ.....61...15A} and \citet{1964AnAp...27..498R,1973A&AS....9..347R} both reported a substantial decrease in the nova population toward the centre of the bulge -- however, this was a selection effect due to surface brightness limitations at the time. Using narrowband H$\alpha$ observations, which are not as affected by the central surface brightness, \citet{1987ApJ...318..520C} was the first to propose that the nova distribution followed the M\,31 galactic light all the way into the centre. Many of the earlier surveys concentrated on the bulge (and therefore simply missed the disk novae) or may have over estimated completeness \citep[see][for a relevant discussion]{2006MNRAS.369..257D}. To address this, \citet{2001ApJ...563..749S} extended their survey to cover the M\,31 disk, but reported that the nova distribution is (still) consistent with an association to the bulge.
\subsection{Selection effects and corrections}
Despite its advances, when we look in more detail at the \citet{2004MNRAS.353..571D,2006MNRAS.369..257D} work, we note that their survey did not detect any novae with speed classes \citep[the time taken for a nova to decay by two magnitudes from peak brightness;][]{1964gano.book.....P} $t_2\lesssim10$\,days, nor any with $t_2\gtrsim215$\,days\footnote{This was, in part, due to the choices made when designing the detection algorithms, as \citet{2004ApJ...601..845A} and \citet{2005AJ....130...84F}, who both also used the POINT-AGAPE data set, discovered a handful of faster novae that were not in the \citeauthor{2004MNRAS.353..571D}\ catalogue.}. The subsequent completeness analysis did not include any novae with speed classes beyond the observed range. The computed rates are therefore only applicable to the quoted $t_2$ range and as such \textit{are lower limits when considering the entire eruptive population}.
With that limitation in mind, \citet{2016MNRAS.455..668S} utilised the \citet[which contains numerous fast, $t_2\leq20$\,d, novae]{1956AJ.....61...15A} catalogue with the \citeauthor{2004MNRAS.353..571D}\ catalogue to attempt to correct for the latter's completeness bias. \citeauthor{2016MNRAS.455..668S}\ assume that the M\,31 novae follow the galactic light and found that $\sim30\%$ of M\,31 novae must be fast ($t_2<10$\,days), yielding a corrected rate $\approx106$\,yr$^{-1}$. \citet{2016MNRAS.458.2916C} coupled a population synthesis approach with the nova eruption model from \citet[also see Section~\ref{two_pops}]{2006MNRAS.369..257D} to derive an M\,31 rate of 97\,yr$^{-1}$, again indicating a `missing' population of the fastest novae. To date a large population of very fast M\,31 novae has not been uncovered (also see Section~\ref{sec_mmrd}), but we do note that there has not been a dedicated campaign to detect such eruptions.
\subsection{Studies of individual extragalactic novae}
The last decade has seen a rapid development in the scope of observations toward individual extragalactic novae. Historically, observations of M\,31 novae typically consisted of sparsely populated light curves and the occasional spectrum. Now, Local Group novae are routinely spectroscopically confirmed, often have detailed multi-colour optical light curves, plus the inclusion of UV and X-ray observations, even late-time infrared observations have been attempted utilising {\it Spitzer} \citep{2011ApJ...727...50S}.
This era of extensive panchromatic studies of extragalactic novae began in earnest in 2007 when four separate eruptions were examined in detail. M31N\,2007-11a was one of the first M\,31 novae to be studied extensively in the optical and X-ray \citep[the latter via {\it Chandra} and {\it XMM-Newton};][]{2009A&A...498L..13H}. The slowly rising yet luminous M31N\,2007-11d was among the first to be studied in detail optically and with multiple epochs of spectroscopy \citep{2009ApJ...690.1148S}. A study of the RN {\it candidate} M31N\,2007-12b quickly followed \citep{2009ApJ...705.1056B}, which combined photometric and spectroscopic evolution with a Neil Gehrels {\it Swift} Observatory detection of the SSS, and the first recovery of a nova progenitor system (which contains a red giant donor) beyond the Milky Way. Further analysis of 2007-12b by \citet{2011A&A...531A..22P} reported additional SSS observations, likely measured the WD rotation period (and potentially the orbital period), and proposed that the system may be an intermediate polar (see \citealt{1977ivsw.conf..238K} and \citealt{1983ASSL..101..155W}). Finally, M31N\,2007-06b became the first CN in an M\,31 Globular Cluster (GC) discovered optically \citep{2007ApJ...671L.121S} and subsequently detected in X-rays \citep{2009A&A...500..769H}.
But it is M31N\,2008-12a, first discovered optically the following year, that has become by far the best studied extragalactic nova to date --- we devote Section~\ref{12a} entirely to that remarkable system.
\subsection{Multiple populations within a single host\label{two_pops}}
The proposal that multiple nova populations may coexist in the same galaxy was initially postulated by \citet{1990LNP...369...34D} and was expanded by \citet{1992A&A...266..232D}. A two-population model was formulated due to evidence for bright--fast novae showing association with the Milky Way `thin disk', whereas the faint--slow novae arose from a more spatially extended `thick disk' or bulge population. \citet{1998ApJ...506..818D} further proposed that the bright--fast novae all belonged to the He/N taxonomic spectral class \citep[see][]{1992AJ....104..725W,2012AJ....144...98W} and were all located at scale heights within 100\,pc of the Galactic plane, contained high mass WDs ($M_\mathrm{WD}$) and were related to Population\,I (relatively young). In contrast, the faint--slow novae were typically Fe\,{\sc ii} novae that extended up to $\sim1$\,kpc beyond the plane, contain low $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and are Population\,II (relatively old). This result has been questioned by \citet{2018MNRAS.476.4162O} who did not find evidence for slow or fast, or Fe\,{\sc ii} or He/N, novae having different Galactic scale height distributions, but instead found that all novae are largely concentrated within the Galactic disk -- a result that they predominantly put down to advances in catalogue completeness, particularly spectroscopically. The spatial distribution of Galactic novae has, however, yet to be studied in a post-Gaia era, so the apparent contradiction between these two studies may soon be understood.
In M\,31, the work by \citet{1987ApJ...318..520C}, \citet{1989AJ.....97.1622C}, and \citet{2001ApJ...563..749S} reported a strong association between the bulge light and the nova distribution -- with little evidence for a {\it substantial} disk contribution\footnote{The disk contribution required to match observations has evolved upward with time.}. Of course, selection effects may have played some part. If faster novae do tend to reside in the disk \citep[as proposed by][]{1992A&A...266..232D}, then survey cadence could impact the ability to detect disk novae.
\citet{1987ApJ...318..520C}, \citet{2001ApJ...563..749S}, and \citet{2006MNRAS.369..257D} each presented a single parameter model for the nova distribution within M\,31:
\begin{equation}
\Psi_i=\frac{\theta\mathscr{L}_i^d+\mathscr{L}_i^b}{\theta\sum_i\mathscr{L}_i^d+\sum_i\mathscr{L}_i^b},\label{nova_mod}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\Psi_i$ is the probability of a nova erupting at a given location, $i$, that has a contribution $\mathscr{L}^d_i+\mathscr{L}^b_i$ from the disk and bulge light, respectively. The wavelength dependant parameter $\theta$ is the ratio of the disk and bulge eruption rates per unit light. This approach allows exploration of the population distribution(s) without explicitly assigning a `bulge' or `disk' origin to individual novae. Due to a limited number of novae and a bulge dominated survey, \citeauthor{1987ApJ...318..520C}\ were restricted to placing an upper limit of $\theta<0.1$ --- i.e.\ a bulge dominated population ($\theta=0$ represents a bulge {\it only} population). \citeauthor{2001ApJ...563..749S}\ derived $\theta=0.41^{+0.40}_{-0.25}$ by considering the $B$-band galactic light.
The \citet{2006MNRAS.369..257D} analysis led to a determination of $\theta=0.18^{+0.24}_{-0.10}$ (when considering the $r'$-band M\,31 light\footnote{$1\sigma$ confidence limits, the distribution is non-Gaussian.}), i.e.\ the bulge nova rate per unit light is $\sim5$ times that of the disk, and ruled out that the novae follow the $r'$-band light (i.e.\ $\theta=1$) of M\,31 at beyond the 95\% level --- thereby lending strong support to separate `bulge' and `disk' populations.
\citet{2011ApJ...734...12S} presented a spectroscopic and photometric catalogue of 46 M\,31 novae, bringing (at the time) the number of spectroscopically confirmed systems up to 91. This work confirmed that the M\,31 proportion of Fe\,{\sc ii} (82\%) and He/N (18\%) novae was consistent with that measured in the Milky Way \citep{1998ApJ...506..818D,2007AAS...211.5115S}. By combining their data set with that of \citet{1989AJ.....97.1622C}, \citeauthor{2011ApJ...734...12S}\ demonstrated that the M\,31 `fast novae' ($t_2\le25$\,d) were more spatially extended than their slower counterparts ($t_2>25$\,d), as might be expected if a younger disk population contained novae with on average higher $M_\mathrm{WD}$ \citep[as proposed by][for the Milky Way]{1992A&A...266..232D}. However, \citeauthor{2011ApJ...734...12S}\ were unable to find compelling evidence for a difference in the spatial distribution of the M\,31 Fe\,{\sc ii} and He/N novae.
Combining the nova catalogue of \citet{2011ApJ...734...12S} and multi-waveband {\it Hubble Space Telescope (HST)} imaging of the north-eastern half of M\,31 \citep[the PHAT survey;][]{2012ApJS..200...18D}, \citet{2014ApJS..213...10W} undertook the first extragalactic survey for nova progenitor systems. From an input catalogue of 38 novae, \citeauthor{2014ApJS..213...10W}\ recovered the progenitors of 11 systems -- those harbouring giant donors and/or bright accretion disks (both potential indicators of a high mass accretion rate, $\dot{M}$). The subsequent statistical analysis found the proportion of M\,31 novae with luminous progenitors is $30^{+13}_{-10}\%$ \citep[$>10\%$ at the 99\% confidence level;][]{2016ApJ...817..143W}. This analysis also indicated that these luminous progenitors were more likely to be associated with the disk population, and the authors could not formally exclude the possibility that all of these systems were disk novae \citep{2016ApJ...817..143W}.
\subsection{The X-ray properties of Andromeda Galaxy novae}\label{xrayprop}
A new and crucial angle was added to the nova population research when \citet{2005A&A...442..879P} used their existing large {\it XMM-Newton} surveys of M\,31 and M\,33 to specifically identify nova X-ray counterparts --- increasing the M\,31 sample size by more than a factor of four\footnote{They also utilised archival M\,31 data from {\it ROSAT} \citep[see surveys by][]{1996LNP...472...75G,2004ApJ...610..261G} and {\it Chandra}.}. While the nova rate in M\,33 is too low to allow a population approach, the M\,31 numbers were significant. \citet{2005A&A...442..879P} concluded that nova eruptions are the main source of transient SSSs in M\,31. In a follow-up study, \citet{2007A&A...465..375P} analysed more recent archival {\it Chandra} and {\it XMM-Newton} data to find additional novae --- among them objects with unexpectedly short SSS states of only a few months alongside novae that remained X-ray bright almost a decade post-eruption. The superior performance of this new generation of large X-ray telescopes, {\it XMM-Newton} and {\it Chandra}, was promising strong synergies with the high nova rate of M\,31.
Building upon those pioneering surveys, \citet{2010A&A...523A..89H,2011A&A...533A..52H,2014A&A...563A...2H} undertook a series of X-ray surveys between 2006 and 2012. These surveys were designed specifically for nova discovery:\ they used cadences of 10 days to study short SSS phases, focussed only on the bulge of M\,31 where most novae are found, and used a coordinated observing strategy of {\it XMM-Newton} and {\it Chandra} pointings to cover the galaxy during a continuous 3-4 months\footnote{The small Sun angle of M\,31 during part of the year strongly affects visibility especially for {\it XMM-Newton}.}. The unparalleled spatial resolution of {\it Chandra} allowed the first X-ray detections of novae close to the M\,31 core. The superior effective area of {\it XMM-Newton} provided the depth to detect faint sources and perform low-resolution spectroscopy for the brighter ones.
By the final paper of the series, \citet{2014A&A...563A...2H} had increased the sample size of M\,31 novae with X-ray detections to 79 and derived a large set of SSS parameters alongside optical properties from support or community observations. \textit{For the first time, it was possible to study the X-ray vs optical parameters of novae using population statistics.} \citet{2010A&A...523A..89H} had found a correlation between the optical decline time and the duration of the SSS phase, confirming a similar result found for Galactic novae \citep{2011ApJS..197...31S}. \citet{2010A&A...523A..89H} also reported tentative evidence for differing X-ray properties between M\,31 bulge and disk novae.
Using the complete sample, \citet{2014A&A...563A...2H} discovered strong correlations between five fundamental observable nova parameters: the `turn-on' ($t_\mathrm{on}$) and `turn-off' ($t_\mathrm{off}$) times of the SSS, the SSS black-body (BB) effective temperature\footnote{SSS spectra are not BBs \citep[see, for e.g.,][among many others]{2013A&A...559A..50N}, yet BB fits can serve as a consistent parametrisation.} ($k_\mathrm{B}T$), the optical decline time ($t_2$), and the ejecta expansion velocity ($v_\mathrm{exp}$) as derived from optical spectra. Many of these relations are now routinely used in the planning of extragalactic X-ray observations of novae. In essence:\ \textit{novae that decline fast in the optical have short and high-temperature SSS states.} In Figure~\ref{fig:xcor} we show correlations based on \citet{2014A&A...563A...2H} and here we reproduce the corresponding best fits:
\begin{equation}
t_\mathrm{on} = 10^{\left(0.8\pm0.1\right)} \cdot t_{2,R}^{\left(0.9\pm0.1\right)}\,\left[\mathrm{days}\right],
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
t_\mathrm{on} = 10^{\left(5.6\pm0.5\right)} \cdot v_\mathrm{exp}^{\left(-1.2\pm0.1\right)}\,\left[\mathrm{days}\right],
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
t_\mathrm{off} = 10^{\left(0.9\pm0.1\right)}\cdot t_\mathrm{on}^{\left(0.8\pm0.1\right)}\,\left[\mathrm{days}\right],
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
t_\mathrm{off} = 10^{\left(6.3\pm0.5\right)} \cdot \left(k_\mathrm{B}T\right)^{\left(-2.3\pm0.3\right)}\,\left[\mathrm{days}\right],
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{{plot_corr_2012_simple_v1.pdf}}
\end{center}
\caption{M\,31 nova X-ray vs optical correlations based on \citet{2014A&A...563A...2H}. Black:\ data; orange:\ smooth fit for visualisation; red:\ robust power-law fit with corresponding 95\% confidence regions.\label{fig:xcor}}
\end{figure}
Beyond being a powerful tool for understanding nova population physics, X-ray observations are crucial for discovering a rare subset of novae:\ those found in GCs. While the intrinsic brightness of (extragalactic) GCs renders optical nova detections difficult, there are no bright SSSs in GCs other than novae (but many harder X-ray sources). With two confirmed plus one likely GC novae \citep{2013A&A...549A.120H}, M\,31 hosts three of the six known GC novae.
The first M\,31 GC nova, M31N\,2007-06b, was discovered in the optical by \citet{2007ApJ...671L.121S} and soon after in X-ray observations by \citet[during their large nova survey]{2009A&A...500..769H}. In the same survey season these authors discovered another GC SSS. Note that SSSs in GCs are also a very rare occurrence but that no optical counterpart was found for this object (yet a nova could not be excluded). The latest M\,31 GC nova, M31N\,2010-10f, was first found in a serendipitous X-ray observation and later confirmed optically \citep{2013A&A...549A.120H}. It is noteworthy that all three of the M\,31 GC novae (candidates) exhibited a short SSS phase. An exploration of this observational property with theoretical models was carried out by \citet{2013ApJ...779...19K}.
\subsection{Beyond Andromeda}
Nova eruptions have been detected in many of the Local Group galaxies, with nova rates determined for the largest constituents (see Table~\ref{LG_rates} for a summary of the most recently published rates). However, the populations of M\,31 and the Milky Way, which constitute the vast majority of the Local Group stellar mass and therefore the vast majority of the nova eruptions, are by far the best studied.
\begin{table}
\caption{Nova rates for Local Group galaxies.\label{LG_rates}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\hline
{Galaxy} & {Rate} & {Reference} \\
{} & {[yr$^{-1}$]}\\
\hline
Milky Way & $50^{+31}_{-23}$ & \citet{2017ApJ...834..196S}\\
LMC & $2.4\pm0.8$ & \citet{2016ApJS..222....9M} \\
SMC & $0.9\pm0.4$ & \citet{2016ApJS..222....9M} \\
M\,31$^{\dag}$ & $65^{+16}_{-15}$ & \citet{2006MNRAS.369..257D}\\
M\,32$^{\ddag}$ & $2^{+2}_{-1}$ & \citet{2005AJ....129.1873N}\\
M\,33 & $2.5\pm1.0$ & \citet{2004ApJ...612..867W} \\
M\,110$^{\ddag}$ & $2^{+2}_{-1}$ & \citet{2005AJ....129.1873N}\\
NGC\,147$^{\ddag}$ & $<2$ & \citet{2005AJ....129.1873N} \\
NGC\,185$^{\ddag}$ & $<1.8$ & \citet{2005AJ....129.1873N} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\setstretch{0.75}{\footnotesize $^{\dag}${See discussion about a possible elevated rate in Section~\ref{M31cent}.}}\\
{\footnotesize $^{\ddag}${The \citeauthor{2005AJ....129.1873N}\ rates are estimates based upon a single nova in each of M\,32 and M\,110, and no detections in NGC\,147 or NGC\,185.}}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\citet{2012ApJ...752..156S} published the first photometric and spectroscopic analysis of the nova population of M\,33. This catalogue contained 36 novae (the majority drawn from the literature) of which 8 yielded spectra (6 newly reported), and directly compared the M\,33 population to that of M\,31 \citep[largely following][]{2011ApJ...734...12S}. Unlike M\,31, \citeauthor{2012ApJ...752..156S}\ found that most M\,33 novae (5/8) belonged to the He/N spectral class, and that only two novae were clearly Fe\,{\sc ii} (cf.\ 82\% for M\,31). Those authors concluded that the spectroscopic mix of M\,33 novae differed from that of M\,31 at the 99\% confidence level.
In the LMC, \citet{2013AJ....145..117S} again confirmed the connection between spectral type and decline time. As with M\,33, only around half of the LMC novae were classified as Fe\,{\sc ii}, and the LMC nova population is more rapidly evolving than that of the Milky Way and M\,31. \citeauthor{2013AJ....145..117S}\ proposed that the LMC nova population is younger than that of the M\,31 bulge, and therefore contains {\it on average} higher mass WDs that evolve more rapidly. \citeauthor{2013AJ....145..117S}\ also comments on the large proportion of known RNe within the LMC population ($\sim10\%$ of systems, or $\sim16\%$ of eruptions).
Recently, individual novae have been studied in detail in IC\,1613 \citep{2017MNRAS.472.1300W} and NGC\,6822 \citep{2019MNRAS.486.4334H}, both hosts are dwarf irregular galaxies in the Local Group and, like the Magellanic Clouds, provide further examples of novae in low metallicity environments \citep[see the discussion within][]{2013AstRv...8a..71O}.
\subsection{Beyond the Local Group and the `LSNR'}
The study of extragalactic novae is not constrained to the Local Group. In Table~\ref{nonLG_rates} we provide a summary of some of the more distant extragalactic nova work -- out to, and including, the Virgo Cluster. A recent highlight within that realm is the results of a {\it HST} survey toward M\,87
by \citet{2016ApJS..227....1S}. In a similar vein to the POINT-AGAPE survey of M\,31 (see Section~\ref{M31cent}), a micro-lensing survey was repurposed to study nova eruptions. In a result entirely independent of an earlier yet similar one presented in \citet{2002AIPC..637..457S}, \citet{2016ApJS..227....1S} derived a nova rate for that giant elliptical galaxy of $\sim400$\,yr$^{-1}$. As noted by \citet{2017RNAAS...1a..11S}, that rate is over double those derived from ground-based observations \citep[see][]{2000ApJ...530..193S,2015ApJ...811...34C}. \citeauthor{2017RNAAS...1a..11S}\ undertook an independent analysis of the {\it HST} data reporting that their results ``are in general agreement'' with \citet{2016ApJS..227....1S}. But \citeauthor{2017RNAAS...1a..11S}\ urge caution, particularly when deriving nova rates using unconfirmed (spectroscopically) nova eruptions and especially when extrapolating a rate beyond the constraints of the survey data.
\begin{table}
\caption{Nova rates for galaxies beyond the Local Group.\label{nonLG_rates}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\hline
{Galaxy} & {Rate} & {Reference} \\
{} & {[yr$^{-1}$]}\\
\hline
M\,49 & $189_{-22}^{+26}$ & \citet{2015ApJ...811...34C} \\
M\,51 & $18\pm7$ & \citet{2000ApJ...530..193S} \\
M\,81 & $ 33^{+13}_{-8}$ & \citet{2004AJ....127..816N} \\
M\,84 & $95_{-14}^{+15}$ & \citet{2015ApJ...811...34C} \\
M\,87 & $363_{-45}^{+33}$ & \citet{2016ApJS..227....1S}\\
M\,94 & $5.0^{+1.8}_{-1.4}$ & \citet{2010ApJ...720.1155G} \\
M\,100 & $\sim25$ & \citet{1996ApJ...468L..95F} \\
M\,101 & $11.7^{+1.9}_{-1.5}$ & \citet{2008ApJ...686.1261C} \\
NGC\,1316 & $135\pm45$&\citet{2002Sci...296.1275D} \\
NGC\,2403 & $2.0^{+0.5}_{-0.3}$ & \citet{2012ApJ...760...13F}\\
NGC\,5128 & $8.0\pm2.8$ & \citet{1990AJ.....99.1079C}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The `Luminosity Specific Nova Rate' (LSNR) was first introduced by \citet{1990ApJ...356..472C,1990AJ.....99.1079C} to compare the nova rates of the M\,31 bulge and the elliptical component of NGC\,5128. The LSNR employs a galaxy's integrated $K$-band luminosity as a proxy for the total stellar mass and permits direct comparison between the nova rates in different galaxies and between galaxies of differing morphological type. \citet{2014ASPC..490...77S} presented a comprehensive review of the evolution and current status of the LSNR. In Figure~\ref{lsnr-plot} we reproduce the LSNR as computed by \citeauthor{2014ASPC..490...77S}\ who concluded that the nova rate is (simply) proportional to the $K$-band luminosity of the host (the grey dashed line). Those authors also found no evidence for the LSNR varying significantly with Hubble type.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{lsnr}
\end{center}
\caption{`Luminosity Specific Nova Rate' (LSNR) based on the $K$-band luminosity of the host galaxy, using data from \citep[see their Figure~1]{2014ASPC..490...77S}.\label{lsnr-plot}}
\end{figure}
Since 2014, new analyses of the Magellanic Clouds \citep{2016ApJS..222....9M}, M\,49 \citep{2015ApJ...811...34C}, M\,87 \citep{2016ApJS..227....1S}, and the Milky Way \citep[see Section~\ref{intro}]{2017ApJ...834..196S} have been published. With the possible exception of the Clouds, each author has reported an elevated nova rate (see the red points in Figure~\ref{lsnr-plot}). As summarised by \citet{2017ApJ...834..196S}, there is now evidence for the LSNR being 3--4 times higher than the adopted value of $\sim2$ novae per year per $10^{10}\,\mathrm{L}_{\odot,K}$ \citep[as computed by][]{2014ASPC..490...77S}. It is, perhaps, the limitations of previous surveys that led to underestimated nova rates. Transient surveys are particularly sensitive to the choice of cadence and the actual temporal sampling achieved, but the depth of extragalactic nova surveys may also be a limiting factor --- one that is perhaps now been bridged by high spatial and temporal resolution {\it HST} surveys of M\,87 \citep{2016ApJS..227....1S}, which can probe any populations of faint yet fast novae.
\section{The `MMRD' and the `faint--fast' novae}\label{sec_mmrd}
No review of nova populations would be complete without a nod to the maximum magnitude---rate of decline relationship (MMRD). \citet{1929ApJ....69..103H} first noted that the brighter an M\,31 nova appeared at peak the more rapidly it diminished. \citet{1945PASP...57...69M} confirmed \citeauthor{1929ApJ....69..103H}'s result Galactically and dubbed the correlation the ``life---luminosity relation''. Over time, the concept that the brightest novae fade the fastest was accepted, the MMRD was refined and, seemingly being invariant to the host population, enabled novae to be touted as primary distance indicators \citep[see, for e.g.,][]{1956AJ.....61...15A,1957ZA.....41..182S,1976A&A....50..113P,1978ApJ...223..351D,1985ApJ...292...90C,1995ApJ...452..704D,2000AJ....120.2007D}. Being brighter than Cepheids at maximum, extragalactic novae seemed like a promising rung on the cosmic distance ladder.
But the MMRD has always been fraught with problems. Despite the best attempts, a scatter of $\sim0.5$\,mag has persisted. This and the long-held knowledge that the MMRD does not work well for all novae, particularly the RNe \citep[see][]{2010ApJS..187..275S}\footnote{\citet{1945PASP...57...69M} noted that the Galactic recurrent RS\,Ophiuchi ``may not be typical'' and excluded that system from his analysis.}, hamstrings the relationship for distance determinations to Galactic systems. Even at its best, the MMRD is a population relationship and should not be used to estimate the distance to individual novae, Galactic or otherwise. Thus, despite some advantages over Cepheid variables, in practice employing novae as (extragalactic) distance indicators had never been observationally efficient.
In the last decade, evidence has slowly started to mount questioning even the concept of an MMRD. The Fast Transients In Nearest Galaxies (P60-FasTING) survey (a forerunner to the Palomar Transient Factory; PTF) was undertaken by the Palomar 60-inch telescope \citep{2011ApJ...735...94K}. This deep and high-cadence survey targeted extragalactic novae, particularly in M\,31. \citeauthor{2011ApJ...735...94K}\ reported the discovery of a `new' population of ``faint--fast'' novae --- novae that populated the lower left quadrant of the MMRD phase-space. As pointed out by \citeauthor{2011ApJ...735...94K}, the M\,31 faint--fast novae occupied a similar locus in MMRD-space as the Galactic RNe. We do note that the \citeauthor{2011ApJ...735...94K}\ sample were corrected for reddening internal to M\,31 by use of the Balmer decrement. As shown specifically in \citet{2017MNRAS.472.1300W}, this decrement should not be used to estimate reddening toward nova eruptions. But it seems unlikely that this should have severely affected the result.
It should be noted that now, almost a decade after the \citeauthor{2011ApJ...735...94K}\ study, a sizeable population of spectroscopically confirmed faint--fast novae has failed to materialise in M\,31. This is despite an increased frequency and depth of coverage by professional and amateur observers alike. A compilation of previous surveys produced by \citet[see their Figure~B.1]{2015A&A...583A.140S} may also indicate a population of faint--fast novae, but also illustrates a very scattered distribution both above and below the traditional MMRD. Faint--fast novae are inherently challenging to discover, let alone observe spectroscopically, it is clear that more work is required locally to understand the true extent of the faint--fast population.
While the situation in M\,31 remains puzzling, there is more serious trouble brewing for the MMRD in a galaxy further away: \citet{2017ApJ...839..109S} published an updated MMRD plot based on a daily-cadence {\it HST} M\,87 survey \citep[see][]{2016ApJS..227....1S}. The M\,87 sample is much less likely (than M\,31 novae) to be affected by reddening internal to M\,87. Here \citeauthor{2017ApJ...839..109S}\ propose (see their Figure~1) that the faint--fast population seen in {\it both} M\,31 and M\,87 severely undermines the validity of the MMRD relationship. To quote \citeauthor{2017ApJ...839..109S}\ directly, ``The fact that these (faint--fast) novae are both common and ubiquitous demonstrates that complete samples of extragalactic novae are not reliable standard candles, and that the MMRD should not be used in the era of precision cosmology either for cosmic distance determinations or the distances of Galactic novae.''
With the availability of Gaia DR2 parallax distances, \citet{2018MNRAS.481.3033S} was the first to re-assess the Galactic MMRD and came to similar conclusions. However, interestingly, \citet{2019A&A...622A.186S} undertook a similar Gaia DR2 analysis using a different (but overlapping) sample to \citeauthor{2018MNRAS.481.3033S}, and concluded that Gaia {\it strengthened} the viability of the MMRD. \citeauthor{2019A&A...622A.186S} also demonstrated that the bolometric luminosity of novae correlates to the optical decline time (a `maximum bolometric magnitude --- rate of decline' relationship?), however, given that the same bolometric correction was used for each of their novae, this is perhaps not surprising --- but we will return to this concept below. \citeauthor{2019A&A...622A.186S}\ went on to explore correlations between other nova system parameters, including $\dot{M}$, finding a correlation between $\dot{M}$ and decline time. The jury is still out on the Galactic MMRD; there is a clear need to understand the sample biases and extinction uncertainties. But the less-biased extragalactic samples indicate that the {\it original} MMRD concept -- a monotonic relation between luminosity and decay rate -- is flawed.
A number of authors have referred to the models of \citet{1995ApJ...445..789P}, which were later built on by \citet{2005ApJ...623..398Y}, for theoretical grounding of the `faint--fast' population. Those models indicate that the original MMRD novae, the ``bright--fast'' and ``faint--slow'' populations are powered by a combination of a high $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and low $\dot{M}$, or a low $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and high $\dot{M}$, respectively. The \citeauthor{2005ApJ...623..398Y}\ models show that faint--fast novae may belong to a population of systems with high $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and high $\dot{M}$, the same fundamental system parameters as the RNe \citep[as noted by][]{2011ApJ...735...94K}. However, we note that \citet[see particularly their Figure~5]{2017ApJ...839..109S} pointed out that the \citeauthor{2005ApJ...623..398Y}\ grids could suggest that the total accreted envelope mass (rather than $\dot{M}$ explicitly) acts along with $M_\mathrm{WD}$ to explain the MMRD position of a given nova. When using grids of models we must consider the relative contribution to the observed population from a particular configuration, e.g. $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and $\dot{M}$. As shorter $P_\mathrm{rec}$ systems inherently produce more eruptions, we would expect faint--fast novae to always have a substantial contribution from RNe.
\citeauthor{2005ApJ...623..398Y}\ also indicated that high $M_\mathrm{WD}$---high $\dot{M}$ novae have low accreted envelope masses, therefore low mass ejecta. As we will see in Section~\ref{12a}, such a low ejected mass may lead to high velocity ejecta and a rapidly evolving eruption. But as shown by \citet{2016ApJ...833..149D}, unlike CNe, the maximum PP radius for faint--fast novae corresponds to a much higher effective temperature \citep[cf.\ $\sim8000$\,K for CNe; see][]{2010AN....331..160B}. Therefore, the peak energy output of the faint--fast novae occurs in the FUV or even EUV, compared to the optical for CNe.
Extending this argument, there is one quadrant of the MMRD that appears unpopulated, the upper right or ``bright--slow'' regime; where one might expect the eruptions of low $M_\mathrm{WD}$ with low $\dot{M}$ to reside. By comparison to faint--fast novae; bright--slow novae should have massive, slowly evolving, ejecta. As such, one might expect their peak to occur somewhere in the IR. But what exactly would such a slowly evolving IR-bright nova actually look like? Would we even identify it as a nova? Galactic examples of such novae {\it could} include systems like the epically-slow evolving V1280\,Scorpii \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2012A&A...545A..63C}; or V723\,Cassiopeiae, which exhibited a SSS so long it was considered a `persistent SSS' \citep{2008AJ....135.1328N,2011ApJS..197...31S} until it abruptly turned off in September 2015 \citep[a SSS phase of almost 10 years;][]{2015ATel.8053....1N}. But more tantalising possibilities present themselves extragalactically. \citet{2017ApJ...839...88K} published the initial results from `SPIRITS', an extragalacitic IR transient survey undertaken with {\it Spitzer}. That paper presented 14 unusual transients those authors dubbed `SPRITES' (eSPecially Red Intermediate-luminosity Transient Events). \citeauthor{2017ApJ...839...88K}\ noted that SPRITES sat in the IR luminosity gap between CNe and SNe, with some SPRITES exhibiting exceptionally slow evolution. With no discovered optical counterparts, perhaps some of the SPRITES fit the criteria of bright--slow novae from low $M_\mathrm{WD}$---low $\dot{M}$ systems? \citet{2010ApJ...725..831S} made similar claims regarding low $M_\mathrm{WD}$---low $\dot{M}$ novae and predicted that {\it some} \citep[particularly `M31-RV'; see][]{1989ApJ...341L..51R} of the `luminous red novae' \citep[LRNe; see, e.g.,][]{2002A&A...389L..51M,2015ApJ...805L..18W} could be extremely slowly evolving CN eruptions\footnote{We note that \citet{2011A&A...528A.114T} presented strong evidence for the LRN V1309\,Scorpii being the merger of a compact binary.}.
Faint--fast novae evaded detection for years because faint--fast transients are just hard to find! But if they arise from high $M_\mathrm{WD}$---high $\dot{M}$ systems they are not inherently faint, they are just optically faint. Likewise, bright--slow novae may be IR bright but optically faint. As such, might there be hope for the MMRD concept yet? Perhaps some time should be taken to further explore the viability of the `maximum {\it bolometric} magnitude---rate of decline' relationship, or the extension of the concept into a multi-parameter space spanned by the luminosity in different energy bands.
\section{Recurring and rapidly recurring novae}\label{sec:rrne}
A combination of a high $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and high $\dot{M}$ is required to drive a RN --- by definition any nova that has been observed in eruption at least twice. The Galactic population of RNe has grown slowly and has remained at ten \citep[see][for a comprehensive review]{2010ApJS..187..275S} since the addition of V2487\,Ophiuchi a decade ago \citep{2009AJ....138.1230P}. The small number is almost certainly a selection effect based mainly on increasing incompleteness as one looks back in time. It is probably not a coincidence that many of Galactic RNe have bright peak apparent magnitudes. The majority of the Galactic RNe are thought to contain a high $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and a high $\dot{M}$ maintained by an evolved donor; a sub-giant or red giant \citep{2012ApJ...746...61D,2014ASPC..490...49D}.
When LMCN\,1968-12a erupted for a second time in 1990 it was widely claimed to be the first extragalactic RN \citep{1991ApJ...370..193S}. It was in fact only the first spectroscopically confirmed extragalactic RN. The honour of the first lies with M31N\,1926-06a \citep[the original eruption discovered by][]{1929ApJ....69..103H}, whose recurrent nature was observed in 1962 independently by \citet{1964AnAp...27..498R} and \citet[see \citealt{2008A&A...477...67H}]{1968AN....291...19B}. Since then, extragalactic RNe have only been discovered in the LMC and M\,31, despite searches within the Local Group and beyond. In Table~\ref{LMC_RNe} we summarise the four currently known LMC RNe and the 18 within M\,31.
\begin{table}[!ht]
\caption{RNe in the LMC (top) and M\,31 (bottom).\label{LMC_RNe}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\hline
\hline
{Nova} & {Known} & {$P_\mathrm{rec}$$^{\dag}$} & {Refs} \\
{} & {eruptions} & {[yr$^{-1}$]}\\
\hline
LMCN\,1968-12a & 4 & $6.7\pm1.2$ & 1\\
LMCN\,1971-08a & 2 & $\sim38$ & 2 \\
LMCN\,1996 & 2 & $\sim22$ & 3 \\
YY\,Doradus & 2 & $\sim67$ & 4, 5 \\
\hline
M31N\,1919-09a & 2 & $\sim79$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1923-12c & 2 & $\sim88$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1926-06a & 2 & $\sim37$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1926-07c & 3 & $\sim11$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1945-09c & 2 & $\sim27$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1953-09b & 2 & $\sim51$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1960-12a & 3 & $\sim6$ & 6--8 \\
M31N\,1961-11a & 2 & $\sim44$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1963-09c & 4 & $\sim5$ & 6, 9\\
M31N\,1966-09e & 2 & $\sim41$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1982-08b & 2 & $\sim14$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1984-07a & 3 & $\sim8$ & 6 \\
M31N\,1990-10a & 3 & $\sim9$ & 10 \\
M31N\,1997-11k & 3 & $\sim4$ & 6 \\
M31N\,2006-11c & 2 & $\sim8$ & 11 \\
M31N\,2007-10b & 2 & $\sim10$ & 12, 13\\
M31N\,2007-11f & 2 & $\sim9$ & 14 \\
M31N\,2008-12a & 14 & $0.99\pm0.02$ & 15, 16 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\setstretch{0.75}
{\footnotesize For the equivalent Galactic table, see \citet[their Table~21]{2010ApJS..187..275S}.}\\
{\footnotesize $^{\dag}${To estimate $P_\mathrm{rec}$ we have (excluding LMCN\,1968-12a and M31N\,2008-12a) simply taken the shortest observed inter-eruption period.}}\\
{\footnotesize References --- {(1)~\citet{2019arXiv190903281K}, (2)~\citet{2016ApJ...818..145B}, (3)~\citet{2018ATel11384....1M}, (4)~\citet{2004IAUC.8424....1B}, (5)~\citet{2004IAUC.8424....2M}, (6)~\citet{2015ApJS..216...34S}, (7)~\citet{2019ATel12915....1V}, (8)~\citet{2019ATel12943....1S}, (9)~\citet{1996ApJ...473..240D}, (10)~\citet{2016ATel.9276....1H}, (11)~\citet{2015ATel.7116....1H}, (12)~\citet{Sch2017}, (13)~\citet{2017ATel11088....1W}, (14)~\citet{2017ATel10001....1S}, (15)~\citet{2017ASPC..509..515D}, (16)~this work.}}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
The first catalogue of M\,31 RN candidates was produced by \citet[see their Table~3]{1996ApJ...473..240D}, who also assessed the RN populations of the LMC and Milky Way. \citeauthor{1996ApJ...473..240D}\ concluded that RNe could only contribute at the few percent level to the SN\,Ia rate in those hosts.
The majority (all but three) of the most recent M\,31 RN catalogue were identified by a monumental search of archival observations by \citet{2015ApJS..216...34S}. Those authors published a catalogue of 16 strong RN candidates, many of which were also spectroscopically confirmed, by virtue of astrometric arguments. Subsequently, three more M\,31 RNe have been identified, M31N\,2006-11c \citep{2015ATel.7116....1H}, 2007-10b \citep{Sch2017,2017ATel11088....1W} and 2007-11f \citep{2017ATel10001....1S}; 1990-10a has erupted again and halved its estimated $P_\mathrm{rec}$ \citep{2016ATel.9276....1H}, as has 1960-12a reducing its $P_\mathrm{rec}$ from $\sim53$ to $\sim6$\,years \citep{2019ATel12915....1V,2019ATel12943....1S}, and 1966-08a has been confirmed to not be a RN.
M31N\,1966-08a and its second eruption 1968-10c both hailed from the \citet{1973A&AS....9..347R} survey. \citeauthor{1973A&AS....9..347R}\ noted ``This star (1966-08a) coincides beyond any doubt with (1968-10c)'', a fact on which \citet{2015ApJS..216...34S} agrees. However, probably due to its (then) unprecedentedly short `recurrence' period there were doubts. \citet{1989SvAL...15..382S} suggested that 1966-08a was more likely a foreground dwarf nova (DN) outburst. Both the 1966 and 1968 events were not observed spectroscopically, and nothing was seen from this system for decades. \citet{2017RNAAS...1a..44S} recovered the progenitor system in archival Local Group Galaxies Survey \citep[LGGS;][]{2006AJ....131.2478M} and 2MASS \citep{2006AJ....131.1163S} data, which indicated a very low eruption amplitude for a nova (even given the potentially short $P_\mathrm{rec}$). Follow-up spectroscopy, also reported by \citeauthor{2017RNAAS...1a..44S}\ indicated that the progenitor was a dwarf not a giant and was therefore incompatible with being in M\,31. \citeauthor{2017RNAAS...1a..44S}\ proposed, based on the low amplitude and spectroscopy, that 1966-08a and its recurrence were the result of a Galactic flare star. Somewhat ironically, just days after that proposal by \citeauthor{2017RNAAS...1a..44S}, another flare (the first in sixty years) from 1966-08a was discovered \citep{2017Con,2017ATel11094....1A}, followed soon after by another \citep{2019ATel12513....1C}.
Long hailed as a RN, PT\,Andromedae (aka M31N\,1957-10b) had been noted to recur five times \citep{2000IBVS.4909....1A,2010CBET.2574....2R,2010CBET.2574....1Z}. Following spectroscopy of the 2010 event, \citet{2012ApJ...752..133C} suggested that PT\,And may be an M\,31 RN. However, \citet[and references therein]{2015ApJS..216...34S} instead proposed a Galactic DN origin. Following another detection in 2017 \citep{2017TNSTR.867....1C}, spectroscopy confirmed that PT\,And was not an M\,31 nova but was consistent with a Galactic DN outburst \citep{2017ATel10692....1W,2017ATel10647....1W}.
Based on their statistical analysis of the M\,31 RN and CN populations, \citet{2015ApJS..216...34S} reported that 1/25$^\mathrm{th}$ of detected M\,31 eruptions arose from {\it known} RNe. Their completeness exercise indicated that as many as a third of M\,31 eruptions could be from RNe ($P_\mathrm{rec}\leq100$\,yrs), broadly consistent with the independent findings of \citet{2014ApJ...788..164P} and \citet{2016ApJ...817..143W}. Although relying upon a number of assumptions, \citeauthor{2015ApJS..216...34S}\ used their estimated M\,31 RN population to compute the potential contribution to the SN\,Ia rate in that host, concluding it is unlikely that RNe provide a significant channel ($\sim2\%$).
But if RNe play any important role in the production of SNe\,Ia, the key systems to find are those with WDs already close to the Chandrasekhar mass and accreting at a high rate. Those systems must be the ones with the shortest $P_\mathrm{rec}$ \citep{2005ApJ...623..398Y,2014ApJ...793..136K,2016ApJ...819..168H,2017ApJ...844..143K}. Prior to 2013, the shortest confirmed $P_\mathrm{rec}$ belonged to the Galactic RN U\,Scorpii, which erupts every $\sim10$\,yrs \citep{2010ApJS..187..275S}. But, starting with the discovery of M31N\,2008-12a (see Section~\ref{12a}), a population of `rapid recurrent novae' (RRNe) has been uncovered.
We hereby, and admittedly arbitrarily, define a RRN as a system that has undergone eruptions less than a decade apart. Galactically, the only known example is U\,Sco, and in the LMC there is LMCN\,1968-12a \citep[$P_\mathrm{rec}=6.7\pm1.2$;][]{2019arXiv190903281K}. But in M\,31 there are eight (see Table~\ref{LMC_RNe}) --- {\it almost half of all known M\,31 RNe}. Indeed, all new M\,31 RNe since M31N\,1984-07a are RRNe. In Figure~\ref{RRN_hist} we illustrate the distribution of $P_\mathrm{rec}$ for the known RNe. These data indicate that the distribution of $P_\mathrm{rec}$ is relatively uniform across the three galaxies. We fervently note that these data likely suffer from multiple selection effects, there is no evidence to support that RRNe should only exist in M31, or that the `peak' at $P_\mathrm{rec}\sim10$\,yr is real.
This ten year threshold creates a phenomenological `watch list' of RNe to study closely through multiple eruptions. Consistent analysis and comparison of multiple eruptions from individual systems will be a key future driver for extragalactic nova science. It would not be the last time that classification based on observed characteristics revealed physical insights.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{RRNe.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Distribution of recurrence periods of all known RNe ($P_\mathrm{rec}\leq40$\,yrs). RRNe are all those with $P_\mathrm{rec}\leq10$\,yrs and they largely exist within M\,31. Data for Galactic RNe are from \citet{2010ApJS..187..275S}. The most rapidly recurring Galactic systems are the prototype sub-giant and red giant donor systems, U\,Sco and RS\,Oph, respectively.\label{RRN_hist}}
\end{figure}
So where are the Galactic RRNe? To date, the study of these systems has been largely confined to M\,31 \citep[but also see][for a detailed analysis of LMCN\,1968-12a]{2019arXiv190903281K}, which despite the advances in recent years severely limits observation opportunities to just optical to soft X-ray light curves and, in all but the most extreme case (see Section~\ref{12a}), optical spectroscopy. Given the high $M_\mathrm{WD}$---high $\dot{M}$ requirements for a short $P_\mathrm{rec}$, RRNe should be faint--fast novae. So it is not unlikely that the rapid-fire eruptions from Galactic RRNe might have been mistaken for other transients or even quasi-periodic variables, e.g., flare stars or DNe (the majority of which are not spectroscopically confirmed) --- particularly before the discovery of the prototype system, M31N\,2008-12a.
An open question -- with direct connection to their ultimate fate -- is just how many RRNe exist? Have we already uncovered the majority, or just scraped the surface? The rapidly approached era of all-sky, wide-field, (multi-messenger,) time-domain astronomy is key to addressing this question. Surveys such as the Zwicky Transient Facility \citep[ZTF;][]{2019PASP..131a8002B} and the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope \citep[LSST;][]{2019ApJ...873..111I} are ideally placed to detect eruptions of RRNe Galactically, in the Local Group, and beyond. To classify and interrogate those eruptions, we are at the mercy of the availability of timely (and in this case, rapid) follow-up observations.
\section{M31N 2008-12a --- a remarkable recurrent nova}\label{12a}
\subsection{Innocuous beginnings}
In-line with predictions \citep{2006MNRAS.369..257D}, there are now regularly over thirty novae discovered in M\,31 each year\footnote{\url{http://www.mpe.mpg.de/~m31novae/opt/m31/index.php}}. So when a new eruption from a previously unknown system, M31N\,2008-12a (hereafter `12a') was announced in 2008, there was nothing remarkable about this event except, perhaps, the date of the eruption, Christmas Day. The discovery note, written by \citet{2008Nis}, simply contains a few sentences about the brightness of the eruption. No known follow-up observations were taken and the event was not spectroscopically confirmed.
In 2011, another eruption was detected by \citet{2011Kor}, while there were a handful of follow-up observations \citep{2011ATel.3725....1B} there was no successful spectroscopy. In the available on-line material, a connection isn't made to the 2008 event, but the statement, ``In SIMBAD object RX\,J0045.4+4154 located at a distance 3.79 asec'' is made. RX\,J0045.4+4154 is, as we will see, intimately associated with 12a.
When the transient reappeared in 2012, again discovered by \citet{2012Nis}, a single spectrum was obtained using the Hobby-Eberly Telescope (HET) by \citet{2012ATel.4503....1S}. That spectrum \citep[reproduced in][]{2014A&A...563L...9D} confirmed that the 2012 event is clearly a nova eruption, within M\,31, and revealed the characteristics of the He/N taxonomic class. In the reporting telegram, \citeauthor{2012ATel.4503....1S}\ make the link between the 2008, 2011, and 2012 events, and the first suggestion that the system may be a RN -- despite the ``unusually short interval between brightenings''. Based on the RN hypothesis, an attempt was made to detect the SSS phase using {\it Swift}, but a series of four XRT \citep{2005SSRv..120..165B} observations beginning 20 days post-eruption failed to detect a source.
\subsection{The realisation}
The intermediate Palomar Transient Factory \citep[iPTF;][]{2009PASP..121.1395L} reported the discovery of the 2013 event, which erupted on Nov 26 \citep{2013ATel.5607....1T}. Upon discovery, iPTF triggered follow-up spectroscopy, which again confirmed the eruptive nova nature \citep{2014ApJ...786...61T}. {\it Swift} observations began only six days post-eruption and found that the SSS was already visible \citep{2014A&A...563L...8H,2014ApJ...786...61T}. At the time, this was the earliest on-set nova SSS to have been observed\footnote{This was surpassed by the 2014 eruption of the RN V745\,Scorpii, whose SSS turned-on 4 days post-discovery \citep{2015MNRAS.454.3108P}.}.
\citet{2014A&A...563L...9D}\ and \citet{2014ApJ...786...61T}\ compiled optical photometry of the 2013 eruption, which confirmed the `under-luminous' nature of the eruptions (as reported in 2008, 2011, and 2012), and indicated an extremely rapid decline, i.e.\ faint--fast. Both \citeauthor{2014A&A...563L...9D}\ and \citeauthor{2014ApJ...786...61T}\ utilised archival {\it HST} data to identify the likely progenitor system -- a very blue system whose SED was consistent with a luminous accretion disk. In those initial analyses, no evidence for the mass donor was recovered.
\citet{2014A&A...563L...8H} and \citet{2014ApJ...786...61T} both found three previous eruptions in the archives of {\it ROSAT} (1992 and 1993) and {\it Chandra} (2001), noting that the system was initially discovered as the ``recurrent supersoft X-ray transient'' RX\,J0045.4+4154 \citep{1995ApJ...445L.125W}. \citeauthor{2014ApJ...786...61T}\ also revealed that PTF detected an eruption in 2009.
Eruptions had been detected in 1992, 1993, 2001, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, and 2013. It seemed clear that the 2010 eruption had been missed, probably occurring during a gap in PTF coverage \citep{2012ApJ...752..133C}. The evidence presented by \citeauthor{2014A&A...563L...9D}, \citeauthor{2014A&A...563L...8H}, and \citeauthor{2014ApJ...786...61T}\ was strongly suggestive that 12a was a RN undergoing annual eruptions, and that it had been (at the time) doing so for at least twenty years. Therefore, it was concluded that 12a must contain a particularly massive WD and must be accreting an an elevated rate \citep{2014A&A...563L...9D,2014A&A...563L...8H,2014ApJ...786...61T}, and all three publications ended with a prediction for the 2014 eruption.
\subsection{2010, 2014 and 2015, and a six month recurrence?}
In light of predictions for a 2014 eruption, a programme was put together to monitor the 12a region of M\,31. This was undertaken predominately by the Liverpool Telescope \citep[LT;][]{2004SPIE.5489..679S}, which detected the eruption on October 2. Upon detection, a pre-planned follow-up campaign was instigated that included multiple ground-based optical telescopes obtaining high-cadence photometry and a number of spectroscopic observations, and space-based UV and X-ray observations by {\it Swift}. \citet[who addressed the optical and UV observations]{2015A&A...580A..45D} reported that the 2014 eruption was similar to that of 2013 and that the nova evolved extremely rapidly ($t_2=1.8\pm0.1$\,days) --- faster than all known Galactic RNe. The first tentative evidence for a light-curve plateau, synonymous with the RN phenomenon \citep{2008ASPC..401..206H,2010ApJS..187..275S,2010AJ....140...34S,2014ApJ...788..164P}, the low peak optical luminosity was consistent with a low ejected mass, and the SEDs indicated a high photospheric temperature at maximum light. \citeauthor{2015A&A...580A..45D}\ also reported that seemingly low ejection velocity, obtained spectroscopically was consistent with models of a high $M_\mathrm{WD}$ and short cycle RNe \cite[see, e.g.,][]{2005ApJ...623..398Y}. The spectra also hinted at possible ejecta deceleration, similar to that seen in RS\,Oph \citep[first noted after the 1958 eruption;][]{1964AnAp...27..555D} when the ejecta interact with pre-existing circumbinary material due to the red giant wind of that system's donor \citep{1967BAN....19..227P,1985MNRAS.217..205B,2006ApJ...652..629B}. \citet{2015A&A...580A..46H} reported on X-ray observations that showed a bright and rapidly evolving SSS with a fast turn-on ($t_\mathrm{on}=5.9\pm0.5$\,days) and short extent ($t_\mathrm{off}=18.4\pm0.5$\,d) --- like the optical and UV, the 2014 X-ray evolution was very similar to that seen in 2013. \citeauthor{2015A&A...580A..46H}\ revealed that a BB parameterisation of the X-ray spectrum indicated a very high effective temperature ($k_\mathrm{B}T=120\pm5$\,eV) and that the X-ray light curve showed substantial variation over the first 10\,days following the unveiling of the SSS. The derived X-ray parameters were also consistent with those predicted based on the M\,31 population \citep[Section~\ref{xrayprop}]{2010A&A...523A..89H,2011A&A...533A..52H,2014A&A...563A...2H}, and were consistent with a near-Chandrasekhar mass WD.
The most interesting finding reported by \citet{2015A&A...580A..45D} was the discovery of extended nebulosity surrounding the system, which is discussed in more detail in Section~\ref{SR}. \citeauthor{2015A&A...580A..45D}\ and \citeauthor{2015A&A...580A..46H}\ predicted that the 2015 eruption would occur between October and December.
The 2015 eruption represented a sea change. A concerted campaign was put together utilising facilities all around the globe including large numbers of observers from the American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO\footnote{\url{https://www.aavso.org}}), the British Astronomical Association (BAA\footnote{\url{https://www.britastro.org}}), and the Variable Star Observers League in Japan (VSOLJ\footnote{\url{http://vsolj.cetus-net.org}}) --- a nova campaign not seen since the 2010 eruption of U\,Sco \citep[see][]{2010AJ....140..925S}. A space-based detection campaign was undertaken by {\it Swift} \citep{2016ApJ...830...40K} in an attempt to capture the long-predicted nova precursor X-ray flash \citep[XRF;][]{1990LNP...369..306S,2002AIPC..637..345K,2015ApJ...808...52K,2016ApJ...824...22H}. Early detection of the 2015 eruption was critical to the follow-up campaigns, which included rapid-response UV spectroscopy and photometry by {\it HST} and late-time ground-based spectroscopy from a number of 8m+ facilities\footnote{Due to unfortunate weather conditions around the globe, none of the late-time spectroscopy was possible. This was all rescheduled for the 2016 eruption and those data remain under analysis.}.
The Las Cumbres Observatory network \citep[LCO;][]{2013PASP..125.1031B} made the discovery on August 28, however, {\it Swift} UVOT had detected the 2015 eruption marginally earlier\footnote{The {\it Swift} observations were hampered by a longer data retrieval time and were received and processed after the LCO data.}. The 2015 eruption occurred sooner than anticipated; the {\it Swift} XRF campaign had only just begun. \citet{2016ApJ...830...40K} reported a failed attempt to capture the XRF, citing the short lead-in time among the possible explanations. Another possibility presented is that although the XRF could `escape' from the natal nova eruption it was largely absorbed by substantial circumbinary material. However, additional scenarios include insufficient {\it Swift} cadence or the XRF energy being incompatible with the {\it Swift} XRT (particularly given that instrument's low sensitivity to hard X-rays and the distance to M\,31).
The follow-up campaign of the 2015 eruption obtained the most detailed optical (photometric and spectroscopic), UV, and X-ray datasets of any M\,31 nova to date. \citet{2016ApJ...833..149D} presented and analysed a combined dataset from the 2013--2015 eruptions, which showed remarkable similarity at all energies, as suggested for RN eruptions by \citet{2010ApJS..187..275S}. \citeauthor{2016ApJ...833..149D}\ reported that the colour evolution was suggestive of a red giant donor, which was also supported by the strong evidence now seen for ejecta deceleration \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2006ApJ...652..629B}. Tentative evidence for high-excitation coronal lines was also presented, as might be expected in the presence of a shocked donor wind. Detailed SEDs provided no evidence for an optically thick photosphere, even at early times, indicating that the photospheric emission must peak in the FUV or even EUV. \citeauthor{2016ApJ...833..149D}\ went on to describe the extremely high velocity material ($\mathrm{FWHM}\approx13000$\,km\,s$^{-1}$) seen fleetingly in the early-time (pre-maximum) spectra, described as ``indicative of outflows along the polar direction---possibly highly collimated outflows or jets''. There was also evidence for a mid-point (day 11) dip in the X-ray light curve across all three eruptions, which we will address further in Section~\ref{2016}. \citeauthor{2016ApJ...833..149D}\ ended on a prediction for the 2016 eruption occurring in mid-September ($\pm1$\,month).
The {\it HST} observations of the 2015 eruption were successful in tying down a number of the outstanding `unknowns' about the system. The NUV spectra (taken 4 and 5 days post-eruption) finally constrained the extinction toward the system, but otherwise revealed very limited features. The FUV spectrum, taken 3.32 days post-eruption was much more fruitful. \citet{2017ApJ...847...35D} reported that the FUV spectrum was broadly consistent with that expected from a CO WD \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2012BASI...40..185S} and importantly there was no evidence for any neon in the ejecta at that time. The FUV lines also exhibited very high velocities and the resonance lines remained optically thick (and saturated in some cases), the profile of the N\,{\sc v} line (the highest ionisation energy line observed) was shown to be consistent with optically thick outflows or jets.
Newly obtained {\it HST} optical--NUV photometry was used to explore the late-decline and was coupled with archival observations to explore the quiescent system. \citet{2017ApJ...849...96D} found that 12a takes only $\sim75$ days to reach quiescence following an eruption, showing a possible increase in luminosity toward the onset of the next event. The quiescent photometry were used to model the accretion disk \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2017ApJ...846...52G}, with those models indicating an extremely high $\dot{M}$. By extrapolating the quiescent disk models back to the late-decline, and with comparison to a late-time Keck spectrum of the 2014 eruption, \citet{2017ApJ...849...96D} presented evidence for the 12a accretion disk surviving each eruption and possibly dominating the optical--NUV flux as early as the plateau phase. The quiescent accretion rates presented were in the region of $(0.6-1.4)\times10^{-6}\,\mathrm{M}_\odot\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ -- once the additional effects of a considerable disk wind/outflow had also been considered \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2015MNRAS.450.3331M}.
With the assistance of the PHAT survey team \citep{2014ApJS..215....9W}, \citet{2017ApJ...849...96D} recovered the mass donor, an M\,31 `red clump' star, most likely a low-luminosity red giant --- with the donor constrained a limit could also be placed on the orbital period ($\gtrsim5$\,days). That paper concluded by assessing all the parameters of the system and made a {\it conservative estimate} of the time remaining for the WD to reach the Chandrasekhar mass of $<20$\,kyr.
The observations of the 2015 eruption \citep{2016ApJ...833..149D,2017ApJ...849...96D,2017ApJ...847...35D} allowed us to complete the basic picture of 12a, placing numbers or strong constraints on most of the key system parameters, which are summarised in Table~\ref{vital_stats}. A few gaps remained, including the 2010 eruption!
\begin{table}
\caption{Key parameters of the M31N\,2008-12a system.\label{vital_stats}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\hline
{Parameter} & {Value} & {References} \\
\hline
$P_\mathrm{rec}$ & $347\pm10$\,days & 1 \\
$M_\mathrm{WD}$ & $\simeq1.38$\,M$_\odot$ & 2 \\
$\dot{M}_\mathrm{SSS}$$^{a}$ & $1.6\times10^{-7}$\,M$_\odot$\,yr$^{-1}$ & 2 \\
$\dot{M}_\mathrm{disk}$$^{b}$ & $\left(6-14\right)\times10^{-7}$\,M$_\odot$\,yr$^{-1}$ & 3\\
$M_\mathrm{ejected,H}$ & $\left(0.26\pm0.04\right)\times10^{-7}$\,M$_\odot$ & 4 \\
$\eta$$^{c}$ & $+63\%$ & 2\\
$L_\mathrm{donor}$ & $103^{+12}_{-11}\,\mathrm{L}_\odot$ & 3 \\
$R_\mathrm{donor}$ & $14.14^{+0.46}_{-0.47}\,\mathrm{R}_\odot$ & 3 \\
$T_\mathrm{eff,donor}$ & $4890\pm110\,\mathrm{K}$ & 3 \\
$P_\mathrm{orb}$ & $\gtrsim5$\,days & 3 \\
\hline
$d$ & $752\pm17$\,kpc & 5\\
$E\left(B-V\right)$ & $0.10\pm0.03$ & 6 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\setstretch{0.75}
{\footnotesize $^{a}${Derived by modelling the SSS development of M31N\,2008-12a, it is assumed to be constant throughout a complete eruption cycle.}}\\
{\footnotesize $^{b}${Derived by fitting accretion disk models to the optical and UV quiescence SEDs. Here, the range during quiescence is presented.}}\\
{\footnotesize $^{c}${WD accretion efficiency; as $\eta>0$, $M_\mathrm{WD}$ in increasing.}}\\
{\footnotesize References --- {(1)~\citet{2015A&A...582L...8H,2018ApJ...857...68H}, (2)~\citet{2015ApJ...808...52K}, (3)~\citet{2017ApJ...849...96D}, (4)~\citet{2015A&A...580A..46H}, (5)~\citet{2001ApJ...553...47F}, (6)~\citet{2017ApJ...847...35D}.}}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
With a hole in the eruption history, an archival search for the `missing' 2010 eruption was undertaken. It did not take long to find the culprit contained within a pair of observations taken on Nov 20, right in the PTF coverage gap \citep{2015A&A...582L...8H}. The timing of the 2008--2014 events suggested that eruptions occurred slightly earlier each year --- i.e.\ a recurrence cycle just under one year (see Figure~\ref{rec_gaps}). However, when the archival X-ray eruptions from 1992, 1993, and 2001 were included they appeared to break this pattern. The simplest solution to this apparent problem was a shorter recurrence period, half that observed between 2008--2014. \citet{2015A&A...582L...8H} therefore adopted $P_\mathrm{rec}=175\pm11$\,days. Under this scenario, each of the observed eruptions in 2008--2014 was the second eruption that calendar year, the earlier eruption happened during the M\,31 Sun constraint. But as the proposed $P_\mathrm{rec}$ was still just under six months, the eruptions would still creep earlier each year --- following the 2015 eruption, \citet{2016ApJ...833..149D} predicted that by 2020/21 there would be a good probability of detecting the earlier eruption and confirming the six month cycle. However, if the eruption pattern remained unchanged, it would be substantially longer until a six month cycle could be confidently excluded.
\subsection{The `peculiar' 2016 eruption}\label{2016}
The lead-in to 2016 focussed on a dedicated attempt to detect the `early' eruption \citep[{\it confidentially} predicted for 2016 March $23\pm1$ month; see][]{HQ}. The results of that work will be published in due course in \citet{HQ}, but, it would not be considered a `spoiler' to report here that the early 2016 eruption was (despite the heroic efforts of some of the observers involved) not recovered.
While the existence of the `early' eruption remained unproved, attention was focussed to the `normal' later-year event, and again a global detection effort was employed. The mid-September prediction came and went, as did the extended window \citep[ending on October 13;][]{2016ApJ...833..149D}. The 2016 eruption finally occured on December 12 \citep{2016ATel.9848....1I}. The results of the 2016 eruption campaign are presented in full detail in \citet{2018ApJ...857...68H}. In general, despite its lateness, the 2016 eruption proceeded largely as those preceding it, and with the earliest spectrum yet obtained, even stronger evidence of the short-lived high-velocity outflows or jets were seen. However, the 2016 eruption differed from its forerunners in two aspects.
Firstly, \citeauthor{2018ApJ...857...68H}\ revealed a short-timescale cusp-like peak that preceded and outshone the `normal' eruption peak (at day 1). While the paper discusses possible links between this cusp and the delayed eruption, it was noted that the timing of the 2016 cusp was coincident with holes in the light curves from 2013--2015 --- so no strong connection could be made to the delayed eruption. The 2010 detection provided limited evidence for a similar event that year; an eruption otherwise deemed `typical' \citep{2015A&A...582L...8H}.
Secondly, the SSS phase, which in 2013--2015 had continued until day 18--19 post-eruption, began to turn-off at day 11 and was last detected by {\it Swift} on day 14 \citep{2018ApJ...857...68H}. Prior to turn-off, the unveiling of the 2016 SSS proceeded in a similar manner to that in 2013--2015, that and the similarity in the optical behaviour (sans the `cusp') strongly implied that the eruptions themselves were similar --- a similar ejected mass, with a similar velocity, and a similar peak luminosity, therefore a similar ignition (or accreted) mass must have been involved. How could a late eruption generate essentially a `normal' eruption but a truncated SSS phase? The inter-eruption period of 12a had always varied, but the SSS phase had been consistent.
Given the generally low ejected mass and $\dot{M}$ of novae \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2005ApJ...623..398Y}, $M_\mathrm{WD}$ must be approximately constant between successive eruptions (whether long-term $M_\mathrm{WD}$ increases or decreases) and hence successive eruptions would always have the same ignition mass and similar eruptions. The logical explanation of a late eruption is a decrease in the average inter-eruption $\dot{M}$. This in turn would lead to a less massive accretion disk. A less massive disk would be more readily disrupted during an eruption. \citeauthor{2018ApJ...857...68H}\ also noted that the 2016 eruption began to turn off (at day 11) at around the same time as the X-ray light curve dip seen in 2013--2015. Therefore it was proposed that day 11 was the natural turn off time of the SSS in 12a, given the ignition mass. The higher average $\dot{M}$ in 2013--2015 meant the disk was minimally disrupted, allowing accretion on the WD to resume once the surface nuclear burning first began to wane (at around day 11), the availability of additional H-rich fuel artificially extended the SSS-phase by a week or so. \citeauthor{2018ApJ...857...68H}\ proposed that in 2016 a less massive disk was more substantially disrupted and accretion onto the WD only resumed once the nuclear burning had ceased. In making this proposal, \citeauthor{2018ApJ...857...68H}\ strongly recommended further study of this `re-feeding' concept. Subsequently, \citet{2018MNRAS.480..572A} suggested that SSS re-feeding might explain the unexpected longevity of the SSS phase in the recent nova V407 Lupi.
Following 2016, the eruption pattern proposed in \citet{2015A&A...582L...8H} had been thrown into disarray. Was the 2016 event a statistical anomaly, or was the assumed model incorrect? Moreover, what had caused the decreased $\dot{M}$ between the 2015 and 2016 eruptions, which must have dropped by $\sim25\%$ from the `norm' during this period?
\subsection{2017 and 2018 --- back on track?}
It is fair to write that we really weren't sure when to expect the 2017 eruption, with predictions from within the `12a collaboration' ranging from the normal pattern to a T\,Pyxidis-style subsidence \citep{2010ApJS..187..275S,2018ApJ...862...89G}. It was not even certain that the `2017 eruption' (aka the next eruption) would occur in 2017.
Leaving it very late, the 2017 eruption was detected on December 31.77 UT\footnote{The time recorded in Table~\ref{12a-erupt} is the estimate of eruption itself.} at the West Challow Observatory in the UK \citep{2017ATel11116....1B}. The 2018 event, was less suspenseful, and was detected on November 6 by the LT \citep{2018ATel12177....1D}. In Table~\ref{12a-erupt} we provide a summary of the past 14 detected eruptions of 12a \citep[based on similar Tables in][]{2017ApJ...849...96D,2017ApJ...847...35D}.
\begin{table}[!ht]
\caption{Summary of the 14 observed eruptions of M31N\,2008-12a.\label{12a-erupt}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\hline
{Eruption date$^{\dag}$} & {Inter-eruption} & {References} \\
{[UT]} & {timescale [days]$^{\ddag}$} & \\
\hline
(1992 Jan.\ 28) & \ldots & 1, 2 \\
(1993 Jan.\ 03) & 341 & 1,2 \\
(2001 Aug.\ 27) & \ldots & 2, 3 \\
2008 Dec.\ 25 & \ldots & 4 \\
2009 Dec.\ 02 & 342 & 5 \\
2010 Nov.\ 19 & 352 & 2 \\
2011 Oct.\ 22.5 & 337.5 & 6 \\
2012 Oct.\ 18.7 & 362.2 & 7 \\
2013 Nov.\ $26.95\pm0.25$ & 403.5 & 4, 8, 9 \\
2014 Oct.\ $02.69\pm0.21$ & $309.8\pm0.7$ & 10, 11 \\
2015 Aug.\ $28.28\pm0.12$ & $329.6\pm0.3$ & 12\\
2016 Dec.\ $12.32\pm0.17$ & $471.7\pm0.2$ & 13\\
2017 Dec.\ $31.3\pm0.1$ & $384.0\pm0.2$ & 14, 15 \\
2018 Nov.\ 06 & $\sim310$ & 15, 16 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\setstretch{0.75}
{\footnotesize {Updated version of Table~1 from \protect \citet{2017ApJ...849...96D,2017ApJ...847...35D}.}}\\
{\footnotesize $^{\dag}${Those in parentheses are extrapolated from X-ray data.}}\\
{\footnotesize $^{\ddag}${Only quoted for consecutive detections in consecutive years.}}\\
{\footnotesize References --- {(1)~\citet{1995ApJ...445L.125W}, (2)~\citet{2015A&A...582L...8H}, (3)~\citet{2004ApJ...609..735W}, (4)~\citet{2008Nis}, (5)~\citet{2014ApJ...786...61T}, (6)~\citet{2011Kor}, (7)~\citet{2012Nis}, (8)~\citet{2014A&A...563L...9D}, (9)~\citet{2014A&A...563L...8H}, (10)~\citet{2015A&A...580A..45D}, (11)~\citet{2015A&A...580A..46H}, (12)~\citet{2016ApJ...833..149D}, (13)~\citet{2018ApJ...857...68H}, (14)~\citet{2017ATel11116....1B}, (15)~\citet{12a1718}, (16)~\citet{2018ATel12177....1D}.}}
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
In Figure~\ref{rec_gaps} we show (left-hand panel) the original 12a eruption `model' \citep{2015A&A...582L...8H} that was consistent with either a $\sim6$\,month or $\sim12$\,month $P_\mathrm{rec}$ and described the 2008--2015 eruption timings reasonably well. But with the inclusion of the 2016--2018 eruptions, which possibly also emphasise the 2013 event, it seems clear that this original model does not well describe the eruptions. In the right-hand panel, we show the distribution of inter-eruption gaps. The solid blue line shows the mean, 360\,days, the red-dashed line the median, 347\,days, the standard deviation is 50\,days. If we are concerned with how well the mean inter-eruption time is known, then $\overline{P_\mathrm{rec}}=0.99\pm0.02$\,years\footnote{The authors agonised about whether to comment on this number, but decided to leave any speculation to the reader.}.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{12a_rec_gaps.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Left) Distribution of M31N\,2008-12a eruption dates since 2008, the blue line and the grey shaded region indicate the original timing model \citep{2015A&A...582L...8H}. (Right) Distribution of 12a inter-eruption gaps, the blue line shows the mean, the red-dashed line the median.\label{rec_gaps}}
\end{figure*}
The 2017 and 2018 eruptions will be presented in a joint paper \citep{12a1718} --- both eruptions appear, at least superficially, to be very similar to the 2013--2015 events. And, so as not to break with tradition, in terms of predictions for the 2019 eruption, then at the time of writing, we would expect it to occur $360\pm50$\,days after the 2018 event:\ between September 12 and December 21.
\subsection{The super-remnant}\label{SR}
We continue to investigate archival observations to attempt the recovery of past -- missed -- eruptions. Our key collaborator, Allen Shafter, alerted us to a H$\alpha$ image of the 12a field that he and Karl Misselt had taken using the Steward 2.3m Bok Telescope \citep[see][]{2008ApJ...686.1261C,2012ApJ...760...13F} as part of an earlier M\,31 nova survey. These data did not reveal a previous eruption, but they did show evidence for {\it vastly} extended nebulosity around 12a \citep{2015A&A...580A..45D}. This discovery was soon confirmed via narrowband data from LGGS \citep{2007AJ....134.2474M} and the LT. Fortuitously, the LT SPRAT \citep[see][]{2014SPIE.9147E..8HP} long-slit spectra of the 2014 eruption contained H$\alpha$+[N\,{\sc ii}] and [S\,{\sc ii}] emission (but little else) from a bright knot in this nebula \citep{2015A&A...580A..45D}.
To follow-up, high-spatial resolution H$\alpha$+[N\,{\sc ii}] imaging was obtained with {\it HST}, and deep low-resolution spectroscopy from the Gran Telescopio Canarias and HET. {\it HST} imaging clearly revealed the shell-like nature of the nebula with the spectra confirming that the phenomenon was not a SN remnant, yet was consistent with being predominately swept-up ISM \citep{2019Natur.565..460D}, see Figure~\ref{NSR_img}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{NSR.jpg}
\end{center}
\caption{The nova super-remnant surrounding M31N\,2008-12a. The lower left of the image shows the LT ground-based narrow-band H$\alpha$ data, the upper right the high spatial resolution {\it HST} H$\alpha$+[N\,{\sc ii}] imaging. Here the colour-scale is based on brightness, this image has been recreated based on the data published in \citet{2019Natur.565..460D}.\label{NSR_img}}
\end{figure}
With semi-major and -minor axes of 67 and 45\,pc, respectively, and a swept-up mass of $\sim10^{5-6}\,\mathrm{M}_\odot$ \citep{2015A&A...580A..45D,2019Natur.565..460D}, a serious question remained, could sustained RN eruptions produce such a vast structure?
The expanding nebulosity around the Galactic nova GK\,Persei was first noted by \citet{1901ApJ....14..293R,1901ApJ....14..167R}, with that nova's ejecta first photographed by \citeauthor{1916BHarO.621....1B}\footnote{Who identifies a ``Miss (Vera Marie) Gushee'' as the photographer.} in 1916\ \citep[see][]{2008clno.book.....B}. Nebular ejecta have been discovered and investigated around $\sim10\%$ of Galactic novae \citep[see, for e.g.,][]{1990LNP...369..179W,1995MNRAS.276..353S,2007ApJ...665L..63B}, but the largest of these are less than a parsec across \citep{2004ApJ...600L..63B,2007Natur.446..159S,2012ApJ...758..121S}. Evidence for interacting ejecta from successive RN eruptions has been presented for T\,Pyxidis \citep{1997AJ....114..258S,2013ApJ...768...48T}.
As a proof of concept, \citet{2019Natur.565..460D} presented a hydrodynamical simulation \citep[based on the {\tt Morpheus} code;][]{2007ApJ...665..654V} of 100,000 annual eruptions of 12a. This simulation followed each set of ejecta separately, including their self-interaction and interaction with the surrounding ISM. \citeauthor{2019Natur.565..460D}\ showed that such recurrent eruptions create a vast evacuated region around the central system while `piling' up the ISM in a thick expanding shell. Unlike remnants of single explosions/eruptions, this `super-remnant' contained a continually shock-heated region, inside the outer shell, where ejecta from successive eruptions collide. The properties of the simulated super-remnant were consistent with the observational constraints. Given the observed size of the super-remnant, \citeauthor{2019Natur.565..460D}\ suggested an age of $6\times10^{6}$\,yrs:\ assuming $\dot{M}=1.6\times10^{-7}\,\mathrm{M}_\odot\,\mathrm{yr}^{-1}$ \citep{2015ApJ...808...52K}, an accretion efficiency of only $\approx40\%$ would be required to grow a WD from 1\,M$_\odot$ to very close to the Chandrasekhar mass in that time.
At the time of writing, the authors see no reason why similar or `natal' super-remnants should not surround all RNe, particularly those with the shortest inter-eruption periods. However, given their vast scale and expected low surface brightness ($m_{\mathrm{H}\alpha}\gtrsim24$\,arcsec$^{-2}$) searches for additional examples are perhaps best conducted extragalactically. The existence of super-remnants around near-Chandrasekhar mass, rapidly accreting, WDs has potentially interesting consequences for any catastrophic event that may subsequently befall the central system. For example, the interaction of a SN\,Ia explosion with a super-remnant environment should be explored to identify potential observational signatures for the nova pathway to a SN\,Ia.
\section{Open questions for the next few decades}
Numerous questions about novae still require answers. Those related to ISM enrichment, $\gamma$-rays, dust formation, and the ejecta geometries are probably best broached Galactically. But when it comes to populations and the link to SNe\,Ia, extragalactic work is vital. Are the faint--fast novae related to the RNe, are they all RRNe? How large is the RRN population, are systems like M31N\,2008-12a rare, or is 12a the tip of the iceberg? Can (or should) the MMRD concept be salvaged? Do RRNe provide a substantial SN\,Ia channel? What is the ratio of CO to ONe WDs in novae? Does the nova population vary between and within host galaxies? Do local stellar population, star formation history, and metallicity affect novae? How do novae affect their environment, is the 12a nova super-remnant unique?
The hugely anticipated high-cadence all-sky surveys, such as LSST, could be a game changer, particularly for the faint--fast and RRNe (although the anticipated LSST observing cadence might be an issue). When launched, the {\it James Webb Space Telescope} could revolutionise the IR studies of novae and their ejecta, but we may also lose {\it HST} and its unparalleled UV capability. Novae will have to compete for their share of new facilities, and while discovery of new novae is one thing, follow-up capability is another. But despite the onslaught of automated all-sky surveys, it was the amateur community that discovered 12a and continues to provide invaluable support to its study. A huge proportion of extragalactic nova discoveries still come from amateur astronomers, these individuals and groups must not be under-valued. The future is bright, we have a lot of work still to do, observational nova work is likely to become more rewarding, but much more challenging.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to express there sincere gratitude to the following for their input to, proofing reading of, and discussion of the content of this Review:\ {\c S}{\"o}len Balman, Mike Bode, \'Eamonn Harvey, Mike Healy, Phil James, Fiona Murphy-Glaysher, Conor Ransome, Allen Shafter, and Steve Williams. Darnley \& Henze are grateful to Allen Shafter and Mike Healy for sharing the data and code, respectively, behind Figure~\ref{lsnr-plot}. Matt Darnley acknowledges funding from the UK Science \& Technology Facilities Council (STFC). Finally, we would like to thank the two referees for their careful reading and thoughtful reports.
\section*{Bibliography}
\bibliographystyle{cospar_new}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum computing is a paradigm of solving computation problems using a quantum physical system as a processor. This paradigm initiated from the idea to use one quantum system to simulate another quantum system, proposed at the end of the twentieth century in works of Manin \cite{Manin} and Feynman \cite{Feynmann}. A decade later Lloyd \cite{Lloyd1996} argued that it is possible to simulate the dynamics of every local quantum system in a quantum-computational way.
In parallel with this, there were attempts to apply the quantum computing paradigm to non-physical computation tasks \cite{Deutsch1992}, which led to the first potentially-useful quantum algorithms with a speed-up (factorization of a number \cite{Shor1994} and search in an unstructured database \cite{Grover1996}). Afterward, the development of quantum computation studies progressed rapidly, and more algorithms have been proposed, e.g., solving a system of linear equations \cite{HHL} or a quantum principal component analysis \cite{QPCA}.
Searching for algorithms with quantum speed-up led to the notion of "quantum supremacy" - an ability of quantum computers to solve specific problems with significantly fewer resource requirements compared to the classical computers \cite{Supremacy}. Recently an experimental realization of quantum supremacy \cite{Arute2019} heralded a new stage of quantum computing technology.
Another achievement of the last decade is the transition of quantum computer prototypes from experimental laboratories to the public. Several examples of quantum processors are available for the development of quantum-enhanced applications and research purposes for users all over the world \cite{ibmqx,rigetti,ionq}.
These are noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices \cite{NISQ}, characterized by a relatively small number of qubits, limited qubit-qubit connectivity, faulty single- and two-qubit gates and qubit state readout procedures, as well as low coherency times and the presence of crosstalks between qubits, leading to uncontrollable dynamics during the computation process.
In the present state, quantum computers are far away from fault-tolerant requirements \cite{QEC_beginners}, and there is much to be done in this emerging field. Nonetheless, there are first practically-interesting results, many scientifically-interesting works, as well as attempts to compensate the imperfection of technology with additional techniques, see, e.g., Refs. \cite{variat,nucleus,Behera2017,Huffman2017, Ku2019, sotnikov2019neural, Gangopadhyay2018,Doronin2020,mitig1,mitig2,mitig3,mitig4}, which inspire hope in the successful future of quantum computing.
One of the promising applications of quantum computing is the calculation of various characteristics of quantum many-body systems. Wave functions of these systems reside in an exponential-size Hilbert space. Due to exploding dimensionality, it is practically impossible for classical computers to calculate properties of such systems from first principles even for a medium particle number. With quantum computing, it becomes realistic to operate with exponentially-many quantum states in a controllable way. Having a properly defined observable, a significant speed-up of computation is possible.
There exist several approaches for modeling properties of quantum mechanical systems using a quantum device. The digital approach implies preparing an initial quantum state and constructing evolution operator using of single- and two-qubit gates from a universal set or more specialized gates preferable for a particular class of problems that can enhance compilation efficiency \cite{foxen2020demonstrating}. This approach requires essentially a universal quantum computer, which has qubits' and operations' quality high enough to guarantee a desired precision. This is the most involved kind of quantum computation, but it can be applied to the widest range of solvable problems \cite{Ladd2010, Georgesce2010}. An alternative method within digital strategy is associated with variational techniques. The analog approach implies constructing a quantum mechanical system with a sufficient level of control, whose dynamics can mimic the dynamics of other quantum systems. The field of analog quantum simulators was developing alongside with universal quantum computing in the last decades, being an interesting alternative \cite{Buluta2009, Georgescu2014}.
The idea to use a system of qubits, connected with tunable couplers, to solve optimization problems with quantum annealing was studied extensively. Although being suitable for narrow range of problems, this approach may be one of the first to become industrially applicable example of quantum computation \cite{Harris2010, Weber2017}.
There is a hybrid digital-analog approach to quantum computation, which until now has attracted much less attention, but potentially can incorporate the best of two worlds, see, e.g., theoretical studies \cite{SB,Hu2007,DAQC1}.
In this approach, a register of qubits is controlled by single-qubit operations from one hand, and by evolution under a Hamiltonian, which provides quantum entanglement, from the other hand. The interaction Hamiltonian is embedded in quantum hardware on a physical level due to the couplings between qubits. The interaction can be tunable, i.e., it can be switched off during execution of single-qubit gates by using dynamically adjustable couplers or frequency-tunable qubits. It is, however, technically simpler to use always-on interaction and fast single-qubit gates, whose fidelity is thus only slightly decreased by the interaction. In principle, qubit-qubit interaction together with single-qubit gates allow for the realization of an arbitrary unitary transformation \cite{SB} including basic subroutines of quantum computation such as quantum Fourier transform \cite{DAQC2}, but it is more straightforward to use it to specialized problems such as quantum simulation. One of the ideas is to create initial highly excited state of qubits using single-qubit gates and then to let the system to evolve under the interaction. This idea was realized experimentally for superconducting qubits \cite{Simulation1} as well as for trapped-ion systems \cite{Simulation4,Simulation2}. The hybrid quantum computational strategy, which relies on single-qubit control and interaction between qubits, is a perfect candidate to use in applications of near-term NISQ devices, since one of the most problematic features of digital quantum hardware, which is a need for high-fidelity two-qubit operations of the universal set, is not required within this strategy. For specific (although wide) class of problems, using digital-analog approach can lead to faster transfer of quantum computation applications into the real life.
In this paper, we show an example of the digital-analog simulation by using a rather unexpected feature of superconducting quantum processors with fixed frequency qubits and illustrate our ideas with superconducting quantum processors of IBM Quantum Experience. We use residual stray couplings between the qubits connected by resonators, which are known as crosstalks, to simulate the dynamics of spin clusters. Let us emphasize that the crosstalks are responsible for additional errors in digital quantum computation. In contrast, we here use them to simulate many-body systems, described by Hamiltonians with interaction terms similar to these couplings.
Within this approach, we avoid the execution of two-qubit quantum gates, thus mitigating error accumulation problem. The role of crosstalks in our work is to provide always-on interaction between qubits. In contrast to Refs. \cite{Simulation1,Simulation4,Simulation2}, we rely more deeply on a digital side of the hybrid strategy and consider Trotterized (discretized) dynamics instead of a fully analog evolution. In essence, we apply single-qubit gates periodically in time and let the system to evolve freely between them. Trotterized quantum simulation potentially yields much better flexibility in terms of the Hamiltonian we wish to simulate.
We observe a significant improvement of the computation accuracy in simulating dynamics of spin clusters, when the digital-analog approach is used instead of fully digital approach based on controlled-NOT (CNOT) gates. Notice that in these studies we are mostly interested
in infidelities between perfect and imperfect realizations of the same
circuit within the digital and digital-analog approaches, i.e., in both cases we use fixed number of Trotter steps, which is dictated by the maximum evolution time considered. We also address quantum Fourier transform and compare accuracies these two approaches which turn out to be nearly the same for this particular quantum circuit. We stress that these results were obtained using available quantum processors with crosstalks being intentionally suppressed. A quantum hardware can be optimized to improve the quality of such a hybrid quantum computation, based on always-on interaction (keeping individual addressability of qubits). We provide simple estimates for the optimal interaction constant between qubits and show that crosstalks in IBM Q machines are one or two orders of magnitude weaker; therefore the efficiency of quantum computation can be further greatly improved (at least, for certain quantum algorithms). This implies that specialized quantum processors based on digital-analog strategy and always-on interaction are prospective within NISQ era.
In digital quantum computers always-on interaction produces non-markovian dynamics of qubits, which gives rise to correlated errors. The character of non-markovian dynamics in IBM Q quantum machines and its impact on digital computation are also discussed in the present paper.
This paper is organized as follows: in Sec. II, we provide background about origin of crosstalks between superconducting qubits as well as describe our tools for modeling the evolution of many-body systems. In Sec. III, we describe experimental results for the dynamics of spin clusters. Sec. IV deals with summary and discussion.
\section{Background and Context}
\subsection{Superconducting fixed-frequency qubits and the origin of their residual interaction}
Nowadays, superconductivity-based quantum processors are the most widespread devices for quantum computing. The superconducting qubits can have both fixed and tunable frequencies. All existing realizations are imperfect and gathered under the name noisy intermediate-scale quantum devices. In order to implement digital-analog quantum computation ideas, it is necessary to have an interaction between qubits together with single-qubit gates and readouts. The interaction can be provided either by capacitive coupling between the qubits or couplings via microwave resonators and it can be either static or tunable. In this paper, we focus on digital-analog computation with IBM quantum devices and then we briefly discuss optimal regimes of coupling strengths for the realization of the hybrid strategy.
IBM Q quantum processors operate with fixed-frequency qubits and coupling between them is due to microwave resonators. These processors are built on transmons - superconducting qubits, which consists of a Josephson junction shunted by a large capacitor \cite{GambettaSC}. The resonance frequency of these devices is typically 4-6 GHz. In terms of a lumped circuit model, it is a parallel LC oscillator with the nonlinear inductor and a linear capacitor. The qubit is two levels of the resulting anharmonic oscillator. For selective control of transitions between energy levels and effective separation of the qubit Hilbert space, anharmonicity of this oscillator is made sufficiently large. Qubit frequencies are fixed to have long coherence times, which approach 50-100 $\mu s$. Full single-qubit control is carried out by applying external microwave driving through a transmission line strongly coupled to qubits. Every qubit is connected to the output resonator, which allows doing measurements of the qubit state. There are qubits connected with a resonator in dispersive regime (i.e., when a frequency of the resonator is significantly detuned from qubits frequencies), between which a two-qubit gate can be applied via microwave pulses.
In general, qubits coupled with a resonator interact with virtual photons (even in the absence of controlling pulses), and this interaction can be described by the Dicke model \cite{GambettaSC, EffectiveH}.
Since the frequency of the photon is significantly larger than the excitation frequencies of qubits, photons can be eliminated from the description of the system using perturbation theory that gives rise to the effective interaction between qubits \cite{GambettaSC, EffectiveH}. Thus, the degrees of freedom, related to physical qubits, slightly hybridize with each other.
To keep an individual addressability of qubits given the hybridization, a modified set of two-level systems can be introduced, which leads to the diagonalization of the Hamiltonian in the new basis \cite{GambettaSC}.
These new qubits, which form computational basis, are constructed from transmons degrees of freedom with small contributions from the other transmons connected with the given one through resonators.
However, transmons cannot be treated as ideal two-level systems due to limited anharmonicity. Higher levels of transmons can be populated via transitions from the first excited state. The incorporation of higher levels into the effective description results in the additional interaction of Ising $ZZ$ type in the Hamiltonian of qubits in the computational basis \cite{GambettaSC}. The interaction between two qubits 1 and 2 in this representation is given by the term of the form $-J^{phys}_{1,2} \sigma_1^z \sigma_2^z$, where $J^{phys}_{1,2} \sim (\delta_1+\delta_2)$, $\delta_{1,2}$ being anharmonicities of qubits 1 and 2; $J^{phys}_{1,2}$ also depends on detunings between various frequencies \cite{EffectiveH}.
For a quantum processor build from fixed-frequency qubits, a connectivity map of qubit-qubit residual interaction coincides with the connectivity map of the two-qubit gates of the processor. Let us stress that this interaction is static and exists even when gates are not active. The values of $J_{ij}^{phys}$ between different qubits are provided for all quantum devices of the IBM Quantum Experience project \cite{ibmqx1} and typical $J_{ij}^{phys}$ is 50-100 kHz, all of them being positive.
Values of crosstalks are measured with a modification of Bilinear Rotational Decoupling, which is a special technique known from NMR experiments (see the device documentation for IBM processors \cite{ibm_device}). It is based on the Ramsey experiment with echo pulses, applied to a pair of qubits, where one qubit state is measured at the end. This experiment is performed for two initial states of the qubit, and the final rotation angle is varied to observe a difference in oscillations for two experiments, which is induced by the crosstalk \cite{ibm_device}.
It turns out that $1/J_{ij}^{phys}$ is usually several times smaller than both $T_1$ and $T_2$, which implies that it is possible to perform few entangling operations using embedded $ZZ$ interaction before the decoherence would play a significant role. For example, for 5-qubit chip IBM QX2 $\overline{J_{ij}^{phys}} \overline{T_1} \approx 4.3$ and $\overline{J_{ij}^{phys}} \overline{T_2} \approx 3.8$, where averaging is performed over all qubits of the device. For 14-qubit chip IBM QX14 $\overline{J_{ij}^{phys}} \overline{T_1} \approx 2.6$ and $\overline{J_{ij}^{phys}} \overline{T_2} \approx 3.6$.
All these estimates are made for the available quantum hardware, which is optimized to keep crosstalks small. We believe that it is possible with a specialized hardware to improve these estimates, i.e., to increase typical values of $J_{ij}^{phys}T_{1,2}$ and to enable for the larger numbers of entangling steps of the algorithm. Of course, this also implies a trade-off between the individual addressability of qubits and the increase of crosstalks. This issue is discussed in a more detail in Section IV.
Strictly speaking, effective Hamiltonian for fixed-frequency qubits in IBM Q architecture contains not only additional terms of ZZ type but also terms of other sorts (such as ZX), which are, however, subdominant within a perturbative expansion \cite{EffectiveH}. If we disregard them in our computation scheme, they produce certain errors. In principle, such errors can be suppressed digitally, i.e., by appropriately applying single-qubit gates and modifying an algorithm itself. However, we are not going to pursue this issue in the present paper.
\subsection{Trotterized evolution within digital-analog approach}
The feature of superconducting quantum processor architecture, described in the preceding subsection, can be exploited to simulate physical systems in a non-standard way.
The idea is to use the internal physics of the quantum chip to model a Trotterized evolution of quantum systems, described by Hamiltonians with interactions digitally reducible to ZZ interaction.
Many spin Hamiltonians contain a part of nearest-neighbor spin ZZ interaction (or XX interactions or combination of XX, YY, and ZZ terms), so the evolution generated by this part of Hamiltonian can be transferred to physics of the quantum processor.
Using this approach, it is possible to simulate the dynamics of spin models (such as the Ising model and the Heisenberg model) with arbitrary single spin terms of the Hamiltonian. A change of the basis is needed to simulate XX, YY, or ZX interaction, which is possible due to the individual control of qubits (single-qubit gates).
To illustrate our idea, we focus on the most straightforward example -- simulation of spin clusters, described by transverse-field Ising model with Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
H = -\sum_{j}h_{j}\sigma^{x}_{j} -\sum_{<ij>}J_{ij}\sigma^{z}_{i}\sigma^{z}_{j},
\label{trIsing}
\end{equation}
where $h_{j}$ are spin local fields and $J_{ij}$ are interaction constants. This model requires to use only single-qubit gates to simulate the effect of terms $h_{j}\sigma^{x}_{j}$ since the ZZ part of the Hamiltonian is realized by coupling between qubits of the quantum processor. If we identify every qubit with spin, the influence of crosstalks on qubits states will be similar to the evolution of spins under the ZZ interaction hamiltonian.
We notice that the topology of the quantum processor dictates the topology of the spin system we can simulate, using this approach (at least, in a straightforward version we here implement). Ratios between values of $J_{ij}^{phys}$ of the processor fix ratios between $J_{ij}$ of the simulated spin system. Nevertheless, parameters $h_{j}$ of the simulated system can be arbitrary. Moreover, by applying additional Pauli-X gates, it is possible to switch off interaction of certain qubits of the device and thus also to engineer digitally the topology of the spin cluster.
In order to trace the free evolution of the system, the Trotter decomposition can be used to split an evolution operator for a full Hamiltonian, consisting of non-commuting operators, into a sequence of evolution operators for individual contributions.
The simplest form of this decomposition for the Hamiltonian $H = H_{A} + H_{B}$ is
\begin{equation}
e^{-it(H_{A}+H_{B})} \approx (e^{-iH_{A}\frac{t}{N_{tr}}}e^{-iH_{B}\frac{t}{N_{tr}}})^{N_{tr}},
\end{equation}
which in $N_{tr} \rightarrow \infty$ limit becomes exact. For transverse field Ising Hamiltonian, an appropriate splitting of the full Hamiltonian is
\begin{equation}
H_{A} = -\sum_{j}h_{j}\sigma^{x}_{j},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
H_{B} = -\sum_{<ij>}J_{ij}\sigma^{z}_{i}\sigma^{z}_{j},
\end{equation}
where the latter term corresponds to ZZ interaction between qubits. Notations $h_{j}$, $J_{ij}$, and $t$ refer to the system we wish to simulate (i.e., not to the actual parameters of the quantum processor). The ratios between $J_{ij}$ and constants of ZZ interactions $J^{phys}_{ij}$ of qubits of the chip must be the same, although the absolute values for the two sets of these quantities can be, of course, different.
In terms of quantum schemes, every two-qubit ZZ-rotation operator within the Trotterized evolution can be performed without application of any quantum gate from the universal set and just idling for some time instead, as depicted schematically in Fig. 1. The upper scheme in Fig. 1(a) shows usual representation of the two-qubit operator
$$
\exp\left(-ih_i t \sigma_{i}^{x}\right) \exp\left(-ih_j t \sigma_{i}^{x}\right) \exp\left(-i J_{ij}t \sigma_{i}^{z} \otimes \sigma_{j}^{z}\right)
$$
using the quantum circuit language (fully digital approach). For more details on the the structure of this quantum circuit see Refs. \cite{weare,Simulation3}. The lower scheme in Fig. 1(a) shows the same operator within our digital-analog approach. The operator $\exp\left(-i J_{ij}t \sigma_{i}^{z} \otimes \sigma_{j}^{z}\right)$ is implemented in the analog way by idling within some physical time interval. The physical idling time $t^{phys}$ is given by the relation $J_{ij}t = J^{phys}_{ij}t^{phys}$, so the controlling dimensionless parameters are $J^{phys}_{ij}t^{phys}$ sometimes referred to as Ising times. To implement such a time delay in IBM Q machines, one needs to incorporate a particular number of identity gates $I$ into the circuit. This number denoted as $M$ can be calculated from a simple relation $M = t^{phys}/T_{I}$, where $T_{I}$ is a physical time of the identity gate (in IBM Q machines, $T_{I} \approx 100$ ns and it also can vary from chip to chip). The technique can be applied to each Trotter step for the evolution operator and the whole structure of the circuit both for digital and digital-analog approaches is shown schematically in Fig. 1(b).
In our experiments, we simulate several spin systems and focus on mean of excitations as a function of time. The operator of excitation number for a single spin $j$ is $n_j = \sigma^{+}_{j}\sigma^{-}_{j}$. The operator of averaged over spins excitation number reads $n = \frac{1}{N_q}\sum_{j}n_j$. The quantity we are interested in is the expectation value $<n>\equiv \bra{\psi} n \ket{\psi}$, which we refer to as the mean excitation number.
The main steps of our digital-analog simulations are:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Prepare an initial state of the quantum register of $N_{q}$ qubits, for example, $\ket{0}^{\otimes N_{q}}$;
\item Apply Trotter-decomposed evolution operator to a prepared register of qubits; the construction of the evolution operator in terms of IBM Q gates is different for digital and digital-analog approaches, as explained above;
\item Measure the state of the qubit register in computational basis and thus obtain a sample of $N_{runs}$ bitstrings of the form, e.g., "01001".
\item Using the sample, calculate the mean excitation number of the spin system as
\begin{equation}
<n(t^{phys})> = \frac{1}{N_{runs}}\sum_{k=1}^{N_{runs}}\sum_{j=1}^{N_{q}}s^{j}_{k}(t^{phys})
\end{equation}
where $s^{j}_{k}(t^{phys})$ is a $j$-th qubit measurement outcome, obtained in the $k$-th run of the quantum circuit with a time parameter $t^{phys}$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Trotter_idea3_thin_arrow}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Stepbystep}
\caption{(a) A single Trotter step for a couple of spins of the transverse field Ising model. The upper picture represents a standard digital decomposition into quantum gates. The lower picture represents the same subroutine based on the ZZ interaction of the qubits of the quantum chip. (b) A general schematic of quantum circuit to simulate spin systems dynamics.}
\end{figure}
\section{Main results}
To illustrate our ideas, we perform several experiments for different physical setups. The first experiment deals with the dynamics of a transverse field Ising model for just two spins as a toy model. Every spin is represented by a qubit of the quantum processor, and the Trotterized evolution is realized using both digital and digital-analog approaches. Then, we increase the number of spins in the system (up to 5 and 14) to see how the growth of the circuit influences results, and compare the accuracy of computation for these two approaches. Finally, we digitally introduce artificial disorder into the 14-spin cluster and simulate the dynamics.
\subsection{Toy model: two spins}
For the case of two qubits of a quantum processor, our approach can more accurately reproduce dynamics of transverse field Ising system for initial basis states (e.g. $\ket{00}$ and $\ket{11})$ compared to the standard digital approach based on CNOT gates. The particular topology for the part of the IBM QX14 processor, used in the experiment, is shown in Fig. 2, where we utilized qubits $Q_{0}$ and $Q_{1}$ for this simulation. Numbers near edges between qubits show corresponding values of $J^{phys}_{ij}$ measured in kilohertz\cite{ibm_device}.
We used 6-step Trotter decomposition to study the dynamics of the two-qubit system. The number of Trotter steps was chosen through a comparison with the exact solution of the Schrodinger equation; for six steps, the Trotterization error is generally not significant for the evolution time we consider, which is limited by $T_{1,2}$ (except the long evolution times close to the upper bound). Notice that we do not pay attention to this error since we aim to analyze errors, associated with the hardware imperfections. Thus, we change $t^{phys}$, and, for each value of $t^{phys}$, we divide it into six intervals and implement six Trotter steps. We have chosen this strategy to be able to characterize the ability of quantum devices to run quantum algorithms within two distinct approaches (digital and digital-analog methods), i.e., we focused on the characterization of the device imperfections. In other words, we are mostly interested in infidelities between perfect and imperfect realizations of the same circuit. Another approach is to analyze and infidelity between the full time-dependent solution of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation and the Trotterized realization with the real quantum device. We believe that such an analysis can be considered as a complementary investigation for the path we follow. We also would like to note that the issue of a proper Trotterization is rather complicated even if we disregard the errors of a quantum device. This is particularly true for disordered systems, see, e.g., Ref. \cite{Heyl}. Quantum models we simulate are also disordered due to different values of couplings between qubits. This is another reason why we would like to focus on errors of realizations with real devices.
The maximum $t^{phys}$ in our simulation of the two-spin model was around 50 microseconds, which nearly corresponds to both $T_{1}$ and $T_{2}$ for a chosen quantum processor -- apparently, this is the main restriction of our approach. Maximum dimensionless Ising time $J_{01}t=J_{01}^{phys}t^{phys}$ was equal to approximately 2.5. In our simulations, we assumed that every spin is subjected to the homogeneous transverse field. Both parameters $h_{0}$ and $h_{1}$ are equal to $2J_{01}$ that corresponds to the regime when ZZ interaction and transverse field are of nearly equal importance.
In all experiments, we estimated statistical error for the mean excitation number using the standard error for a sample of experimental data $n_i$:
\begin{equation}
SE = \sqrt{\frac{1}{N_{runs}(N_{runs}-1)}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{runs}}(n_{i} - \overline{n})^{2}},
\end{equation}
where $\overline{n}=\frac{1}{N_{runs}}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{runs}}n_{i}$, which for $N_{runs} = 8192$ gives SE = $\mathcal{O}$ $(10^{-3})$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center{\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{melbourne_2spins}}
\caption{A schematic view of a part of the IBM QX14 quantum processor, utilized for the simulation of the two-spin system ($Q_{0}$ and $Q_{1}$ are used). CNOT gates can be applied directly between qubits, which are connected by lines. Those qubits experience pairwise ZZ stray interaction of Ising type due to the presence of resonator they share. Numbers between qubits show corresponding values of coupling constants measured in kilohertz.}
\end{figure}
Both experimental and theoretical results for the mean number of excited spins $<n(t)>$ are presented in Fig. 3. It shows a good agreement between the theory and the results of the digital-analog simulation. The theoretical result is based on an approximation of the same level (6-step Trotter decomposition). For the purely digital evolution, the agreement between the theory and the experiment is much poorer. To characterize the quality of experiments, we calculated several figures of merit (see Appendix A for more detail), which support our general conclusions.
Note that the theoretical curve demonstrates an irregular behavior in Fig. 3 at long times, where it starts to deviate significantly from the results of the digital-analog simulation. This feature is related to the fact that at such long times Trotterization error becomes significant and a larger number of Trotter steps is needed. In general, Trotterization errors are manifested through irregular and unstable dynamical behavior. In contrast, decoherence smears out such features within the digital-analog strategy. Also, note that the initial time in our digital simulations was not exactly zero, but we used a certain small value (0.001 in terms of the mean Ising time). This was done on purpose since otherwise the IBM compiler optimizes the circuit automatically at zero time by removing quantum gates from the circuit, which leads to the unphysical jump of $<n(t)>$ at $t = 0$.
We emphasize that all actual connections of every chosen qubit to other qubits of the quantum processor should be taken into account in our simulations because even if neighboring qubits ($Q_{2}$ and $Q_{13}$ in this simulation) stay in ground states, they are still connected to qubits used in the experiment ($Q_{1}$) and influence their time evolution.
Thus, we perform our simulation for the four-spin cluster ($Q_{0}$, $Q_{1}$, $Q_{2}$, and $Q_{13}$), where two spins play a passive role.
We compare experimental data with the theory, taking into account the presence of surrounding qubits.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center{\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{daqc_2_qubit_plot}}
\caption{Dynamics of the mean excitation number for two-spin transverse field Ising cluster during the free evolution from the initial state $\ket{00}$. Shown are results of the same approximation level (6 Trotter steps) for theoretical calculation (blue color), for the experiment within the digital-analog approach (magenta color), and the experiment within the digital approach (black color). Physical time $t^{phys}$ defines the total time of algorithm execution within the digital-analog approach, which gives rise to ZZ interaction of qubits. For both theoretical results and the result of experimental implementation of the digital approach, $t^{phys}$ must be mapped on time $t = J^{phys}_{ij}t^{phys}/J_{ij}$ of the simulated system.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{ibmqx2}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{melbourne-bus}
\caption{A topology of IBM QX2 (a) and IBM QX14 (b) quantum processors, which determine the connectivity map of spin clusters we simulate.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Dynamics of 5-spin and 14-spin clusters}
To test our idea further, we used IBM QX2 and IBM QX14 processors. Full connectivity maps of these processors are provided in Fig. 4. We exploited all qubits of these quantum chips to model a temporal evolution of spin clusters.
We again assumed homogeneous field in Hamiltonian (1) -- all parameters $h_{j}$ are equal to the averaged over the cluster $2J_{ij}$.
In these experiments, a Trotter decomposition of evolution operator for the transverse field Ising model requires many two-qubit gates within the digital strategy, leading to significant error accumulation, see, e.g., Refs. \cite{weare,Simulation3}. Figure 5 shows both experimental and theoretical results for the dynamics of the mean number of excited spins in 5- (a) and 14-spin (b) clusters. The number of Trotter steps was 6 and 3, respectively. Thus, this figure compares results of three types, but with the same Trotter numbers: (i) using a unitary simulator of the quantum processor (theory), (ii) using a digital-analog approach, and (iii) using a digital approach.
From this figure, we can see that a conventional digital approach completely fails to reproduce theoretically expected dynamics with the chosen number of Trotter steps. The reason is that every native two-qubit gate has an error of several percents, and to model a dynamics of 5 and 14 spin clusters, one needs to use many two-qubit gates. At the same time, if we replace two-qubit gates with the evolution of the system under crosstalks' influence, then there is a good correspondence between theoretical and experimental results. Notice that for the 14-spin experiment, we chose Trotter number 3 because, within the digital approach, it already gives results, which are even qualitatively incorrect.
We remind that the important timescale in our simulation is given by the average Ising times $\overline{J_{ij}^{phys}} \overline{T_1}$ and $\overline{J_{ij}^{phys}} \overline{T_2}$. For the IBM QX2 processor, these times are slightly larger, which makes this quantum machine more suitable for the hybrid approach. It is seen from Fig. 5 (a) that the time dependence of mean excitation number for 5-spin cluster includes also a second oscillation and not only the first one, in contrast to similar experimental data for the 14-spin cluster, see Fig. 5 (b). This is due to a larger mean crosstalk value in the 5-qubit machine. We see that experimental results obtained within the digital-analog approach both for 5- and 14-spin clusters reproduce systematically faster evolution compared to the theoretical results. A possible explanation is that some crosstalk parameters used in our simulations \cite{ibmqx1,ibm_device} are underestimated compared to the actual ones.
In Ref. \cite{Simulation1} authors used quantum hardware with embedded interaction between qubits and investigated a phenomenon of many-body localization in an XY spin model without the usage of Trotterization. Single-qubit gates have been used only to create an initial highly excited state, while the interaction between qubits produced a nontrivial dynamics. The Trotterized evolution has an advantage which originates from the flexibility of digitization -- the effect of various additional (tunable) terms of the modeled Hamiltonian, not present in the actual interaction of qubits in the chip, can be simulated, as well as time-dependent Hamiltonians. The disadvantage of this strategy is associated with additional digitization errors.
It is interesting to explore deeper an impact of flexibility, as provided by digitization, for the implementation of other quantum algorithms, which are different from quantum simulation of spin clusters with interaction terms of the Hamiltonian similar to the interaction of qubits of the device. To this end, in Appendix B, we consider a more "mathematical" problem, which is quantum Fourier transform with three qubits of IBM QX2 processor. For this particular quantum circuit, the results of digital-analog and digital implementation with available IBM Q machines have nearly the same accuracy. This implies that specialized quantum processors designed for digital-analog computation schemes potentially can outperform digital quantum computers for such problems as well. In Section IV we discuss an issue of optimal parameters for such processors in a more detail.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{daqc_5_qubit_plot}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{daqc_14_qubit_plot}
\caption{Dynamics of the mean excitation number for 5-spin and 14-spin transverse field Ising systems during the free evolution from the initial state $\ket{00..0}$. Shown are the results of the same approximation level (6 Trotter steps for 5-spin system and 3 Trotter steps for the 14-spin system) obtained theoretically (blue color), experimentally within the digital-analog approach (magenta color) and experimentally within the digital approach (black color). The experiments for 5- and 14-spin clusters were performed with IBM QX2 and IBM QX14 processors, respectively. Physical time $t^{phys}$ defines the total time of algorithm execution within the digital-analog approach. For both theoretical and experimental implementation results of the digital approach, $t^{phys}$ must be mapped on time $t = J^{phys}_{ij}t^{phys}/J_{ij}$ from the simulated model.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Simulation of the effect of disorder}
In this subsection, we incorporate digitally additional disorder to the Hamiltonian (\ref{trIsing}), which refer to the random magnetic field in $z$ direction, $\epsilon_j \sigma_j^{z}$. Thus, two types of single-spin terms are introduced to the Hamiltonian, which corresponds to two different directions of the magnetic field. This model is known to have a rich phase diagram \cite{Imbrie} showing a tendency towards localization in the large spin number limit as amplitudes of the magnetic field in $z$ direction increases or alternatively, as its amplitude in $x$ direction decreases. The single-body terms of the above form are simulated by adding corresponding single-qubit rotations around $z$ axis within each Trotter step. For this experiment, we chose an IBM QX14 processor to make the modeled systems large enough to incorporate many-body phenomena. This processor has crosstalk values in a wide range, thus already having a disorder in parameters. We assume that artificial disorder parameters $\epsilon_j$ are randomly chosen from a uniform distribution in the interval [$-2\overline{J}$, $2\overline{J}$], $\overline{J}$ being an average interaction between all spins of the system.
The initial state of the 14-spin system is shown schematically in Fig. 6. It contains a long domain wall between spin-up and spin-down regions, which is expected to decay faster in absence of an artificial additional disorder. In our experiments, we focus on the time evolution of the initial magnetization pattern and the half-difference of spin magnetization in the chosen pattern. The operator of the former quantity is defined as $m_j=2n_{j}-1$, while the operator of the latter quantity is
\begin{equation}
n_{half} = \sum_{j \in S^{init}_{up}}\frac{1}{N^{init}_{up}}m_j - \sum_{j \in S^{init}_{down}}\frac{1}{N^{init}_{down}}m_j,
\end{equation}
where $S^{init}_{up}$ and $S^{init}_{down}$ are sets of spins with initial magnetization +1 ("up") and -1 ("down"), while $N^{init}_{down}$ and $N^{init}_{up}$ are their numbers, correspondingly. Figure 7 shows the experimental results for the expectation values of these operators.
Figure 7 (a) depicts typical patterns of magnetization as a function of time in the absence and the presence of the disorder (a particular realization of the disorder is chosen for the right panel). Figure 7 (b) shows the time dependence of the half-difference of spin magnetization, averaged over 10 disorder realizations. We see that the presence of the additional disorder extends the survival time of the initial domain wall, as expected. However, we cannot enter the most interesting regime of large Ising times, since the maximum evolution time is limited by $T_{1,2}$, which exceeds typical entangling time $1/\overline{J_{ij}^{phys}}$ only by a factor of 3-4, so our results can be considered as only qualitative and illustrative. Notice that the fact that two curves in Fig. 7 (b) start approaching each other at $t^{phys}\gtrsim 40$ $\mu s$ is due to the digitization errors, which become noticeable at corresponding values of Ising time.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\center{\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{melbourne-bus_spins3}}
\caption{Initial states of the spin cluster. The free evolution of the system from this state is studied.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{disorder_pattern}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{half}
\caption{(a) A pattern of magnetization, calculated in the absence of disorder (left panel) and the presence of disorder (right panel) on IBM QX14 quantum processor over the time for a 14-spin cluster during the free evolution under the transverse field Ising Hamiltonian (6 Trotter steps). The colorbar corresponds to spin magnetization value (b) Half-difference spin magnetization values over time in the presence (blue) and the absence (magenta) of the disorder.}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and discussion}
In this paper, we argued that it is prospective to use a digital-analog quantum computation strategy within near-term NISQ technology. There can be various modifications of this approach, but the general idea is to avoid the use of two-qubit gates of the universal set and to rely on physical interaction between qubits, which can naturally bring entanglement into the quantum system.
The most straightforward application of this approach is quantum simulation of spin systems. Particularly, always-on interaction between qubits of the quantum processor can be used to realize interaction between spins within Trotterized (discretized) evolution, while single-qubit gates can be applied to introduce any desired single-qubit terms of the Hamiltonian as well as to possibly modify interaction terms by changing basis. More technically advanced approach is to use tunable couplers to switch off interaction during execution of single-qubit gates.
We illustrate our ideas with the quantum processors of IBM Quantum Experience, which are constructed for digital (not for digital-analog) computation. Nevertheless, qubits of these machines experience residual static couplings known as crosstalks which physically originate from interaction between qubits through virtual microwave photons. These couplings are responsible for additional (correlated) errors within digital quantum computing paradigm, which are harder to correct. They produce non-Markovian dynamics of qubits and one of the examples of such a dynamics is analyzed both experimentally and theoretically in the Appendix C. Although negative effect of crosstalks is known from literature, see, e.g., Ref. \cite{crosstalk}, our simple illustration shows explicitly that the actual computation time in NISQ devices may be limited not by $T_{1,2}$, but by crosstalks ($\sim 1/J^{phys}$).
In contrast to digital approach, in our digital-analog simulations, we rely on this always-on interaction due to crosstalks. Despite of the fact that crosstalks are small (tens or hundreds of kilohertz), the results of the digital-analog simulation of spin clusters dynamics in the transverse-field Ising model are much more accurate than similar results for the conventional digital simulation based on two-qubit CNOT gates. The latter approach suffers from severe error accumulation problem and yields a very low accuracy under just few Trotter steps, while the digital-analog approach still gives results accurate on semi-quantitative level.
There are other computational problems, one can approach with the digital-analog strategy and in principle it can be used to realize any unitary transformation \cite{SB,DAQC2}. In Appendix B we applied this strategy for the quantum Fourier transform with three qubits available IBM quantum machines and compared the result with the results of digital quantum computation. For this particular problem, accuracies of both implementations turn out to be nearly the same. We attribute this result mainly to the fact that crosstalks in IBM Q machines are too small to efficiently realize controlled rotations on large angles, which are necessary in quantum Fourier transform, since decoherence starts to play significant role on such time scales (see Appendix B for a more detail).
We would like to stress that our experimental results have been obtained using quantum machines designed to keep crosstalks between qubits small, since they produce additional errors in digital quantum computation. Let us now estimate a value of coupling constant between qubits, which is optimal for digital-analog computation based on always-on interaction, which alters fidelity of single-qubit gates. We assume that coupling energy of a pair of qubits is $J$, so that the typical entangling time for a pair of qubits is $t_{2q} \sim 1/J$. Typical duration $t_{1q}$ of single-qubit gates for IBM Q machines is nearly 50 ns. The error of the single-qubit gate due to the coupling between the qubits can be estimated as $\sim Jt_{1q}$. Due to the decoherence, the entangling operation is also not ideal and it is characterized by the error $\sim t_{2q}/T_{1,2} \sim 1/JT_{1,2}$, where $T_{1,2}$ is typically 50-100 $\mu s$. Within this model, the total error of the single step of the algorithm (single-qubit gate plus idling) is of the order of $Jt_{1q}+1/JT_{1,2}$. The optimal value of $J$ which corresponds to the minimum of this expression is $J_{opt}\sim 1/\sqrt{t_{1q}T_{1,2}}$, while the minimum of the total error is $\sim \sqrt{t_{1q}/T_{1,2}}$. For the parameters of IBM Quantum Experience, we obtain an estimate $J_{opt}\sim 1$ MHz which is one or two orders of magnitude larger than the typical crosstalk value in IBM Q machines and it can be achived using both the capacitive coupling and the coupling through a resonator.
Thus, in our illustrations with IBM Q devices, we are far away from the optimal regime for digital-analog quantum computation strategy. Yet our experimental results are much more accurate than the results of standard digital approach for a very specialized problem, which is a simulation of transverse-field Ising model, or have nearly the same accuracy for a less specialized and more "mathematical" problem, which is quantum Fourier transform with three qubits. This shows that it is prospective to construct specialized quantum processors designed for digital-analog simulation, particular quantum algorithms and possibly particular topology. Being in optimal regime, one can implement $\sim J_{opt}T_{1,2}$ entangling steps, which is nearly 50-100 for the above values of $t_{1q}$ and $T_{1,2}$. We remind that the actual crosstalk values in our experiments were small, so that the number of such steps was an order of magnitude smaller. Of course, there are also other methods to increase the efficiency of digital-analog computation, which can be seen in the increase of $T_{1,2}$ and decrease of $t_{1q}$ thus making an error $\sqrt{t_{1q}/T_{1,2}}$ smaller. In principle, it is also possible to extend the time of simulation beyond $T_{1,2}$ by using a dynamical decoupling within each idling time interval. However, this requires a modified estimate for $J_{opt}$, since the number of single-qubit gates per Trotter step would be enhanced; this issue is beyond the scope of the present paper. Another potentially useful technique is related to the zero-noise extrapolation \cite{mitig1}. For aforementioned specialized processors it could be used to mitigate errors of single-qubit gates.
Our results also suggest that for the digital-analog computation with superconducting qubits coupled by resonators, it is preferable not to switch to the new "rotated" basis, as done in IBM Q setup. This transform suppresses the crosstalk, which starts to be determined residually by third levels of transmons (not the direct physical interaction involving two lowest levels), and increases the fidelity of single-qubit gates. The above discussion shows that it is favorable to operate in the regime at which errors of the single-qubit gates caused by the always-on coupling and errors of entangling operations caused by decoherence are of the same order. Note that Without an additional rotation, coupling between the qubits would be of XX and not of ZZ form.
Of course, our estimates for the optimal couplings are valid only for digital-analog strategy based on always-on interaction. For architectures based on adjustable couplers, allowing for the isolation of qubits during single-qubit gates, our simple model is not applicable, so that stronger couplings might be preferable leading to faster entangling operations. In this context, we would like to mention a recent paper \cite{foxen2020demonstrating}, which reports on realization of a continuous set of two-qubit excitation-conserving gates appropriate for fermionic simulation problems \cite{Babbush}. The use of these gates instead of the standard gates from the universal set is able to enhance significantly compilation efficiency, while conservation of excitation number allows to eliminate a need for microwave control. Certain analogies can be noticed with the approach we follow in our experiments, since we also get rid of microwave control for a continuous set of entangling ZZ operations, which conserve excitation number and have immediate application in quantum simulation of spin models. Apparently, the approach of Ref. \cite{foxen2020demonstrating} is promising for the construction of specialized quantum processors appropriate for quantum simulation of both spin models and fermionic systems in NISQ era. It is of interest to explore a potential of digital-analog strategy based on always-on interaction for the simulation of fermionic systems along the ideas of Ref. \cite{Babbush}.
Let us mention that the newer generation of IBM Q devices is characterized by CNOT gates infidelities, which are significantly lower than infidelities of the devices used by us, and therefore accuracy of digital simulation are expected to be higher compared to the illustrative results shown in this paper.
Note that the hybrid digital-analog approach can be also exploited in variational quantum-classical calculations. Indeed, always-on interaction can be used as an entangler and durations of "waiting" intervals can be considered as additional variational parameters. Similar but fixed entangler was used in Ref. \cite{variat} to evaluate molecular energies. This entangler was constructed from a fixed sequence of microwave pulses rather than from always-on interaction between qubits. Of course, other physical realizations of quantum computers or simulators different from superconducting quantum circuits, can be also prospective for the implementation of digital-analog strategy.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge use of the IBM Quantum Experience for this work. The viewpoints expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of IBM or the IBM Quantum Experience team.
D. V. B. and A. A. Zh. acknowledge a support from RFBR (project no. 20-37-70028). W. V. P. acknowledges a support from RFBR (project no. 19-02-00421).
\FloatBarrier
\renewcommand{ |
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
Due to the expense of including dust coagulation in already expensive hydrodynamic models of protoplanetary disks, (magneto-)hydrodynamic codes usually adopt either fixed size or fixed Stokes number approach, and the size distribution is taken into account either by stacking results of series of single-sized models or including multiple dust fluids representing different dust sizes in one simulation (but without the possibility to exchange mass between the different size fluids as would happen during coagulation, see, e.g. \citealt{2010ApJ...722.1437B, 2014ApJ...785..122Z, 2015A&A...584A.110P, 2015MNRAS.453L..73D, 2015ApJ...804...35R, 2016ApJ...818...76J, 2016A&A...590A..17R, 2017ApJ...847...52X, 2017ApJ...835..118M, 2018ApJ...867....3H, 2018A&A...618A..75S}).
Dust coagulation is usually studied in azimuthally and vertically averaged setups \citep{2008A&A...480..859B, 2010A&A...513A..79B, 2012ApJ...752..106O, 2016ApJ...818..200E, 2018ApJ...868..118H, 2019ApJ...878...39L}. The dust component is typically treated as a fluid and the Smoluchowski equation is used to solve for dust coagulation. The alternative is to treat dust as (super-)particles and use the Monte Carlo approach to model collisions \citep{2007A&A...461..215O, 2008A&A...489..931Z, 2013A&A...556A..37D, 2018A&A...611A..18L, 2019ApJ...874...26S}.
A limited number of hybrid algorithms, which connect the two approaches have been developed as well \citep{2012ApJ...753..119C, 2018ApJ...864...78K}.
The connection between hydrodynamic simulations was previously done by taking azimuthally averaged profile of gas obtained in hydrodynamic simulations and performing the dust coagulation calculation in a post-processing step \citep{2012A&A...545A..81P, 2016ApJ...823...80C}.
\citet{2018ApJ...863...97T} included a simplified prescription for dust growth in hydrodynamic code RoSSBi \citep{2015A&A...579A.100S, 2016ApJ...831...82S}, where dust is represented by a single fluid but dust size may be different in every cell and is set in a sub-grid algorithm based on the work of \citet{2012A&A...539A.148B}, and demonstrated that this approach yields significantly different outcome than fixed-size treatment. \citet{2018A&A...614A..98V} implemented a similar method, with two dust populations, where dust growth is limited by barriers as proposed by \citet{2012A&A...539A.148B}. However, the method proposed by \citet{2012A&A...539A.148B} was developed for azimuthally averaged, smooth disk and was previously not tested in a full disk setup. \citet{2017MNRAS.467.1984G} included dust coagulation in a 3-D smoothed-particle hydrodynamics code (SPH), however the particle size distribution is not taken into account in the coagulation calculation (i.e. single-sized growth is modeled inside of every SPH dust super-particle).
In this paper, for the first time, we test different approaches to include dust coagulation in 2-D hydrodynamic simulations of protoplanetary disks against the fully self-consistent dust coagulation prescription included in the hydrodynamic grid code \texttt{LA-COMPASS} \citep{2005ApJ...624.1003L, 2009ApJ...690L..52L, 2014ApJ...788L..41F, 2014ApJ...795L..39F, 2019ApJ...878...39L}.
We focus on the problem of dust growth in the vicinity of a Jupiter-mass planet, which interacts with the protoplanetary disk and modifies the evolution of gas and dust. The problem of dust evolution in the neighbourhood of a gap-opening planet is particularly important for further growth of the planet by pebble accretion \citep{2018A&A...615A.110A, 2018A&A...612A..30B}. Early accretion of Jupiter in the Solar System is thought to impact the subsequent accretion of the other planets \citep{2012ApJ...756...70K, 2015A&A...582A..99I}. The growing Jupiter is also considered as a barrier for mixing of different reservoirs in the early solar nebula \citep{2017PNAS..114.6712K, 2018NatAs...2..873A}.
This paper is organized as follows. We describe our setup and numerical methods in section~\ref{sect:methods}. We describe the results in section~\ref{sect:results}. In section~\ref{sect:discussion}, we discuss the limitations and implications of the results. Finally, we summarize our work in section~\ref{sect:summary}.
\section{Methods}\label{sect:methods}
\begin{deluxetable}{ll}[tbp!]
\tablecaption{{Input parameters of our model.} \label{tab:input}}
\tablecolumns{2}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Description} &
\colhead{Value}
}
\startdata
Gas surface density at 1~AU & 1700~g~cm$^{-2}$ \\
Gas surface density exponent & -1.5 \\
Dust-to-gas ratio & 0.01 \\
Temperature at 1 AU & 195~K \\
Temperature exponent & -0.5 \\
Turbulence strength parameter $\alpha$ & 10$^{-3}$ \\
Planet mass & 1~M$_{\rm J}$ \\
Planet semi-major axis & 10~AU \\
Initial / minimum dust size & $10^{-4}$~cm \\
Internal density of dust grains & 1.2~g~cm$^{-3}$ \\
Dust fragmentation threshold & 10~m~s$^{-1}$ \\
\enddata
\end{deluxetable}
We study the evolution of a protoplanetary disk around a solar mass star and follow the Minimum Mass Solar Nebula model (MMSN, \citealt{1977Ap&SS..51..153W}) characterized by the gas surface density profile
\begin{equation}
\Sigma_{\rm g,t=0} = 1700 \cdot \left(\frac{r}{1~\textrm{AU}}\right)^{-3/2} \mathrm{g~cm}^{-2},
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the radial distance to the central star. The initial distribution of dust follows the gas profile with radially constant dust-to-gas ratio of 1\%. In models including dust coagulation, the initial size of grains is set to $a_0=1~\mu$m.
The isothermal temperature structure of the disk is set by the sound speed in the gas $c_\mathrm{s}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cs}
c_{\mathrm s} = 83745.82 \cdot \left(\frac{r}{1~\textrm{AU}}\right)^{-1/4} \mathrm{cm~s}^{-1},
\end{equation}
which translates into $T = 195~\mathrm{K} \cdot (r/{1~\mathrm{AU}})^{-1/2}$ (we adopt the mean molecular weight of $\mu=2.3$~proton mass). The temperature profile is fixed during the simulation.
We assume that the scale-height of the disk is $H_{\mathrm g}=c_{\mathrm s}/\Omega_{\mathrm K}$, where $\Omega_{\mathrm K}$ is Keplerian frequency. With these assumptions, $c_{\mathrm s}/v_{\mathrm{K}} = H_{\mathrm g}/r \propto r^{1/4}$, so the disk is slightly flaring. We assume a gas kinematic viscosity $\nu = \alpha c_{\mathrm s} H_{\mathrm g}$ \citep{1973A&A....24..337S} and we set $\alpha=10^{-3}$. We focus on the region between 4~AU and 34~AU and place a Jupiter mass planet at a fixed, circular orbit with a semi-major axis of 10~AU. With the adopted disk parameters, $H_{\mathrm g}/r=0.05$ at the planet location. The planet gradually opens a gap in the disk, modifying the radial distribution of both gas and dust. Table~\ref{tab:input} summarizes the input values used in all the models. A very similar setup was used in \citet{2018ApJ...863...97T}, however they assumed an inviscid disk.
In this paper, we use four different methods to model the evolution of this system of gas, planet, and dust:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Fixed size}: 2-D hydrodynamic simulations with one dust fluid representing dust of a fixed size.
\item {\bf 1-D coagulation}: 1-D dust coagulation simulation using the azimuthally averaged gas evolution obtained from the 2-D hydrodynamic models as an input to simulate multiple 1D dust fluids to resolve dust coagulation and radial transport.
\item {\bf Simple coagulation}: 2-D hydrodynamic simulation with one dust fluid and a sub-grid method that sets the dust size in each cell according to an expected coagulation outcome (similar to the method proposed by \citealt{2018ApJ...863...97T}).
\item {\bf Full coagulation}: 2-D hydrodynamic simulation with multiple dust fluids representing the full size distribution, and dust coagulation algorithm which redistributes mass between the fluids.
\end{itemize}
We describe each of these methods in detail below.
\subsection{2-D models}\label{sub:2Dmodels}
All the 2-D ($r+\phi$) hydrodynamic models are performed using code which is a part of \texttt{LA-COMPASS} (which stays for Los Alamos CoMPutational AStrophysics Suite) and was described by \citet{2005ApJ...624.1003L, 2009ApJ...690L..52L}. The protoplanetary disk is assumed to be geometrically thin so that the hydrodynamical equations can be reduced to two-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations by considering vertically integrated quantities. We adopt a locally isothermal equation of state
\begin{equation}
P_{\rm g}(r) = \Sigma_{\rm g} c_{\rm s}^2,
\end{equation}
where $P_{\rm g}$ is the vertically integrated pressure, $\Sigma_{\rm g}$ is the gas surface density and $c_{\rm s}$ is the sound speed, which only depends on distance $r$ here (see \autoref{eq:cs}).
Dust is treated as a pressureless fluid in a bi-fluid model that is governed by conservation laws \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2006A&A...453.1129P, 2012A&A...545A.134M}. The gas and dust equations are coupled together through source terms that model the drag between the two fluids, i.e.~including the backreaction from dust to gas. We include both Epstein and Stokes drag regimes. We have implemented a Godunov Riemann solver for dust equations. We also implement dust diffusion due to the turbulence and consistently combine it with the dynamic model of bi-fluid \citep[see][]{2014ASPC..488...96L, 2014ApJ...795L..39F}. To deal with multiple timescales of coupling different dust species with gas dynamics, we develop an efficient and robust $L$-stable method to solve the coupled gas and dust equations \citep{2017AIPC.1863X0004L}.
The planet motion is governed by Newton's laws, whose equations are solved with an adaptive high-order Runge-Kutta method. Planet's gravitational potential is smoothed over 0.7 disk scale-height $H_{\mathrm g}$ at the planet location. The disk self-gravity is not included in the models presented in this paper.
We used linear polar grid with uniform spacing between the cells. The grid resolution is $N_{\mathrm r}\times N_\phi$ = $1024\times1024$. With this resolution, the disk scale-height $H_{\mathrm g}$ is resolved with 17 cells and the Hill radius of the planet is resolved with 23 cells at the planet location.
The computational domain is set from 4~AU to 34~AU. We keep the gas density constant at the inner and outer boundaries. This is justified because no significant viscous evolution is expected for the duration of the simulations ($\sim10^5$~years). For dust, we have open inner boundary to allow outflow. We keep the dust density at the outer boundary constant for the first 1000 planet orbits, which is equivalent to a steady inflow, and then we close the boundary, mimicking a decreasing flux of dust from the outer disk to the planet region. In the initial condition, velocities of gas and dust are set according to their equilibrium values derived by \citet{1986Icar...67..375N}. At the inner and outer boundaries, the velocities (both radial and azimuthal) are kept constant during the simulation.
\subsubsection{Fixed size dust}
In the default version of the code, dust is treated as a single fluid with a fixed particle size. We run a series of models covering dust sizes between 1 micron ($10^{-4}$~cm) and 10 centimeter.
\subsubsection{Full dust coagulation treatment}
The default code has been modified to include multiple dust fluids representing different dust sizes. Collisional evolution of dust is solved using explicit integration of the Smoluchowski equation. We include the Brownian motion, turbulence, differential radial and azimuthal drift, and vertical settling as sources of the collision velocities. The values of radial and azimuthal velocities for each dust species are obtained directly from the hydrodynamic solver and the other three sources are calculated in the same way as in \citet{2010A&A...513A..79B}.
When calculating the collision probabilities, we take into account midplane density of dust, which we calculate for each dust species $i$ from the surface density $\Sigma_{\rm d}^i$ used in the 2-D version of \texttt{LA-COMPASS}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rhod}
\rho_{\rm d}^i = \frac{\Sigma_{\rm d}^i}{\sqrt{2\pi}H_{\rm d}^i},
\end{equation}
where we assume Gaussian distribution of the grains around the midplane with scale-height following \citet{1995Icar..114..237D}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hd}
H_{\rm d}^i = H_{\rm g} \cdot\sqrt{\frac{{\alpha}}{\alpha+{St^i}}},
\end{equation}
where $H_{\rm g}$ is the gas scale-height. For small grains, this equation is consistent with the work of \citet{2007Icar..192..588Y}. In this approach, we assume that turbulent mixing is fast enough to always keep the vertical structure in the settling-mixing equilibrium. This assumption might break in a low turbulence case, when the interplay between settling and dust growth leads to the so-called sedimentation-driven coagulation \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2011A&A...534A..73Z}.
We assume that grains are compact spheres with internal density of $\rho_{\rm s}=1.2$~g~cm$^{-3}$. Collisional outcomes include sticking for collisions with the impact speed below $v_{\rm f}=10$~m~s$^{-1}$, fragmentation for collisions speeds above $v_{\rm f}$, and erosion for collisions speeds above $v_{\rm f}$ when the mass ratio of colliding particles is greater than 10. Numerical implementation of the collisional evolution is the same as described in \citet[][their section 2.6]{2010A&A...513A..79B}.
The dust size distribution is resolved with 151 dust fluids covering sizes between 1~$\mu$m and 100~cm, which corresponds to 8.4 grid points per mass decade, a typical resolution used in dust coagulation models. In the initial condition, all the dust has a radius of $\SI{1}{\mu m}$.
Due to the computational expense of solving dust coagulation, we call the coagulation solver every 50 time-steps of the hydrodynamic solver. We tested that this sub-stepping routine does not impact the results significantly by running an analogical simulation where coagulation was solved at every time step (but with a shorter duration).
A more detailed description of the code will be given in a corresponding paper by Li et al. (in prep).
\subsubsection{Simple dust coagulation approach}\label{sect:simple}
We implemented a simple, sub-grid method for dust growth in the \texttt{LA-COMPASS} code, which is an updated version of the method adopted by \citet{2018ApJ...863...97T}. In this method, dust is treated as a single fluid but its size is not fixed. The dust size is calculated at every time-step and in every cell based on local conditions. In the initial condition, the size in all cells is set to $a_0 = 1~\mu$m. The initial Stokes number of grains is calculated as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:st0}
St_0 = \frac{\pi}{2}\frac{a_0 \rho_{\rm s}}{\Sigma_{\rm g}},
\end{equation}
as all the micron-sized grains in our computational domain are in the Epstein drag regime.
Dust growth is modeled as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stini}
a_i = a_{i-1} + \dot{a} \cdot \Delta t
\end{equation}
where $a_{i-1}$ is dust size obtained in the given cell in the previous time-step, $\Delta t$ is the length of the time-step, and the growth speed $\dot{a}$ is calculated as \citep[see, e.g.][]{2001A&A...378..180K}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dotSt}
\dot{a} = \frac{\rho_{\rm d} \Delta v}{\rho_{\rm s}},
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{\rm d}$ is the midplane density of dust (see equation \ref{eq:rhod}), $\Delta v$ is impact velocity between grains of Stokes number equivalent to $St_{i-1}$ and $0.5\cdot St_{i-1}$ (where $St_{i-1}$ corresponds to the Stokes number of grains with size $a_{i-1}$), and $\rho_{\rm s}$ is the internal density of grains. When calculating the impact speed $\Delta v$, we take into account turbulence, radial drift and azimuthal drift. The impact speeds are calculated from the radial and azimuthal velocities returned by the hydrodynamic solver assuming that the radial speed depends on the Stokes number as $v_{\rm r}\propto{St}$ (correct for ${St}<1$) and the azimuthal speed as $v_{\phi}\propto1/(1+{St}^2)$.
Dust growth can be halted either by fragmentation or radial drift. To take this into account, we calculate the maximum dust size that could grow using the semi-analytic expressions derived by \citet{2012A&A...539A.148B}.
The maximum Stokes number with turbulence-driven fragmentation is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stfrag}
{St}_{\rm frag} = {\rm f_f} \cdot \frac{v_{\rm f}^2}{3\alpha c_{\rm s}^2},
\end{equation}
where the fudge factor ${\rm f_f}=0.37$, and $v_{\rm f}$ is the fragmentation threshold velocity which we set to 10 m~s$^{-1}$ in this paper. This equation was derived assuming that the turbulence driven impact velocities scale as $\Delta v_{\rm t}\propto\sqrt{St}$, which applies for grains in so-called fully intermediate regime of \citet{2007A&A...461..215O}. In fact, grains which hit the fragmentation barrier are typically in this regime as shown by \citet{2011A&A...525A..11B}.
Fragmentation can also be caused by the differential drift and the maximum Stokes number for the drift-induced fragmentation is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stdf}
{St}_{\rm df} = {\rm f_f} \cdot \frac{v_{\rm f}}{|\eta| v_{\rm K}},
\end{equation}
where $\eta v_{\rm K}$ is the maximum drift speed calculated using the midplane radial pressure gradient
\begin{equation}\label{eq:eta}
\eta v_{\rm K} = \frac{1}{2 \rho_{\rm g} \Omega_{\rm K}}\cdot\frac{dP_{\rm g,z=0}}{dr},
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{\rm g}$ is the midplane gas density and $P_{\rm g, z=0}$ is midplane gas pressure.
Fragmentation is the dominant factor in setting dust size when the coagulation timescale is shorter than the drift timescale. However, in a realistic disk, this is not always true. Particularly, in the outer part of the disk, radial drift may be faster than coagulation. This sets a limit on how far the growth can proceed before the grains are removed faster that they can grow. This effect is naturally recovered in the full coagulation models, in which each dust fluid can be advected at its own speed. Although the radial drift is still accurately modeled by the hydrodynamic solver, in the simple coagulation approach the advection of dust does not have a direct effect on the representative size. Therefore we must include the drift limit explicitly in the size calculation.
The maximum Stokes number which can remain at given location taking into account radial drift is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:stdrift}
{St}_{\rm drift} = {\rm f_d} \cdot \frac{1}{2|\eta|}\frac{\Sigma_{\rm d}}{\Sigma_{g}},
\end{equation}
where the fudge factor ${\rm f_d}=0.55$.
The values of the fudge factors ${\rm f_f}$ and ${\rm f_d}$ that we adopted were derived by \citet{2012A&A...539A.148B} by comparing simple coagulation results to 1-D coagulation in a framework of a global, smooth disk.
The new Stokes number is decided by choosing the minimum of the values calculated when taking into account growth (${St}_i$, corresponding to the size $a_i$ obtained in equation~\ref{eq:stini}), and the possible barriers (equations \ref{eq:stfrag}, \ref{eq:stdf}, and \ref{eq:stdrift}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:st}
{St} = \min{\left({{St}_i},{St}_{\rm frag},{St}_{\rm df},{St}_{\rm drift} \right)}.
\end{equation}
We found that, particularly in case when pressure gradient is briefly enhanced by the spiral wakes (see figure~\ref{fig:eta}), the Stokes number recovered from this treatment can be much lower than the one given by full coagulation results. This is because the radial advection of size and the timescale needed to fragment all particles in a given cell are not taken into account. To minimize this effect, we limit the impact of fragmentation by comparing the Stokes number obtained in equation \ref{eq:st} to the Stokes number from the previous time-step ${St}_{i-1}$, and if ${St}<{St}_{i-1}$ we set
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fraglim}
{St} = \min\left(1,{\rm f_n}\right)\cdot {St} + \max\left(0,(1-{\rm f_n})\right)\cdot{St}_{i-1},
\end{equation}
where the fudge-factor ${\rm f_n}={\Delta t}/{t_{\rm{coag}}}$ is a ratio of the simulation time-step $\Delta t$ and the coagulation timescale calculated as $t_{\rm{coag}}={a}/\dot{a}$ (see equation~\ref{eq:dotSt}). This way we avoid any sudden, local drops of the Stokes number but let it decrease gradually.
Finally we limit the minimum value of the Stokes number to the Stokes number of the smallest, micron-sized grains:
\begin{equation}
{St} = \max{\left({St},{St_0} \right)}.
\end{equation}
The main difference between our implementation of the simple coagulation and the algorithm presented by \citet{2018ApJ...863...97T} is in the treatment of the initial dust growth phase. We changed the dust growth prescription from an exponential function implemented by \citet{2018ApJ...863...97T} to calculating the growth rate based on the local conditions (see equation \ref{eq:dotSt}). We have also introduced the limit on how much can the size decrease between two consecutive time steps (see equation~\ref{eq:fraglim}).
\subsection{1-D coagulation}
To run the azimuthally averaged models, we used the \texttt{DustPy} code. The code, developed by S.~M.~Stammler and T.~Birnstiel, is \texttt{Python}-based version of the commonly used dust coagulation code described by \citet{2010A&A...513A..79B}. It solves dust coagulation and radial surface density evolution in azimuthally and vertically averaged framework, performing implicit integration of Smoluchowski equation and advection-diffusion equation.
To test the impact of solving dust coagulation in azimuthally averaged framework, and reproduce the approach previously used to study dust coagulation in the presence of gap opening planet, we set up a model where the \texttt{DustPy} code uses azimuthally averaged gas evolution obtained in the \texttt{LA-COMPASS} simulation as an input. This is done in the following way: the azimuthally averaged output of the 2-D model is stored at every 10 planet orbits. An interpolation routine is used to generate input at time instances needed by the 1-D model. Otherwise, we use the coagulation setup with parameters given in Table~\ref{tab:input}.
\section{Results}\label{sect:results}
\subsection{Full coagulation}
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{full_coag_maps_zoom.pdf}
\caption{Surface density of gas and dust (left and right panel, respectively) obtained in the full coagulation run after 1000 planet orbits (corresponding to 31622.8 years). The inserts zoom in on the planet region.}
\label{fig:full_coag_maps}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{full_coag_evo.pdf}
\caption{Azimuthally averaged time evolution of the full coagulation run. The snapshots were taken every 1000 planets orbits. {\it a)} surface density of gas, {\it b)} surface density of dust, {\it c)} vertically integrated dust-to-gas ratio, {\it d)} density averaged grain size.}
\label{fig:full_coag_evo}
\end{figure}
As expected, the massive planet placed in a viscous disk quickly clears a gap, however some accretion flow through the gap is retained \citep{2006ApJ...641..526L}, which is visible in the Figure~\ref{fig:full_coag_maps}. The initial power-law density profiles are modified not only by planetary gap opening, but also by the planet induced spiral density waves and by dust drift. Dust evolution depends strongly on grain sizes, which influence their aerodynamic interaction with gas.
We run the simulation for 4000 planet orbits (corresponding to $t=1.26\cdot10^5$~years). Figure~\ref{fig:full_coag_evo} presents time evolution of the gas and dust surface density as well as characteristic dust size. As can be seen, the gap profile is practically saturated at the end of the simulation. As dust growth timescale is on the order of 100 local orbits (or, to be more precise, the growth timescale is orbital timescale divided by the dust-to-gas ratio, see, e.g., \citealt{2012A&A...539A.148B}), the dust sizes quickly reach a steady-state and therefore they do not change significantly after the gap is fully open.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{eta_drift_2D.pdf}
\caption{Radial pressure gradient parameter $\eta$ at 4000 planet orbits. The grey lines correspond to 20 azimuthal disk sectors. The red line is calculated based on azimuthally averaged gas density. The negative values of $\eta$ correspond to inward and positive values to outward dust drift (see the red arrows). The dotted vertical line marks position of the planet.}
\label{fig:eta}
\end{figure}
Interaction between the planet and the disk causes formation of a pressure bump at the outer edge of the planet gap. Figure~\ref{fig:eta} shows the $\eta$ parameter (see equation~\ref{eq:eta}), which defines the maximum possible drift speed of dust and its direction. The red line corresponds to azimuthally averaged value of $\eta$, which determines the overall evolution of dust. Negative values of $\eta$ translate into inward drift and positive values mean outward drift of dust. As $\eta>0$ between 11~AU and 15~AU, the inward drift is reversed and thus we can expect that the radial dust drift is halted around 15~AU. Indeed, as visible in the middle panel of figure~\ref{fig:full_coag_evo}, dust is radially concentrated around 15 AU. However, trapping is not 100\% efficient and the inner region of the domain is not completely cleared, but some population of grains is retained throughout the simulation. This is because the effect of trapping is compromised by viscosity \citep[see, e.g.][]{2012A&A...545A..81P, 2018A&A...615A.110A}. Since the radial drift speed in the pressure bump is directed towards $\eta=0$ and it increases with size, there is a critical size for which the particle will always drift back to the pressure bump after being displaced by random turbulent movements. Thus, small grains are expected to pass through the gap, while large grains are expected to stay outside of the gap. Gas flows quickly through the gap and small grains, which are well-coupled, are carried along \citep{2006MNRAS.373.1619R, 2012ApJ...755....6Z}. This is confirmed in the lower panel of figure~\ref{fig:full_coag_evo}, where the density averaged size at each location is plotted. The typical size of grains in the gap is much smaller than outside of the gap. We will discuss this effect in more details in the subsequent section, where we focus on comparing the full coagulation run to models employing the fixed size approach.
It is worth noting that the radial profiles of the $\eta$ parameter plotted for different disk sectors (the grey lines in figure~\ref{fig:eta}) display significant variations, driven mostly by the spiral wakes. These wakes sweep the disk, causing temporary, small-scale pressure bumps. However, in the full coagulation approach, these do not seem to modify dust evolution considerably.
\subsection{Fixed dust size versus full coagulation}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{coag_single_2D_maps.pdf}
\caption{Snapshots of dust density obtained in the fixed size and in the full coagulation runs. Density was normalized by its initial power-law profile. The size used in each run is indicated by panel titles. In the full coagulation run, size distribution in each cell is determined by the interplay between dust coagulation and drift.}
\label{fig:2D_maps_coag}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{filtering_split_MRN.pdf}
\caption{{\it Upper panel:} Azimuthally averaged gas (dashed blue line) and dust (solid lines) surface density profiles obtained in runs with fixed dust size after 1000 planet orbits. The red dashed line is the total dust density assuming the MRN size distribution. {\it Lower panel:} Split of the total dust density obtained in the full coagulation run (red dashed line) into contributions from different size bins (solid lines). The blue dashed line shows surface density of gas. The dotted vertical line marks the position of the planet.}
\label{fig:filtering}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:2D_maps_coag} compares dust distribution in the protoplanetary disk obtained in the series of models assuming fixed dust size and in the model with full coagulation.
In agreement with previously published results \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2004A&A...425L...9P, 2006MNRAS.373.1619R, 2010A&A...518A..16F, 2018ApJ...854..153W}, we find that large grains are trapped outside of the gap opened by the planet and cannot pass it. The larger the grains, the larger and deeper gap they open in dust density distribution. On the other hand, small grains that are coupled to the gas, pass through the gap. The critical size of grains that can pass trough the gap is about 1 millimeter in our setup.
The millimeter sized grains open a clear gap but at the same time do not form a distinct peak outside of the planetary gap, which is characteristic for simulations including larger dust sizes.
Figure~\ref{fig:filtering} compares the azimuthally averaged dust density profiles obtained in the series of fixed-size models (upper panel) to the results of the full coagulation model (lower panel).
We find that the results obtained when applying the full dust coagulation treatment cannot be adequately fitted using a single fixed-size model. Dust distribution resulting from the interplay between multi-size dust advection and coagulation shows both confined peak outside of the planetary gap, characteristic for centimeter-sized and larger grains, and the partially filled planetary gap, characteristic for sub-millimeter grains. Overall, the slope of dust density through the outer edge of the planet gap is much shallower in the full coagulation model than in most of the fixed-size models.
This can be understood when considering what are the contributions to the total dust density from grains of different sizes (see the lower panel of figure~\ref{fig:filtering}). While the maximum dust sizes that can be obtained in the pressure bump outside of the planet orbit are on the order of few centimeters, the gap is filled exclusively with grains smaller than 300 micron.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{sizedistr_MRN.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the MRN size distribution with maximum size of 10~cm (dashed line) and the global dust size distribution obtained in the full coagulation model at different times (integrated over the whole disk, solid lines).}
\label{fig:sizedistr_MRN}
\end{figure}
In models that do not solve dust coagulation but need input on size distribution (mostly for comparison to observations), it is often assumed that the dust size distribution follows the so called MRN distribution with $n(a)\propto a^{-3.5}$ \citep{1977ApJ...217..425M}. In the upper panel of figure~\ref{fig:filtering}, we summed up contributions from each single-size model assuming the MRN distribution. The resulting total density profile (red dashed line) is relatively similar to the density profile obtained in the full coagulation model presented in the bottom panel. In figure~\ref{fig:sizedistr_MRN} we compare the global size distribution obtained in the full models to the assumed MRN profile. At 1000 orbits of the planet, it does indeed match the power-law distribution reasonably well, although the slope of the distribution is generally shallower and there is significantly less of the largest grains. The MRN profile may be a reasonable assumption for the overall size distribution, although a good estimate of the maximum dust size is necessary, as most of the mass is contained in the largest grains. The size distribution is significantly different at the beginning of the simulation, when the grains have not reached their maximum sizes yet. Also, the maximum size of grains decreases toward the end of the simulation, and falls from 10~cm to about 3~cm at 4000 planet orbits. This is caused by the decreasing dust influx at the outer boundary (see Section \ref{sub:2Dmodels}). With a lower dust-to-gas ratio, the drift barrier affects smaller grains \citep{2012A&A...539A.148B}. Thus, the MRN size distribution with a fixed maximum dust size may not be very useful to model disk evolution over a long period of time.
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{sizedistr.pdf}
\caption{Dust size distributions obtained at 10 AU ({\it lower panel}) and at 16~AU ({\it upper panel}) in the full coagulation model. The red line corresponds to azimuthally averaged profile while the gray lines represent sample distributions across 20 homogeneously distributed angles.}
\label{fig:sizedistr}
\end{figure}
A significant difference between the full coagulation and fixed-size models is that in the full models fragmentation constantly replenishes small grains that can pass through the planetary gap. The impact of fragmentation is noticeable when comparing the upper and lower panels of figure~\ref{fig:filtering}. In the full coagulation simulation (lower panel), the small grains follow the density profile of larger grains outside of the planet orbit, different than expected from the fixed-size simulations (upper panel). This is because the small grains are constantly produced in collisions between larger aggregates. Our results suggest that, if fragmentation is efficient, density of small aggregates should be enhanced in dust traps, despite they are not trapped themselves. Indeed, a look into the size distribution of grains presented in figure~\ref{fig:sizedistr} reveals that outside of the planet orbit, the size distribution is close to coagulation-fragmentation equilibrium \citep[see, e.g.][]{2011A&A...525A..11B}.
Another effect that distinguishes the full-coagulation simulation from the fixed-size models is the growth of small particles after they passed the gap. Dust density in the gap is too low to allow for efficient coagulation. But in the inner region of the simulation domain, where dust density increases, grains larger than 3 centimeters are present, which would not be expected from the fixed-size models.
It is worth noting that the dust distribution obtained outside of the planet gap (the upper panel of figure~\ref{fig:sizedistr}) is remarkably symmetric, with little deviation when considering different azimuthal angles. This is not true in the planet co-orbital region (lower panel of figure~\ref{fig:sizedistr}). Some of the small grains that pass through the gap are trapped either in direct vicinity of the planet (we do not consider accretion onto the planet) or in the Lagrange points (this is visible in figure~\ref{fig:full_coag_maps}). Due to this asymmetric nature of the co-orbital region, the size distributions sampled around the planet orbit exhibit different profiles.
Since the density and size distribution profiles are generally symmetric (outside of the planetary gap region) and the size distribution generally follows the expected coagulation-fragmentation equilibrium profile, we can expect that it would be possible to recover results of the full coagulation model using less computationally expensive methods. In the subsequent section, we compare results of three methods of including dust coagulation.
\subsection{Comparison of different treatments for dust coagulation}
We aimed to reproduce the results of the full coagulation run using two less computationally intensive methods. The first method relies on semi-analytical estimate of the coagulation outcome and is based on the work of \citet{2012A&A...539A.148B}. The second method relies on extracting the gas evolution from the full, 2-D simulation and running 1-D, azimuthally averaged dust evolution model in a post-processing step. The estimated computational expense of the three methods, per 1000 planet orbits, is as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item {Full coagulation:} 27 684 CPU hours (12 hours on 2304 CPUs).
\item {Simple coagulation:} 192 CPU hours (20 minutes on 576 CPUs, very similar to an analogical fixed-size simulation).
\item {1-D coagulation:} 78 CPU hours.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{400compare_coag_lineplots.pdf}
\caption{{\it Upper panel:} comparison of azimuthally averaged dust surface density profiles obtained in runs with full coagulation, simple coagulation, and 1-D coagulation after 4000 planet orbits. {\it Lower panel:} azimuthally averaged profiles of dust size obtained in the three simulations.}
\label{fig:coag_lineplots}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:coag_lineplots} compares azimuthally averaged dust densities and dust sizes obtained using the three methods.
As can be inferred from this plot, the simple coagulation method is generally better in reproducing the full results than the azimuthally averaged approach.
The main problem of 1-D coagulation is that azimuthal averaging of gas density "kills" the effects of spiral wakes (see figure~\ref{fig:eta}): they induce additional impact speeds, limiting the maximum size possible to obtain, but they also induce extra mixing.
The 1-D coagulation predicts almost one order of magnitude higher peak density in the trap outside of the planet orbit. The peak is also narrower than in full coagulation results. This effect has multiple reasons: first of all, due to averaging out of the spiral wakes, the 1-D coagulation predicts larger particles, that are trapped more efficiently. On top of that, in the full coagulation results, the exact position of the trap may change with the azimuthal angle because of the asymmetric nature of planet-disk interaction. Thus the trap is radially "smeared" in the full coagulation results. Additionally, as we mentioned before, the spiral wakes induce additional mixing which is not taken into account in the 1-D model. The full coagulation model includes the effect of backreaction of dust to gas, which additionally increase the width of dust ring (although this is not a significant contribution in our setup, see section~\ref{sect:br}). It is worth noting that similar results of widening the peak in 2-D versus 1-D models was found by \citet{2018ApJ...854..153W} for fixed size grains.
The negligence of the 2-D effects of planet-disk interaction has the most significant outcome in the planetary gap region. The 1-D coagulation predicts significantly more dust inside of the gap than the full and simple coagulation models. In 2-D simulations, dust can only flow through the gap if it enters the streamline around the plane (see figure~\ref{fig:full_coag_maps}). The 1-D model cannot take this subtlety into account. In our case, using the azimuthally averaged gas density information to calculate pressure gradient and drift speed leads to an increased dust flux through the gap. This is an opposite conclusion than presented by \citet{2018ApJ...854..153W} who also compared a 2-D and 1-D approach to dust dynamics in the vicinity of Jupiter-mass planet, using a fixed-size model. However, they did not extract the density information from 2-D simulation but run a self-consistent 1-D model with planet, which led to a different density profile in 1-D and 2-D runs.
The simple coagulation results do not reproduce the full coagulation perfectly either. The main problem of the simple model is that the size is calculated locally, without an input from neighbouring cells, thus the effect of dust mixing is not taken into account in all aspects. As shown by \citet{2012A&A...539A.148B}, the simple method reproduces results of full coagulation very well in the case a smooth, axisymmetric disk. We find that including a massive planet that induces spiral wakes, locally enhancing the pressure gradient and thus impact speeds, leads to violent fragmentation events. In the current simple coagulation approach, we only track one "representative" particle size per cell. If this size suddenly drops due to the spiral wake induced fragmentation, dust will take relatively long time to re-grow at this position. In the full coagulation method, this effect is significantly reduced as the fluids representing different sizes mix, leading to a similar size distribution in neighbouring cells. This is why we had to limit the effect of fragmentation in the simple coagulation model (see section~\ref{sect:simple}).
Despite these difficulties, the simple model reproduces the full coagulation results reasonably well. Outside of the region where the spiral wakes have the strongest effect ($\sim$10~AU to 25~AU), the dust size calculated in the sub-grid method fits the density averaged size obtained in the full coagulation model almost perfectly (see the lower panel of figure~\ref{fig:coag_lineplots}). It is worth noting that the implementation of the simple coagulation practically does not increase the computational cost of the 2-D hydrodynamic model, so this calculation is as fast as a fixed-size run.
\section{Discussion}\label{sect:discussion}
\subsection{Limitations}
We presented results of computational models utilizing state-of-the-art methods for modeling dust evolution in protoplanetary disk. However, our models are not free from limitations, which we discuss in this section.
We performed 2-D models, solving for radial and azimuthal structure of the protoplanetary disk, assuming that the vertical density distribution is Gaussian, and depends on dust size in a simple way (see equations \ref{eq:rhod} and \ref{eq:hd}). Thus we neglect potential effect that sedimentation-driven coagulation could have on dust growth \citep{2011A&A...534A..73Z}. It is known that in some cases, the 3-D effects may change the conclusions of 2-D hydrodynamic models \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2018RNAAS...2d.195L}.
We adopted a simple, isothermal protoplanetary disk model with a fixed temperature structure. Thus we do not take into account the effects of planet heating the protoplanetary disk \citep{2015MNRAS.453.1768P, 2017ApJ...842..103S}, which could potentially change the outcome of dust coagulation as the collisional speeds are dependent on the sound speed (see equation \ref{eq:stfrag}).
Our computational domain covers a patch of the protoplanetary disk ranging from 4~AU and 34~AU. While this domain allows us to cover most of the physics connected to dust drift, it is still a relatively small fraction of the global disk, which could extend to several hundreds AU. One of the problems associated with not including the outer parts of the protoplanetary disk directly is that, without a proper boundary condition, we would quickly "run out" of dust. In the models presented in this paper, we adopted an outer boundary condition which allows inflow of gas and dust, thus preventing the density at the outer edge from dropping significantly. However, particularly for a long runtime of the simulation, this condition cannot adequately account for an evolving pebble flux that is expected from global disk simulations \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2012A&A...539A.148B}.
In the full coagulation and 1-D coagulation models, we adopted a relatively simple collision model with only two possible collision outcomes: sticking and fragmentation. We have assumed a single fragmentation threshold value in the whole domain ($v_{\rm f}=10$~m~s$^{-1}$). While more complex collision models can be developed based on results of laboratory experiments \citep[see, e.g.,][]{2018SSRv..214...52B}, these are much harder to implement in the Smoluchowski equation solver \citep{2012A&A...540A..73W}. We have also neglected the evolution of porosity of dust aggregates, which can potentially lead to a different coagulation pattern \citep{2007A&A...461..215O, 2012ApJ...752..106O, 2016A&A...586A..20K}.
\subsection{Dust filtering and pebble isolation mass}
Despite these limitations, our results may have implications for the theory of pebble isolation mass. This concepts assumes that delivery of solids to a growing gap-opening planets is halted if grains are large enough to be trapped in the pressure maximum outside of the planet orbit \citep[see, e.g.][]{2014A&A...572A..35L, 2018A&A...615A.110A, 2018A&A...612A..30B}. However, our results suggest that those large grains will fragment and constantly replenish the population of small grains, which are able to pass through the gap and potentially re-grow in the planet co-orbital region (although the resolution of our models does not allow us to resolve the potential circumplanetary disk, in which the growth would be most efficient, see \citealt{2017ApJ...846...81S, 2018ApJ...866..142D}). Dust coagulation and fragmentation could thus increase the pebble isolation mass.
Similarly, our results cast doubt on the efficiency of dust filtration by growing Jupiter which is postulated to explain some features of the Solar System. Efficient isolation of different reservoirs by a gap-opening planet, as postulated by, e.g.,~\citet{2017PNAS..114.6712K, 2018NatAs...2..873A, 2019arXiv190312274H} would only be possible if particles do not fragment during collisions (but at the same time are large enough to undergo efficient trapping). Because of the efficient fragmentation outside of the planet, small grains passing the gap around growing Jupiter could still transport water into the inner Solar System, in contrast to the idea proposed by \citet{2016Icar..267..368M}, where the proto-Jupiter blocks the delivery of water when it reaches mass of about 20 M$_{\oplus}$.
\subsection{Importantce of backreaction}\label{sect:br}
\begin{figure}[tbp!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{br_nobr.pdf}
\caption{Azimuthally averaged surface densities of gas and dust obtained after 4000 planet orbits in the run with (solid lines) and without (dashed lines) the effect of backreaction of dust on gas included.}
\label{fig:br}
\end{figure}
The 2-D hydrodynamic models include the effect of backreaction of dust on gas. We tested the importance of this effect by running a setup analogical to the full coagulation run but with backreaction switched off. The comparison of these two runs is presented in figure~\ref{fig:br}. The gas density is not modified significantly, but the effect of including backreaction is visible in the dust distribution. The dust ring formed outside of the planetary gap is placed a little bit further away and it is slightly wider in the run including backreaction. This is because the large grains in overdense region push on the gas, leading to a slight modification of the pressure gradient. The outward drift of dust in the pressure bump is sped up, leading to the wider ring profile. This effect was also observed by \citet{2018ApJ...868...48K}. \citet{2015MNRAS.454L..36G} suggested that backreaction may lead to formation of a second pressure maximum and, in consequence, second dust ring caused by a single planet. We do not observe such an effect in our results, but this may be due to difference in setup: our planet is significantly less massive than 5~M$_{\rm J}$ implemented by \citet{2015MNRAS.454L..36G}.
The limited effect of backreaction we observe is a consequence of assuming a viscous disk with $\alpha=10^{-3}$. Viscosity prevents the dust-to-gas ratio from becoming high: in the full coagulation model, the maximum vertically integrated dust-to-gas ratio stays below 10\% (see figure~\ref{fig:full_coag_evo}). In disks with lower viscosity, planet-disk interactions lead to development of a vortex outside of the planet orbit \citep{2009ApJ...690L..52L, 2014ApJ...788L..41F, 2017MNRAS.466.3533H}. The vortices are able to significantly concentrate dust and the effects of backreaction are more pronounced, including destruction of the vortex \citep{2014ApJ...795L..39F, 2015ApJ...804...35R, 2015MNRAS.450.4285C, 2016ApJ...831...82S}, although this effect is mitigated in 3-D models \citep{2018RNAAS...2d.195L}. We plan to study effects of dust coagulation inside of a vortex in a next paper.
\section{Summary}\label{sect:summary}
Dust coagulation is the first step toward forming planetesimals and planets. In this paper, we presented results of coupling dust coagulation to hydrodynamics in simulation of a protoplanetary disk including a massive planet. We compared our model to the usual, fixed-size approach and showed that the results differ considerably. We have also compared the full coagulation results to previously used, azimuthally averaged approach and to a simple, sub-grid growth prescription. The main findings of this work may be summarized in the following points:
\begin{itemize}
\item Stacking fixed size simulations cannot reproduce the full coagulation results as it does not take into account the exchange of mass between dust populations of different sizes. Particularly, the fragmentation of large grains leads to enhanced density of small grains in the trap region, while the fixed size simulation does not predict trapping of small grains.
\item Fragmentation of large grains limits the effect of trapping and increases the permeability of planet-induced gap.
\item None of the cheaper methods of solving dust coagulation that we tested is able to recover the full coagulation result perfectly. However, both methods give a reasonable estimate of dust sizes. Any of the two methods is better in reproducing the dust density evolution than a single fixed-size approach.
\end{itemize}
\acknowledgments
We thank the referee for their valuable comments. J.D., T.B., and S.M.S. acknowledge funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 714769 and the support from the DFG Research Unit ``Transition Disks'' (FOR 2634/1, ER 685/8-1). S.L. and H.L. gratefully acknowledge the support by LANL/CSES and NASA/ATP. Part of this work was performed at the Aspen Center for Physics, which is supported by National Science Foundation grant PHY-1607611. This research used resources provided by the Los Alamos National Laboratory Institutional Computing Program, which is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration under Contract No. 89233218CNA000001.
\bibliographystyle{aasjournal}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec_Intro}
$\indent$The paper is focused on such an important aspect of the study of regression models with correlated observations as an estimation of random noise functional characteristics. When considering this problem the regression function unknown parameter becomes nuisance and complicates the analysis of noise. To neutralise its presence, we must estimate the parameter and then build estimators, say, of spectral density parameter of a stationary random noise using residuals, that is the difference between the values of the observed process and fitted regression function.
So, in the first step we employ the least squares estimator~(LSE) for unknown parameter of nonlinear regression, because of its relative simplicity. Asymptotic properties of the LSE in nonlinear regression model were studied by many authors. Numerous results on the subject can be found in monograph by Ivanov and Leonenko\cite{IvLeo_SAoRF_En}, Ivanov\cite{Iv_AToNR}.
In the second step we use the residual periodoram to estimate the unknown parameter of the noise spectral density using the Whittle-type contrast process~\cite{Wh_HTiTS,Wh_EaIiSTS}.
The results obtained at this time on the Whittle minimum contrast estimator~(MCE) form a developed theory that covers various mathematical models of stochastic processes and random fields. Some publications on the topic are Hannan~\cite{Han_MTS,Han_tAToLTSM}, Dunsmuir and Hannan~\cite{DunHan_VLTSM}, Guyon~\cite{Guy_PEfSPodDL}, Rosenblatt~\cite{Ros_SSaRF}, Fox and Taqqu~\cite{FoxTa_LSPoPE4SDSGTS}, Dahlhaus~\cite{Dah_EPE4SSP}, Heyde and Gay~\cite{HeGay_oAQLSP, HeGay_SPAaE4P&FwPLRD}, Giraitis and Surgailis~\cite{GiSur_CLT4QFiSDLVaiA}, Giraitis and Taqqu~\cite{GiTa_WE4FVnGTSwLM}, Gao et al~\cite{Gaoetal_PEoSPwLRD&I}, Gao~\cite{Gao_MLRDGPwAiCTFM}, Leonenko and Sakhno~\cite{LeoSa_oWE4SCoCPRP}, Bahamonde and Doukhan~\cite{BaDou_SEitPoMD}, Ginovyan and Sahakyan~\cite{GiSah_RE4CTLMwM}, Avram et al~\cite{AvLeoSa_oSTLTHUBLIetc}, Anh et al~\cite{AnhLeoSa_oCoMCE4FSP}, Bai et al~\cite{BaiGiTa_LT4QFoLDCTLP}, Ginovyan et al~\cite{GiSaTa_tTP4TM&OaiIiP}, Giraitis et al~\cite{GiTaTa_ANoQFoMD}.
In the article by Koul and Surgailis\cite{KoSur_ANoWEiLRMwLME} in the linear regression model the asymptotic properties of the Whittle estimator of strongly dependent random noise spectral density parameters were studied in a discrete-time setting.
In the paper by Ivanov and Prihod'ko\cite{IvPr_oWEoPoSDoRNiNRM} sufficient conditions on consistency and asymptotic normality of the Whittle estimator of the spectral density parameter of the Gaussian stationary random noise in continuous-time nonlinear regression model were obtained using residual periodogram. The current paper continues this research extending it to the case of the Lévy-driven linear random noise and more general classes of regression functions including trigonometric ones. We use the scheme of the proof in the case of Gaussian noise~\cite{IvPr_oWEoPoSDoRNiNRM} and some results of the papers~\cite{AvLeoSa_oSTLTHUBLIetc,AnhLeoSa_oCoMCE4FSP}. For linear random noise the proofs utilize essentially another types of limits theorems. In comparison with Gaussian case it leads to the use of special conditions on linear Lévy-driven random noise, new consistency and asymptotic normality conditions.
In the present publication continues-time model is considered. However, the results obtained can be also used for discrete time observations using the statements like Theorem 3 of Alodat and Olenko~\cite{AlOle_WCoWAFoLRDF} or Lemma 1 of Leonenko and Taufer~\cite{LeoTau_WCoFoSLMP2RtD}.
\section{Setting}\label{sec_Setting}
$\indent$Consider a regression model
\begin{equation}
X(t)=g(t,\,\alpha_0)+\varepsilon(t),\ t\ge 0,
\label{c_n_reg_m}
\end{equation}
where $g\;:\;(-\gamma,\,\infty)\times\mathcal{A}_\gamma\ \rightarrow\ \mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function, $\mathcal{A}\subset\mathbb{R}^q$ is an open convex set, $\mathcal{A}_\gamma=\bigcup\limits_{\|e\|\leq 1}\l(\mathcal{A}+\gamma e\r)$, $\gamma$ is some positive number, $\alpha_0\in\mathcal{A}$ is a true value of unknown parameter, and $\varepsilon$ is a random noise described below.
\begin{remark}
The assumption about domain $(-\gamma,\,\infty)$ for function $g$ in $t$ is of technical nature and does not effect possible applications. This assumption makes it possible to formulate the condition \textbf{N$_2$}, which is used in the proof of Lemma \ref{lema_cnv_Dlta_2_0}.
\end{remark}
Throughout the paper $(\Omega,\,\mathcal{F},\,\Prob)$ denotes a complete probability space.
A Lévy process $L(t)$, $t\ge0$, is a stochastic process, with independent and stationary increments, continuous in probability, with sample-paths which are right-continuous with left limits (càdlàg) and $L(0)=0$. For a general treatment of Lévy processes we refer to Applebaum~\cite{App_LPaSC} and Sato~\cite{Sato_LPaIDP}.
Let $(a,\,b,\,\Pi)$ denote a characteristic triplet of the Lévy process $L(t)$, $t\ge0$, that is for all $t\ge0$
\[
\log \ExpV\exp\l\{\mathrm{i}zL(t)\r\}=t\kappa(z)
\]
for all $z\in\mathbb{R}$, where
\begin{equation}
\kappa(z)=\mathrm{i}az-\frac12bz^2+\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l(e^{\mathrm{i}zu}-1-\mathrm{i}z\tau(u)\r)\Pi(du),\ z\in\mathbb{R},
\label{def_kappa}
\end{equation}
where $a\in\mathbb{R}$, $b\ge0$, and
\[
\tau(u)=\l\{\begin{array}{rl}
u, & |u|\le1; \\
\frac{u}{|u|}, & |u|>1.
\end{array}
\right.
\]
The Lévy measure $\Pi$ in \eqref{def_kappa} is a Radon measure on $\mathbb{R}\backslash\{0\}$ such that $\Pi(\{0\})=0$, and
\[
\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\min(1,\,u^2)\Pi(du)<\infty.
\]
It is known that $L(t)$ has finite $p$-th moment for $p>0$ ($\ExpV|L(t)|^p<\infty$) if and only if
\[
\int\limits_{|u|\ge1}\,|u|^p\Pi(du)<\infty,
\]
and $L(t)$ has finite $p$-th exponential moment for $p>0$ ($\ExpV\l[e^{pL(t)}\r]<\infty$) if and only if
\begin{equation}
\int\limits_{|u|\ge1}\,e^{pu}\Pi(du)<\infty,
\label{bnd_int_e^luPi}
\end{equation}
see, i.e., Sato~~\cite{Sato_LPaIDP}, Theorem 25.3.
If $L(t)$, $t\ge0$, is a Lévy process with characteristics $(a,\,b,\,\Pi)$, then the process $-L(t)$, $t\ge0$, is also a Lévy process with characteristics $(-a,\,b,\,\tilde{\Pi})$, where $\tilde{\Pi}(A)=\Pi(-A)$ for each Borel set $A$, modifying it to be càdlàg~\cite{AnhHeLeo_DMoLMPDbLP}.
We introduce a two-sided Lévy process $L(t)$, $t\in\mathbb{R}$, defined for $t<0$ to be equal an independent copy of $-L(-t)$.
Let $\hat{a}\,:\,\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}_+$ be a measurable function. We consider the Lévy-driven continuous-time linear (or moving average) stochastic process
\begin{equation}
\varepsilon(t)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \hat{a}(t-s)dL(s),\ t\in\mathbb{R}.
\label{LinRep_RmdnNse}
\end{equation}
For causal process \eqref{LinRep_RmdnNse} $\hat{a}(t)=0,\ t<0$.
In the sequel we assume that
\begin{equation}
\hat{a}\in L_1(\mathbb{R})\cap L_2(\mathbb{R})\ \text{or}\ \hat{a}\in L_2(\mathbb{R}) \ \text{with}\ \ExpV L(1)=0.
\label{hat_a_L_2&EL1=0}
\end{equation}
Under the condition \eqref{hat_a_L_2&EL1=0} and
\[
\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,u^2\Pi(du)<\infty,
\]
the stochastic integral in \eqref{LinRep_RmdnNse} is well-defined in $L_2(\Omega)$ in the sense of stochastic integration introduced in Rajput and Rosinski \cite{RajRos_SRoIDP}.
The popular choices for the kernel in \eqref{LinRep_RmdnNse} are Gamma type kernels:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\cdot$] $\hat{a}(t)=t^\alpha e^{-\lambda t}\mathbb{I}_{[0,\,\infty)}(t)$, $\lambda>0$, $\alpha>-\frac12$;
\item[$\cdot$] $\hat{a}(t)=e^{-\lambda t}\mathbb{I}_{[0,\,\infty)}(t)$, $\lambda>0$ (Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process);
\item[$\cdot$] $\hat{a}(t)=e^{-\lambda|t|}$, $\lambda>0$ (well-balanced Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process).
\end{itemize}
\textbf{A$_1$.} The process $\varepsilon$ in \eqref{c_n_reg_m} is a measurable causal linear process of the form \eqref{LinRep_RmdnNse}, where a two-sides Lévy process $L$ is such that $\ExpV L(1)=0$, $\hat{a}\in L_1(\mathbb{R})\cap L_2(\mathbb{R})$. Moreover the Lévy measure $\Pi$ of $L(1)$ satisfies \eqref{bnd_int_e^luPi} for some $p>0$.
From the condition \textbf{A$_1$} it follows~\cite{AnhHeLeo_DMoLMPDbLP} for any $r\ge1$
\begin{equation}
\log \ExpV\exp\l\{\mathrm{i}\sum\limits_{j=1}^r\,z_j\varepsilon(t_j)\r\}= \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\kappa\l(\sum\limits_{j=1}^r\,z_j\hat{a}\l(t_j-s\r)\r)ds.
\label{logEexp_isum_zEps}
\end{equation}
In turn from \eqref{logEexp_isum_zEps} it can be seen that the stochastic process $\varepsilon$ is stationary in a strict sense.
Denote by
\[
\begin{aligned}
m_r(t_1,\,\ldots,\,t_r)&=\ExpV \varepsilon(t_1)\ldots\varepsilon(t_r),\\
c_r(t_1,\,\ldots,\,t_r)&=\mathrm{i}^{-r}\l.\dfrac{\partial^r}{\partial z_1\ldots\partial z_r}\,\log \ExpV\exp\l\{\mathrm{i}\sum\limits_{j=1}^r\,z_j\varepsilon(t_j)\r\}\,\r\vert_{z_1 = ... =z_r = 0}
\end{aligned}
\]
the moment and cumulant functions correspondingly of order $r,\ r\ge1$, of the process $\varepsilon$. Thus $m_2(t_1,\,t_2)=B(t_1-t_2)$, where
\[
B(t)=d_2\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\hat{a}(t+s)\hat{a}(s)ds,\ t\in\mathbb{R},
\]
is a covariance function of $\varepsilon$, and the fourth moment function
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
m_4(t_1,\,t_2,\,t_3,\,t_4)=&c_4(t_1,\,t_2,\,t_3,\,t_4)+m_2(t_1,\,t_2)m_2(t_3,\,t_4)+\\
&+m_2(t_1,\,t_3)m_2(t_2,\,t_4)+m_2(t_1,\,t_4)m_2(t_2,\,t_3).
\end{aligned}
\label{4ordr_mmnt_fn}
\end{equation}
The explicit expression for cumulants of the stochastic process $\varepsilon$ can be obtained from \eqref{logEexp_isum_zEps} by direct calculations:
\begin{equation}
c_r(t_1,\,\ldots,\,t_r)=d_r\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\prod\limits_{j=1}^r\,\hat{a}\l(t_j-s\r)ds,
\label{rep_c_r_by_hat-a}
\end{equation}
where $d_r$ is the $r$-th cumulant of the random variable $L(1)$. In particular,
\[
d_2=\ExpV L^2(1)=-\kappa^{(2)}(0),\ \ \ d_4=\ExpV L^4(1) - 3\l(\ExpV L^2(1)\r)^2.
\]
Under the condition \textbf{A$_1$}, the spectral densities of the stationary process $\varepsilon$ of all orders exist and can be obtained from \eqref{rep_c_r_by_hat-a} as
\begin{equation}
f_r(\lambda_1,\,\ldots,\,\lambda_{r-1})=(2\pi)^{-r+1}d_r\cdot a\l(-\sum\limits_{j=1}^{r-1}\,\lambda_j\r)\cdot \prod_{j=1}^{r-1}\,a(\lambda_j),
\label{spec_den_H-ordr}
\end{equation}
where $a\in L_2(\mathbb{R})$, $a(\lambda)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\hat{a}(t)e^{-\mathrm{i}\lambda t}dt$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, if complex-valued functions $f_r\in L_1\l(\mathbb{R}^{r-1}\r)$, $r>2$, see, e.g., \cite{AvLeoSa_oSTLTHUBLIetc} for definitions of the spectral densities of higher order $f_r,\ r\ge3$.
For $r=2$, we denote the spectral density of the second order by
\[
f(\lambda)=f_2(\lambda)=(2\pi)^{-1}d_2a(\lambda)a(-\lambda)=(2\pi)^{-1}d_2\l|a(\lambda)\r|^2.
\]
\textbf{A$_2$.(i)} Spectral densities \eqref{spec_den_H-ordr} of all orders $f_r\in L_1(\mathbb{R}^{r-1})$, $r\ge2$;\\
\hspace*{11mm}\textbf{(ii)} $a(\lambda)=a\l(\lambda,\,\theta^{(1)}\r)$, $d_2=d_2\l(\theta^{(2)}\r)$, $\theta=\l(\theta^{(1)},\,\theta^{(2)}\r)\in\Theta_\tau$, $\Theta_\tau=\bigcup\limits_{\|e\|< 1}(\Theta+\tau e)$, $\tau>0$ is some number, $\Theta\subset\mathbb{R}^m$ is a bounded open convex set, that is $f(\lambda)=f(\lambda,\,\theta)$, $\theta\in\Theta_\tau$, and a true value of parameter $\theta_0\in\Theta$; \\
\hspace*{9mm}\textbf{(iii)} $f(\lambda,\,\theta)>0$, $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$.
In the condition \textbf{A$_2$(ii)} above $\theta^{(1)}$ represents parameters of the kernel $\hat{a}$ in \eqref{LinRep_RmdnNse}, while $\theta^{(2)}$ represents parameters of Lévy process.
\begin{remark}
The last part of the condition \textbf{A$_1$} is fully used in the proof of Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl} and Theorem \ref{thm_AN4fncnl_appB} in Appendix \ref{app_LSE_AsymNorm}. The condition \textbf{A$_2$(i)} is fully used just in the proof of Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl}. When we refer to these conditions in other places of the text we use them partially: see, for example, Lemma \ref{lema_cnv_J_T^eps}, where we need in the existence of $f_4$ only.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition} \label{dfn_LSE}
The least squares estimator (LSE) of the parameter $\alpha_0\in\mathcal{A}$ obtained by observations of the process $\l\{X(t),\ t\in[0,T]\r\}$ is said to be any random vector $\widehat{\alpha}_T=(\widehat{\alpha}_{1T},\,\ldots,\,\widehat{\alpha}_{qT})\in \mathcal{A}^c$ ($\mathcal{A}^c$ is the closure of $\mathcal{A}$), such that
\[
S_T\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)= \min\limits_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c}\,S_T(\alpha),\
S_T(\alpha)=\int\limits_0^T\,\l(X(t)-g(t,\,\alpha)\r)^2dt.
\]
\end{definition}
We consider the residual periodogram
\[
I_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)=(2\pi T)^{-1}\l|\int\limits_0^T\,\l(X(t)-g(t,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r) e^{-\mathrm{i}t\lambda}dt\r|^2,\ \lambda\in \mathbb{R},
\]
and the Whittle contrast field
\begin{equation}
U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l(\log f(\lambda,\,\theta) +\dfrac{I_T\l(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}\r)w(\lambda)d\lambda,\ \theta\in\Theta^c,
\label{Wh_ctrst_fn}
\end{equation}
where $w(\lambda),\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, is an even nonnegative bounded Lebesgue measurable function, for which the intgral \eqref{Wh_ctrst_fn} is well-defined. The existence of integral \eqref{Wh_ctrst_fn} follows from the condition \textbf{C$_4$} introduced below.
\begin{definition} \label{dfn_MCE}
The minimum contrast estimator (MCE) of the unknown parameter $\theta_0\in\Theta$ is said to be any random vector $\widehat{\theta}_T=\l(\widehat{\theta}_{1T},...,\widehat{\theta}_{mT}\r)$ such that
\[
U_T\l(\widehat{\theta}_T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)=\min\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\,U_T\l(\theta,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r).
\]
\end{definition}
The minimum in the Definition \ref{dfn_MCE} is attained due to integral \eqref{Wh_ctrst_fn} continuity in $\theta\in\Theta^c$ as follows from the condition \textbf{C$_4$} introduced below.
\section{Consistency of the minimum contrast estimator}
$\indent$Suppose the function $g(t,\,\alpha)$ in \eqref{c_n_reg_m} is continuously differentiable with respect to $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c$ for any $t\ge0$, and its derivatives $g_i(t,\,\alpha)=\dfrac\partial{\partial\alpha_i}g(t,\,\alpha)$, $i=\overline{1,q}$, are locally integrable with respect to $t$. Let
\[
d_T(\alpha)=\diag\Bigl(d_{iT}(\alpha),\ i=\overline{1,q}\Bigr),\ d_{iT}^2(\alpha)=\int\limits_0^T\,g_i^2(t,\,\alpha)dt,
\]
and $\underset{T\to\infty}\liminf\,T^{-\frac12}d_{iT}(\alpha)>0$, $i=\overline{1,q}$, $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$.
Set
\[
\Phi_T(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)=\int\limits_0^T\, (g(t,\,\alpha_1)-g(t,\,\alpha_2))^2dt,\ \alpha_1,\,\alpha_2\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\]
We assume that the following conditions are satisfied.
\textbf{C$_1$.} The LSE $\widehat{\alpha}_T$ is a weakly consistent estimator of $\alpha_0\in\mathcal{A}$ in the sense that
\[
T^{-\frac12}d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \text{as}\ T\to\infty.
\]
\textbf{C$_2$.} There exists a constant $c_0<\infty$ such that for any $\alpha_0\in\mathcal{A}$ and $T>T_0$, where $c_0$ and $T_0$ may depend on $\alpha_0$,
\[
\Phi_T(\alpha,\,\alpha_0)\leq c_0\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\alpha-\alpha_0\r)\|^2,\ \alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\]
The fulfillment of the conditions C$_1$ and C$_2$ is discussed in more detail in Appendix \ref{app_LSE_cons}.
We need also in 3 more conditions.
\textbf{C$_3$.} $f(\lambda,\,\theta_1)\ne f(\lambda,\,\theta_2)$ on a set of positive Lebesgue measure once $\theta_1\ne\theta_2$, $\theta_1,\theta_2\in\Theta^c$.
\textbf{C$_4$.} The functions $w(\lambda)\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)$, $\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}$ are continuous with respect to $\theta\in\Theta^c$ almost everywhere in $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, and\\
\hspace*{14mm}\textbf{(i)} $w(\lambda)\l|\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)\r|\le Z_1(\lambda)$, $\theta\in\Theta^c$, almost everywhere in $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, and $Z_1(\cdot)\in L_1(\mathbb{R})$;\\
\hspace*{13mm}\textbf{(ii)} $\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R},\,\theta\in\Theta^c}\,\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)} =c_1<\infty$.
\textbf{C$_5$.} There exists an even positive Lebesgue measurable function $v(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, such that\\
\hspace*{15mm}\textbf{(i)} $\dfrac{v(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}$ is uniformly continuous in $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$;\\
\hspace*{14mm}\textbf{(ii)} $\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\,\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}<\infty$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_MCE_cons}
Under conditions \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$, C$_1$ -- C$_5$}\ \ $\widehat{\theta}_T\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ \theta$, as $T\rightarrow\infty$.
\end{theorem}
To prove the theorem we need some additional assertions.
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_int_eps^2}
Under condition \textbf{A$_1$}
\[
\nu^*_T=T^{-1}\int\limits_0^T\,\varepsilon^2(t)dt\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ B(0),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} For any $\rho>0$ by Chebyshev inequality and \eqref{4ordr_mmnt_fn}
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Prob\l\{\l|\nu^*_T-B(0)\r|\ge\rho\r\}\le \rho^{-2}T^{-2}&\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,c_4(t,t,s,s)dtds+ \\ &+2\rho^{-2}T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,B^2(t-s)dtds=I_1+I_2.
\end{aligned}
\]
From \textbf{A$_1$} it follows that $I_2=O(T^{-1})$. Using expression \eqref{rep_c_r_by_hat-a} for cumulants of the process $\varepsilon$ we get
\[
\begin{aligned}
I_1&= d_4\rho^{-2}T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\hat{a}^2(t-u)\hat{a}^2(s-u)dudtds=\\
&=d_4\rho^{-2}T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\hat{a}^2(t-u)\l(\int\limits_0^T\,\hat{a}^2(s-u)ds\r)du\r)dt \le d_4\rho^{-2}\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_2^4T^{-1},
\end{aligned}
\]
where $\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_2=\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\hat{a}^2(u)du\r)^{\frac12}$, that is $I_1=O(T^{-1})$ as well.
\end{proof}
$\indent$Let
\[
\begin{aligned}
\mathrm{F}_T^{(k)}\l(u_1,\,\ldots,\,u_k\r)=\mathrm{F}_T^{(k)}\l(u_1\,\ldots,\,u_{k-1}\r)=&(2\pi)^{-(k-1)}T^{-1} \int\limits_{[0,T]^k}\, e^{\mathrm{i}\sum\limits_{j=1}^kt_j u_j}dt_1\ldots dt_k=\\
=&(2\pi)^{-(k-1)}T^{-1}\prod\limits_{i=1}^k\, \dfrac{\sin\frac{Tu_j}2}{\frac{u_j}2},
\end{aligned}
\]
with $u_k=-\l(u_1+\ldots+u_{k-1}\r)$, $u_j\in\mathbb{R}$, $j=\overline{1,k}$.
The functions $\mathrm{F}_T^{(k)}\l(u_1,\ldots,u_k\r)$, $k\ge3$, are multidimensional analogues of the Fejér kernel, for $k=2$ we obtain the usual Fejér kernel.
The next statement bases on the results by R.~Bentkus~\cite{Ben_ANoEoSP,Ben_oEoEoSFoSP}, R.~Bentkus and R.~Rutkauskas~\cite{BenRut_oAo12Mo2OSE}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_int_Fejer_krnl}
Let function $G\l(u_1,\,\ldots,\,u_k\r)$, $u_k=-\l(u_1+\ldots+u_{k-1}\r)$ be bounded and continuous at the point $\l(u_1,\,\ldots,\,u_{k-1}\r)=(0,\,\ldots,\,0)$. Then
\[
\lim\limits_{T\rightarrow\infty}\,\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^{k-1}}\,\mathrm{F}_T^k\l(u_1,\,\ldots,\,u_{k-1}\r) G\l(u_1,\,\ldots,\,u_k\r)du_1\ldots du_{k-1}=G(0,\,\ldots,\,0).
\]
\end{lemma}
We set
\[
\begin{aligned}
g_T(\lambda,\,\alpha)&=\int\limits_0^T\,e^{-\mathrm{i}\lambda t}g(t,\,\alpha)dt,\ &s_T(\lambda,\,\alpha)&=g_T(\lambda,\,\alpha_0)-g_T(\lambda,\,\alpha),\\
\varepsilon_T(\lambda)&=\int\limits_0^T\,e^{-\mathrm{i}\lambda t}\varepsilon(t)dt,\
&I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)&=(2\pi T)^{-1}\l|\varepsilon_T(\lambda)\r|^2,
\end{aligned}
\]
and write the residual periodogram in the form
\[
I_T\l(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)=I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)+(\pi T)^{-1}\re\l\{\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\r\} +(2\pi T)^{-1}\l|s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r|^2.
\]
Let $\varphi=\varphi (\lambda,\,\theta)$, $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, be an even Lebesgue measurable with respect to variable $\lambda$ for each fixed $\theta $ weight function. We have
\[
\begin{aligned}
J_T(\varphi,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)=&
\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)d\lambda= \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)d\lambda +\\
&+(\pi T)^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\re\l\{\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\r\} \varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)d\lambda+(2\pi T)^{-1} \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l|s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r|^2 \varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)d\lambda=\\
&\ \ \ =J_T^{\varepsilon}(\varphi)+J_T^{(1)}(\varphi)+J_T^{(2)}(\varphi).
\end{aligned}
\]
Suppose
\begin{equation}
\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)\ge0,\ \sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R},\,\theta\in\Theta^c}\,\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)= c(\varphi)<\infty .
\label{phi_pos&bnded}
\end{equation}
Then by the Plancherel identity and condition \textbf{C$_2$}
\[
\begin{aligned}
\l|J_T^{(1)}(\varphi)\r|&\le 2c(\varphi)\l((2\pi T)^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, |\varepsilon_T(\lambda)|^2d\lambda\r)^{\frac12}
\l((2\pi T)^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l| s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r|^2d\lambda\r)^{\frac12}=\\
&=2c(\varphi)\l(\nu_T^*\r)^{\frac12}T^{-\frac12}\l(\Phi_T(\widehat{\alpha}_T,\,\alpha_0)\r)^{\frac12} \le2c_0^{\frac12}c(\varphi)\l(\nu_T^*\r)^{\frac12}\l\|T^{-\frac12}d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|.
\end{aligned}
\]
Taking into account conditions \textbf{A$_1$, C$_1$, C$_2$} and the result of Lemma \ref{lema_int_eps^2} we obtain
\begin{equation}
\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\,\l|J_T^{(1)}(\varphi)\r|\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty.
\label{J_T^1phi_2_0}
\end{equation}
On the other hand
\[
J_T^{(2)}(\varphi)\leq c(\varphi)T^{-1}\Phi_T(\alpha_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)
\le c_0c(\varphi)\l\|T^{-\frac12}d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|^2,
\]
and again, thanks to \textbf{C$_1$, C$_2$},
\begin{equation}
\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\,J_T^{(2)}(\varphi)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty.
\label{J_T^2phi_2_0}
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_cnv_J_T^eps}
Suppose conditions \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$} are fulfilled and the weight function $\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)$ introduced above satisfies \eqref{phi_pos&bnded}. Then, as $T\to\infty$,
\[
J_T^{\varepsilon}(\varphi)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ J(\varphi)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta_0) \varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)d\lambda,\ \theta\in\Theta^c.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The lemma in fact is an application of Lemma 2 in \cite{AnhHeLeo_DMoLMPDbLP} and Theorem 1 in \cite{AnhLeoSa_oCoMCE4FSP} reasoning to linear process \eqref{LinRep_RmdnNse}. It is sufficient to prove
\[
1)\ \ExpV J_T^\varepsilon(\varphi)\ \longrightarrow\ J(\varphi);\ \ \ 2)\ J_T^\varepsilon(\varphi)-\ExpV J_T^\varepsilon(\varphi)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0.
\]
Omitting parameters $\theta_0$, $\theta$ in some formulas below we derive
\[
\begin{aligned}
\ExpV J_T^{\varepsilon}(\varphi)&=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,G_2(u)\mathrm{F}_T^{(2)}(u)du,\ \ G_2(u)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda+u)\varphi(\lambda)d\lambda;\\
T\Var J_T^\varepsilon(\varphi)&=2\pi\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^3}\,G_4(u_1,\,u_2,\,u_3) \mathrm{F}_T^{(4)}(u_1,\,u_2,\,u_3) du_1du_2du_3,\\
G_4(u_1&,\,u_2,\,u_3)=2\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda+u_1)f(\lambda-u_3)\varphi(\lambda)\varphi(\lambda+u_1+u_2)d\lambda+\\
&\hspace*{21mm}+\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}^2}\,f_4(\lambda+u_1,\,-\lambda+u_2,\,\mu+u_3)\varphi(\lambda) \varphi(\mu)d\lambda d\mu=\\
&\hspace*{15mm}=2G_4^{(1)}(u_1,\,u_2,\,u_3)+G_4^{(2)}(u_1,\,u_2,\,u_3).
\end{aligned}
\]
To apply Lemma \ref{lema_int_Fejer_krnl} we have to show that the functions $G_2(u)$, $u\in\mathbb{R}$; $G_4^{(1)}(\mathrm{u})$, $G_4^{(2)}(\mathrm{u})$, $\mathrm{u}=(u_1,\,u_2,\,u_3)\in\mathbb{R}^3$, are bounded and continuous at origins.
Boundedness of $G_2$ follows from \eqref{phi_pos&bnded}. Thanks to \eqref{phi_pos&bnded}
\[
\underset{\mathrm{u}\in\mathbb{R}^3}\sup\,\l|G_4^{(1)}(\mathrm{u})\r|\le c^2(\varphi)\|f\|_2^2<\infty,\ \ \|f\|_2=\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)d\lambda\r)^{\frac12}.
\]
On the other hand, by \eqref{spec_den_H-ordr}
\[
\begin{aligned}
|G_4^{(2)}(u_1,\,u_2,\,u_3)|\le d_4&(2\pi)^{-3}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l|a(\lambda+u_1)a(-\lambda+u_2)\r|\varphi(\lambda)d\lambda \cdot\\
&\cdot\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l|a(\mu+u_3)a(-\mu-u_1-u_2-u_3)\r|\varphi(\mu)d\mu=d_4\cdot(2\pi)^{-3}\cdot I_3\cdot I_4,
\end{aligned}
\]
\[
I_3\le 2\pi c(\varphi)d_2^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)d\lambda=2\pi c(\varphi)d_2^{-1}B(0).
\]
Integral $I_4$ admits the same upper bound. So,
\[
\underset{\mathrm{u}\in\mathbb{R}^3}\sup\,\l|G_4^{(2)}(\mathrm{u})\r|\le (2\pi)^{-1}\gamma_2c^2(\varphi)B^2(0),
\]
where $\gamma_2=\dfrac{d_4}{d_2^2}>0$ is the excess of $L(1)$ distribution, and functions $G_2$, $G_4^{(1)}$, $G_4^{(2)}$ are bounded. The continuity at origins of these functions follows from conditions of Lemma~\ref{lema_cnv_J_T^eps} as well.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_cnv_cntrst_fld}
If $\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)=\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}$, then under conditions \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$, C$_1$, C$_2$} and \textbf{C$_4$}
\[
U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ U(\theta) =\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l(\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)+ \dfrac{f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}\r)w(\lambda)d\lambda,\ \theta\in\Theta^c.
\]
\end{corollary}
Consider the Whittle contrast function
\[
K(\theta_0,\,\theta)=U(\theta)-U(\theta_0)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l(\dfrac{f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}-1- \log\dfrac{f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}\r) w(\lambda)d\lambda\ge 0,
\]
with $K(\theta_0,\,\theta)=0$ if and only if $\theta=\theta_0$ due to \textbf{C$_3$}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_cnv_sup_dif_cntrst_fld}
If the coditions \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$, C$_1$, C$_2$, C$_4$} and \textbf{C$_5$} are satisfied, then
\[
\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\,\l|U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)- U(\theta)\r|\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{\theta_j,\ j=\overline{1,N_{\delta}}\}$ be a $\delta$-net of the set $\Theta^c$. Then
\[
\begin{aligned}
&\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\l|U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta)\r|\le \\
&\ \ \ \le\sup\limits_{\|\theta_1-\theta_2\|\leq\delta} \l|U_T(\theta_1,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_1) -(U_T(\theta_2,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_2))\r|
+\max\limits_{1\le j\le N_{\delta}} \l|U_T(\theta_j,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_j)\r|,
\end{aligned}
\]
and for any $\rho\ge0$
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Prob\l\{\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\,\l| U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta)\r|\ge\rho\r\}\leq P_1+P_2,
\end{aligned}
\]
with
\[
P_2=\Prob\l\{\max\limits_{1\le j\le N_{\delta}}\,\l| U_T(\theta_j,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_j)\r| \ge\dfrac{\rho}2\r\}\ \to\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
by Corollary \ref{cor_cnv_cntrst_fld}. On the other hand,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
P_1=\Prob&\l\{\sup\limits_{\|\theta_1-\theta_2\|\le\delta}\, \Bigl|U_T(\theta_1,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_1)- \l(U_T(\theta_2,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_2)\r) \Bigr|\ge\frac\rho2\r\}\le\\
&\le \Prob\l\{\sup\limits_{\|\theta_1-\theta_2\|\le\delta}\, \l|\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda) \l(\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_1)}- \dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_2)}\r)d\lambda\r|\r.+\\
&\hspace*{9mm}+\sup\limits_{\|\theta_1-\theta_2\|\le\delta}\, \l|\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta_0) \l(\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_1)} -\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_2)}\r)d\lambda\r|+\\
&\hspace*{18mm}+2\l.\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c} \l|J_T^{(1)}\l(\dfrac{w}{f}\r)\r| +2\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\,J_T^{(2)}\l(\dfrac{w}{f}\r) \ge\dfrac{\rho}2\r\}.
\end{aligned}
\label{ineq_P_1}
\end{equation}
By the condition \textbf{C$_5$(i)}
\[
\sup\limits_{\|\theta_1-\theta_2\|\le\delta}\, \l|\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda) \l(\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_1)} -\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_2)}\r)d\lambda\r| \le\eta(\delta)\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}d\lambda,
\]
where
\[
\eta(\delta)=\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R},\, \|\theta_1-\theta_2\|\le\delta}\, \l|\dfrac{v(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_1)} -\dfrac{v(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_2)}\r|\ \to\ 0,\ \delta\to0.
\]
Since by Lemma \ref{lema_cnv_J_T^eps} and the condition \textbf{C$_5$(ii)}
\[
\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)} d\lambda\overset{\Prob} \longrightarrow \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda, \theta_0)\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)} d\lambda,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow \infty,
\]
and the 2nd term under the probability sign in \eqref{ineq_P_1} by chosing $\delta$ can be made arbitrary small, then $P_1\to0$, as $T\to0$, taking into account that the 3rd and the 4th terms converge to zero in probability, thanks to \eqref{J_T^1phi_2_0} and \eqref{J_T^2phi_2_0}, if $\varphi=\dfrac wf$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prfthm1}
By Definition \ref{dfn_MCE} for any $\rho>0$
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Prob&\l\{\l\|\widehat{\theta}_T-\theta_0\r\|\ge\rho\r\} =\Prob\l\{\l\|\widehat{\theta}_T-\theta_0\r\|\ge\rho;\ U_T(\widehat{\theta}_T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\le U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r\}\le\\
&\le \Prob\l\{\inf\limits_{\|\theta-\theta_0\|\ge\rho}\, \l(U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T) -U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r)\le 0\r\}=\\
&= \Prob\l\{\inf\limits_{\|\theta-\theta_0\|\ge\rho}\, \Bigl[U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta) -(U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_0)) +K(\theta_0,\theta)\Bigr]\leq 0\r\}\le\\
&\le \Prob\l\{\inf\limits_{\|\theta-\theta_0\|\ge\rho}\, \Bigl[U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta) -(U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_0))\Bigr] +\inf\limits_{\|\theta-\theta_0\|\ge\rho} K(\theta_0,\theta)\leq 0\r\}\le\\
&\le \Prob\l\{\sup\limits_{\theta\in\Theta^c}\, \l|U_T(\theta,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta)\r| +\l|U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-U(\theta_0)\r| \ge\inf\limits_{\|\theta-\theta_0\|\ge\rho}\, K(\theta_0,\,\theta)\r\}\ \to\ 0,
\end{aligned}
\]
when $T\to\infty$ due to Lemma~\ref{lema_cnv_sup_dif_cntrst_fld} and the property of the contrast function $K$.
\end{prfthm1}
\section{Asymptotic normality of minimum contrast estimator}
$\indent$The first three conditions relate to properties of the regression function $g(t,\,\alpha)$ and the LSE $\widehat{\alpha}_T$. They are commented in Appendix \ref{app_LSE_AsymNorm}.
\textbf{N$_1$.} The normed LSE $d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)$ is asymptotically,\ \ as $T\to\infty$, normal $N(0,\,\Sigma_{_{LSE}})$, $\Sigma_{_{LSE}}=\l(\Sigma_{_{LSE}}^{ij}\r)_{i,j=1}^q$.
Let us
\[
g'(t,\,\alpha)=\dfrac{\partial}{\partial t}g(t,\,\alpha);\ \ \ \Phi'_T(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2) =\int\limits_0^T\,\l(g'(t,\,\alpha_1)-g'(t,\,\alpha_2)\r)^2dt,\ \alpha_1,\,\alpha_2\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\]
\textbf{N$_2$.} The function $g(t,\,\alpha)$ is continuously differentiable with respect to $t\ge0$ for any $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c$ and for any $\alpha_0\in\mathcal{A}$, and $T>T_0$ there exists a constant $c_0'$ ($T_0$ and $c'_0$ may depend on $\alpha_0$) such that
\[
\Phi_T'(\alpha,\,\alpha_0) \le c_0'\Bigl\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\alpha-\alpha_0\r)\Bigr\|^2,\ \alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\]
Let
\[
g_{il}(t,\,\alpha)=\dfrac{\partial^2}{\partial\alpha_i \partial\alpha_l}g(t,\,\alpha),\ \ d_{il,T}^2(\alpha)=\int\limits_0^T\,g_{il}^2(t,\,\alpha)dt,\ \ i,l=\overline{1,q},\ \ v(r)=\l\{x\in\mathbb{R}^q\,:\,\|x\|<r\r\},\ r>0.
\]
\textbf{N$_3$.} The function $g(t,\,\alpha)$ is twice continuously differentiable with respect to $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c$ for any $t\ge0$, and for any $R\ge0$ and all sufficiently large $T$ ($T>T_0(R)$)\\
\hspace*{15mm}\textbf{(i)} $d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\sup\limits_{t\in[0,T],\,u\in v^c(R)}\, \l|g_i\l(t,\,\alpha_0+d_T^{-1}(\alpha_0)u\r)\r|\le c^i(R)T^{-\frac12}$, $i=\overline{1,q}$;\\
\hspace*{14mm}\textbf{(ii)} $d_{il,T}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\sup\limits_{t\in[0,T],\,u\in v^c(R)}\, \l|g_{il}\l(t,\,\alpha_0+d_T^{-1}(\alpha_0)u\r)\r|\le c^{il}(R)T^{-\frac12}$, $i,l=\overline{1,q}$;\\
\hspace*{12mm}\textbf{(iii)} $d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)d_{lT}^{-1}(\alpha_0) d_{il,T}(\alpha_0)\le \tilde{c}^{il}T^{-\frac12}$, $i,l=\overline{1,q}$,\\
with positive constants $c^i$, $c^{il}$, $\tilde{c}^{il}$, possibly, depending on $\alpha_0$.
We assume also that the function $f(\lambda,\,\theta)$ is twice differentiable with respect to $\theta\in\Theta^c$ for any $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$.
Set
\[
f_i(\lambda,\,\theta)=\dfrac{\partial}{\partial\theta_i} f(\lambda,\,\theta),\ \ \
f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)=\dfrac{\partial^2}{\partial\theta_i \partial\theta_j}f(\lambda,\,\theta),
\]
and introduce the following conditions.
\textbf{N$_4$. (i)} For any $\theta\in\Theta^c$ the functions $\varphi_i(\lambda)=\dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, $i=\overline{1,m}$, possess the following properties:\\
\hspace*{18mm}\textbf{1)} $\varphi_i\in L_\infty(\mathbb{R})\cap L_1(\mathbb{R})$;\\
\hspace*{18mm}\textbf{2)} $\OpLim{\Var}{-\infty}{+\infty}\,\varphi_i<\infty$;\\
\hspace*{18mm}\textbf{3)} $\underset{\eta\to1}\lim\,\underset{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\sup\, \l|\varphi_i(\eta\lambda)-\varphi_i(\lambda)\r|=0$ ;\\
\hspace*{18mm}\textbf{4)} $\varphi_i$ are differentiable and $\varphi'_i$ are uniformly continuous on $\mathbb{R}$.\\
\hspace*{12mm}\textbf{(ii)} $\dfrac{|f_i(\lambda,\,\theta)|}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda) \le Z_2(\lambda)$, $\theta\in\Theta$, $i=\overline{1,m}$, almost everywhere in $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$ and $Z_2(\cdot)\in L_1(\mathbb{R})$.\\
\hspace*{11mm}\textbf{(iii)} The functions $\dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta) f_j(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)$, $\dfrac{f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)$ are continuous with respect to $\theta\in\Theta^c$ for each $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$ and
\[
\dfrac{f_i^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda) +\dfrac{|f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)|}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)\le a_{ij}(\lambda),\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R},\ \theta\in\Theta^c,
\]
where $a_{ij}(\cdot)\in L_1(\mathbb{R})$, $i,j=\overline{1,m}$.
\textbf{N$_5$.} \textbf{(i)} $\dfrac{f_i^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)$, $\dfrac{f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)$, $i,j=\overline{1,m}$, are bounded functions in $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$;\\
\hspace*{12mm}\textbf{(ii)} There exists an even positive Lebesgue measurable function $v(\lambda),\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, such that the functions $\dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta) f_j(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)$, $\dfrac{f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)$, $i,j=\overline{1,m}$, are uniformly continuous in $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$;\\
\hspace*{11mm}\textbf{(iii)} $\underset{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\sup\,\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}<\infty$.
Conditions \textbf{N$_5$(iii)} and \textbf{C$_5$(ii)} look the same, however the function $v$ in these conditions must satisfy different conditions \textbf{N$_5$(ii)} and \textbf{C$_5$(i)}, and therefore, generally speaking, the functions $v$ in these two conditions can be different.
The next three matrices appear in the formulation of Theorem 2:
\[
\begin{aligned}
W_1(\theta)&=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\nabla_\theta\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)\nabla_\theta'\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)w(\lambda)d\lambda,\\
W_2(\theta)&=4\pi\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\nabla_\theta\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)\nabla_\theta'\log f(\lambda,\,\theta) w^2(\lambda)d\lambda,\\
V(\theta)&=\gamma_2\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\nabla_\theta\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)w(\lambda)d\lambda \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\nabla_\theta'\log f(\lambda,\theta)w(\lambda)d\lambda,
\end{aligned}
\]
where $\nabla_\theta$ is a column vector-gradient, $\nabla_\theta'$ is a row vector-gradient.
\textbf{N$_6$.} Matrices $W_1(\theta)$ and $W_2(\theta)$ are positive definite for $\theta\in\Theta$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_MCE_asym_norm}
Under conditions \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$, C$_1$ -- C$_5$} and \textbf{N$_1$ -- N$_6$} the normed MCE\ \ $T^{\frac12}(\widehat{\theta}_T-\theta_0)$ is asymptotically, as $T\to\infty$, normal with zero mean and covariance matrix
\begin{equation}
W(\theta)=W_1^{-1}(\theta_0)\l(W_2(\theta_0)+V(\theta_0)\r) W_1^{-1}(\theta_0).
\label{cov_mtrx_W}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The proof of the theorem is preceded by several lemmas. The next statement is Theorem 5.1~\cite{AvLeoSa_oSTLTHUBLIetc} formulated in a form convenient to us.
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl}
Let the stochastic process\ \ $\varepsilon$\ \ satisfies \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$},\ \ spectral density $f\in L_p(\mathbb{R})$,\ \ a function $b\in L_q(\mathbb{R})\bigcap L_1(\mathbb{R})$, where $\dfrac1{p}+\dfrac1{q}=\dfrac12$. Let
\begin{equation}
\hat{b}(t)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,e^{i\lambda t}b(\lambda)d\lambda
\label{def_Ftrfrm_b}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
Q_T=\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\, \l(\varepsilon(t)\varepsilon(s) -B(t-s)\r)\hat{b}(t-s)dtds.
\label{def_fnctinl_Q_T}
\end{equation}
Then the central limit theorem holds:
\[
T^{-\frac12}Q_T\ \Rightarrow\ N(0,\,\sigma^2),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty,
\]
where $"\Rightarrow"$ means convergence in distributions,
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2=16\pi^3\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,b^2(\lambda) f^2(\lambda)d\lambda+\gamma_2\l(2\pi\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, b(\lambda)f(\lambda)d\lambda\r)^2.
\label{cov_mtrx_sigma^2}
\end{equation}
In particular, the statement is true for $p=2$ and $q=\infty$.
\end{lemma}
Alternative form of Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl} is given in Bai et al.~\cite{BaiGiTa_LT4QFoLDCTLP}. We formulate their Theorem 2.1 in the form convenient to us.
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl_Bai}
Let the stochastic process $\varepsilon$ be such that $\ExpV L(1)=0$, $\ExpV L^4(1)<\infty$, and $Q_T$ be as in \eqref{def_fnctinl_Q_T}.
Assume that $\hat{a}\in L_p(\mathbb{R})\cap L_2(\mathbb{R})$, $\hat{b}$ is of the form \eqref{def_Ftrfrm_b} with even function $b\in L_1(\mathbb{R})$ and $\hat{b}\in L_q(\mathbb{R})$ with
\[
1\le p,\,q\le2,\ \ \dfrac2{p}+\dfrac1{q}\ge\dfrac52,
\]
then
\[
T^{-\frac12}Q_T\ \Rightarrow\ N(0,\,\sigma^2),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty,
\]
where $\sigma^2$ is given in \eqref{cov_mtrx_sigma^2}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
It is important to note that conditions of Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl} are given in frequency domain, while Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl_Bai} employs the time domain conditions.
\end{remark}
Theorems similar to Lemmas \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl} and \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl_Bai} can be found in paper by Giraitis et al~\cite{GiTaTa_ANoQFoMD}, where the case of martingale-differences were considered. Overview of analogous results for different types of processes is given in the paper by Ginovyan et al~\cite{GiSaTa_tTP4TM&OaiIiP}.
Set
\[
\Delta_T(\varphi)=T^{-\frac12}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \varepsilon_T(\lambda)\overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)} \varphi(\lambda)d\lambda.
\]
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_cnv_Dlta_2_0}
Suppose the conditions \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$, C$_2$, N$_1$ -- N$_3$} are fulfilled, $\varphi(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, is a bounded differentiable function satisfying the relation \textbf{3)} of the condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)}, and moreover the derivative $\varphi'(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, is uniformly continuous on $\mathbb{R}$. Then
\[
\Delta_T(\varphi)\overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow 0\ \text{as}\ T\to\infty.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $B_\sigma$ be the set of all bounded entire functions on $\mathbb{R}$ of exponential type $0\le\sigma<\infty$ (see Appendix \ref{app_Levitan_polnml}), and $\delta>0$ is an arbitrarily small number. Then there exists a function $\varphi_\sigma\in B_\sigma$, $\sigma=\sigma(\delta)$, such that
\[
\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\, |\varphi(\lambda)-\varphi_\sigma(\lambda)|<\delta.
\]
Let $T_n(\varphi_\sigma;\,\lambda)=\sum\limits_{j=-n}^n\, c_j^{(n)}e^{\mathrm{i}j\frac\sigma{n}\lambda},\ n\geq 1$, be a sequence of the Levitan polynomials that corresponds to $\varphi_\sigma$. For any $\Lambda>0$ there exists $n_0=n_0(\delta,\,\Lambda)$ such that for $n>n_0$
\[
\sup\limits_{\lambda\in[-\Lambda,\Lambda]}\, |\varphi_\sigma-T_n(\varphi_\sigma;\,\lambda)|\leq\delta.
\]
Write
\[
\Delta_T(\varphi)= \Delta_T(\varphi-\varphi_\sigma) +\Delta_T(\varphi_\sigma-T_n)+\Delta_T(T_n),
\]
\[
\begin{aligned}
|\Delta_T(\varphi-\varphi_\sigma)|&\le \delta T^{-\frac12} \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l|\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\r|d\lambda\le\\
&\le\delta T^{-\frac12}\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l|\varepsilon_T(\lambda)\r|^2d\lambda\r)^{\frac12} \l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l| s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r|^2d\lambda\r)^{\frac12}=\\
&=2\pi\delta\l(\nu_T^*\r)^{\frac12}\Phi_T^{\frac12}(\widehat{\alpha}_T,\,\alpha_0) \le 2\pi c^{\frac12}_0\delta\l(\nu_T^*\r)^{\frac12}\l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|.
\end{aligned}
\]
So, under the condition \textbf{C$_2$}, for any $\rho>0$
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Prob&\l\{|\Delta_T(\varphi-\varphi_\sigma)|\ge\rho\r\}\le \\
&\ \ \ \le \Prob\l\{\l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\ge \dfrac{\rho}{2\pi c^{\frac12}_0\delta(B(0)+1)^{\frac12}}\r\}
+\Prob\l\{\nu_T^*-B(0)>1\r\}=P_3+P_4.
\end{aligned}
\]
The probability $P_4\to0$, as $T\to\infty$, and the probability $P_3$ under the condition \textbf{N$_1$} for sufficiently large $T$ (we will write $T>T_0$) can be made less than a preassigned number by chosing $\delta>0$ for a fixed $\rho>0$.
As far as the function $\varphi_\sigma\in B_\sigma$ and the corresponding sequence of Levitan polynomials $T_n$ are bounded by the same constant, we obtain
\[
|\Delta(\varphi_\sigma-T_n)|\le\delta T^{-\frac12} \int\limits_{-\Lambda}^{\Lambda}\, \l|\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\r|d\lambda +2c(\varphi_\sigma)T^{-\frac12} \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}\backslash[-\Lambda,\Lambda]}\, \l|\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\r|d\lambda=D_1+D_2.
\]
The integral in the term $D_1$ can be majorized by an integral over $\mathbb{R}$ and bounded as earlier. We have further
\[
\overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}=(\mathrm{i}\lambda)^{-1} \l[e^{\mathrm{i}\lambda T}(g(T,\,\alpha_0)-g(T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)) -(g(0,\,\alpha_0)-g(0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)) -\overline{s_T'(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\r],
\]
where $\overline{s_T'(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)} =\int\limits_0^T\, e^{-\mathrm{i}\lambda t}(g'(t,\,\alpha_0)-g'(t,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T))dt$.
Under the Lemma conditions
\[
\begin{aligned}
T^{-\frac12}&\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}\backslash[-\Lambda,\Lambda]}\, |\varepsilon_T(\lambda)\overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)} |d\lambda\le T^{-\frac12}\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}\backslash [-\Lambda,\Lambda]}\, \l|\varepsilon_T(\lambda)\r|^2 d\lambda\r)^{\frac12} \cdot\\ &\cdot\l(3\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}\backslash[-\Lambda,\Lambda]}\, \lambda^{-2} \l[\l|g(T,\,\alpha_0)-g(T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r|^2 +\l|g(0,\,\alpha_0)-g(0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r|^2 +\l|s_T'(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r|^2\r] d\lambda\r)^{\frac12}\le\\
&\le \sqrt{3}\l(2\pi\nu_T^*\r)^{\frac12}\l(\sqrt{2}\Lambda^{-\frac12}\Bigl(\l|g(T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)- g(T,\,\alpha_0)\r| +\l|g(0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)-g(0,\,\alpha_0)\r|\Bigr)+\r.\\
&\hspace*{81mm}\l.+\l(2\pi c'_0\r)^{\frac12}\Lambda^{-1}\l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\r).
\end{aligned}
\]
Obviously,
\[
g(T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)- g(T,\,\alpha_0)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^q\,g_i(T,\,\alpha^*_T), \l(\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0}\r),
\]
$\alpha^*_T=\alpha_0+\eta\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)$, $\eta\in(0,\,1)$, $d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\alpha^*_T-\alpha_0\r)= \eta d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)$, and for any $\rho>0$ and $i=\overline{1,q}$
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Prob\Bigl\{\l|g_i(T,\,\alpha^*_T), \l(\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0}\r)\r|\ge\rho\Bigr\} \le \Prob\Bigl\{\l|g_i(T,\,\alpha^*_T), \l(\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0}\r)\r|\ge\rho,\ \l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\le R\Bigr\}&+\\ +\Prob\Bigl\{\l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|> R\Bigr\}=&P_5+P_6.
\end{aligned}
\]
By condition \textbf{N$_3$(i)} for any $R\ge0$
\[
\begin{aligned}
P_5&\le \Prob\l\{\l(d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\sup\limits_{t\in[0,T],\,\|u\|\le R}\, \l|g_i\l(t,\,\alpha_0+d_T^{-1}(\alpha_0)u\r)\r|\r)\cdot \l(d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\l|\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0}\r|\r)\ge\rho\r\}\le\\
&\le\Prob\l\{T^{-\frac12}d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\l|\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0}\r|\ge\frac\rho{c^i(R)}\r\}\ \to\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,
\end{aligned}
\]
according to \textbf{N$_1$} (or \textbf{C$_1$}). On the other hand, by condition \textbf{N$_1$} the value $R$ can be chosen so that for $T>T_0$ the probability $P_6$ becomes less that preassigned number.
So,
\[
g(T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)- g(T,\,\alpha_0)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,
\]
and, similarly, $g(0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)- g(0,\,\alpha_0)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0$, as $T\to\infty$.
Moreover, for any $\rho>0$
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Prob\l\{\Lambda^{-1}\l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\ge\rho\r\}\le P_6+ \Prob\Bigl\{\Lambda^{-1}\l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\ge\rho,\ \l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\le R\Bigr\},
\end{aligned}
\]
and the second probability is equal to zero, if $\Lambda>\frac R\rho$.
Thus for any fixed $\rho>0$, similarly to the probability $P_3$, the probability $P_7=\Prob\{D_2\ge\rho\}$ for $T>T_0$ can be made less than preassigned number by the choice of the value $\Lambda$.
Consider
\[
\Delta_T(T_n)=T^{-\frac12}\sum\limits_{j=-n}^n\,c_j^{(n)} \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)} e^{\mathrm{i}j\frac\sigma{n}\lambda}d\lambda,
\]
\[
\overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)} e^{\mathrm{i}j\frac\sigma{n}\lambda}= \int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^{T+\frac{j\sigma}n}\, e^{\mathrm{i}\lambda t}\l(g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r) -g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)\r)dt,\ j=\overline{-n,n}.
\]
It means that
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Delta_T(T_n)=2\pi&\sum\limits_{j=1}^n\,c_j^{(n)}T^{-\frac12} \int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\,\varepsilon(t) \l(g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r) -g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)\r)dt+\\
&+2\pi\sum\limits_{j=-n}^0\,c_j^{(n)}T^{-\frac12} \int\limits_0^{T+\frac{j\sigma}n}\,\varepsilon(t) \l(g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r) -g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)\r)dt.
\end{aligned}
\]
For $j>0$ consider the value
\[
\begin{aligned}
T^{-\frac12}&\int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\,\varepsilon(t) \l(g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T\r)- g\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r)\r)dt=\\
&=\sum\limits_{i=1}^q\,\l(T^{-\frac12}d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\, \varepsilon(t)g_i\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r)dt\r) d_{iT}(\alpha_0)(\widehat{\alpha}_{iT} - \alpha_{i0})+\\
&+\dfrac12\sum\limits_{i,k=1}^q\,\l(T^{-\frac12} \int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\,\varepsilon(t) g_{ik}\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_T^{*}\r)dt\r) (\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0}) \l(\widehat{\alpha}_{kT}-\alpha_{k0}\r)=S_{1T}+\frac12S_{2T},
\end{aligned}
\]
$\alpha_T^{*}=\alpha_0+\bar{\eta}\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)$, $\bar{\eta}\in(0,\,1)$.
Note that for $i=\overline{1,q}$
\[
d_{iT}(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0}\r)\Rightarrow N(0,\,\Sigma_{_{LSE}}^{ii}),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,
\]
by the condition \textbf{N$_1$}. Moreover,
\[
\begin{aligned}
\ExpV&\l(T^{-\frac12}d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\, \varepsilon(t)g_i\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r)dt\r)^2=\\
&=T^{-1}d_{iT}^{-2}(\alpha_0)\int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\,B(t-s) g_i\l(t-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r)g_i\l(s-j\dfrac{\sigma}{n},\,\alpha_0\r)dtds\le\\
&\le \l(T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,B^2(t-s)dtds\r)^{\frac12}=O\l(T^{-\frac12}\r),
\end{aligned}
\]
since
\[
T^{-1}\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,B^2(t-s)dtds\ \to\ 2\pi\|f\|_2^2,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
It means that the sum $S_{1T}\overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow0$, as $T\to\infty$.
For the general term $S_{2T}^{ik}$ of the sum $S_{2T}$ and any $\rho>0$, $R>0$,
\[
\Prob\l\{\l|S_{2T}^{ik}\r|\ge\rho\r\}\le P_6+P_8,\ \ P_8=\Prob\Bigl\{\l|S_{2T}^{ik}\r|\ge\rho,\ \l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\le R\Bigr\}.
\]
Under condition $\l\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\le R$ using assumptions \textbf{N$_3$(ii)} and \textbf{N$_3$(iii)} we get as in the estimation of the probability $P_5$
\[
\begin{aligned}
\l|S_{2T}^{ik}\r|\le& \l(T^{-\frac12}\int\limits_{\frac{j\sigma}n}^T\, |\varepsilon(t)|dt\r)\cdot \l(d_{ik,T}^{-1}(\alpha_0)\sup\limits_{t\in[0,T],\,u\in v^c(R)}\, \l|g_{ik}\l(t,\,\alpha_0+d_T^{-1}(\alpha_0)u\r)\r|\r)\cdot\\
&\cdot\Bigl(d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha_0)d_{kT}^{-1}(\alpha_0) d_{ik,T}(\alpha_0)\Bigr)\cdot
\l|d_{iT}(\alpha_0)(\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0})\r|\cdot \l|d_{kT}(\alpha_0)(\widehat{\alpha}_{kT}-\alpha_{k0})\r|\le\\
&\le c^{ik}(R)\tilde{c}^{ik}T^{-\frac32}\int\limits_0^T\, |\varepsilon(t)|dt\cdot\l|d_{iT}(\alpha_0)(\widehat{\alpha}_{iT}-\alpha_{i0})\r|\cdot \l|d_{kT}(\alpha_0)(\widehat{\alpha}_{kT}-\alpha_{k0})\r|.
\end{aligned}
\]
By Lemma \ref{lema_int_eps^2}
\[
T^{-\frac32}\int\limits_0^T\, |\varepsilon(t)|dt\le\frac12T^{-\frac12}+\frac12 T^{-\frac32}\int\limits_0^T\, \varepsilon^2(t)dt\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
So, by condition \textbf{N$_1$} $P_8\to0$, as $T\to\infty$, that is $S_{2T}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0$, as $T\to\infty$. For $j\le0$ the reasoning is similar, and
\[
\Delta_T(T_n)\overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow0,\ T\to\infty.
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_cnv_I_thta_T_2_thta_0}
Let the function $\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)w(\lambda)$ be continuous in $\theta\in\Theta^c$ for each fixed $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$ with
\[
|\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)|\le\varphi(\lambda),\ \theta\in\Theta^c,\ \text{and}\ \varphi(\cdot)w(\cdot)\in L_1(\mathbb{R}).
\]
If $\theta_T^{*}\overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\theta_0$, then
\[
I\l(\theta_T^{*}\r)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \varphi\l(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*}\r)w(\lambda)d\lambda\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_0)w(\lambda)d\lambda=I(\theta_0).
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By a Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem the integral $I(\theta)$, $\theta\in\Theta^c$, is a continuous function. Further argument is standard. For any $\rho>0$ and $\varepsilon=\dfrac{\rho}2$ we find such a $\delta>0$, that $|I(\theta)-I(\theta_0)|<\varepsilon$ as $\|\theta-\theta_0\|<\delta$. Then
\[
\Prob\l\{|I(\theta_T^{*})-I(\theta_0)|\ge\rho\r\}=P_9+P_{10},
\]
where
\[
P_9=\Prob\l\{|I(\theta_T^{*})-I(\theta_0)|\ge\dfrac{\rho}2,\ \|\theta_T^{*}-\theta_0\|<\delta\r\}=0,
\]
due to the choice of $\varepsilon$, and
\[
P_{10}=\Prob\l\{|I(\theta_T^{*})-I(\theta_0)|\ge\dfrac{\rho}2,\ \|\theta_T^{*}-\theta_0\|\ge\delta\r\}\ \to\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_cnv_int_phi_eps_s_T}
If the conditions \textbf{A$_1$, C$_2$} are satisfied and $\sup\limits_{\lambda\in \mathbb{R},\,\theta\in\Theta^c}\, |\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)|=c(\varphi)<\infty$, then
\[
\begin{aligned}
T^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*}) \varepsilon_T(\lambda)\overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)} d\lambda\ &\overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,\\
T^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*}) |s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)|d\lambda\ &\overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\end{aligned}
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
These relations are similar to \eqref{J_T^1phi_2_0}, \eqref{J_T^2phi_2_0}, and can be obtained in the same way.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lema_cnv_int_phi_I_T^e_w}
Let under conditions \textbf{A$_1$, A$_2$} there exists an even positive Lebesgue measurable function $v(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, and an even Lebesgue measurable in $\lambda$ for any fixed $\theta\in\Theta^c$ function $\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)$, $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, such that\\
\hspace*{15mm}\textbf{(i)} $\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)v(\lambda)$ is uniformly continuous in $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$;\\
\hspace*{14mm}\textbf{(ii)} $\underset{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\sup\,\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}<\infty$;\\
\hspace*{12mm}\textbf{(iii)} $\underset{\lambda\in\mathbb{R},\ \theta\in\Theta^c}\sup\,|\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)|w(\lambda)<\infty$.\\
Suppose also that $\theta_T^{*}\overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\theta_0$, then, as $T\to\infty$,
\[
\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})w(\lambda)d\lambda\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_0)w(\lambda)d\lambda.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We have
\[
\begin{aligned}
\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})w(\lambda)d\lambda =\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda) \bigl(\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*}) -\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_0)\bigr)v(\lambda) \dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}d\lambda&+\\
+\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_0)w(\lambda)d\lambda&=I_5+I_6.
\end{aligned}
\]
By Lemma \ref{lema_cnv_J_T^eps} and the condition \textbf{\textit{(iii)}}
\begin{equation}
I_6\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta_0)w(\lambda) d\lambda,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\label{cnv_I_4_2_int}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, for any $r>0$ under the condition \textbf{\textit{(i)}} there exists $\delta=\delta(r)$ such that for $\l\|\theta_T^{*}-\theta_0\r\|<\delta$
\begin{equation}
|I_5|\leq r \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, I_T^{\varepsilon}\dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}d\lambda,
\label{ineq_I_3_by_r_int}
\end{equation}
and by the condition \textbf{\textit{(ii)}}
\begin{equation}
\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon} \dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}d\lambda\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta_0) \dfrac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}d\lambda.
\label{cnv_int_I_T^e*w/v}
\end{equation}
The relations \eqref{cnv_I_4_2_int}--\eqref{cnv_int_I_T^e*w/v} prove the lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{prfthm2}
By definition of the MCE $\widehat{\theta}_T$, formally using the Taylor formula, we get
\begin{equation}
0=\nabla_\theta U_T(\widehat{\theta}_T,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T) =\nabla_\theta U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T) +\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta'U_T(\theta_T^{*},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T) (\widehat{\theta}_T-\theta_0).
\label{nblaU_T_Tlr_exp}
\end{equation}
Since there is no vector Taylor formula, \eqref{nblaU_T_Tlr_exp} must be taken coordinatewise, that is each row of vector equality \eqref{nblaU_T_Tlr_exp} depends on its own random vector $\theta_T^{*}$, such that $\|\theta_T^{*}-\theta_0\| \leq\|\widehat{\theta}_T-\theta_0\|$. In turn, from \eqref{nblaU_T_Tlr_exp} we have formally
\[
T^{\frac12}(\widehat{\theta}_T-\theta_0)=\l(\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta' U_T(\theta_T^{*},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r)^{-1} \l(-T^{\frac12}\nabla_\theta U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r).
\]
As far as the condition \textbf{N$_4$} implies the possibility of differentiation under the sign of the integrals in \eqref{Wh_ctrst_fn}, then
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
-T^{\frac12}\nabla_\theta&U_T(\theta_0,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)=-T^{\frac12}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l(\nabla_\theta \log f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)+\nabla_\theta\l(\dfrac1{f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}\r)I_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r) w(\lambda)d\lambda=\\
&=T^{\frac12}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l(\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)} I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)-\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}\r) w(\lambda)d\lambda+\\
&+(2\pi)^{-1}T^{-\frac12}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l(2\re\l\{\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\r\} +|s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)|^2\r)\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)} w(\lambda)d\lambda=\\
&=A_T^{(1)}+ A_T^{(2)}+ A_T^{(3)}.
\end{aligned}
\label{nblaU_T_exp_by_A1-3}
\end{equation}
Similarly
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta'&U_T(\theta_T^{*},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l(\nabla_\theta \nabla_\theta' \log f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})+\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta' \l(\dfrac1{f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})}\r)I_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\r) w(\lambda)d\lambda=\\
&=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l\{\l( \dfrac{\nabla_\theta \nabla_\theta'f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})} -\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*}) \nabla_\theta' f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})}\r)\r.+\\
&+\l(2\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})\nabla_\theta' f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})} -\dfrac{\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta'f(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})} {f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_T^{*})}\r)\times\\
&\ \ \ \times\l.(I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)+(\pi T)^{-1}\re \{\varepsilon_T(\lambda) \overline{s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\} +(2\pi T)^{-1} |s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)|^2)\r\}w(\lambda)d\lambda=\\
&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ =B_T^{(1)}+B_T^{(2)}+B_T^{(3)}+B_T^{(4)},
\end{aligned}
\label{nbla_nblaU_T_exp_by_B1-4}
\end{equation}
where the terms $B_T^{(3)}$ and $B_T^{(4)}$ contain values $\re\{\varepsilon_T(\lambda)\overline{s_T(\lambda,\widehat{\alpha}_T)}\}$ and $|s_T(\lambda,\widehat{\alpha}_T)|^2$, respectively.
Bearing in mind the 1st part of the condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)}, we take in Lemma~\ref{lema_cnv_Dlta_2_0} the functions
\[
\varphi(\lambda)=\varphi_i(\lambda) =\dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda),\ i=\overline{1,m}.
\]
Then in the formula \eqref{nblaU_T_exp_by_A1-3} $A_T^{(2)}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0$, as $T\to\infty$.
Consider the term $A_T^{(3)}=(a_{iT}^{(3)})_{i=1}^m$, in the sum \eqref{nblaU_T_exp_by_A1-3}
\[
a_{iT}^{(3)}=(2\pi)^{-1}T^{-\frac12}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, |s_T(\lambda,\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)|^2\varphi_i(\lambda)d\lambda,
\]
where $\varphi_i(\lambda)$ are as before. Under conditions \textbf{C$_1$, C$_2$, N$_1$} and \textbf{1)} of \textbf{N$_4$(i)} $A_T^{(3)}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0$, as $T\rightarrow\infty$, because
\[
|a_{iT}^{(3)}|\le c(\varphi_i)T^{-\frac12} \Phi_T(\widehat{\alpha}_T,\,\alpha_0)\le c(\varphi_i)c_0 \|T^{-\frac12}d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\|\;\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T- \alpha_0\r)\|\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty.
\]
Examine the behaviour of the terms $B_T^{(1)}-B_T^{(4)}$ in formula \eqref{nbla_nblaU_T_exp_by_B1-4}. Under conditions \textbf{C$_1$} and \textbf{N$_4$(iii)} we can use Lemma \ref{lema_cnv_I_thta_T_2_thta_0} with functions
\[
\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)=\varphi_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)=\dfrac{f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)} {f(\lambda,\,\theta)},\ \dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta) f_j(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)},\ i,j=\overline{1,m},
\]
to obtain the convergence
\begin{equation}
B_T^{(1)}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l(\dfrac{\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta'f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)} {f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}-\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0) \nabla_\theta'f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}\r) w(\lambda)d\lambda,\ \text{as}\ T\rightarrow\infty.
\label{cnv_B_T^1_2_int}
\end{equation}
Under the condition \textbf{N$_5$(i)} we can use Lemma \ref{lema_cnv_int_phi_eps_s_T} with functions
\[
\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)=\varphi_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)= \dfrac{f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)} w(\lambda),\ \dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta) f_j(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)},\ i,j=\overline{1,m},
\]
to obtain that
\[
B_T^{(3)}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ B_T^{(4)}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
Under conditions \textbf{C$_1$} and \textbf{N$_5$}
\begin{equation}
B_T^{(2)}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\, \l(2\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)\nabla_\theta' f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)} -\dfrac{\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta'f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)} {f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}\r)w(\lambda)d\lambda,
\label{cnv_B_T^2_2_int}
\end{equation}
if we take in Lemma \ref{lema_cnv_int_phi_I_T^e_w} in conditions \textbf{\textit{(i)}} and \textbf{\textit{(iii)}}
\[
\varphi(\lambda,\,\theta)=\varphi_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)= \dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta)f_j(\lambda,\,\theta)} {f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)},\ \dfrac{f_{ij}(\lambda,\,\theta)} {f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}\ i,j=\overline{1,m}.
\]
So, under conditions \textbf{C$_1$, C$_2$, N$_4$(iii)} and \textbf{N$_5$}
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\nabla_\theta\nabla_\theta'U_T(\theta_T^{*},\,\widehat{\alpha}_T)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ &\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)\nabla_\theta' f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}w(\lambda)d\lambda=\\
=&\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\nabla_\theta\log f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)\nabla_\theta'\log f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)w(\lambda)d\lambda=W_1(\theta_0),
\end{aligned}
\label{cnv_nbla_nblaU_T_2_W1}
\end{equation}
because $W_1(\theta_0)$ is the sum of the right hand sides of \eqref{cnv_B_T^1_2_int} and \eqref{cnv_B_T^2_2_int}.
From the facts obtained, it follows that for the proof of Theorem \ref{thm_MCE_asym_norm} it is necessary to study an asymptotic behaviour of vector $A_T^{(1)}$ from \eqref{nblaU_T_exp_by_A1-3}:
\[
A_T^{(1)}= T^{\frac12}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l(\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)-\dfrac{\nabla_\theta f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}\r) w(\lambda)d\lambda.
\]
We will take
\[
\begin{aligned}
\varphi_i(\lambda)=&\dfrac{f_i(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)}w(\lambda),\ i=\overline{1,m},\\
\Psi(\lambda)=&\sum\limits_{i=1}^m\,u_i\varphi_i(\lambda),\ \mathrm{u}=\l(u_1,\,\ldots,\,u_m\r)\in\mathbb{R}^m,\\
Y_T=&\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,I_T^{\varepsilon}(\lambda)\Psi(\lambda)d\lambda,\ \ \ Y=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)\Psi(\lambda)d\lambda,
\end{aligned}
\]
and write
\[
\l<A_T^{(1)},\,\mathrm{u}\r>=T^{\frac12}(Y_T-\ExpV Y_T)+T^{\frac12}(\ExpV Y_T-Y).
\]
Under conditions \textbf{1)} and \textbf{2)} of \textbf{N$_4$(i)} \cite{Ben_oEoEoSFoSP,Ibr_aEoSGPSF} for any $u\in\mathbb{R}^m$
\begin{equation}
T^{\frac12}(\ExpV Y_T-Y)\ \longrightarrow\ 0, \ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\label{cnv_T12_EYT-T_2_0}
\end{equation}
On the other hand
\[
T^{\frac12}(Y_T-\ExpV Y_T)=T^{-\frac12}\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\, \l(\varepsilon(t)\varepsilon(s) -B(t-s)\r)\hat{b}(t-s)dtds
\]
with
\[
\hat{b}(t)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,e^{\mathrm{i}\lambda t}\,(2\pi)^{-1}\Psi(\lambda)d\lambda .
\]
Thus we can apply Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl} taking $b(\lambda)=(2\pi)^{-1}\Psi(\lambda)$ in the formula \eqref{cov_mtrx_sigma^2} to obtain for any $u\in\mathbb{R}^m$
\begin{equation}
T^{\frac12}(Y_T-\ExpV Y_T)\ \Rightarrow\ N(0,\,\sigma^2),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty,
\label{asymNorm_T12_YT-EYT}
\end{equation}
where
\[
\begin{aligned}
\sigma^2=&4\pi\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\Psi^2(\lambda) f^2(\lambda,\,\theta_0)d\lambda +\gamma_2\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\Psi(\lambda) f(\lambda,\,\theta_0)d\lambda\r)^2.
\end{aligned}
\]
The relations \eqref{cnv_T12_EYT-T_2_0} and \eqref{asymNorm_T12_YT-EYT} are equivalent to the convergence\
\begin{equation}
A_T^{(1)}\ \Rightarrow\ N\l(0,\,W_2(\theta_0)+V(\theta_0)\r),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty.
\label{A_T^1_2_N0,W2+V}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{cnv_nbla_nblaU_T_2_W1} and \eqref{A_T^1_2_N0,W2+V} it follows \eqref{cov_mtrx_W}.
\end{prfthm2}
\begin{remark}
From the conditions of Theorem \ref{thm_MCE_asym_norm} it follows also the fulfillment of Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl_Bai} conditions for functions $\hat{a}$ and $\hat{b}$. Really by condition \textbf{A$_1$} $\hat{a}\in L_1(\mathbb{R})\cap L_2(\mathbb{R})$ and we can take $p=1$ in Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl_Bai}. On the other hand, if we look at $b=(2\pi)^{-1}\Psi$ as at an original of the Fourier transform, from \textbf{N$_4$(i)1)} we have $b\in L_1(\mathbb{R})\cap L_2(\mathbb{R})$. Then according to the Plancherel theorem $\hat{b}\in L_2(\mathbb{R})$ and we can take $q=2$ in Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl_Bai}. Thus
\[
\frac2p+\frac1q=\frac52,
\]
and conclusion of Lemma \ref{lema_AN_lin_fnctnl_Bai} is true.
\end{remark}
\section{Example. The motion of a pendulum in a turbulent fluid}\label{sec_Example}
$\indent$First of all we review a number of results discussed in Parzen~\cite{Parz_SP}, Anh et al.~\cite{AnhHeLeo_DMoLMPDbLP}, Leonenko and Papić~\cite{LeoPap_CPoCTAPDnIoSS}, see also references therein.
We examine the stationary Lévy-driven continuous-time autoregressive process $\varepsilon(t),\ t\in\mathbb{R}$, of the order two ( $CAR(2)$-process ) in the under-damped case (see \cite{LeoPap_CPoCTAPDnIoSS} for details).
The motion of a pendulum is described by the equation
\begin{equation}
\ddot{\varepsilon}(t)+2\alpha\dot{\varepsilon}(t)+\l(\omega^2+\alpha^2\r)\varepsilon(t)=\dot{L}(t),\ t\in\mathbb{R},
\label{PendTurbFl_dif_eq}
\end{equation}
in which $\varepsilon(t)$ is the replacement from its rest position, $\alpha$ is a damping factor, $\dfrac{2\pi}\omega$ is the damped period of the pendulum (see, i.e., \cite{Parz_SP}, p.~111-113).
We consider the Green function solution of the equation \eqref{PendTurbFl_dif_eq}, in which $\dot{L}$ is the Lévy noise, i.e. the derivative of a Lévy process in the distribution sense (see \cite{AnhHeLeo_DMoLMPDbLP} and \cite{LeoPap_CPoCTAPDnIoSS} for details). The solution can be defined as the linear process
\[
\varepsilon(t)=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\hat{a}(t-s)dL(s),\ t\in\mathbb{R},
\]
where the Green function
\begin{equation}
\hat{a}(t)=e^{-\alpha t}\, \frac{\sin(\omega t)}\omega\,\mathbb{I}_{[0,\,\infty)}(t),\ \alpha>0.
\label{hat_a_repr_exle}
\end{equation}
Assuming $\ExpV L(1)=0$, $d_2=\ExpV L^2(1)<\infty$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
B(t)=d_2\int\limits_0^\infty\,\hat{a}(t+s)\hat{a}(s)ds=\frac{d_2}{4(\alpha^2+\omega^2)}\,e^{-\alpha|t|}\, \l(\frac{\sin(\omega|t|)}\omega+\frac{\cos(\omega t)}\alpha\r).
\label{CovFn_eps4exle}
\end{equation}
The formula \eqref{CovFn_eps4exle} for the covariance function of the process $\varepsilon$ corresponds to the formula (2.12) in \cite{LeoPap_CPoCTAPDnIoSS} for the correlation function
\[
\Corr\l(\varepsilon(t),\,\varepsilon(0)\r)=\frac{B(t)}{B(0)}= e^{-\alpha|t|}\,\l(\cos(\omega t)+\frac\alpha\omega\sin(\omega|t|)\r).
\]
On the other hand for $\hat{a}(t)$ given by \eqref{hat_a_repr_exle}
\[
a(\lambda)=\int\limits_0^\infty\,e^{-i\lambda t}\hat{a}(t)dt=\frac1{\alpha^2+\omega^2-\lambda^2+2i\alpha\lambda}.
\]
Then the positive spectral density of the stationary process $\varepsilon$ can be written as (compare with \cite{Parz_SP})
\begin{equation}
f_2(\lambda)=\frac{d_2}{2\pi}\l|a(\lambda)\r|^2=\frac{d_2}{2\pi}\cdot\frac1{\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\omega^2\r)^2+4\alpha^2\lambda^2},\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R}.
\label{spec_dens_eps_exle}
\end{equation}
It is convenient to rewrite \eqref{spec_dens_eps_exle} in the form
\begin{equation}
f_2(\lambda)=f(\lambda,\,\theta)=\frac1{2\pi}\cdot\frac{\beta}{\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)^2+4\alpha^2\lambda^2},\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R},
\label{spec_dens_eps_repr_exle}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha=\theta_1$ is a damping factor, $\beta=-\varkappa^{(2)}(0)=d_2(\theta_2)=\theta_2$, $\gamma=\omega=\theta_3$ is a damped cyclic frequency of the pendulum oscillations. Suppose that
\[
\theta=\l(\theta_1,\,\theta_2,\,\theta_3\r)=\l(\alpha,\,\beta,\,\gamma\r)\in\Theta=\l(\underline{\alpha},\,\overline{\alpha}\r)\times \l(\underline{\beta},\,\overline{\beta}\r)\times \l(\underline{\gamma},\,\overline{\gamma}\r),\ \underline{\alpha},\underline{\beta},\underline{\gamma}>0,\ \overline{\alpha},\overline{\beta},\overline{\gamma}<\infty.
\]
The condition \textbf{C$_3$} is fulfilled for spectral density \eqref{spec_dens_eps_repr_exle}.
Assume that
\[
w(\lambda)=\l(1+\lambda^2\r)^{-a},\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R},\ a>0.
\]
More precisely the value of $a$ will be chosen below.
Obviously the functions $w(\lambda)\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)$, $\frac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}$ are continuous on $\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$. For any $\Lambda>0$ the function $\l|\log f(\lambda,\,\theta)\r|$ is bounded on the set $[-\Lambda,\,\Lambda]\times\Theta^c$. The number $\Lambda$ can be chosen so that for $\mathbb{R}\backslash[-\Lambda,\,\Lambda]$
\[
1<\frac{8\pi}{\overline{\beta}}\underline{\alpha}^2\lambda^2\le f^{-1}(\lambda,\,\theta) \le\frac{2\pi}{\underline{\beta}}\l(2\l(\lambda^4+\l(\overline{\alpha}^2+\overline{\gamma}^2\r)^2\r)+4\overline{\alpha}^2\lambda^2\r).
\]
Thus the function $Z_1(\lambda)$ in the condition \textbf{C$_4$(i)} exists.
As for condition \textbf{C$_4$(ii)}, if $a\ge2$, then
\[
\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R},\,\theta\in\Theta^c}\,\frac{w(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}<\infty.
\]
As a function $v$ in condition \textbf{C$_5$} we take
\[
v(\lambda)=\l(1+\lambda^2\r)^{-b},\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R},\ b>0.
\]
Obviously, if $a\ge b$, then $\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\,\frac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}<\infty$ (condition \textbf{C$_5$(ii)}), and the function $\frac{v(\lambda)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}$ is uniformly continuous in $(\lambda,\,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, if $b\ge2$ (condition \textbf{C$_5$(i)}).
Further it will be helpful to use the notation $s(\lambda)=\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)^2+4\alpha^2\lambda^2$. Then
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)&=\frac\partial{\partial\alpha}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta)=-\frac{2\alpha\beta}{\pi}\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)s^{-2}(\lambda);\\
f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta)&=\frac\partial{\partial\beta}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta)=\l(2\pi s(\lambda)\r)^{-2};\\
f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)&=\frac\partial{\partial\gamma}\,f(\lambda,\,\theta)=\frac{2\beta\gamma}{\pi}\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)s^{-2}(\lambda).
\end{aligned}
\label{drvtv_spec_dens4exle}
\end{equation}
To check the condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)1)} consider the functions
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\varphi_\alpha(\lambda)&=\frac{f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda) =-\frac{4\pi\alpha}\beta\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)w(\lambda);\\
\varphi_\beta(\lambda)&=\frac{f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)=\frac{2\pi}{\beta^2}s(\lambda)w(\lambda);\\
\varphi_\gamma(\lambda)&=\frac{f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda) =\frac{8\pi\gamma}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)w(\lambda).
\end{aligned}
\label{def_phis4exle}
\end{equation}
Then the condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)1)} is satisfied for $\varphi_\alpha$ and $\varphi_\gamma$ when $a>\frac32$, for $\varphi_\beta$ when $a>\frac52$. The same values of $a$ are sufficient also to meet the condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)2)}.
To verify \textbf{N$_4$(i)3)} fix $\theta\in\Theta^c$ and denote by $\varphi(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, any of the continuous functions $\varphi_\alpha(\lambda)$, $\varphi_\beta(\lambda)$, $\varphi_\gamma(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$. Suppose $|1-\eta|<\delta<\frac12$. Then
\[
\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\,\l|\varphi(\eta\lambda)-\varphi(\lambda)\r| =\max\l(\sup\limits_{\eta|\lambda|\le\Lambda}\,\l|\varphi(\eta\lambda)-\varphi(\lambda)\r|,\ \sup\limits_{\eta|\lambda|>\Lambda}\,\l|\varphi(\eta\lambda)-\varphi(\lambda)\r|\r)=\max\l(s_1,\,s_2\r),
\]
\[
s_2\le\sup\limits_{|\lambda|>\Lambda}\,\l|\varphi(\lambda)\r|+\sup\limits_{\eta|\lambda|>\Lambda}\,\l|\varphi(\lambda)\r|= s_3+s_4.
\]
By the properties of the functions $\varphi$ under assumption $a>\frac52$ for any $\varepsilon>0$ there exists $\Lambda=\Lambda(\varepsilon)>0$ such that for $|\lambda|>\frac23\Lambda$\ \ $|\varphi(\lambda)|<\frac\varepsilon2$. So, $s_3\le\frac\varepsilon2$. We have also $s_4\le\underset{|\lambda|>\frac23\Lambda}\sup\,|\varphi(\lambda)|\le\frac\varepsilon2$. On the other hand,
\[
s_1\le \sup\limits_{|\lambda|<2\Lambda}\,\l|\varphi(\eta\lambda)-\varphi(\lambda)\r|,\ \ |\eta\lambda-\lambda|\le2\Lambda\delta=\delta',
\]
and by the proper choice of $\delta$
\[
s_1\le\sup\limits_{\substack{\lambda_1,\lambda_2\in[-2\Lambda,\,2\Lambda]\\ \l|\lambda_1-\lambda_2\r|<\delta'}}\, \l|\varphi(\lambda_1)-\varphi(\lambda_2)\r|<\varepsilon,
\]
and condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)3)} is met.
Using \eqref{def_phis4exle} we get for any $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\[
\begin{aligned}
\varphi_\alpha'(\lambda)&=-\frac{8\pi\alpha}\beta\,\lambda w(\lambda)-\frac{4\pi\alpha}\beta\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)w'(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a+1}\r);\\
\varphi_\beta'(\lambda)&=\frac{2\pi}{\beta^2}\bigl(s'(\lambda)w(\lambda)+s(\lambda)w'(\lambda)\bigr)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a+3}\r);\\
\varphi_\gamma'(\lambda)&=\frac{16\pi\gamma}\beta\,\lambda w(\lambda)+\frac{8\pi\gamma}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)w'(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a+1}\r).
\end{aligned}
\]
Therefore for $a>\frac32$ these derivatives are uniformly continuous on $\mathbb{R}$ (condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)4)}). So, to satisfy condition \textbf{N$_4$(i)} we can take weight function $w(\lambda)$ with $a>\frac52$.
The check of assumption \textbf{N$_4$(ii)} is similar to the check of \textbf{C$_4$(i)}.
As $\lambda\to\infty$, uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\l|f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)\r|}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\l|\varphi_\alpha(\lambda)\r|f(\lambda,\,\theta)w(\lambda) =2\alpha\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a-2}\r);\\
\frac{\l|f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta)\r|}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\varphi_\beta(\lambda)f(\lambda,\,\theta)w(\lambda) =\beta^{-1}w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a}\r);\\
\frac{\l|f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)\r|}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\l|\varphi_\gamma(\lambda)\r|f(\lambda,\,\theta)w(\lambda) =4\gamma\l|\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r|s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a-2}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_phis_f_w4exle}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, for any $\Lambda>0$ the functions \eqref{ordr_phis_f_w4exle} are bounded on the sets $[-\Lambda,\,\Lambda]\times\Theta^c$.
To check \textbf{N$_4$(iii)} note first of all that the functions uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_\alpha^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\varphi_\alpha(\lambda)f(\lambda,\,\theta) =8\alpha^2\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)^2s^{-2}(\lambda)w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a-4}\r);\\
\frac{f_\beta^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\varphi_\beta(\lambda)f(\lambda,\,\theta) =\beta^{-2}w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a}\r);\\
\frac{f_\gamma^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\varphi_\gamma(\lambda)f(\lambda,\,\theta) =16\gamma^2\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)^2s^{-2}(\lambda)w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a-4}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_phis^2/f^2w4exle}
\end{equation}
These functions are continuous on $\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, as well as the functions
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\varphi_\alpha(\lambda)f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta) =-\frac{2\alpha}\beta\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda);\\
\frac{f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\varphi_\alpha(\lambda)f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta) =-8\alpha\gamma \l(\lambda^4-\l(\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)^2\r)s^{-2}(\lambda)w(\lambda);\\
\frac{f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta)f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\varphi_\beta(\lambda)f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta) =\frac{4\gamma}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_phi*phi/f^2w4exle}
\end{equation}
Moreover, uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_{\alpha\alpha}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=-4\l(\lambda^2+3\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda) +8\alpha\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)s^{-2}(\lambda)s_\alpha'(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a-2}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\beta\beta}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=0;\\
\frac{f_{\gamma\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=4\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-3\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda) -8\gamma\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)s^{-2}(\lambda)s_\gamma'(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a-2}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\alpha\beta}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=-\frac{4\alpha}\beta\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a-2}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\alpha\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=-8\alpha\gamma s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda)+ 16\alpha\gamma\l(\lambda^4-\l(\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)^2\r)s^{-2}(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a-4}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\beta\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\frac{4\gamma}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a-2}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_2nd_der_f/f*w4exle}
\end{equation}
Note that the functions \eqref{ordr_2nd_der_f/f*w4exle} are continuous on $\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$ as well as functions \eqref{ordr_phis^2/f^2w4exle} and \eqref{ordr_phi*phi/f^2w4exle}. Therefore the condition \textbf{N$_4$(iii)} is fulfilled.
Let us verify the condition \textbf{N$_5$(i)}. According to equation \eqref{ordr_phis^2/f^2w4exle}, uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_\alpha^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)& =\frac{16\pi\alpha^2}\beta\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)^2s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a}\r);\\
\frac{f_\beta^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)& =\frac{2\pi}{\beta^3}s(\lambda)w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a+4}\r);\\
\frac{f_\gamma^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)& =\frac{32\pi\gamma^2}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)^2s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2a}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_phis^2/f^3w4exle}
\end{equation}
Therefore the continuous in $(\lambda,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$ functions \eqref{ordr_phis^2/f^3w4exle} are bounded in $(\lambda,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, if $a\ge2$.
Using equations \eqref{ordr_phi*phi/f^2w4exle} and \eqref{ordr_2nd_der_f/f*w4exle} we obtain uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_{\alpha\alpha}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=-\frac{8\pi}\beta\l(\lambda^2+3\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)w(\lambda) +\frac{16\pi\alpha}\beta\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)s_\alpha'(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a+2}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\beta\beta}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=0;\\
\frac{f_{\gamma\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\frac{8\pi}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-3\gamma^2\r)w(\lambda) -\frac{16\pi\gamma}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)s_\gamma'(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a+2}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\alpha\beta}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=-\frac{8\pi\alpha}{\beta^2} \l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a+2}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\alpha\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=-\frac{16\alpha\gamma}\beta w(\lambda)+ \frac{32\pi\alpha\gamma}\beta\l(\lambda^4-\l(\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\beta\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}w(\lambda)&=\frac{8\pi\gamma}{\beta^2}\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)w(\lambda) =O\l(\lambda^{-2a+2}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_2nd_der_f/f^2*w4exle}
\end{equation}
So, continuous on $\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$ functions \eqref{ordr_2nd_der_f/f^2*w4exle} are bounded in $(\lambda,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, if $a\ge1$.
To check \textbf{N$_5$(ii)} consider the weight function
\[
v(\lambda)=\l(1+\lambda^2\r)^{-b},\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R},\ b>0.
\]
If $a\ge b$, then function $\frac{w(\lambda)}{v(\lambda)}$ is bounded on $\mathbb{R}$ (condition \textbf{N$_5$(iii)}). Using \eqref{ordr_phis^2/f^3w4exle} we obtain uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_\alpha^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)& =\frac{16\pi\alpha^2}\beta\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)^2s^{-1}(\lambda)v(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2b}\r);\\
\frac{f_\beta^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)& =\frac{2\pi}{\beta^3}s(\lambda)v(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2b+4}\r);\\
\frac{f_\gamma^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)& =\frac{32\pi\gamma^2}\beta\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)^2s^{-1}(\lambda)v(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2b}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_der_f^2/f^3v4exle}
\end{equation}
In turn, similarly to \eqref{ordr_phi*phi/f^2w4exle} it follows uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)& =-\frac{4\pi\alpha}{\beta^2}\l(\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)v(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2b+2}\r);\\
\frac{f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)& =-\frac{16\alpha\gamma}\beta \l(\lambda^4-\l(\alpha^2+\gamma^2\r)^2\r)s^{-1}(\lambda)v(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2b}\r);\\
\frac{f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta)f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^3(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)& =\frac{8\pi\gamma}{\beta^2}\l(\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2\r)v(\lambda)=O\l(\lambda^{-2b+2}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_ders_f*f/f^3v4exle}
\end{equation}
The functions \eqref{ordr_der_f^2/f^3v4exle} and \eqref{ordr_ders_f*f/f^3v4exle} will be uniformly continuous in $(\lambda,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, if they converge to zero, as $\lambda\to\infty$, uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, that is if $b>2$.
Similarly to \eqref{ordr_2nd_der_f/f^2*w4exle} uniformly in $\theta\in\Theta^c$, as $\lambda\to\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{f_{\alpha\alpha}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)&=O\l(\lambda^{-2b+2}\r);\ \
\frac{f_{\beta\beta}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)&=&0;&\ \
\frac{f_{\gamma\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)&=O\l(\lambda^{-2b+2}\r);\\
\frac{f_{\alpha\beta}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)&=O\l(\lambda^{-2b+2}\r);\ \
\frac{f_{\alpha\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)&=&O\l(\lambda^{-2b}\r);&\ \
\frac{f_{\beta\gamma}(\lambda,\,\theta)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}v(\lambda)& =O\l(\lambda^{-2b+2}\r).
\end{aligned}
\label{ordr_2nd_der_f/f^2*v4exle}
\end{equation}
Thus the functions \eqref{ordr_der_f^2/f^3v4exle}--\eqref{ordr_2nd_der_f/f^2*v4exle} are uniformly continuous in $(\lambda,\theta)\in\mathbb{R}\times\Theta^c$, if $b>2$.
Proceeding to the verification of condition \textbf{N$_6$}, we note that for any $x=\l(x_\alpha,\,x_\beta,\,x_\gamma\r)\ne0$
\[
\l<W_1(\theta)x,\,x\r>=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l(x_\alpha f_\alpha(\lambda,\,\theta)+x_\beta f_\beta(\lambda,\,\theta) +x_\gamma f_\gamma(\lambda,\,\theta)\r)\frac{w(\lambda)}{f^2(\lambda,\,\theta)}d\lambda.
\]
From equation \eqref{drvtv_spec_dens4exle} it is seen that the positive definiteness of the matrix $W_1(\lambda)$ follows from linear independence of the functions $\lambda^2+\alpha^2+\gamma^2$, $s(\lambda)$, $\lambda^2-\alpha^2-\gamma^2$. Positive definiteness of the matrix $W_2(\theta)$ is established similarly.
In our example to satisfy the consistency conditions \textbf{C$_4$} and \textbf{C$_5$} the weight functions $w(\lambda)$ and $v(\lambda)$ should be chosen so that $a\ge b>2$. On the other hand to satisfy the asymptotic normality conditions \textbf{N$_4$} and \textbf{N$_5$} the functions $w(\lambda)$ and $v(\lambda)$ should be such that $a>\frac52$ and $a\ge b>2$.
The spectral density \eqref{spec_dens_eps_repr_exle} has no singularity at zero, so that the functions $v(\lambda)$ in the conditions \textbf{C$_5$(i)} and \textbf{N$_5$(ii)} could be chosen to be equal to $w(\lambda)$, for example, $a=b=3$. However we prefer to keep in the text the function $v(\lambda)$, since it is needed when the spectral density could have a singularity at zero or elsewhere, see, e.g., Example 1~\cite{LeoSa_oWE4SCoCPRP}, where linear process driven by the Brownian motion and regression function $g(t,\,\alpha)\equiv0$ have been studied. Specifically in the case of Riesz-Bessel spectral density
\begin{equation}
f(\lambda,\,\theta)=\frac{\beta}{2\pi|\lambda|^{2\alpha}(1+\lambda^2)^\gamma},\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R},
\label{Rie_Bess_sp_fn}
\end{equation}
where $\theta=\l(\theta_1,\,\theta_2,\,\theta_3\r)=(\alpha,\,\beta,\,\gamma)\in\Theta=(\underline{\alpha},\,\overline{\alpha}) \times(\underline{\beta},\,\overline{\beta})\times(\underline{\gamma},\,\overline{\gamma})$, $\underline{\alpha}>0$, $\overline{\alpha}<\frac12$, $\underline{\beta}>0$, $\overline{\beta}<\infty$, $\underline{\gamma}>\frac12$, $\overline{\gamma}<\infty$, and the parameter $\alpha$ signifies the long range dependence, while the parameter $\gamma$ indicates the second-order intermittency~\cite{AnhLeoSa_oCoMCE4FSP,Gaoetal_PEoSPwLRD&I,LimTeo_SPPoFRBFoVO}, the weight functions have been chosen in the form
\[
w(\lambda)=\frac{\lambda^{2b}}{\l(1+\lambda^2\r)^a},\ a>b>0;\ \ \ v(\lambda)=\frac{\lambda^{2b'}}{\l(1+\lambda^2\r)^{a'}},\ a'>b'>0,\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R}.
\]
Unfortunately, our conditions do not cover so far the case of the general non-linear regression function and Lévy driven continuous-time strongly dependent linear random noise such as Riesz-Bessel motion.
\begin{appendices}
\numberwithin{lemma}{section}
\numberwithin{theorem}{section}
\numberwithin{definition}{section}
\numberwithin{example}{section}
\section{LSE consistency}\label{app_LSE_cons}
$\indent$Some results on consistency of the LSE $\widehat{\alpha}_T$ in the observation model of the type \eqref{c_n_reg_m} with stationary noise $\varepsilon(t)$, $t\in\mathbb{R}$, were obtained, for example, in Ivanov and Leonenko~\cite{IvLeo_SAoRF_En,IvLeo_AToNRwLRD,IvLeo_REiNRMwLRD,IvLeo_SAoLRDiNR}, Ivanov~\cite{Iv_aSotPoDHP,Iv_CoLSEoAaAFoSoHO}, Ivanov et al.~\cite{IvLeRuMeZhu_EoHCiRwCDE} to mention several of the relevant works. In this section we formulate a generalization of Malinvaud theorem~\cite{Mlvd_tCoNR} on $\widehat{\alpha}_T$ consistency for linear stochastic process \eqref{LinRep_RmdnNse} and consider an example of nonlinear regression function $g(t,\,\alpha)$ satisfying the conditions of this theorem and conditions \textbf{C$_1$}, \textbf{C$_2$}. Then we consider another possibilities of \textbf{C$_1$} and \textbf{C$_2$} fulfillment.
Set
\[
\begin{aligned}
w_T(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)&=\int\limits_0^T\,\varepsilon(t)\l(g(t,\,\alpha_1)-g(t,\,\alpha_2)\r)dt,\ \alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\mathcal{A}^c,\\
\Psi_T(u_1,\,u_2)&=\Phi_T\l(\alpha_0+T^{\frac12}d_T^{-1}(\alpha_0)u_1,\ \alpha_0+T^{\frac12}d_T^{-1}(\alpha_0)u_1\r).
\end{aligned}
\]
For any fixed $\alpha_0\in\mathcal{A}$, the function\ \ $\Psi_T(u_1,\,u_2)$\ \ is defined on the set $U_T(\alpha_0)\times U_T(\alpha_0)$, $U_T(\alpha_0)=T^{-\frac12}d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\mathcal{A}^c-\alpha_0\r)$.
Assume the following.
\textbf{1)} For any $\varepsilon>0$ and $R>0$ there exists $\delta=\delta(\varepsilon,\,R)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\sup\limits_{\substack{u_1,u_2\in U_T(\alpha_0)\cap v^c(R)\\ \|u_1-u_2\|\le\delta}}\,T^{-1}\Psi_T(u_1,\,u_2)\le\varepsilon.
\label{sup_T^-1Psi_T<=eps}
\end{equation}
\textbf{2)} For some $R_0>0$ and any $\rho\in(0,\,R_0)$ there exist numbers $a=a(R_0)>0$ and $b=b(\rho,\,R_0)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\inf\limits_{u\in U_T(\alpha_0)\cap\l(v^c(R_0)\backslash v(\rho)\r)}\, T^{-1}\Psi(u,\,0)\ge b;
\label{inf_T^-1Psi_T>=b}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\inf\limits_{u\in U_T(\alpha_0)\backslash v^c(R_0)}\, T^{-1}\Psi(u,\,0)\ge 4B(0)+a.
\label{inf_T^-1Psi_T>=4B0+a}
\end{equation}
It was proven in Lemma \ref{lema_int_eps^2} that under condition \textbf{A$_1$}
\begin{equation}
\ExpV\l(\nu_T^*-B(0)\r)^2=O\l(T^{-1}\r).
\label{ordrE_nu_T-B0}
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}
Under condition \textbf{A$_1$},
\begin{equation}
\ExpV w_T^4(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)\le c \Phi_T^2(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2),\ \alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\label{Ew^4<=cPhi_T^2}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By formula \eqref{4ordr_mmnt_fn}
\[
\begin{aligned}
\ExpV& w_T^4(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)=\int\limits_{[0,T]^4}\,c_4(t_1,\,t_2,\,t_3,\,t_4)\prod\limits_{i=1}^4\, \l(g(t_i,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_i,\,\alpha_2)\r)dt_1dt_2dt_3dt_4+\\
&+3\l(\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,B(t_1-t_2)\l(g(t_1,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_1,\,\alpha_2)\r) \l(g(t_2,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_2,\,\alpha_2)\r)dt_1dt_2\r)^2=I_7+3I_8^2.
\end{aligned}
\]
By condition \textbf{A$_1$} and Fubini-Tonelli theorem
\[
\begin{aligned}
|I_8|&\le\frac12\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,|B(t_1-t_2)|\l[\l(g(t_1,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_1,\,\alpha_2)\r)^2 +\l(g(t_2,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_2,\,\alpha_2)\r)^2\r]dt_1dt_2\le
d_2\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1^2,
\end{aligned}
\]
$\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1=\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,|\hat{a}(t)|dt$.
On the other hand by formula \eqref{rep_c_r_by_hat-a}
\[
\begin{aligned}
|I_7|&\le d_4\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,ds\int\limits_{[0,T]^4}\,\prod\limits_{i=1}^4\, \Bigl|\hat{a}(t_i-s)\l(g(t_i,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_i,\,\alpha_2)\r)\Bigr|dt_1dt_2dt_3dt_4\le\\
&\le\frac12 d_4\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,ds\int\limits_{[0,T]^4}\,\prod\limits_{i=1}^4\, \l|\hat{a}(t_i-s)\r|\Bigl[\bigl(g(t_1,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_1,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2 \bigl(g(t_2,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_2,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2+\Bigr.\\
&\hspace*{27mm}\Bigl.+\bigl(g(t_3,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_3,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2 \bigl(g(t_4,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_4,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2\Bigr]dt_1dt_2dt_3dt_4=I_7^{(1)}+I_7^{(2)};
\end{aligned}
\]
\[
\begin{aligned}
I_7^{(1)}=&\frac12 d_4\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,ds\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,\, \bigl|\hat{a}(t_1-s)\hat{a}(t_2-s)\bigr|\bigl(g(t_1,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_1,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2 \bigl(g(t_2,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_2,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2dt_1dt_2\ \cdot\\
&\hspace*{87mm}\cdot \int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,\, \bigl|\hat{a}(t_3-s)\hat{a}(t_4-s)\bigr|dt_3dt_4\le\\
\le&\frac14 d_4\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1^2\int\limits_0^T\int\limits_0^T\,\, \bigl(g(t_1,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_1,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2 \bigl(g(t_2,\,\alpha_1)-g(t_2,\,\alpha_2)\bigr)^2\ \cdot\\
&\hspace*{72mm}\cdot \l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\Bigl[\hat{a}^2(t_1-s)+\hat{a}^2(t_2-s)\Bigr]ds\r)dt_1dt_2\le\\
\le& \frac12 d_4\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1^2\Phi_T^2(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2).\hspace*{96mm}
\end{aligned}
\]
For integral $I_7^{(2)}$ we get the same bound. So, we obtain inequality \eqref{Ew^4<=cPhi_T^2} with
\[
c=d_4\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1^2\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_2^2+3d_2^2\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1^4.
\]
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
If assumptions \textbf{1), 2),} and \textbf{A$_1$} are valid then for any $\rho>0$
\[
\Prob\l\{\l\|T^{-\frac12}d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\r\|\ge\rho\r\}=O(T^{-1}),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\rightarrow\infty.
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{prfapthm}
The proof of this Malinvaud theorem generalization is similar to the proof of Theorem 3.2.1. in \cite{IvLeo_SAoRF_En} and uses the relations \eqref{ordrE_nu_T-B0} and \eqref{Ew^4<=cPhi_T^2}.
\end{prfapthm}
Instead of \textbf{C$_2$} consider the stronger condition.
\textbf{C$_2'$}. There exist positive constants $c_0,\,c_1<\infty$ such that for any $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c$ and $T>T_0$
\begin{equation}
c_1\bigl\|d_T(\alpha)\l(\alpha_1-\alpha_2\r)\bigr\|^2\ \le\ \Phi_T(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)\ \le\ c_0\bigl\|d_T(\alpha)\l(\alpha_1-\alpha_2\r)\bigr\|^2,\ \alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\label{dbnd4Phi_T_w_d_app}
\end{equation}
Point out a sufficient condition for \textbf{C$_2'$} fulfillment. Introduce a diagonal matrix
\[
s_T=\diag\Bigl(s_{iT},\ i=\overline{1,q}\Bigr),\ s_{iT}\to\infty,\ \text{as}\ T\rightarrow\infty,\ i=\overline{1,q}.
\]
\textbf{C$_2''$. (i)} There exist positive constants $\underline{c}_i,\ \overline{c}_i$, $i=\overline{1,q}$, such that for $T>T_0$ uniformly in $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$
\begin{equation}
\underline{c}_i<s_{iT}^{-1}d_{iT}(\alpha)<\overline{c}_i,\ i=\overline{1,q}.
\label{dbnd4s_iT&d_iT_app}
\end{equation}
\hspace*{12mm}\textbf{(ii)} For some numbers $c_0^*.\ c_1^*$ and $T>T_0$,
\[
c_0^*\,\bigl\|s_T\l(\alpha_1-\alpha_2\r)\bigr\|^2\le \Phi_T(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)\le c_0^*\,\bigl\|s_T\l(\alpha_1-\alpha_2\r)\bigr\|^2,\ \alpha_1,\alpha_2\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\]
Under condition \textbf{C$_2''$} as it is easily seen one can take in \textbf{C$_2'$}
\[
c_0=c_0^*\l(\min\limits_{1\le i \le q}\,\underline{c}_i\r)^{-1},\ \ \ c_1=c_1^*\l(\max\limits_{1\le i \le q}\,\overline{c}_i\r)^{-1}.
\]
The next example demonstrates the fulfillment of the condition \textbf{C$_2'$} (compare with Ivanov and Orlovskyi~\cite{IvOr_LDoRPEiCTMwsGN}).
\begin{example}
Let
\[
g(t,\,\alpha)=\exp\l\{\l<\alpha,\,y(t)\r>\r\},
\]
with $\l<\alpha,\,y(t)\right>=\sum\limits_{i=1}^q\,\alpha_iy_i(t)$, regressors $y(t)=\Bigl(y_1(t),\,\ldots,\,y_q(t)\Bigr)'$, $t\ge0$, take values in a compact set $Y\subset\mathbb{R}^q$. Suppose
\[
J_T=\l(T^{-1}\int\limits_0^Ty_i(t)y_j(t)dt\r)_{i,j=1}^q\ \to\ J=\l(J_{ij}\r)_{i,j=1}^q,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,
\]
where $J$ is a positive definite matrix, and the set $\mathcal{A}$ in the model \eqref{c_n_reg_m} is bounded. Set
\[
M=\underset{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c,\,y\in Y}\max\,\exp\l\{\l<\alpha,\,y\r>\r\},\ L=\underset{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c,\, y\in Y}\min\,\exp\l\{\l<\alpha,\,y\r>\r\}.
\]
Then for any $\delta>0$ and $T>T_0$
\[
L^2\l(J_{ii}-\delta\r)< T^{-1} d_{iT}^2(\alpha)< M^2\l(J_{ii}+\delta\r),\ i=\overline{1,q},
\]
and condition \textbf{C$_2''$(i)} is fulfilled with matrix $s_T=T^{\frac12}\mathbb{I}_q$, $\mathbb{I}_q$ is identity matrix of order $q$, and $\underline{c}_i=L^2\l(J_{ii}-\delta\r)$, $\overline{c}_i=M^2\l(J_{ii}+\delta\r)$, $i=\overline{1,q}$.
Let us check the condition \textbf{C$_2''$(ii)}. We have
\[
e^{\l<\alpha_1,\,y(t)\r>}-e^{\l<\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>} =e^{\l<\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}\l(e^{\l<\alpha_1-\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}-1\r).
\]
As far as $\left(e^x-1\right)^2\ge x^2$, $x\ge0$, and $\left(e^x-1\right)^2\ge e^{2x}x^2$, $x<0$, then
\[
\l(e^{\l<\alpha_1-\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}-1\r)^2\ge\Delta\,\l<\alpha_1-\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>^2,\ \ \Delta=\min\l\{1,\ e^{2\l<\alpha_1-\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}\r\}.
\]
Thus
\[
e^{2\l<\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}\l(e^{\l<\alpha_1-\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}-1\r)^2\ge e^{2\l<\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}\Delta\,\l<\alpha_1-\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>^2\ge L^2\l<\alpha_1-\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>^2,
\]
and for any $\delta>0$ and $T>T_0$
\[
\Phi_T(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)\ge L_2\sum\limits_{i,j=1}^q\,J_{ij,T}\l(T^{\frac12}(\alpha_{i1}-\alpha_{i2})\r) \l(T^{\frac12}(\alpha_{j1}-\alpha_{j2})\r)\ge L^2\bigl(\lambda_{\min}(J)-\delta\bigr) \l\|T^{\frac12}(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)\r\|^2,
\]
where $\lambda_{\min}(J)$ is the least eigenvalue of the matrix $J$.
On the other hand,
\[
\l|e^{\l<\alpha_1,\,y(t)\r>}-e^{\l<\alpha_2,\,y(t)\r>}\r|=\l|\sum\limits_{i=1}^q\,y_i(t) e^{\l<y(t),\,\alpha_1+\eta(t)(\alpha_2-\alpha_1)\r>}(\alpha_{i1}-\alpha_{i2})\r|\le M\l|\sum\limits_{i=1}^q\,y_i(t) (\alpha_{i1}-\alpha_{i2})\r|,
\]
$\eta(t)\in(0,\,1)$, and
\[
\Phi_T(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2)\le M^2\int\limits_0^T\,\l(\sum\limits_{i=1}^q\,y_i(t) (\alpha_{i1}-\alpha_{i2})\r)^2dt \le M^2\bigl(\lambda_{\max}(J)+\delta\bigr) \l\|T^{\frac12}(\alpha_1-\alpha_2)\r\|^2,
\]
where $\lambda_{\max}(J)$ is the maximal eigenvalue of the matrix $J$. It means that condition \textbf{C$_2''$(ii)} is valid for matrix $s_T=T^{\frac12}\mathbb{I}_q$.
So the condition \textbf{C$_2'$} is valid as well and in \eqref{dbnd4Phi_T_w_d_app} one can choose for $T>T_0$ some numbers
\[
c_0>\frac{M^2\lambda_{\max}(J)}{L^2\min\limits_{1\le i\le q}\,J_{ii}},\ \ \ c_1<\frac{L^2\lambda_{\min}(J)}{M^2\max\limits_{1\le i\le q}\,J_{ii}}.
\]
\end{example}
Inequalities \eqref{dbnd4Phi_T_w_d_app} can be rewritten in the equivalent form
\begin{equation}
c_1\bigl\|u-v\bigr\|^2\ \le\ T^{-1}\Psi_T(u,\,v)\ \le\ c_0\bigl\|u-v\bigr\|^2,\ u,v\in U_T(\alpha),\ \alpha\in\mathcal{A}.
\label{dbnd4Psi_T_app}
\end{equation}
From the right hand side of \eqref{dbnd4Psi_T_app} it follows \eqref{sup_T^-1Psi_T<=eps}. Similarly, from the left hand side of \eqref{dbnd4Psi_T_app} taking $\nu=0$ we obtain \eqref{inf_T^-1Psi_T>=b} for any $R_0>0$ and it is possible to choose $R_0>0$ satisfying \eqref{inf_T^-1Psi_T>=4B0+a}.
In our example \textbf{A$_1$} due to inequalities \eqref{dbnd4s_iT&d_iT_app} with $s_{iT}=T^{\frac12}$, $i=\overline{1,q}$, the set $U_T(\alpha)$ is bounded uniformly in $T$ and it is not necessary to use condition \eqref{inf_T^-1Psi_T>=4B0+a}. However in Malinvaud theorem we can not ignore the condition \eqref{inf_T^-1Psi_T>=4B0+a} of parameters distinguishability in the cases when the sets $U_T(\alpha)$ expands to infinity as $T\to\infty$ or the set $\mathcal{A}$ is unbounded.
It goes without saying not all the interesting classes of nonlinear regression functions satisfy consistency conditions of Malinvaud or, say, Jennrich~\cite{Jen_APoNLSE} types. The important example of such a class is given by the trigonometric regression functions.
\begin{example}\label{exmp_trig_reg_fn}
Let
\begin{equation}
g(t,\,\alpha)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^N\,\l(A_i\cos\varphi_it+B_i\sin\varphi_it\r),
\label{trig_reg_fn_app}
\end{equation}
$\alpha=\l(\alpha_1,\,\alpha_2,\,\alpha_3,\,\ldots,\,\alpha_{3N-2},\,\alpha_{3N-1},\,\alpha_{3N}\r) =\l(A_1,\,B_1,\,\varphi_1,\,\ldots,\,A_N,\,B_N,\,\varphi_N\r)$, $0<\underline{\varphi}<\varphi_1<\ldots<\varphi_N<\overline{\varphi}<\infty$.
Under some conditions on angular frequencies $\varphi=\l(\varphi_1,\,\ldots,\,\varphi_N\r)$ distinguishability\ \ (see Walker~\cite{Wal_oEoHCiTSwSDR}, Ivanov~\cite{Iv_aSotPoDHP}, Ivanov et al~\cite{IvLeRuMeZhu_EoHCiRwCDE}) it is possible to prove that at least
\begin{equation}
T^{-1}\Phi_T(\widehat{\alpha}_T,\,\alpha_0)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,
\label{cnv_T^-1Phi_T20_ex-app}
\end{equation}
$\widehat{\alpha}_T=\l(A_{1T},\,B_{1T},\,\varphi_{1T},\,\ldots,\,A_{NT},\,B_{NT},\,\varphi_{NT}\r)$, $\alpha_0=\l(A_1^0,\,B_1^0,\,\varphi_1^0,\,\ldots,\,A_N^0,\,B_N^0,\,\varphi_N^0\r)$, $\l(C_k^0\r)^2=\l(A_k^0\r)^2+\l(B_k^0\r)^2>0$, $k=\overline{1,N}$.
The convergence in \eqref{cnv_T^-1Phi_T20_ex-app} can be a.s. In turn, from \eqref{cnv_T^-1Phi_T20_ex-app} it follows (see cited papers)
\begin{equation}
A_{iT}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ A_i^0,\ \ B_{iT}\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ B_i^0,\ \ T\l(\varphi_{iT}-\varphi_i^0\r)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\label{Pcons4A_B_phi_ex-app}
\end{equation}
Note that
\begin{equation}
T^{-1}d^2_{3k-2,T}(\alpha_0),\ T^{-1}d^2_{3k-1,T}(\alpha_0)\ \to\ \frac12,\ T^{-3}d^2_{3k,T}(\alpha_0)\ \to\ \frac16\l(\l(A_k^0\r)^2+\l(B_k^0\r)^2\r),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,
\label{cnv4T^-1d_T_ex-app}
\end{equation}
$k=\overline{1,N}$.
From \eqref{Pcons4A_B_phi_ex-app} and \eqref{cnv4T^-1d_T_ex-app} we obtain the relation of condition \textbf{C$_1$} for trigonometric regression:
\[
T^{-\frac12}d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
To check the fulfillment of the condition \textbf{C$_2$} for regression function \eqref{trig_reg_fn_app} we get
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\l|A_i\cos\varphi_it+B_i\sin\varphi_it-A_i^0\cos\varphi_it-B_i^0\sin\varphi_it\r|\le
\l|A_i-A_i^0\r|+\l|B_i-B_i^0\r|+\l(|A_i^0|+|B_i^0|\r)t\l|\varphi_i-\varphi_i^0\r|,
\end{aligned}
\label{inq4dif_trig_comp_ex-app}
\end{equation}
$k=\overline{1,N}$, and therefore
\[
\Phi_T(\widehat{\alpha}_T,\,\alpha_0)\le3N\sum\limits_{i=1}^N\, \l(T\l(A_i-A_i^0\r)^2+T\l(B_i-B_i^0\r)^2+\frac13\l(|A_i^0|+|B_i^0|\r)^2T^3\l(\varphi_i-\varphi_i^0\r)^2\r).
\]
Using again the relations \eqref{cnv4T^-1d_T_ex-app} we arrive at the inequality of the condition \textbf{C$_2$}.
\begin{equation}
\Phi_T(\alpha,\,\alpha_0)\ \le\ c_0\bigl\|d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\alpha-\alpha_0\r)\bigr\|^2,\ \alpha\in\mathcal{A}^c.
\label{inq4Phi_T_l_C2_ex-app}
\end{equation}
with constant $c_0$ depending on $A_i^0$, $B_i^0$, $i=\overline{1,N}$.
\end{example}
The next lemma is the main part of the convergence \eqref{cnv_T^-1Phi_T20_ex-app} proof.
\begin{lemma}
Under condition \textbf{A$_1$}
\begin{equation}
\xi(T)=\sup\limits_{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\,\l|T^{-1}\int\limits_0^T\,e^{-i\lambda t}\varepsilon(t)dt\r|\ \overset{\Prob}\longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\label{cnv4supT^-1int_e_eps_app}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since
\[
\l|\int\limits_0^T\,e^{-i\lambda t}\varepsilon(t)dt\r|^2=\int\limits_{-T}^T\,e^{-i\lambda u} \int\limits_0^{T-|u|}\,\varepsilon(t+|u|)\varepsilon(t)dtdu=2\int\limits_0^T\,\cos{\lambda u} \int\limits_0^{T-u}\,\varepsilon(t+u)\varepsilon(t)dtdu,
\]
then
\[
E\xi^2(T)\le 2T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,\ExpV\l|\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,\varepsilon(t+u)\varepsilon(t)dt\r|du \le 2T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,K^{\frac12}(u)du.
\]
By formula \eqref{4ordr_mmnt_fn}
\[
\begin{aligned}
K(u)=&\int\limits_0^{T-u}\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,\ExpV\varepsilon(t+u)\varepsilon(s+u)\varepsilon(t)\varepsilon(s)dtds =\int\limits_0^{T-u}\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,c_4(t+u,\,s+u,\,t,\,s)dtds+\\
&+(T-u)^2B^2(u)+\int\limits_0^{T-u}\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,B^2(t-s)dtds +\int\limits_0^{T-u}\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,B(t-s+u)B(t-s-u)dtds\le\\
&\le K_1(u)+K_2(u)+K_3(u)+|K_4(u)|,
\end{aligned}
\]
and
\begin{equation}
E\xi^2(T)\le 2T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,\l(K_1^{\frac12}(u)+K_2^{\frac12}(u)+K_3^{\frac12}(u)+\l|K_4(u)\r|^{\frac12}\r)du.
\label{inq4Exi^2T_app}
\end{equation}
By formula \eqref{rep_c_r_by_hat-a}
\[
\begin{aligned}
K_1(u)=&d_4\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l(\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,\hat{a}(t+u-r)\hat{a}(t-r)\r)^2dr
\le d_4\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l(\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,\hat{a}^2(t+u-r)dt \int\limits_0^{T-u}\,\hat{a}^2(t-r)dt\r)dr\le\\
&\le d_4\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_2^2\int\limits_0^{T-u}\,dt\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\hat{a}^2(t+u-r)dr \le d_4\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_2^4(T-u),
\end{aligned}
\]
that is
\begin{equation}
T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,K_1^{\frac12}(u)du \le d_4^{\frac12}\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_2^2 T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,\sqrt{T-u}\,du=\frac23 d_4^{\frac12}\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_2^2T^{-\frac12}.
\label{inq4int_K_1^1/2_app}
\end{equation}
Obviously,
\begin{equation}
T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,K_2^{\frac12}(u)du =T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,(T-u)|B(u)|du \le3^{-\frac12}\|B\|_2T^{-\frac12},
\label{inq4int_K_2^1/2_app}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,K_3^{\frac12}(u)du \le\frac23\|B\|_2T^{-\frac12},
\label{inq4int_K_3^1/2_app}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,K_4^{\frac12}(u)du =T^{-2}\int\limits_0^T\,\l(\frac12\int\limits_0^{T-u}\ \int\limits_0^{T-u}\,\l(B^2(t-s+u)+B^2(t-s-u)\r)dtds\r)^{\frac12}du\le\frac23\|B\|_2T^{-\frac12}.
\label{inq4int_K_4^1/2_app}
\end{equation}
From inequalities \eqref{inq4Exi^2T_app} - \eqref{inq4int_K_4^1/2_app} it follows
\[
\ExpV\xi^2(T)=O\l(T^{-\frac12}\r),\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\]
\end{proof}
The result of the lemma can be strengthened to a.s. convergence in \eqref{cnv4supT^-1int_e_eps_app}. Note also that in the proof we did not use the condition $\hat{a}\in L_1(\mathbb{R})$.
\section{LSE asymptotic normality}\label{app_LSE_AsymNorm}
$\indent$Cumbersome sets of conditions on the behavior of the nonlinear regression function are used in the proofs of the LSE asymptotic normality of the model parameter can be found, for example, in~\cite{IvLeo_SAoRF_En,Iv_AToNR,IvLeRuMeZhu_EoHCiRwCDE}, and it does not make sense to write here all of them. We will comment only on the conditions associated with the proof of the CLT for one weighted integral of the linear process $\varepsilon$ in the observation model \eqref{c_n_reg_m}.
Consider the family of the matrix-valued measures $\mu _T (dx;\,\alpha)=\l(\mu_T^{jl}(dx;\,\alpha)\r)_{j,l=1}^q$, $T>T_0$, $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$, with densities
\begin{equation}
\mu_T^{jl}(x;\,\alpha)=g_T^j(x,\,\alpha)\overline{g_T^l(x,\,\alpha)} \l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\l|g_T^j(x,\,\alpha)\r|^2dx \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\l|g_T^l(x,\,\alpha)\r|^2dx\r)^{-\frac12},\ x\in\mathbb{R},
\label{pre_SpMs4ANoLSE_app}
\end{equation}
where
\[
g_T^j(x,\,\theta)=\int\limits_0^T\;e^{ixt}g_j(t,\,\theta)dt,\ j=\overline{1,q}.
\]
\textbf{1)} Suppose that the weak convergence $\mu_T\ \Rightarrow\ \mu$ as $T\to\infty$ holds, where $\mu_T$ is defined by \eqref{pre_SpMs4ANoLSE_app} and $\mu$ is a positive definite matrix measure.
This condition means that the element $\mu^{jl}$ of the matrix-valued measure $\mu$ are complex measures of bounded variation, and the matrix $\mu(A)$ is non-negative definite for any set $A\in\mathcal{Z}$, with $\mathcal{Z}$ denoting the $\sigma$-algebra of Lebesgue measurable subsets of $\mathbb{R}$, and $\mu(\mathbb{R})$ is positive definite matrix, (see, for example, Ibragimov and Rozanov~\cite{IbrRoz_GRP}).
The following definition can be found in Grenander~\cite{Gren_OEoRCicoAD}, Grenander and Rosenblatt~\cite{GrenRos_SAoSTS}, Ibragimov and Rozanov~\cite{IbrRoz_GRP}, Ivanov and Leonenko~\cite{IvLeo_SAoRF_En}.
\begin{definition}
The positive-definite matrix-valued measure $\mu(dx;\,\alpha)=\l(\mu^{jl}(x;\,\alpha)\r)_{j,l=1}^q$ is said to be the spectral measure of regression function $g(t,\,\alpha)$.
\end{definition}
Practically the components $\mu^{jl}(x;\,\alpha)$ are determined from the relations
\begin{equation}
R_{jl}(h;\,\alpha)=\lim\limits_{T\to\infty}\,d_{jT}^{-1}(\alpha)d_{lT}^{-1}(\alpha) \int\limits_0^T\,g_j(t+h,\,\alpha)g_l(t,\,\alpha)dx =\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}e^{i\lambda h}\mu^{jl}(d\lambda;\,\alpha),\ j,l=\overline{1,q},
\label{def_R_jl_app}
\end{equation}
where it is supposed that the matrix function $\bigl(R_{jl}(h;\,\alpha)\bigr)$ is continuous at $h=0$.
Continuing Example \ref{exmp_trig_reg_fn} with the trigonometric regression function \eqref{trig_reg_fn_app} from Appendix \ref{app_LSE_cons}, we can state using \eqref{def_R_jl_app} that the function $g(t,\,\alpha)$ has a block-diagonal spectral measure $\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha)$ (see e.g., Ivanov et al~\cite{IvLeRuMeZhu_EoHCiRwCDE}) with blocks
\begin{equation}
\l(\begin{array}{ccc}
\varkappa_k & i\rho_k & \overline{\beta}_k \\
-i\rho_k & \varkappa_k & \overline{\gamma}_k \\
\beta_k & \gamma_k & \varkappa_k
\end{array}\r)
,\ k=\overline{1,N},
\label{blck_mtrx4spec_msr_ex-app}
\end{equation}
where
\[
\beta_k=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2C_k}\bigl(B_k\varkappa_k+iA_k\rho_k\bigr),\ \ \ \gamma_k=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2C_k}\bigl(-A_k\varkappa_k+iB_k\rho_k\bigr),\ \ \ C_k=\sqrt{A_k^2+B_k^2},\ \ k=\overline{1,N}.
\]
In \eqref{blck_mtrx4spec_msr_ex-app} the measure $\varkappa_k=\varkappa_k(d\lambda)$ and the signed measure $\rho_k=\rho_k(d\lambda)$ are concentrated at the points $\pm\varphi_k$, and $\varkappa_k\bigl(\l\{\pm\varphi_k\r\}\bigr)=\frac12$, $\rho_k\bigl(\l\{\pm\varphi_k\r\}\bigr)=\pm\frac12$.
Returning to the general case let the parameter $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$ of regression function $g(t,\,\alpha)$ be fixed. We will use the notation $d_{iT}^{-1}(\alpha)g_i(t,\,\alpha)=b_{iT}(t,\,\alpha)$ and condition
\textbf{2)} $\sup\limits_{t\in[0,\,T]}\,\l|b_{iT}(t,\,\alpha)\r|\le c_iT^{-\frac12}$, $i=\overline{1,q}$.
The next CLT is an important part of the proof of LSE $\widehat{\alpha}_T$ asymptotic normality in the model \eqref{c_n_reg_m} and fully uses condition \textbf{A$_1$}.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm_AN4fncnl_appB}
Under conditions \textbf{A$_1$, 1)} and \textbf{2)} the vector
\begin{equation}
\zeta_T=d_T^{-1}(\alpha)\int\limits_0^T\,\varepsilon(t)\nabla g(t,\,\alpha)dt =\l(\int\limits_0^T\,\varepsilon(t)b_{iT}(t,\,\alpha)dt\r)_{i=1}^q
\label{rv4CLT_asym_norm_app}
\end{equation}
is asymptotically, as $T\to\infty$, normal $N(0,\Sigma)$,
\[
\Sigma=2\pi\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda)\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha) =d_2\int\limits_{-\infty}^\infty\,|a(\lambda)|^2\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha).
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{prfapthm}
For any $z=\l(z_1,\,\ldots,\,z_q\r)\in\mathbb{R}^q$ set
\[
\eta_T=\l<\zeta_T,\,z\r>=\int\limits_0^T\,\varepsilon(t)S_T(t)dt,\ \ S_T(t)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^q\,b_{iT}(t,\,\alpha)z_i.
\]
By condition \textbf{1)}
\[
\sigma^2(z)=\lim\limits_{T\to\infty}\,\ExpV\eta_T^2 =2\pi\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda)\mu_z(d\lambda;\,\alpha),
\]
$\mu_z(d\lambda;\,\alpha)=\sum\limits_{i,j=1}^q\,\mu^{ij}(d\lambda;\,\alpha)z_iz_j$.
To prove the theorem it is sufficient to show for any $z\in\mathbb{R}$ and $\nu\ge1$, that
\begin{equation}
\lim\limits_{T\to\infty}\,\ExpV\eta_T^n=\ExpV\eta^n
=\l\{\begin{array}{ll}
(n-1)!!\sigma^n(z), & n=2\nu, \\
0 , & n=2\nu+1.\end{array}\r.
\label{lim4Eeta_T^n_app}
\end{equation}
Use the Leonov-Shiryaev formula (see, e.g., Ivanov and Leonenko~\cite{IvLeo_SAoRF_En}). Let
\[
I=\{1,\,2,\,\ldots,\,n\},\ I_p=\l\{i_1,\,\ldots,\,i_{l_p}\r\}\subset I,\ c(I_p)=c_{l_p}\l(t_{i_1},\,\ldots,\,t_{i_{l_p}}\r).
\]
Then
\begin{equation}
m(I)=m_n\l(t_1,\,\ldots,\,t_n\r)=\sum\limits_{A_r}\,\prod\limits_{p=1}^r\,c(I_p),
\label{m_I_repr_app}
\end{equation}
where $\sum\limits_{A_r}$ denotes summation over all unordered partitions $A_r=\l\{\bigcup\limits_{p=1}^r\,I_p\r\}$ of the set $I$ into sets $I_1,\,\ldots,\,I_r$ such that $I=\bigcup\limits_{p=1}^r\,I_p$, $I_i\cap I_j=\emptyset$, $i\ne j$.
Since
\begin{equation}
\ExpV\eta_T^n=\int\limits_{[0,\,T]^n}\,m_n(t_1,\,\ldots,\,t_n)\prod\limits_{k=1}^n\,R_T(t_k)dt_1\ldots dt_n,
\label{Eeta_T^n_repr_app}
\end{equation}
then the application of formula \eqref{m_I_repr_app} to \eqref{Eeta_T^n_repr_app} shows that to obtain \eqref{lim4Eeta_T^n_app} it is sufficient to prove
\begin{equation}
I(l)=\int\limits_{[0,\,T]^l}\,c_l(t_1,\,\ldots,\,t_l)\prod\limits_{k=1}^l\,R_T(t_k)dt_1\ldots dt_l\ \ \longrightarrow\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty.
\label{cnv_I_l_2_0_app}
\end{equation}
for all $i=\overline{3,n}$. Taking into account the equality $\ExpV\varepsilon(t)=0$, from \eqref{cnv_I_l_2_0_app} will follow that in \eqref{lim4Eeta_T^n_app} all the odd moments $\ExpV\eta^{2\nu+1}=0$. On the other hand, for even moments $\ExpV\eta^{2\nu}$ we shall find that in \eqref{Eeta_T^n_repr_app} thanks to \eqref{m_I_repr_app} only those terms correspond to the partitions of the set $I=\{1,\,2,\,\ldots,\,2\nu\}$ into pairs of indices will remain nonzero, i.e. "Gaussian part" : all $l_p=2$. In \eqref{m_I_repr_app} it will be $(2\nu-1)!!$ of such terms and each of them will be equal to $\sigma^{2\nu}(z)$.
Let us prove \eqref{cnv_I_l_2_0_app}. We note that condition \textbf{2)} implies
\[
\sup\limits_{t\in[0,\,T]}\,\l|R_T(t)\r|\le\|c\|\,\|z\|\,T^{-\frac12},\ \ c=\l(c_1,\,\ldots,\,c_q\r),\ \ z=\l(z_1,\,\ldots,\,z_q\r).
\]
Then using formula \eqref{rep_c_r_by_hat-a} we have
\[
\begin{aligned}
|I(l)|=&\l|\,\int\limits_{[0,\,T]^l}\,c_l(t_1-t_l,\,\ldots,\,t_{l-1}-t_l,\,0)\prod\limits_{k=1}^l\,R_T(t_k)dt_1\ldots dt_l\r|\le\\
\le&|d_l|\,\l|\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,ds\int\limits_{[0,\,T]^l}\, \l(\prod\limits_{i=1}^{l-1}\,\hat{a}\l(t_i-t_l-s\r)\r)\hat{a}(-s)\prod\limits_{k=1}^l\,R_T(t_k)dt_1\ldots dt_l\r|\le\\
\le&|d_l|\,\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\l|\hat{a}(-s)\r|\int\limits_0^T\, \l(\int\limits_0^T\,\l|\hat{a}\l(t-t_l-s\r)R_T(t)\r|dt\r)^{l-1} \l|R_T(t_l)\r|dt_lds\le\\
\le&|d_l|\,\l(\|c\|^{l-1}\|z\|^{l-1}\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1^lT^{-\frac{l-1}2}\r)\l(\|c\|\,\|z\|\,T^{\frac12}\r)=
\end{aligned}
\]
\begin{equation}
=|d_l|\,\bigl(\|c\|\,\|z\|\,\l\|\hat{a}\r\|_1\bigr)^lT^{-\l(\frac l2-1\r)}\ \to\ 0,\ \ \text{as}\ \ T\to\infty,\ \ l\ge3.
\label{prf_cnv4I_l_2_0_app}
\end{equation}
\end{prfapthm}
To obtain \eqref{prf_cnv4I_l_2_0_app} we have used $\hat{a}\in L_1(\mathbb{R})$ only.
Using the theorem, just as in the works cited above (for definiteness, we turn our attention to Ivanov et al~\cite{IvLeRuMeZhu_EoHCiRwCDE}), it can be proved that, if a number of additional conditions on the regression function are satisfied, the normalized LSE $d_T(\alpha_0)\l(\widehat{\alpha}_T-\alpha_0\r)$ is asymptotically normal $N\l(0,\,\Sigma_{_{LSE}}\r)$, with
\[
\begin{aligned}
\Sigma_{_{LSE}}=&2\pi\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha_0)\r)^{-1} \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,f(\lambda)\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha_0)\, \l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha_0)\r)^{-1}=\\
&d_2\l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha_0)\r)^{-1} \int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,|a(\lambda)|^2\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha_0)\, \l(\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,\mu(d\lambda;\,\alpha_0)\r)^{-1}.
\end{aligned}
\]
Note that, firstly, our conditions \textbf{N$_3$, 1), 2)} are included in the conditions for the LSE asymptotic normality of Ivanov et al~\cite{IvLeRuMeZhu_EoHCiRwCDE}, and, secondly, the trigonometric regression function \eqref{trig_reg_fn_app} satisfies the conditions of Ivanov et al~\cite{IvLeRuMeZhu_EoHCiRwCDE}. Moreover, using \eqref{blck_mtrx4spec_msr_ex-app} and \eqref{cnv4T^-1d_T_ex-app} we conclude that for the trigonometric model the normalized LSE
\[
\begin{aligned}
&\Bigl(T^{\frac12}\l(A_{1T}-A_1^0\r),\,T^{\frac12}\l(B_{1T}-B_1^0\r),\,T^{\frac32}\l(\varphi_{1T}-\varphi_1^0\r), \,\ldots,\Bigr.\\
&\hspace*{39mm} \Bigl.T^{\frac12}\l(A_{NT}-A_N^0\r),\,T^{\frac12}\l(B_{NT}-B_N^0\r),\, T^{\frac32}\l(\varphi_{NT}-\varphi_N^0\r) \Bigr)
\end{aligned}
\]
is asymptotically normal $N\l(0,\,\Sigma_{_{TRIG}}\r)$, where $\Sigma_{_{TRIG}}$ is a block diagonal matrix with blocks
\[
\dfrac{4\pi f\l(\varphi_k^0\r)}{\l(C_k^0\r)^2}
\l(\begin{array}[pos]{ccc}
\l(A_k^0\r)^2+4\l(B_k^0\r)^2 & -3A_k^0B_k^0 & -6B_k^0 \\
-3A_k^0B_k^0 & \l(B_k^0\r)^2+4\l(A_k^0\r)^2 & 6A_k^0 \\
-6B_k^0 & 6A_k^0 & 12 \end{array}\r),\ k=\overline{1,N}.
\]
The matrix $\Sigma_{_{TRIG}}$ is positive definite, if $f\l(\varphi_k^0\r)>0$, $k=\overline{1,N}$. Hovewer it follows from our condition \textbf{A$_2$(iii)}.
Note also that condition \textbf{N$_2$} is satisfied, for example, for the trigonometric regression function \eqref{trig_reg_fn_app}. Indeed, in this case
\[
g'(t,\,\alpha)=\sum\limits_{i=1}^N\,\l(-\varphi_iA_i\sin\varphi_it+\varphi_iB_i\cos\varphi_it\r),
\]
and similarly to \eqref{inq4dif_trig_comp_ex-app}
\[
\begin{aligned}
&\l|-\varphi_iA_i\sin\varphi_it+\varphi_iB_i\cos\varphi_it+\varphi_i^0A_i^0\sin\varphi_i^0t- \varphi_i^0B_i^0\cos\varphi_i^0t\r|\le\\
&\hspace*{21mm}\le\overline{\varphi}\bigl(\l|A_i-A_i^0\r|+\l|B_i-B_i^0\r|\bigr) +\l(|A_i^0|+|B_i^0|\r)\l(1+\overline{\varphi}t\r)\l|\varphi_i-\varphi_i^0\r|,\ i=\overline{1,N},
\end{aligned}
\]
which leads to the inequality of condition \textbf{N$_2$} similar to \eqref{inq4Phi_T_l_C2_ex-app}, but with a different constant $c_0'$.
\section{Levitan polynomials}\label{app_Levitan_polnml}
$\indent$Some necessary facts of approximation theory adapted to needs of this article are represented in this Appendix. All the definitions and results are taken from the book \cite{Ahi_LoAT}.
In complex analysis entire function of exponential type is said to be such a function $F(z)$ that for any complex $z$ the inequality
\begin{equation}
F(z)\le A e^{B|z|}
\label{ent_fn_o_exp_type}
\end{equation}
holds true, where the numbers $A$ and $B$ do not depend on $z$. Infinum $\sigma$ of the constant $B$ values for which inequality \eqref{ent_fn_o_exp_type} takes place is called the exponential type of function $F(z)$ and can be determined by formula
\[
\sigma=\underset{|z|\to\infty}{\lim\sup}\,\dfrac{\ln|F(z)|}{|z|}.
\]
Denote by $\mathcal{B}_\sigma$ the totality of all the entire functions $F(z)$ of exponential type $\le\sigma$ with property $\underset{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\sup\,|F(\lambda)|<\infty$.
Let $\mathcal{C}$ be linear normed space of bounded continuous functions $\varphi(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, with norm $\|\varphi\|=\underset{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\sup\,|\varphi(z)|<\infty$. Consider further some set of functions $\mathfrak{M}\subset \mathcal{C}$. For the function of interest $\varphi\in\mathfrak{M}$ suppose that
\begin{equation}
\underset{\eta\to1}\lim\,\underset{\lambda\in\mathbb{R}}\sup\,|\varphi(\eta\lambda)-\varphi(\lambda)|=0,
\label{limsup_dif_phis_2_0}
\end{equation}
and write
\[
\mathcal{A}_\sigma[\varphi]=\underset{F\in \mathcal{B}_\sigma}\inf\,\|\varphi-F\|.
\]
Let $h(\lambda)$, $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, be uniformly continuous function. Denote by
\[
\omega(\delta)=\omega(\delta;\,h)=\underset{|\lambda_1-\lambda_2|\le\delta}\sup\,\l|h(\lambda_1)-h(\lambda_2)\r|,\ \lambda_1,\lambda_2\in\mathbb{R},\ \delta>0,
\]
the modulus of continuity of the function $h$. Obviously $\omega(\delta),\ \delta>0$, is nondecreasing continuous function tending to zero, as $\delta\to0$.
Let the set $\mathfrak{M}$ introduced above consists of differentiable functions such that for $\varphi\in\mathfrak{M}$ the derivatives $\varphi'(\lambda)=h(\lambda),\ \lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, are uniformly continuous on $\mathbb{R}$. Then for function $\varphi$ satisfying the property \eqref{limsup_dif_phis_2_0} there exists a function $F_\sigma\subset\mathcal{B}_\sigma$ such that (see \cite{Ahi_LoAT}, p. 252)
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{A}_\sigma[\varphi]=\|\varphi-F_\sigma\|\le\frac3\sigma\omega\l(\frac1\sigma;\,h\r).
\label{A_sigma-phi_from_M}
\end{equation}
The inequality \eqref{A_sigma-phi_from_M} means that for the described function $\varphi$ and any $\delta>0$ there exists a number $\sigma=\sigma(\delta)$ and a function $F_\sigma\in\mathcal{B}_\sigma$ such that
\[
\|\varphi-F_\sigma\|<\delta.
\]
As it has been proved in the 40s of the 20th century by B.M.~Levitan for any function $F\in\mathcal{B}_\sigma$ it is possible to build a sequence of trigonometric sums $T_n(F;\,z),\ n\ge1$, bounded on $\mathbb{R}$ by the same constant as the function $F$, that converges to $F(z)$ uniformly in any bounded part of the complex plane. In particular, for any compact set $K\subset\mathbb{R}$
\[
\underset{n\to\infty}\lim\,\underset{\lambda\in K}\sup\,\l|F(\lambda)-T_n(F;\,\lambda)\r|=0.
\]
Put $s=\frac{\sigma}n$, $n\in\mathbb{N}$; $c_j^{(n)}=sE_s(js)$, $j\in\overline{-n,n}$;
\[
E_s(x)=(2\pi)^{-1}\int\limits_{\mathbb{R}}\,e^{-\mathrm{i}xu}\l(\frac{2\sin\frac{su}2}{su}\r)^2F(u)du,\ x\in\mathbb{R}.
\]
Then the sequence of the Levitan polynomials that corresponds to $F$ can be written as
\[
T_n(F;z)=\sum\limits_{j=-n}^n\,c_j^{(n)}e^{\mathrm{i}jsz}.
\]
\end{appendices}
\renewcommand{\refname}{References}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro
Our work aims to address a general, fundamental question: ``How can we design
particles such that they assemble into a given ordered structure?'' In
particular our focus is on the formation of a target complex crystal. Such a
question is, of course, of great importance to materials
design.\cite{Whitesides2002a,Talapin2010,Thorkelsson2015} As synthesis methods
to produce an increasing variety of complex particles, both in the nanoparticle
and colloidal domains, continue to
progress,\cite{Glotzer2007,Yi2013,Manoharan2015,Boles2016,Ravaine2017} it is
important to understand what properties such particles should possess in order
to form a specific structure, and hence have particular material properties.
For example, an oft-mentioned target is colloidal particles that can form a
diamond lattice, because of the potential favourable photonic properties.\cite{Maldovan2004}
Although the anisotropic shape of particles can be a powerful way of
controlling the structures into which particles assemble, and for which there
has been much recent progress,\cite{Damasceno2012,Geng2017} here we restrict
ourselves to particles that are spherical in shape. For such particles, there
are two main approaches to particle design that have been explored. Firstly,
there is the use of isotropic, and typically long-ranged, potentials with a
complex radial dependence (e.g.\ possessing features such as multiple minima
and repulsive shoulders). As the relationship between the features of these
potentials and the structures they adopt is often not obvious, one approach is
to map out the structures formed as a function of the parameter space of the
potential in search of interesting ordering
behaviour.\cite{Engel2007,Dotera2014,Engel2015} Another approach is to use
inverse design techniques to evolve a potential in order to stabilize a given
target
structure.\cite{Torquato2009b,Marcotte2013,Jain2013,Lindquist2017,Adorf2018}
Although both approaches have revealed a rich range of structural behaviour,
how to engineer particles to have such complex radial forms is not
straightforward.
Secondly, there is the use of particles with directional attractive
interactions. Typically, these are ``patchy'' particles where short-ranged
attractive interactions only occur when the patches on adjacent particles are
aligned.\cite{Bianchi2011} One advantage is that the geometry of the patches
has a clear and direct relationship to the preferred local coordination shell
around a particle. However, how these local environments join together to
determine the overall global structure may be less obvious. For example, there
are many potential structures that have local tetrahedral coordination.
Although exploring state points and different potential parameters (e.g.\ patch
width) have located conditions under which tetrahedral patch particles
generally form (cubic or hexagonal) diamond\cite{Romano2011} and even clathrate
structures,\cite{Noya19} competing structures are sometimes observed, and the
situation is somewhat unsatisfactory from a design point of view. One approach
around this problem is to increase the number of particles and patch types in a
way that is only compatible with the target structure, as has recently been
been done for cubic and hexagonal diamond, albeit with assembly only being
succesful when seeded or grown from a template.\cite{Patra18}
Another potential solution is to introduce a torsional component to the patchy
interactions, as this then allows the relative orientations of the two
particles to be fully determined, hence providing control of the
second-neighbour shell. For example, this approach has been exploited to create
tetrahedral patchy particles that readily form a cubic diamond
crystal.\cite{Zhang2005} Here, we further explore how the patchy particles with
torsionally-specific interactions can be used to form complex crystal
structures. In particular, our aim is to come up with a general design scheme
that should work for any target crystal structure, however complex. Previous
work on patchy particles and crystallization has mainly focussed on particles
without torsions. A significant fraction of that work has been on 2D
crystals,\cite{Doye2007,Doppelbauer2010,Antlanger2011,VanderLinden2012,Reinhardt2013,Whitelam2016,Chen18}
and those studies focussing on 3D crystals have mainly been with one-component
systems.\cite{Noya2007,Romano2010,Noya2010,Romano2011,Saika-Voivod2011,Dorsaz2012,Romano2012a}
By contrast, most work using torsionally-specific patchy particles has been on
the assembly of finite structures (analogous to protein
complexes),\cite{Wilber2009b,Villar2009} an exception being the study on
diamond mentioned above.\cite{Zhang2005}
Of course, the potential down-side of introducing torsional interactions is
that this adds an extra level of complexity when trying to
experimentally realize such particles. Perhaps the most directly analogous
experimental examples
have been spherical colloidal particles that have DNA origami belts wrapped
around them that have complementary patches.\cite{BenZion2017a} Although
globular proteins are of course not perfectly spherical, protein-protein
interactions mediated by complementary interacting patches of surface amino
acids are typically torsionally specific. Such control allows proteins to
assemble into well-defined ordered structures. Most frequently these are
finite-sized protein complexes,\cite{Levy06d} perhaps the most iconic being icosahedral virus
capsids, but there are some examples of proteins that are designed to form 2D
and 3D crystals {\it in vivo}.\cite{Doye06b,Coulibaly07,Pum13,GarciaSeisdedos18} Furthermore,
although proteins have traditionally been hard to programme because of the
difficulty of predicting structure from sequence, great strides to overcome
this hurdle have been recently made, including the {\it de novo} design of
protein complexes and arrays.\cite{Huang16,Yeates17,Chen19}
DNA nanotechnology perhaps provides the most promising avenue to realize
designable analogues of our model particles. Multi-arm DNA tiles have been
shown to form a wide range of polyhedra\cite{He2008,Zhang2008a,Zhang12c} and 2D
arrays\cite{Yan2003,He2005,He2006,Zhang2008a,Zhang2013,Zhang2016,Liu2019} that
bear striking similarities (e.g.\ equivalent networks of interactions) to those
formed by patchy particles.\cite{Doye2007,Wilber2009b,Reinhardt2016} Each tile
arm is made of two helices with the arms interacting via the hybridization of
single-stranded overhangs. Although the nature of the excluded volume is very
different from our model patchy particles, the assembly behaviour at
low-density in both cases is dominated by the directional attractions. A more
significant difference is the flexibility of the tiles with rigidification
occurring as a result of assembly into the target structure.\cite{Schreck16} At
a larger scale, three-arm DNA origami (where the angles between the arms are
constrained by bracing cross-struts) have been used to form a variety of
polyhedra.\cite{Iinuma14} Torsionally-specific assembly of DNA origami into
larger ordered structures can also be achieved through stacking interactions
between shape complementary surface features,\cite{Gerling15} and has been
utilized to form crystal lattices\cite{Zhang18} and large gigadalton
polyhedra.\cite{Wagenbauer17b}
\section{Methods}\label{sec:methods}
\subsection{Interaction potential}\label{sec:potential}
The patchy-particle model we use derives from, but generalises, that used in Ref.~\onlinecite{Wilber2009b}.
The model particles interact with an isotropic repulsion, but their attraction depends on the relative orientation of the particles. The single-site, pairwise interaction potential between particles $i$ and $j$, $V_{ij}$, is given by
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
V_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\mathbf{\Omega}_i,\mathbf{\Omega}_j) = \begin{cases}
V_{\mathrm{LJ}}^\prime(r_{ij}) & : r_{ij} < \sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}^{\prime} \\
V_{\mathrm{LJ}}^\prime(r_{ij}) \underset{{\mathrm{patch~pairs~}\alpha,\beta}}{\max} \left[ \varepsilon_{\alpha\beta}V_{\mathrm{ang}}(\mathbf{\hat{r}}_{ij},\mathbf{\Omega}_i,\mathbf{\Omega}_j)V_{\mathrm{tor}}(\mathbf{\hat{r}}_{ij},\mathbf{\Omega}_i,\mathbf{\Omega}_j) \right] & : r_{ij} \geqslant \sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}^{\prime}
\end{cases},
\label{eq:V}
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
where $\mathbf{r}_{ij}${} is the interparticle vector,
$\alpha$ and $\beta$ are patches on particles $i$ and $j$ respectively, and $\mathbf{\Omega}_i$ is the orientation of particle $i$.
Equation~(\ref{eq:V}) is based on a cut-and-shifted Lennard-Jones (LJ) potential,
\begin{equation}
V_{\mathrm{LJ}}^\prime(r) = \begin{cases} V_{\mathrm{LJ}}(r)-V_{\mathrm{LJ}}(r_{\mathrm{cut}}) & : r < r_{\mathrm{cut}} \\
0 & : r \geqslant r_{\mathrm{cut}}
\end{cases},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
V_{\mathrm{LJ}}(r)=4\epsilon_{\mathrm{LJ}} \left[ \left( \frac{\sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}}{r} \right)^{12} - \left( \frac{\sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}}{r} \right)^{6} \right]
\end{equation}
is the standard LJ potential, $\sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}${} and $\epsilon_{\mathrm{LJ}}${} are, respectively, the interparticle distance at which $V_{\mathrm{LJ}}=0$ and the minimum value of $V_{\mathrm{LJ}}$.
$\sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}^{\prime}$ in Eq.~\ref{eq:V} corresponds to the distance at which $V_{\mathrm{LJ}}^\prime$ passes through zero. We set the cutoff distance $r_{\mathrm{cut}}${}~$=2.5$\,$\sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}${}.
The overall potential (Eq.~\ref{eq:V}) has two regimes (but is continuous, by design). In the shorter-distance regime ($r_{ij}${}~$< \sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}^{\prime}$), the potential is simply the isotropic LJ repulsion. In the longer-distance regime ($r_{ij}${}~$\geqslant \sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}^{\prime}$) the LJ interaction is modulated by a dimensionless prefactor, $\varepsilon_{\alpha\beta}${}, which is specific to the two patch types involved, and two orientationally dependent functions, $V_{\mathrm{ang}}${} and $V_{\mathrm{tor}}${}. For any pair of particles $i$ and $j$, only the pair of patches $\alpha$ and $\beta$ that maximises $\varepsilon_{\alpha\beta}${}$V_{\mathrm{ang}}${}$V_{\mathrm{tor}}${} is considered to interact. In this work, $\varepsilon_{\alpha\beta}${} only takes on binary values, i.e.~1 for patches that interact or 0 for patches that do not, but it could in principle be used to vary the strength of different patch-patch interactions.
In practice (see section~\ref{sec:design_approach}), we divide patches into \emph{types}, each of which has the same properties, and define a matrix of values of $\varepsilon_{\alpha\beta}${} for all pairs of patch types.
The \emph{angular} modulation term $V_{\mathrm{ang}}${} is a measure of how directly the patches $\alpha$ and $\beta$ point at each other, and is given by
\begin{equation}
V_\mathrm{ang}(\mathbf{\hat{r}}_{ij},\mathbf{\Omega}_i,\mathbf{\Omega}_j) = \exp \left( -\frac{\theta_{\alpha ij}^{2}}{2\sigma_{\mathrm{ang}}^{2}} \right) \exp \left( -\frac{\theta_{\beta ji}^{2}}{2\sigma_{\mathrm{ang}}^{2}} \right) .
\label{eq:Vang}
\end{equation}
$\theta_{\alpha ij}$ is the angle between the patch vector $\mathbf{\hat{p}}_{i}^{\alpha}$, representing the patch $\alpha$, and $\mathbf{\hat{r}}_{ij}$. $\sigma_{\mathrm{ang}}${} is a measure of the angular width of the patch.
The \emph{torsional} modulation term $V_{\mathrm{tor}}${} describes the variation in the potential as either of the particles is rotated about the interparticle vector $\mathbf{r}_{ij}${}, and is given by
\begin{equation}
V_{\mathrm{tor}}(\mathbf{\hat{r}}_{ij},\mathbf{\Omega}_i,\mathbf{\Omega}_j)
= \exp\left(
- \frac{1}{2\sigma_{\mathrm{tor}}^{2}}\left[
\min\limits_{\phi^{\mathrm{offset}}_{\alpha\beta}}
\left(\phi_{\alpha\beta}-\phi^{\mathrm{offset}}_{\alpha\beta} \right)
\right]^{2}
\right).
\label{eq:Vtor}
\end{equation}
To define $\phi_{\alpha\beta}${}, a unique \emph{reference vector} (usually one of the other patch vectors) is associated with each patch. $\phi_{\alpha\beta}${} is then the angle between the projections of the reference vectors for patches $\alpha$ and $\beta$ onto a plane perpendicular to $\mathbf{\hat{r}}_{ij}$.
Generalising the original model,\cite{Wilber2009b} we also define an \emph{offset angle} for each patch pair, $\phi^{\mathrm{offset}}_{\alpha\beta}${}. This allows us to specify a non-zero preferred
value of the torsional angle, $\phi_{\alpha\beta}${}, favouring some relative torsional rotation. More than one equivalent offset angle can be defined (in order to capture the site symmetry of the particle in the target structure), in which case we find the minimum value of $\phi_{\alpha\beta}$$-$$\phi^{\mathrm{offset}}_{\alpha\beta}${} across the set of equivalent offset angles. $V_{\mathrm{tor}}${} is maximised when the torsional angle $\phi_{\alpha \beta}$ matches one of the offset angles,
and twisting around the interparticle vector, away from $\phi^{\mathrm{offset}}_{\alpha\beta}${}, is penalised. Thus, the torsional component of the potential ensures bonded patches have the correct relative orientation. $\sigma_{\mathrm{tor}}${} is the torsional `patch width' and controls how quickly the potential energy increases on deviating from the preferred torsional alignment.
As in Ref.~\onlinecite{Wilber2009b}, we fix the ratio of the two patch widths; we use $\sigma_{\mathrm{tor}}${}$= 2\,$$\sigma_{\mathrm{ang}}${}$= 0.6\,\mathrm{rad}$ throughout.
The results are relatively insensitive to the precise values (or ratio) of these parameters,
as long as the patches are sufficiently specific to favour the target structure and not too narrow that kinetic accessibility is hindered.\cite{Wilber2009b}
Note, as $\sigma_{\mathrm{ang}}${}~$\to\infty$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{tor}}${}~$\to\infty$, the isotropic LJ potential is recovered. We use $\sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}${} and $\epsilon_{\mathrm{LJ}}${} as our (reduced) units of length and energy, respectively, and use the reduced temperature $T^{*}=k_{\mathrm{B}}T/\epsilon_{\mathrm{LJ}}$.
\subsection{Simulation method}\label{sec:simulations}
To simulate our model, we perform standard Metropolis\cite{Metropolis1953} Monte Carlo (MC) simulations in the canonical ($NVT$) ensemble with (equally likely) single-particle translation and rotation moves. This leads to diffusive motion of the particles as is appropriate for colloidal particles in solution.
We initiate each simulation in a random configuration with particle number density $\rho=0.1\,\sigma_{\mathrm{LJ}}^{-3}$ at a temperature corresponding to the stable low-density fluid phase. We use $N\approx1000$, normally choosing a cubic multiple of the number of particles in the target structure's unit cell. We anneal from the fluid phase to the two-phase region, corresponding to a coexistence of crystalline and very low-density fluid phases, lowering the reduced temperature at a rate of $2\times10^{-4}$ per $2.2\times10^{5}$~MC cycles. (Annealing is not continuous, but stepwise.) We repeat this protocol a number of times for each target structure.
We chose to assemble large crystalline clusters from a low-density
fluid, as this is typical of the conditions under which we would expect
such patchy colloids
to be assembled. Note that we do not expect our particles to have a
stable liquid phase, as the torsional component of the potential
inhibits the formation of low-energy disordered configurations.\cite{Wilber2009b}
\section{Design of patchy particles}\label{sec:design}
\subsection{General approach}\label{sec:design_approach}
To design a set of patchy particles that forms a target structure, we use the following scheme.
For each particle in our target structure, we define patch vectors pointing at its nearest-neighbour coordination shell. We divide the patchy particles in the unit cell into \emph{types}, based on the structure's crystallographic symmetry. Particles of the same type have all the same properties (number of patches, patch vectors, and all patch properties). We then include the appropriate number of particles of each type in our simulation box.
In general, particles are of the same type if they map onto each other by the symmetry operations of the structure's space group; but there is an exception. By way of explanation, the particles in the target structure's unit cell can be categorised by the \emph{Wyckoff positions}\cite{Wondratschek2006, Hammond2015} they occupy. Distinct particles occupying the same Wyckoff position map onto each other by the group's symmetry operations. Each occupied Wyckoff position corresponds to either one or two \emph{types} of patchy particle, in our scheme. For space groups without mirror planes or improper rotations, each occupied Wyckoff position corresponds to \emph{one} patchy-particle type. For space groups with mirror planes or improper rotations, occupied Wyckoff positions which lie on a mirror plane or improper rotation axis correspond to \emph{one} patchy-particle type; but other occupied Wyckoff positions correspond to \emph{two} patchy-particle types, since particles that map onto each other by mirror planes or improper rotations have enantiomeric environments. In the latter case, there are equal numbers of particles of each type, and the two patchy-particle types are enantiomeric---they are the same except for equal and opposite offset angles ($\phi^{\mathrm{offset}}_{\alpha\beta}${}) on all pairs of corresponding patches.
As for particles, we categorise patches into \emph{types}. Patches of the same type have the same properties.
On a given particle, patches that are related by the site symmetry (at that Wyckoff position) are usually equivalent and so are of the same patch type. The exception is patches that are \emph{only} related by a mirror plane or improper rotation; these patches are of different patch types, but differ only in their offset angles, which are equal and opposite. Otherwise, patches are of distinct types.
For each patch $\alpha$, we define $\varepsilon_{\alpha\beta}${}~$=1$ for all patches $\beta$ to which $\alpha$ points in the target structure. For all other $\beta$, we define $\varepsilon_{\alpha\beta}${}~$=0$; these patch pairs do not interact in the target structure. For each patch, we choose a reference vector from one of the other patch vectors on that particle; where possible the reference vector chosen lies on a symmetry axis or plane. For each complementary (i.e.~interacting) patch pair $\alpha\beta$, we calculate the offset angle(s) $\phi^{\mathrm{offset}}_{\alpha\beta}${} in the target structure. An offset angle is given by the torsional (or dihedral) angle for a sequence of four coordinating particles: the two particles interacting via their patches, and the particles to which the two corresponding reference vectors point. If the reference vector is a patch vector for which other patches on that particle are of the same patch type, then any of these symmetry-equivalent patches could have been used as the reference vector; to capture this symmetry when using a single reference vector we allow multiple offset angles, one for each of the equivalent possible reference vectors. Thus each offset angle corresponds to a symmetry-equivalent orientation of the particle in the target structure.
The patchy interactions specified by the above rules \emph{fully}
specify the target structure, and thus are sufficient to make it the
potential energy global minimum for a system with the correct
composition of the different particles. The torsional interactions are
key to this, as they ensure that the first coordination shell of a
particle not only bonds in the correct relative positions but that
these particles also have the correct relative orientations, thus
ensuring that the next coordination shell also binds in the correct
positions. For example, without torsions, it would be hard to design a
patchy-particle system that selectively forms cubic rather than
hexagonal diamond (or {\it vice versa}) since the structures only
differ in their second coordination shell.
In this scheme, we use symmetry to try to minimize the amount of information that needs to
be encoded in the particles. It is an interesting question whether one can reduce this information further
whilst still retaining robust structural selectivity---we start to explore this in Section \ref{sec:results_information}.
Also, in this paper we have restricted ourselves to target structures for which the inter-particle distances between bonded particles are very similar (the difference between the longest and shortest bonds in the ClaI, ClaII, BC8, and A15 structures that we consider in Section \ref{sec:results} are $2.1$\%, $1.4$\%, $3.7$\%, and $11.8$\%, respectively, and all bonds in cP4 are of the same length),
allowing us to use particles of all the same size. However, there is no reason why the approach could not be extended to structures where different-sized particles would be required, as long
as the bond distances are sufficiently additive.
\subsection{Application to example structure}\label{sec:design_examples}
Here we illustrate the above scheme
for one of our target structures,
namely clathrate type I (ClaI), which is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:crystals}(a). The supplementary material contains further information on this structure (Table~S1) and the set of patchy particles designed to form it (Table~S2 and Fig.~S1(a--d)).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.95]{crystals.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:crystals}Crystal structures of the (a) clathrate type I, (b) BC8, (c) clathrate type II, and (d) cP4 targets, depicted with patchy particles.
The patch vectors are represented by the small particles on the surface of the main particles. The particle and patch sizes have been chosen for clarity.
Different colours correspond to different types (for both particles and patches). Details of each structure are given in Table~S1; particle designs are specified in Table~S2 and pictured in Fig.~S1.}
\end{figure*}
ClaI is in space group Pm$\overline{3}$n (number 223) and has 46 particles in its unit cell, located at three Wyckoff positions: 24k (red in Fig.~\ref{fig:crystals}(a)), 16i (blue and black), and 6d (green). (The number associated with a Wyckoff position denotes how many particles occupy this position in the unit cell.)
Positions 24k and 6d lie on mirror planes, so each corresponds to a single patchy-particle type, whereas position 16i does not, so corresponds to two enantiomeric particle types. Thus we define four types of patchy particles, with 8 particles in the unit cell for each of the two 16i types.
All particles have a coordination number of four and so have four patches. On the 24k particles, one patch interacts with a patch on another 24k particle, one with a 6d particle, and one with each of the two types of 16i particles. The two former patches lie on a mirror plane and are unique. The latter two patches map onto each other only by a mirror plane, and so are of different types, with equal and opposite offset angles.
For all these patches, we choose as reference vectors one of the two patch vectors that lies on the mirror plane passing through this site. The four patches on the 6d particles each interact with a patch on a (different) 24k particle, and map onto each other by the site symmetry ($D_{2d}$). These patches are all of the same type, and the reference vector for each patch is chosen to be the vector for the patch that is related by both a 2-fold rotation and a mirror plane. For the 16i particles, one patch is unique and interacts with an equivalent 16i particle.
The other three patches interact with 24k particles, and map onto each other by a 3-fold rotation, so are therefore of the same type. The patch vectors of any of the three symmetry-related patches could be used as the reference vector for the unique patch; we choose one but have three equivalent offset angles to account for the symmetry. We use the unique patch, which lies on a 3-fold axis, as the reference vector for the other three patches. The two types of 16i particle are identical except for having equal and opposite offset angles for all patches.
\section{Self-assembly simulation results}\label{sec:results}
We applied our patchy-particle design scheme to the five target structures shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:crystals}(a--d) and \ref{fig:A15}(a): clathrate type I (ClaI), BC8, clathrate type II (ClaII), cP4 and A15. The structures are relatively complex (i.e.~have a large number of particles in their unit cells), mostly open (i.e.~have a low packing fraction) and have features, e.g.\ the pores in the clathrates, that may be of interest for functional materials.
ClaI, BC8, and ClaII are three examples from the many structures that involve just tetrahedral coordination. As mentioned in the Introduction, previous work on particles with tetrahedral patches \cite{Zhang2005, Romano2010, Noya2010, Romano2011, Saika-Voivod2011, Dorsaz2012,Noya19} has shown that it is hard to control the assembly product without torsional interactions.
Also, ClaI, BC8, ClaII, and cP4 have been found to be stable in potential parameter space near to an icosahedral quasicrystal (IQC) for a one-component system with an isotropic potential with multiple minima.\cite{Engel2015}
A15 provides an example crystal with a higher average coordination number.
The supplementary material contains further information on these structures (Table~S1), and the sets of patchy particles designed to form each (Table~S2 and Fig.~S1).
\subsection{General assembly kinetics}\label{sec:results_general}
All five target structures successfully assembled from their respective patchy-particle systems. To characterize the nucleation and growth of a crystalline cluster from the dilute fluid phase, we use a simple order parameter: the number of particles in the largest cluster in the system, where we define a \emph{cluster} as any network of sequentially bonded particles, where two particles are \emph{bonded} if
their pairwise interaction energy is less than $-0.2$\,$\epsilon_{\mathrm{LJ}}${}.
In Figs.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}
and \ref{fig:A15}(b) this quantity is plotted over the course of the simulation for each of the five repetitions for each structure. They show that by the end of most simulations, the largest cluster contained all or almost all of the particles in the simulation box. When this did not occur, it was simply because one (or sometimes two) additional, smaller crystalline cluster(s) had formed. Visual inspection of the configurations confirms the target structure correctly formed in all cases---both for the largest clusters, and any smaller clusters.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.66,trim=0 12 0 0, clip]{largest_cluster_4x1.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:largest_clusters}Cluster nucleation and growth during annealing simulations for the systems designed to form (a) clathrate I, (b) clathrate II, (c) BC8, and (d) cP4 target structures. Each plot shows the crystal growth, measured in terms of the largest cluster, against progress in the simulation, measured both in in terms of the number of MC cycles (bottom axis) and the reduced temperature (top axis). For each design, the results
of five distinct simulations are presented.
The maximum value on the vertical axis in each plot corresponds to the total
number of particles in the simulation.
The annealing rate was the same for all simulations.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.97]{A15.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:A15}(a) Crystal structure (as for Fig.\ref{fig:crystals}) and (b) cluster nucleation and growth (as for Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}) for the A15 target.}
\end{figure}
The assembly behaviour was generally as hoped for in the design process. When the temperature was sufficiently below the
fluid-crystal binodal,
assembly starts to occur. Snapshots from the self-assembly of BC8, as an example, can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:stages}(a--c): (a) shows the low-density fluid phase, (b) the nucleation of a cluster, and (c) the final cluster, containing all particles. Nucleation appears consistent with classical nucleation theory.
Assembly progresses by the addition of monomers (and occasionally small clusters) onto growing clusters. Disordered aggregates, incorrect structures, and other kinetic traps were not observed. Their absence is a feature of assembly when torsional interactions are included.\cite{Wilber2009b}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.93]{stages_small.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:stages}Simulation snapshots showing: (a)--(c) three stages in the self-assembly of BC8 during repetition 2 ((a) fluid phase, (b) nucleation of a crystalline cluster (towards the bottom right) within the fluid phase, and (c) final cluster), (d) the final state of BC8 in repetition 1 (Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}(c)), and (e,f) the final stages of the assembly of the A15 target during repetition 5 (Fig.~\ref{fig:A15}(b)).}
\end{figure*}
There is a narrow temperature window for good nucleation and crystal
growth from the fluid, in which a single, large cluster forms, rather
than multiple smaller clusters. Within the two-phase region
at \emph{high} temperatures, the free energy barrier to
nucleation is high, so it does not occur on practical timescales.
By contrast, at \emph{low}
temperatures, the free energy barrier is low, and so multiple nucleation
occurs and many clusters grow.
These clusters are unlikely to have complementary shapes so as to
fit together to form a defect-free larger cluster.
However, neither can these clusters easily break apart and
reassemble, because the low temperature offers limited thermal energy
to break bonds. Thus, the system is kinetically trapped, and tends to retain
separate clusters, rather than forming a single large cluster. For example, this can be seen
in Fig.~\ref{fig:stages}(d) for the BC8 design.
Instead, assembly best occurs in an \emph{intermediate}
temperature window, where nucleation can occur but does so only rarely, and the rate of growth is much greater than the
rate of nucleation. Consequently once a cluster does nucleate, it grows rapidly,
and it is unlikely other clusters will nucleate in this period.
In our preliminary simulations, we used a faster annealing rate. Consistent with the above discussion, nucleation
typically occurred at lower temperatures, and the formation of multiple clusters was more likely.
Nonetheless, these quicker simulations helped guide the choice of temperature range for the production runs.
In Figs.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters} and \ref{fig:A15}(b), among repeated simulations for the same design, clusters nucleated at a range of temperatures; this reflects the
stochastic nature of the nucleation process.
Multiple cluster formation is clearly more likely for those simulations, in which nucleation happens to occur at a lower temperature.
For example, the BC8 repetition for which nucleation occurred at the lowest temperatures was the only one in which the largest cluster did not contain all particles at the end of the simulation
(the final configuration is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:stages}(d)).
Multiple cluster formation is also more likely for those systems that have a slower growth rate (e.g.\ ClaI and ClaII).
In some cases involving multiple nucleation, the largest cluster combined with other clusters, as manifested in discontinuous jumps in its size (e.g.~ClaI-4 at $T^{*}\approx0.0715$ and $T^{*}\approx0.069$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}(a))). When two separate clusters join, the number of initial intercluster bonds may be relatively few, and
so the joined clusters may soon break apart (e.g.~ClaII-5 twice briefly forms a larger cluster of $\sim900$~particles at $T^{*}\approx0.072$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}(b))).
\subsection{Differences between target structures}\label{sec:results_differences}
It is apparent in Figs.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters} and \ref{fig:A15}(b) that some structures form more rapidly and successfully than others. cP4 forms most easily: in all simulations, the final largest structure contained all particles, and the cluster grew rapidly.
Similarly, A15 forms easily, and BC8 forms almost as easily, with multiple clusters forming in only one instance (repetition 1). The reason these structures form more easily is most likely that their patchy-particle designs are simpler: there are fewer particles in the unit cell (4 for cP4, 8 for A15, 8 for BC8), fewer particle types (1, 2 and 2, respectively),
and fewer patch types (1, 3 and 4). Thus, for these structures, there are fewer distinct configurations for the system to explore, and it can find the correct ones more quickly. In contrast, for both clathrates, at the end of many simulations the largest cluster did not contain all particles, and cluster growth was slower. ClaII and ClaI have, respectively, 34 and 46 particles in their unit cells, and their patchy-particle designs have 3 and 4 types of particles, and 7 and 9 types of patches. A system has more configurations to explore to find these more complex structures.
Whereas particles in ClaI, ClaII, and BC8 have 4 patches per particle, those in cP4 and A15 have more (cP4 has 6 patches per particle, and A15 particles has on average 7.5 patches per particle).
Structures containing particles with more patches will be energetically more stable, and have higher melting points. This can be seen by the different nucleation temperatures in Figs.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters} and \ref{fig:A15}(b): the maximum nucleation temperatures (across all five repetitions, and defined as the first point at which the largest cluster always exceeds 10 particles) were $T^{*}\approx0.078$ for the ClaI and ClaII designs, $T^{*}\approx0.081$ for BC8, $T^{*}\approx0.126$ for cP4, and $T^{*}\approx0.133$ for A15.
These temperatures are roughly in proportion to the (average) number of patches per particle in each structure.
The higher nucleation temperatures for cP4 and A15 are also likely to aid assembly, as individual bonds are easier to break, thus facilitating particle rearrangements
to find the correct structure.
That the two types of patchy particles in our design for A15 have different numbers of patches (one has 12 patches and the other 6)
gives rise to assembly behaviour that is somewhat different from the other designs. Assembly occurs in two `stages', as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:stages}(e) and (f). First, a cluster forms that incorporates all the 12-patch particles, but only some of the 6-patch particles---all the interior sites for the 6-patch particles are occupied, but not all the surface sites---and so the assembled cluster is surrounded by
a gas of unbonded 6-patch particles (Fig.~\ref{fig:stages}(e)). Then, as the temperature is further decreased, the unbonded 6-patch particles gradually join onto the outside of the cluster (Fig.~\ref{fig:stages}(f)). This behaviour can also be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:A15}(b): after the steep period of cluster growth, the curves do not become flat (as they do for most other structures), but have a slightly positive gradient. In this period, the largest cluster's size continues growing as more 6-patch particles add on.
The reason for this behaviour is simply the considerably smaller binding energy of the 6-patch particles.
\subsection{Reduced structural information}\label{sec:results_information}
The patchy-particle design protocol that we have introduced encodes
\emph{sufficient} information in the particles to ensure the target
structure both is the low-temperature free-energy global minimum, and,
at least for all the examples considered above, is able to correctly
assemble on annealing. Furthermore, we have exploited the symmetry of
the target to try to minimize the number of particle and patch types.
However, can one further reduce the encoded information whilst retaining the favourable assembly behaviour?
For example, could one use fewer particle types, patches or patch types, and less (or no) torsional restrictions?
The potential advantage of such information reduction is that simpler designs are likely to be easier to realize experimentally.
The danger of reducing the encoded information is, of course, that it is likely to increase the energetic stabilisation of alternative structures.
These competing structures may lead to a reduction in the kinetic accessibility of the target (due to them acting as kinetic traps) or may even become thermodynamically more stable than the target.
For example, there are many structures with near-tetrahedral local coordination, and the less information is encoded in the design to specify one over the others, the more competition there will be between them. Thus, whether, and to what extent, the information in the particle design can be reduced is likely to be target dependent.
We begin to explore these questions through the examples below.
\subsubsection{Fewer patches}\label{sec:results_information_patches}
Intuitively, structures with high coordination environments (e.g.~A15) are good candidates for reducing structural information in their designs. Their large number of patchy bonds may over-specify the target structure, and, hence, there may be redundancy in their designs. Indeed, in our original A15 design we chose to ignore some neighbour information: it includes all 2a-6c (the labels refer to particle Wyckoff positions, as in Table~S2) nearest-neighbour bonds (4 per 6c particle, 12 per 2a particle; bond length $2.544$\,\r{A} in Cr$_{3}$Si) and the shorter 6c-6c nearest-neighbour bonds (two per 6c particle; $2.275$\,\r{A}), but not the slightly longer 6c-6c bonds (8 per particle; $2.786$\,\r{A}). Patches for the former two bond types
were sufficient to yield A15,
but can the information content be reduced further still?
We designed a system with no 6c-6c patches, only patches for 2a-6c
bonds: the design is the same as that in Table~S2 and Fig.~S1, except
6c particles have only 4 patches, not 6 (patch numbers 5 and 6, both of
type 3, are omitted). This system correctly formed A15 (all simulation
details were the same as before). The results for this test are shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:A15_lesspatches}. As expected, crystallization
occurred at a somewhat lower temperature than in the original
simulations
($T^{*}\approx0.113$, previously
$T^{*}\approx0.132$). Like with the original A15 design, assembly
occurs in two stages, but it is now even more pronounced because of the
bigger difference in the number of patches between the two particle
types. Indeed at the end of the simulations ($T^{*}=0.097$), the
surface 6c particles have still not all bonded to the cluster
(Fig.~\ref{fig:A15_lesspatches})
The key feature that allows the reduced design to assemble correctly is that the network of remaining bonds is still able to fully define the target structure.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.98]{A15_lesspatches.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:A15_lesspatches}Simulations of a system designed to form A15 but with a reduced number of patches: (a) example final configuration and (b) cluster-growth plot (as in Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}).}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{No torsional interactions}\label{sec:results_information_torsional}
Another approach to reduce the information embedded in the particle design that we tested was to eliminate the torsional component of the interaction potential (i.e.~setting $V_{\mathrm{tor}}${}~$=1$). This approach is attractive, given that torsional interactions are a potentially difficult aspect of our model to implement experimentally. However, such a change gives up direct control of the next-neighbour shell that is key to the generality of the success of the current patchy-particle design protocol, and thus has the potential to detrimentally affect the kinetics and thermodynamics of target assembly.
For instance, it is difficult for cubic diamond to form from tetrahedral patchy particles without torsional interactions;\cite{Zhang2005, Romano2010, Noya2010, Romano2011, Saika-Voivod2011, Dorsaz2012} however it is possible under some conditions (in particular, by using a seed\cite{Zhang2005, Noya2010} or via more selective interactions\cite{Dorsaz2012}).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.98]{no_torsions.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:no_torsions}(a) and (b) Final configurations and (c) and (d) cluster-growth plots (as in Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}), in simulations of the sets of patchy particles designed to form (a,c) clathrate I and (b,d) BC8, but for which the torsional component of the potential was not included. Note the hexagonal diamond structure at the top and bottom of (b), connected by a disordered liquid-like droplet.}
\end{figure*}
To this end, we simulated designs with no torsional interactions (but with all other design details the same) for two sample structures, ClaI and BC8. The annealing rates were slightly faster ($T^{*}$ decreased by $2\times10^{-4}$ every $2.9\times10^{5}$~MC cycles for ClaI and $2\times10^{-4}$ every $4.5\times10^{5}$~MC cycles for BC8) and the temperature ranges narrower. The results for these simulations are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:no_torsions}. ClaI assembled with roughly equal success compared to when torsional interactions were included: a sample final configuration is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:no_torsions}(a); and the cluster-growth plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:no_torsions}(c) is similar to Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}(a).
However, BC8 did not. Instead, a disordered liquid-like cluster first nucleated from the low-density fluid. On further cooling, a different ordered structure, namely hexagonal diamond, nucleated from the liquid-like phase. An example final configuration is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:no_torsions}(b). The hexagonal diamond crystallites were anisotropic in shape, due to its layered structure (the two particle types occupy alternating layers). In hexagonal diamond, the patches are not perfectly aligned (they were optimised for BC8), and so the energy of hexagonal diamond is somewhat higher than that of BC8. Therefore, the former is likely to be a kinetic product that is thermodynamically less stable. There was also a degree of variability in the results of the simulations: sometimes, liquid-like regions remained (as in Fig.~\ref{fig:no_torsions}(b)); sometimes, BC8 motifs were present.
Growth of the largest cluster for the BC8 design without torsional interactions (Fig.~\ref{fig:no_torsions}(d)) is slower and less smooth than with torsional interactions (Fig.~\ref{fig:largest_clusters}(c)).
This is simply because the initial cluster growth is of liquid droplets. Nucleation of multiple droplets initially occurs, followed by Ostwald ripening leading to the growth of the largest cluster by evaporation and re-condensation, and by cluster-cluster aggregation. The fluctuations in the cluster size reflect both the stochastic nature of the former, and that recently-joined clusters often break apart.
These two examples illustrate that the necessity of torsional interactions is target dependent. In the more complex ClaI system, the specificity inherent in the multiple particle and patch types is sufficient to ensure that the target structure is both thermodynamically and kinetically favoured. However, removing the torsions from the simpler BC8 system allows a second fully-bonded hexagonal diamond crystal structure, which is more kinetically accessible than the BC8 target. Removing the torsions will also tend to stabilize the liquid phase,\cite{Wilber2009b} but whether this is detrimental to assembly is likely to be system specific.
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
We have demonstrated a systematic scheme to rationally design patchy particles that assemble into a given periodic structure. The scheme ensures the target structure is the free-energy global minimum structure below some cutoff temperature, with no nearby competing structures.
We have shown the scheme to be robust in enabling the formation of the target crystal for a variety of complex structures.
The specificity encoded by precise patch positions, patch interaction selectivity, and restrictions on torsional orientations programme the system to assemble into the correct structure.
Torsional interactions are a key feature of our designs, as they only permit the particles to bind together in a way that is consistent with the target structure, thus removing the possibility of competing forms and ensuring the kinetic accessibility of the target.
Given that the experimental realization of these patchy particle
designs would be challenging, it would be useful to know the minimal
information that needs to be encoded in a patchy design to form a
target structure. We have explored two potential ways to simplify
the designs. In our general design scheme we introduce patches directed
at all neighbouring particles in the target structure. However, for
structures involving higher coordination numbers they may not all be
necessary, as a design with a reduced number of interactions may still
fully determine the target structure. This was the case for our
simplified A15 design which still assembled successfully. The second
simplification that we considered was the removal of the torsional
specificity of the interactions. Perhaps surprisingly, the clathrate-I
design was still able to assemble; the remaining specificity in this
relatively complex design was still sufficient to favour correct
assembly. However, the BC8 design no longer reliably assembled, because
other competing structures were now compatible with the particle
design; in such cases perhaps reintroducing greater specificity through
increasing the number of patch or particle types may enable the target
structure to form without torsions.\cite{Dorsaz2012,Patra18} These examples
illustrate that there is unlikely to be a general scheme that enables
the ``simplest'' design to be obtained.
An interesting next challenge would be to obtain design rules for patchy particles to form (\emph{aperiodic}) target structures, such as quasicrystals. In two dimensions, patchy particles that can form dodecagonal\cite{VanderLinden2012, Reinhardt2013, Reinhardt2016} and metastable octagonal and decagonal\cite{Gemeinhardt2019} quasicrystals have been identified, but the formation of a three-dimensional aperiodic structure, such as an icosahedral quasicrystal, is a considerably
more difficult undertaking.
One of the issues is that quasicrystals can involve a mixture of order and disorder, and so there is not a single target structure; indeed, they can be stabilized by the resulting entropy.\cite{Reinhardt2013}
The current study can potentially help as a starting point by providing the design rules necessary for crystalline approximants to quasicrystals; modifications to these designs that somewhat reduce their specificity may be a productive path to explore.
\begin{acknowledgments}
D.F.T. is grateful for funding via the ESPRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Theory and Modelling in Chemical Sciences, under grant EP/L015722/1.
E.G.N. acknowledges funding from the Agencia Estatal de Investigaci\'{o}n (AEI) and the Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER) under grant numbers FIS2015-72946-EXP(AEI) and FIS2017-89361-C3-2-P(AEI/FEDER,UE), and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sk\l{}odowska-Curie grant agreement No.\ 734276.
We thank Lorenzo Rovigatti for helpful advice about the simulation code.
\end{acknowledgments}
\section*{References}\label{sec:references}
|
\section{Introduction}
The fair allocation of resources to interested parties is a central issue in economics and has increasingly received attention in computer science in the past few decades~\cite{brams1996fair,Moulin03,Thomson16,markakis2017approximation,Moulin19}.
The problem has a wide range of applications, from reaching divorce settlements~\cite{brams1996fair} and dividing land~\cite{SegalhaleviNiHa17} to sharing apartment rent~\cite{GalMaPr17}.
\emph{Envy-freeness} is one of the most commonly studied fairness criterion in the literature; it stipulates that all agents find their assigned bundle to be the best among all bundles in the allocation \citep{Foley67,Varian74}.
Envy-freeness is a compelling notion when all agents have equal entitlements---indeed, in a standard envy-free allocation, no agent would rather take the place of another agent with respect to the assigned bundles.
However, in many division problems, agents may have varying claims on the resource.
For instance, consider a facility that has been jointly funded by three investors---Alice, Bob, and Charlie---where Alice contributed $3/5$ of the construction expenses while Bob and Charlie contributed $1/5$ each.
One could then expect Alice to envy either Bob or Charlie if she does not value her share at least three times as much as each of the latter two investors' share when they divide the usage of the facility.
Besides this interpretation as the \emph{cost} of participating in the resource allocation exercise, the weights may also represent other publicly known and accepted measures of entitlement such as \emph{eligibility} or \emph{merit}.
A prevalent example is inheritance division, wherein closer relatives are typically more entitled to the bequest than distant ones.
Likewise, different countries have differing entitlements when it comes to apportioning humanitarian aid.
Envy-freeness can be naturally extended to the general setting in which agents have \emph{weights} designating their entitlements.
When the resource to be allocated is infinitely divisible (e.g., time to use a facility, or land in a real estate), it is known that a weighted envy-free allocation exists for any set of agents' weights and valuations \cite{RobertsonWe98,zeng2000approximate}.
In this article, we initiate the study of weighted envy-freeness for the ubiquitous setting where the resource consists of \emph{indivisible} items.
Indeed, inheritance division usually involves discrete items such as real estate, cars, and jewelry; similarly, facility usage is often allocated in fixed time slots (e.g., hourly).
Since envy-freeness cannot always be fulfilled even in the canonical setting without weights, for example when all agents agree that one particular item is more valuable than the remaining items combined, recent works have focused on identifying relaxations of envy-freeness that can be satisfied in the case of equal entitlements.
The most salient of these approximations is perhaps \emph{envy-freeness up to one item (EF1)}: for any two agents $i$ and $j$, if agent $i$ envies agent $j$, then we can eliminate this envy by removing a single item from $j$'s bundle~\citep{budish2011combinatorial}.
\citet{lipton2004approximately} showed that an EF1 allocation exists and can be computed efficiently for any number of agents with monotone valuations.\footnote{EF1 is also remarkable for its robustness: it can be satisfied under cardinality constraints~\citep{BiswasB18} and connectivity constraints~\citep{bilo2019almost,Suksompong19}, has a relatively low price in terms of social welfare \citep{BeiLuMa19,barman2020optimal}, and is computable using few queries~\cite{OhPrSu19}.}
Our goal in this work is to extend EF1 to the general case with arbitrary entitlements, and explore the relationship of these extensions to other important justice criteria such as proportionality and Pareto optimality.
The richness of the weighted setting will be evident throughout our work; in particular, we demonstrate that while some protocols from the unweighted setting can be generalized to yield strong guarantees, others are less robust and cease to offer desirable properties upon the introduction of weights.
\subsection{Our Contributions}
We assume that agents have positive (not necessarily rational) weights representing their entitlements and, with the exception of Propositions~\ref{prop:wef-1-identical}, \ref{mwnw_notef1}, and \ref{non_transfer}, that they are endowed with additive valuation functions.
We begin in Section~\ref{sec:prelims} by proposing two generalizations of EF1 to the weighted setting: (strong) weighted envy-freeness up to one item ($\mathtt{WEF1}$) and weak weighted envy-freeness up to one item ($\mathtt{WWEF1}$).
While $\mathtt{WEF1}$ may appear as the more natural extension, we argue that it can impose a highly demanding constraint when the weights vastly differ, so that $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ is a useful alternative.
In Section~\ref{sec:wef1}, we focus on two classical EF1 protocols.
On the one hand, we show that the envy cycle elimination algorithm of \citet{lipton2004approximately} does not extend to the weighted setting except in the special case of identical valuations.
On the other hand, we construct a weight-based picking sequence which allows us to compute a $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation efficiently---this generalizes a folklore result from the unweighted setting.
The analysis of this algorithm is significantly more involved than for the unweighted version and requires making intricate algebraic manipulations.
Nevertheless, the algorithm itself is simple both to explain and to implement, so we believe that it is suitable for maintaining fairness in practice.
In Sections \ref{sec:wef1_po} and \ref{sec:wwef1_po}, we
examine the interplay between fairness and Pareto optimality.
For two agents, we exhibit that a weighted variant of the adjusted winner procedure allows us to compute an allocation that is both $\mathtt{WEF1}$ and Pareto optimal in polynomial time---our algorithm provides a natural discretization of the classical procedure, which was designed for the divisible item setting.
We then show by adapting an algorithm of \citet{barman2018finding} that a Pareto optimal and $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation is guaranteed to exist and can be found in pseudo-polynomial time for any number of agents.
Furthermore, we prove that while an allocation with maximum weighted Nash welfare may fail to satisfy $\mathtt{WEF1}$, such an allocation is both Pareto optimal and $\mathtt{WWEF1}$, thereby generalizing an important result of \citet{caragiannis2016unreasonable}.
Our proof for the $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ result follows a similar outline as that of Caragiannis et al., but we need to make a case distinction based on the comparison between weights.
We continue our investigation in Section~\ref{sec:wef1_propMMS} by exploring the relationship between weighted envy-freeness and the weighted versions of other fairness concepts---in particular, we find that several relationships from the unweighted setting break down---and illustrate through experiments in Section~\ref{sec:expts} that envy-freeness is often harder to satisfy in the presence of weights than otherwise.
Finally, we conclude in Section~\ref{sec:nonadd} by discussing some obstacles that we faced when trying to extend our ideas and results beyond additive valuation functions; specifically, we show that a $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ allocation may not exist when agents have non-additive (submodular) valuations.
\subsection{Related Work}
\label{sec:relatedwork}
There is a long line of work on the fair division of indivisible items; see, e.g., the surveys by \citet{bouveret2016fair} and \citet{markakis2017approximation} for an overview.
Prior work on the fair allocation of indivisible items to asymmetric agents has tackled fairness concepts that are not based on envy. \citet{farhadi2019fair} introduced \emph{weighted maximin share (WMMS)} fairness, a generalization of an earlier fairness notion of \citet{budish2011combinatorial}.
\citet{aziz2019weighted} explored WMMS fairness in the allocation of indivisible \emph{chores}---items that, in contrast to goods, are valued negatively by the agents---where agents' weights can be interpreted as their shares of the workload.
\citet{babaioff2019fair} studied competitive equilibrium for agents with different budgets.
Recently, \citet{aziz2019polynomial} proposed a polynomial-time algorithm for computing an allocation of a pool of goods and chores that satisfies both Pareto optimality and \emph{weighted proportionality up to one item (WPROP1)} for agents with asymmetric weights.
Unequal entitlements have also been considered in the context of divisible items with respect to \emph{proportionality} \citep{Barbanel95,brams1996fair,cseh2018complexity,RobertsonWe98,segalhalevi19cake}.
We remark here that (weighted) proportionality is a strictly weaker notion than (weighted) envy-freeness under additive valuations.
However, while PROP1 is also implied by EF1 in the unweighted setting, the relationship between the corresponding weighted notions is much less straightforward, as we demonstrate in Section~\ref{sec:wef1_propMMS}.
In addition to expressing the entitlement of individual agents, weights can also be applied to settings where each agent represents a group of individuals \citep{benabbou2019fairness,benabbou2020diversity}---here, the \emph{size} of a group can be used as its weight.\footnote{Note that in this model, each group has a valuation function that represents the overall preference of its members. Other group fairness notions do not assume the existence of such aggregate functions and instead take directly into account the preferences of the individual agents in each group \citep{conitzer2019group,kyropoulou2019almost,segal2019democratic,segal2021how}.}
Specifically, in the model of \citet{benabbou2020diversity}, groups correspond to ethnic groups (namely, the major ethnic groups in Singapore, i.e., Chinese, Malay, and Indian).
Maintaining provable fairness guarantees amongst the ethnic groups is highly desirable; in fact, it is one of the principal tenets of Singaporean society.
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:prelims}
Throughout the article, given a positive integer $r$, we denote by $[r]$ the set $\{1,2,\dots,r\}$.
We are given a set $N = [n]$ of {\em agents}, and a set $O = \{o_1,\dots,o_m\}$ of {\em items} or {\em goods}. Subsets of $O$ are referred to as {\em bundles}, and each agent $i \in N$ has a {\em valuation function} $v_i:2^O \to \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$ over bundles; the valuation function for every $i \in N$ is {\em normalized} (i.e., $v_i(\emptyset) = 0$) and {\em monotone} (i.e., $v_i(S) \leq v_i(T)$ whenever $S \subseteq T$). We denote $v_i(\{o\})$ simply by $v_i(o)$ for any $i \in N$ and $o \in O$.
An {\em allocation} $A$ of the items to the agents is a collection of $n$ disjoint bundles $A_1,\dots,A_n$ such that $\bigcup_{i \in N} A_i \subseteq O$; the bundle $A_i$ is allocated to agent $i$ and $v_i(A_i)$ is agent $i$'s {\em realized valuation} under $A$. Given an allocation $A$, we denote by $A_0$ the set $O\setminus \left(\bigcup_{i \in N} A_i\right)$, and its elements are referred to as {\em withheld items}. An allocation $A$ is said to be \emph{complete} if $A_0 = \emptyset$, and \emph{incomplete} otherwise.
In our setting with different entitlements, each agent $i \in N$ has a fixed weight $w_i\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}$; these weights regulate how agents value their own allocated bundles relative to those of other agents, and hence bear on the overall (subjective) fairness of an allocation. More precisely, we define the \emph{weighted envy} of agent $i$ towards agent $j$ under an allocation $A$ as $\max\left\{0,\frac{v_i(A_j)}{w_j}-\frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i}\right\}$. An allocation is \emph{weighted envy-free} ($\mathtt{WEF}$) if no agent has positive weighted envy towards another agent.
Intuitively, agent~$i$ being weighted envy-free towards agent~$j$ means that $i$'s valuation for her share $A_i$, given that $i$'s entitlement is $w_i$, is at least as high as $i$'s valuation for $A_j$ if $i$'s entitlement were $w_j$.
Weighted envy-freeness reduces to traditional envy-freeness when $w_i=w$, $\forall i \in N$ for some positive real constant $w$. Since a complete envy-free allocation does not always exist, it follows trivially that a complete $\mathtt{WEF}$ allocation may not exist in general.
We briefly remark here that with indivisible items, it is possible to define variations of weighted envy-freeness---for example, if $w_i=1$ and $w_j=2$, one could require that agent~$j$'s bundle can be divided into two parts neither of which agent~$i$ finds more valuable than her own bundle.
Nevertheless, the definition that we use is mathematically natural and can be directly applied to arbitrary (not necessarily rational) weights.
We now state the main definitions of our article, which naturally extend \emph{envy-freeness up to one item (EF1)} \citep{lipton2004approximately,budish2011combinatorial} to the weighted setting.
\begin{definition}
An allocation $A$ is said to be \emph{(strongly) weighted envy-free up to one item} ($\mathtt{WEF1}$) if for any pair of agents $i,j$ with $A_j\neq\emptyset$, there exists an item $o \in A_j$ such that \[\frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i} \ge \frac{v_i(A_j \setminus \{o\})}{w_j}.\]
More generally, $A$ is said to be \emph{weighted envy-free up to $c$ items} ($\mathtt{WEF}c$) for an integer $c \ge 1$ if for any pair of agents $i,j$, there exists a subset $S_c \subseteq A_j$ of size at most $c$ such that \[\frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i} \ge \frac{v_i(A_j\setminus S_c)}{w_j}.\]
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
An allocation $A$ is said to be \emph{weakly weighted envy-free up to one item} ($\mathtt{WWEF1}$) if for any pair of agents $i,j$ with $A_j\neq\emptyset$, there exists an item $o \in A_j$ such that
\[\text{either } \frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i} \ge \frac{v_i(A_j \setminus \{o\})}{w_j} \text{ or } \frac{v_i(A_i\cup\{o\})}{w_i} \ge \frac{v_i(A_j)}{w_j}.\]
More generally, $A$ is said to be \emph{weakly weighted envy-free up to $c$ items} ($\mathtt{WWEF}c$) for an integer $c \ge 1$ if for any pair of agents $i,j$, there exists a subset $S_c \subseteq A_j$ of size at most $c$ such that \[\text{either }\frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i} \ge \frac{v_i(A_j\setminus S_c)}{w_j} \text{ or } \frac{v_i(A_i\cup S_c)}{w_i} \ge \frac{v_i(A_j)}{w_j}.\]
\end{definition}
In other words, an allocation is $\mathtt{WEF1}$ if any (weighted) envy from an agent~$i$ towards another agent~$j$ can be eliminated by removing a single item from $j$'s bundle.
Similarly, $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ requires that any such envy can be eliminated by either removing an item from $j$'s bundle or adding a copy of an item from $j$'s bundle to $i$'s bundle.
A valuation function $v:2^O \to \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$ is said to be \emph{additive} if $v(S)= \sum_{o \in S} v(o)$ for every $S \subseteq O$. We will assume additive valuations for most of the article; this is a very common assumption in the fair division literature and offers a tradeoff between expressiveness and simplicity~\citep{BouveretLe16,caragiannis2016unreasonable,KurokawaPrWa18}.
Under this assumption, both $\mathtt{WEF1}$ and $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ reduce to EF1 in the unweighted setting.
Moreover, one can check that under additive valuations, an allocation satisfies $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ if and only if for any pair of agents $i,j$ with $A_j\neq\emptyset$, there exists an item $o \in A_j$ such that
\[\frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i} \ge \frac{v_i(A_j)}{w_j} - \frac{v_i(o)}{\min\{w_i,w_j\}}.\]
The criterion $\mathtt{WEF1}$ can be criticized as being too demanding in certain circumstances, when the weight of the envied agent is much larger than that of the envying agent. To illustrate this, consider a problem instance where agent $1$ has an additive valuation function and is indifferent among all items taken individually, e.g., $v_1(o)=1$ for every $o \in O$. Now, if $w_1=1$ and $w_2=100$, then eliminating one item from agent $2$'s bundle reduces agent $1$'s weighted valuation of this bundle by merely $0.01$. As such, we may trigger a substantial adverse effect on the overall welfare of the allocation by aiming to eliminate agent $1$'s weighted envy towards agent $2$. This line of thinking was our motivation for introducing the weak weighted envy-freeness concept.
We also note that $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ can be viewed as a stronger version of what one could refer to as ``transfer weighted envy-freeness up to one item'': agent $i$ is \emph{transfer weighted envy-free up to one item} towards agent~$j$ under the allocation $A$ if there is an item $o \in A_j$ that would eliminate the weighted envy of $i$ towards $j$ upon being transferred from $A_j$ to $A_i$, i.e., $v_i(A_i \cup \{o\}) \ge \frac{w_i}{w_j} \cdot v_i(A_j \setminus \{o\})$.
In addition to fairness, we often want our allocation to satisfy an efficiency criterion. One important such criterion is Pareto optimality. An allocation $A'$ is said to \emph{Pareto dominate} an allocation $A$ if $v_i(A'_i) \ge v_i(A_i)$ for all agents $i \in N$ and $v_j(A'_j) > v_j(A_j)$ for some agent $j \in N$.
An allocation is \emph{Pareto optimal} (or $\mathtt{PO}$ for short) if it is not Pareto dominated by any other allocation.
Allocations maximizing the {\em Nash welfare}---defined as $\mathtt{NW}(A) := \prod_{i \in N} v_i(A_i)$---are known to offer strong guarantees with respect to both fairness and efficiency in the unweighted setting \citep{caragiannis2016unreasonable}.
For our weighted setting, we define a natural extension called \emph{weighted Nash welfare}---$\mathtt{WNW}(A) := \prod_{i \in N} v_i(A_i)^{w_i}$.
Since it is possible that the maximum attainable $\mathtt{WNW}(A)$ is $0$, we define a \emph{maximum weighted Nash welfare} or $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation along the lines of \citet{caragiannis2016unreasonable} as follows: given a problem instance, we find a maximum subset of agents, say $N_{\max} \subseteq N$, to which we can allocate bundles of positive value, and compute an allocation to the agents in $N_{\max}$ that maximizes\footnote{There can be multiple maximum subsets $N_{\max}$ having the same cardinality but different maximum weighted Nash welfare.
Our main positive result for $\mathtt{MWNW}$ (Theorem~\ref{thm:mwnw}) holds for all such subsets $N_{\max}$.} $\prod_{i \in N_{\max}} v_i(A_i)^{w_i}$.
To see why the notion of $\mathtt{MWNW}$ makes intuitive sense, consider a setting where agents have a value of $1$ for each item; furthermore, assume that the number of items is exactly $\sum_{i =1}^n w_i$. In this case, one can verify (using standard calculus) that an allocation maximizing $\mathtt{MWNW}$ assigns to agent $i$ exactly $w_i$ items. Indeed, following the interpretation of $w_i$ as the number of members of group $i$ (see Section~\ref{sec:relatedwork}), the expression $v_i(A_i)^{w_i}$ can be thought of as each member of group $i$ deriving the same value from the set $A_i$; the group's overall Nash welfare is thus $v_i(A_i)^{w_i}$.
We also examine the extent to which weighted envy-freeness relates to the weighted versions of two other key fairness notions: \emph{proportionality} and the \emph{maximin share guarantee}.
An allocation $A$ is said to be \emph{weighted proportional} ($\mathtt{WPROP}$) if for every agent $i \in N$, it holds that $v_i(A_i) \ge \frac{w_i}{\sum_{j \in N} w_j}v_i(O)$. For a positive integer $c$, it is \emph{weighted proportional up to $c$ items} ($\mathtt{WPROP} c$) if for every $i \in N$, there exists a subset of items not allocated to $i$, i.e., $S_c \subseteq O \setminus A_i$, of size at most $c$ such that $v_i(A_i) \ge \frac{w_i}{\sum_{j \in N} w_j}\cdot v_i(O) - v_i(S_c)$; this is a natural extension of the (weighted) PROP1 concept \cite{conitzer2017fair,aziz2019polynomial}.\footnote{For any $a<b$, $\mathtt{WPROP} a$ implies $\mathtt{WPROP} b$ but the converse does not hold. Indeed, the former follows directly from the definition. For the latter, consider a problem instance with $n=2$ and $O=\{o_1,\dots,o_b\}$, weights $w_1>b-1$ and $w_2=1$, and identical, additive valuation functions such that $v_i(o)=1$ for all $i\in N$ and $o\in O$. It can be verified that the allocation that gives all items to agent~$2$ is $\mathtt{WPROP} b$ but not $\mathtt{WPROP} a$. }
Let $\Pi(O)$ denote the collection of all (ordered) $n$-partitions of the set of items $O$, or, in other words, the collection of all complete allocations of $O$ to $n$ agents. Then, the \emph{weighted maximin share} \cite{farhadi2019fair} of agent $i$ is defined as: $$\mathtt{WMMS}_i := \max_{(A_1,A_2,\dots,A_n) \in \Pi(O)} \min_{j \in N} \frac{w_i}{w_j} v_i(A_j).$$
An allocation $A$ is called $\mathtt{WMMS}$ if $v_i(A_i) \ge \mathtt{WMMS}_i$ for every $i \in N$.
More generally, for any approximation ratio $\alpha \in (0,1]$, $A$ is called $\alpha$-$\mathtt{WMMS}$ if $v_i(A_i) \ge \alpha \cdot \mathtt{WMMS}_i$ for every $i \in N$.
\section{$\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocations}
\label{sec:wef1}
We commence our exploration of weighted envy-freeness by considering extensions of two standard methods for producing $\mathtt{EF1}$ allocations in the unweighted setting: the \emph{envy cycle elimination algorithm} and the \emph{round-robin algorithm}.
As we will see, these two procedures experience contrasting fortunes in the presence of weights: while the idea of eliminating envy cycle fundamentally fails, the round-robin algorithm admits an elegant generalization that can take into account arbitrary entitlements of the agents.
\subsection{Envy Cycle Elimination Algorithm}
Before we discuss the envy cycle elimination algorithm of \citet{lipton2004approximately}, let us briefly recap how it works in the unweighted setting.
The algorithm allocates one item at a time in an arbitrary order.
It also maintains an ``envy graph'', which captures the envy relation between the agents with respect to the (incomplete) allocation at each stage.
The next item is allocated to an unenvied agent, and any envy cycle that forms as a result is eliminated by letting each agent take the bundle of the agent that she envies.
This cycle elimination step allows the algorithm to ensure that there is an unenvied agent to whom it can allocate the next item.
As far as envy in the traditional sense is concerned, what an agent actually ``envies'' is an allocated bundle regardless of who owns that bundle. However, both the subjective valuations of allocated bundles and the relative weights interact in non-trivial ways to determine weighted envy. It is easy to see that weighted envy of $i$ towards $j$ does not imply traditional envy of $i$ towards $j$, and vice versa. A crucial implication is that even if agent $i$'s bundle is replaced with the bundle of an agent $j$ towards whom $i$ has weighted envy, $i$'s realized valuation, and hence the ratio of her realized valuation to her weight, may decrease as a result.
Indeed, consider a problem instance with $n=2$ and $O=\{o_1,o_2,o_3\}$, weights $w_1=3$ and $w_2=1$, and identical, additive valuation functions such that $v_i(o)=1$ for all $i \in N$ and $o \in O$. Under the complete allocation with $A_1=\{o_1,o_2\}$, agent $1$ has weighted envy towards agent $2$ since $v_1(A_2)/w_2=1/1=1>2/3=v_1(A_1)/w_1$, but agent $1$ would not prefer to replace $A_1$ with $A_2$ since that reduces her realized valuation from $2$ to $1$. On the other hand, agent $2$ could benefit from replacing $A_2$ with $A_1$ even though she does not have weighted envy towards agent $1$. As such, the natural extension of the envy cycle elimination algorithm, where an edge exists from agent $i$ to agent $j$ if and only if $i$ has weighted envy towards $j$, does not guarantee a complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ or even $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ allocation.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:wef-1-diff}
The weighted version of the envy cycle elimination algorithm may not produce a complete $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ allocation, even in a problem instance with two agents and additive valuations.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider a problem instance with $n=2$ and $m=12$, weights $w_1=1$ and $w_2=2$, and valuation functions defined by
\begin{align*}
v_1(o_r) = \begin{cases}
1 &\text{for $r=1$};\\
0.1 &\text{for $r=12$};\\
0.21 &\text{otherwise};
\end{cases}\quad \text{and} \quad
v_2(o_r) = \begin{cases}
1.1 &\text{for $r=1$};\\
0.1 &\text{for $r=12$};\\
0.2 &\text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
Suppose that the weighted envy cycle elimination algorithm iterates over $o_1,o_2,\dots,o_{12}$, and starts by allocating $o_1$ to agent $1$ due to, say, lexicographic tie-breaking. At this point, agent $2$ has weighted envy towards agent $1$ and not vice versa; moreover, this condition persists until items $o_2, \dots, o_{10}$ have all been allocated to agent $2$. At this point, item $o_{11}$ also goes to agent $2$, resulting in valuations $v_1(A_1)=v_1(o_1)=1$ and $v_2(A_2)=v_2(\{o_2,\dots,o_{11}\})=2$.
Agent $2$ still has weighted envy towards agent $1$ since
$v_2(A_2)/w_2=1<1.1/1=v_2(A_1)/w_1$;
on the other hand, agent~$1$ also develops weighted envy towards agent $2$ since
$v_1(A_2)/w_2=1.05>1=v_1(A_1)/w_1$.
Thus, there is a cycle in the induced weighted envy graph. For an unweighted envy graph, we would ``de-cycle'' the graph at this point by swapping bundles over the cycle and that would still maintain the invariant that the allocation is $\mathtt{EF1}$. However, if we swap the bundles in this example so that the new allocated bundles are $A'_1=A_2=\{o_2,\dots,o_{11}\}$ and $A'_2=A_1=\{o_1\}$, agent $2$ will end up having (weak) weighted envy up to more than one item towards agent $1$ since
$v_2(A'_2)/w_2=1.1/2=0.55$ and $v_2(A'_1 \setminus \{o\})/w_1=(0.2 \times 9)/1=1.8$ for every $o \in A'_1$, and this weighted envy persists no matter how we allocate $o_{12}$.\footnote{Another interesting feature of this example is that the two agents have \emph{commensurable} valuations, i.e., both agents have the same valuation for the entire collection of items $O$: $\sum_{o \in O} v_1(o)=\sum_{o \in O} v_2(o) = 3.2$. This shows that the negative result of Proposition~\ref{prop:wef-1-diff} holds even if we impose the additional restriction of commensurability on the valuation functions.}
\end{proof}
By replacing each of the items $o_2,\dots,o_{11}$ with $c$ smaller items of equal value, one can check that the envy cycle elimination algorithm cannot even guarantee $\mathtt{WWEF}c$ for any fixed $c$.
In spite of this negative result, the algorithm does work in the special case where the agents all have the same valuations.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:wef-1-identical}
The weighted version of the envy cycle elimination algorithm produces a complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation whenever agents have identical (not necessarily additive) valuations, i.e., $v_i(S)=v(S)$ for some $v:2^O \to \mathbb{R}_{\ge 0}$, $\forall i \in N$, $\forall S \subseteq O$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By construction of the algorithm,
the (incomplete) allocation at the end of each iteration is guaranteed to be $\mathtt{WEF1}$ as long as we can find an agent, say $i$, towards whom no other agent has weighted envy at the beginning of the iteration: we give the item under consideration to agent $i$ and thus any resulting weighted envy towards $i$ can be eliminated by removing this item. If there is no unenvied agent, then the weighted envy graph consists of at least one cycle; however, under identical valuations, the envy graph cannot have cycles.
Indeed, suppose that agents $1,2,\ldots,\ell$ form a cycle (in that order) for some $\ell \in [n]$.
Since agents have identical valuations, it must be that $v(A_1)/w_1 < v(A_2)/w_2 < \dots < v(A_\ell)/w_\ell < v(A_1)/w_1$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Picking Sequence Protocols}\label{sec:picking}
We now turn our attention to protocols that let agents pick their favorite item according to some predetermined sequence.
When all agents have equal weight and additive valuations, it is well-known that a round-robin algorithm, wherein the agents take turns picking an item in the order $1,2,\dots,n,1,2,\dots,n,\dots$, produces an $\mathtt{EF1}$ allocation.
This is in fact easy to see: If agent $i$ is ahead of agent $j$ in the ordering, then in every ``round'', $i$ picks an item that she likes at least as much as $j$'s pick; by additivity, $i$ does not envy $j$.
On the other hand, if agent $i$ picks after agent $j$, then by considering the first round to begin at $i$'s first pick, it follows from the same argument that $i$ does not envy $j$ up to the first item that $j$ picks.
We show next that in the general setting with weights, we can construct a weight-dependent picking sequence which guarantees $\mathtt{WEF1}$ for any number of agents and arbitrary weights.
The resulting algorithm is efficient, intuitive and can be easily explained to a layperson, so we believe that it has a strong practical appeal.
Unlike in the unweighted case, however, the proof that the algorithm produces a fair allocation is much less straightforward and requires making several intricate arguments.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:pickseq}
For any number of agents with additive valuations and arbitrary positive real weights, there exists a picking sequence protocol that computes a complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation in polynomial time.
\end{theorem}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Weighted Picking Sequence Protocol}
\label{alg_pickseq}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE Remaining items $\widehat{O} \leftarrow O$.
\STATE Bundles $A_i \leftarrow \emptyset$, $\forall i \in N$.
\STATE $t_i \leftarrow 0$, $\forall i \in N$. \textbf{/*number of times each agent has picked so far*/}\\
\WHILE{$\widehat{O} \neq \emptyset$}
\STATE $i^* \leftarrow \arg\min_{i \in N} \frac{t_i}{w_i}$, breaking ties lexicographically.
\STATE $o^* \leftarrow \arg\max_{o \in \widehat{O}} v_{i^*}(o)$, breaking ties arbitrarily.
\STATE $A_{i^*} \leftarrow A_{i^*} \cup \{o^*\}$.
\STATE $\widehat{O} \leftarrow \widehat{O} \setminus \{o^*\}$.
\STATE $t_{i^*} \leftarrow t_{i^*}+1$.
\ENDWHILE
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
To prove Theorem~\ref{thm:pickseq}, we construct a picking sequence such that in each turn, an agent with the lowest weight-adjusted picking frequency picks the next item (Algorithm~\ref{alg_pickseq}). We claim that after the allocation of each item, for any agent $i$, every other agent is weighted envy-free towards $i$ up to the item that $i$ picked first.
To this end, first note that choosing an agent who has had the minimum (weight-adjusted) number of picks thus far ensures that the first $n$ picks are a round-robin over all of the agents; in this phase, the allocation is obviously $\mathtt{WEF1}$ since each agent has at most one item at any point. We will show that, after this phase, the algorithm generates a picking sequence over the agents with the following property:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:pickseq}
Consider an agent $i$ chosen by Algorithm~\ref{alg_pickseq} to pick an item at some iteration $t$, and suppose that this is not her first pick. Let $t_i$ and $t_j$ be the numbers of times agent $i$ and some other agent $j$ appear in the prefix of iteration $t$ in the sequence respectively, not including iteration $t$ itself. Then $\frac{t_j}{t_i} \ge \frac{w_j}{w_i}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since agent $i$ is picked at iteration $t$, it must be that $i \in \arg\min_{k \in N} \frac{t_k}{w_k}$. This means that $\frac{t_i}{w_i} \le \frac{t_j}{w_j}$, i.e., $\frac{t_j}{t_i} \ge \frac{w_j}{w_i}$ since $t_i > 0$.
\end{proof}
The property guaranteed by Lemma~\ref{lem:pickseq} is sufficient to ensure that the latest picker does not attract weighted envy up to more than one item towards herself after her latest pick:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:each_pick_wef1}
Suppose that, for every iteration $t$ in which agent $i$ picks an item after her first pick, the numbers of times that agent $i$ and some other agent $j$ appear in the prefix of the iteration in the sequence, not including iteration $t$ itself---call them $t_i$ and $t_j$ respectively---satisfy the relation $\frac{t_j}{t_i} \ge \frac{w_j}{w_i}$. Then, in the partial allocation up to and including $i$'s latest pick, agent $j$ is weighted envy-free towards $i$ up to the first item $i$ picked.
\end{lemma}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.85]
\draw [fill = gray!50] (3,2.4) rectangle (4,3.9);
\draw (4.5,2.4) rectangle (5.5,3.4);
\draw [fill = gray!50] (6,2.4) rectangle (7,3.9);
\draw (7.5,2.4) rectangle (8.5,3.4);
\draw (9,2.4) rectangle (10,3.4);
\node at (2,2) {$i$};
\node at (3.5,2) {$j$};
\node at (5,2) {$i$};
\node at (6.5,2) {$j$};
\node at (8,2) {$i$};
\node at (9.5,2) {$i$};
\node at (3.5,3.15) {$1$};
\node at (5,2.9) {$\frac{2}{3}$};
\node at (6.5,3.15) {$1$};
\node at (8,2.9) {$\frac{2}{3}$};
\node at (9.5,2.9) {$\frac{2}{3}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Illustration of the intuition behind the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:each_pick_wef1}. Here, $i<j$, $w_i = 3$, and $w_j = 2$. The rectangles represent the agents' buckets, and the numbers therein correspond to their capacities. Note that agent~$i$ does not receive a bucket in her first pick. Agent~$j$'s buckets are filled, while those of agent~$i$ are empty.}
\label{fig:water}
\end{figure}
Before we prove Lemma~\ref{lem:each_pick_wef1}, we first provide a high-level intuition.
Recall the argument for the unweighted case at the beginning of Section~\ref{sec:picking}.
One way to visualize this argument is that when we consider envy from agent~$j$ towards agent~$i$, every time agent~$j$ picks an item, we give her a bucket with $1$ unit of water, while every time agent~$i$ picks an item from the second time onwards, we give her an empty bucket of capacity $1$.
Agent~$j$ is allowed to pour water from any of her buckets into any of $i$'s buckets that comes later in the sequence.
Since $j$ values an item that she picks at least as much as any item that $i$ picks in a later turn, in order to establish $\mathtt{EF1}$, it suffices to show that $j$ can fill up all of $i$'s buckets using such operations.
A similar idea can be used in the weighted setting, except that in order to account for the weights, every time agent~$i$ picks after the first time, we give her an empty bucket of capacity $w_j/w_i$ units (see Figure~\ref{fig:water} for an example when $w_i > w_j$).
Note in particular that this bucket setup is entirely independent of the agents' valuations for the items.
However, unlike in the unweighted setting, where agent~$j$ can accomplish the task by simply pouring all the water from each of her buckets into $i$'s following bucket, in the weighted case, $j$ may need to pour water from a bucket into several of $i$'s buckets, even those coming after $j$'s subsequent bucket.
The proof below formalizes this intuition.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:each_pick_wef1}]
Let $\gamma := \frac{w_j}{w_i}$. Consider any iteration $t$ in which agent $i$ is chosen after her first pick. Let agent $j$'s values for the items allocated to agent $i$ in the latter's second, third, $\dots$, $(t_i+1)^\mathrm{st}$ picks (the last one occurring at the iteration $t$ under consideration) be $\beta_1$, $\beta_2$, $\dots$, $\beta_{t_i}$ respectively. If $o^*$ is the first item picked by agent $i$ and $A^t$ the partial allocation up to and including iteration $t$, then clearly $v_j(A_i^t \setminus \{o^*\}) = \sum_{x=1}^{t_i} \beta_x$. Let the number of times agent $j$ appears in the prefix of agent $i$'s second pick be $\tau_1$; that between agent $i$'s second and third picks be $\tau_2$; $\dots$; that between agent $i$'s $t_i^\mathrm{th}$ and $(t_i+1)^\mathrm{st}$ picks be $\tau_{t_i}$. Let agent $j$'s values for the items she herself picked during phase $x\in[t_i]$ be $\alpha^x_1, \alpha^x_2, \dots, \alpha^x_{\tau_x}$ respectively, where the phases are defined as in the previous sentence. Then, $v_j(A^t_j)= \sum_{x=1}^{t_i} \sum_{y=1}^{\tau_x} \alpha^x_y$.
Now, for $r\in[t_i]$, since $\sum_{x=1}^{r} \tau_x$ and $r$ are the numbers of times agents $j$ and $i$ appear in the prefix of the latter's $(r+1)^\mathrm{st}$ pick respectively, the condition of the lemma dictates that
\begin{align}
\sum_{x=1}^{r} \tau_x \ge r \gamma \quad \forall r \in [t_i].\label{spill_and_fresh}
\end{align}
Note that $\tau_1 \ge \gamma >0$; however, $\tau_x$ can be zero for $x \in \{2,3,\dots,t_i\}$---this corresponds to the scenario where agent $i$ picked more than once without agent $j$ picking in between.
Moreover, every time agent $j$ was chosen, she picked one of the items she values the most among those available, including the items picked by agent $i$ later. Hence, if $\tau_x > 0$ for some $x\in [t_i]$, then
\begin{align}
\alpha^x_y &\ge \max\{\beta_x, \beta_{x+1}, \dots, \beta_{t_i}\} \quad \forall y \in [\tau_x] \notag\\
\Rightarrow \quad \sum_{y=1}^{\tau_x} \alpha^x_y &\ge \tau_x \max\{\beta_x, \beta_{x+1}, \dots, \beta_{t_i}\}. \label{alphaxy}
\end{align}
Note that Inequality~\eqref{alphaxy} holds trivially if $\tau_x=0$ since both sides are zero; hence it holds for every $x \in [t_i]$.
We claim that for each $r\in[t_i]$,
\begin{align*}
\sum_{x=1}^r \sum_{y=1}^{\tau_x} \alpha^x_y \ge \gamma\sum_{x=1}^r\beta_x + \left(\sum_{x=1}^r\tau_x - r\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_r, \beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\}.
\end{align*}
To prove the claim, we proceed by induction on $r$. For the base case $r=1$, we have from Inequality~\eqref{alphaxy} that
\begin{align*}
\sum_{y=1}^{\tau_1} \alpha^1_y
&\ge \tau_1\max\{\beta_1,\beta_2,\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} \\
&\ge \gamma\beta_1 + (\tau_1-\gamma)\max\{\beta_1,\beta_2,\dots,\beta_{t_i}\}.
\end{align*}
For the inductive step, assume that the claim holds for $r-1$; we will prove it for $r$.
We have
\begin{align*}
\qquad\sum_{x=1}^r\sum_{y=1}^{\tau_x} \alpha^x_y &= \sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\sum_{y=1}^{\tau_x} \alpha^x_y + \sum_{y=1}^{\tau_r} \alpha^r_y \\
&\ge \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\beta_x + \left(\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\tau_x - (r-1)\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_{r-1}, \beta_r,\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} + \sum_{y=1}^{\tau_r} \alpha^r_y \\
&\ge \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\beta_x + \left(\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\tau_x - (r-1)\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_{r-1}, \beta_r,\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} + \tau_r\max\{\beta_r,\beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} \\
&\ge \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\beta_x + \left(\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\tau_x - (r-1)\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_r, \beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} + \tau_r\max\{\beta_r,\beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} \\
&= \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\beta_x + \left(\sum_{x=1}^{r}\tau_x - (r-1)\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_r, \beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\}\\
&= \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\beta_x + \gamma\max\{\beta_r,\beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} + \left(\sum_{x=1}^r\tau_x - r\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_r, \beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} \\
&\ge \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\beta_x + \gamma \beta_r + \left(\sum_{x=1}^r\tau_x - r\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_r, \beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} \\
&= \gamma\sum_{x=1}^r\beta_x + \left(\sum_{x=1}^r\tau_x - r\gamma\right)\max\{\beta_r, \beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\},
\end{align*}
where the first inequality follows directly from the inductive hypothesis, the second from Inequality~\eqref{alphaxy}, and the third from the following facts:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{x=1}^{r-1}\tau_x - (r-1)\gamma \ge 0 && \text{due to Inequality~\eqref{spill_and_fresh}},\\
\text{and} \quad &\max\{\beta_{r-1}, \beta_r,\dots,\beta_{t_i}\} \ge \max\{\beta_r,\beta_{r+1},\dots,\beta_{t_i}\}.&&
\end{align*}
This completes the induction and establishes the claim.
Now, taking $r=t_i$ in the claim, we get
\begin{align*}
\sum_{x=1}^{t_i} \sum_{y=1}^{\tau_x} \alpha^x_y
&\ge \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{t_i}\beta_x + \left(\sum_{x=1}^{t_i}\tau_x-t_i\gamma\right)\beta_{t_i} \\
&\ge \gamma\sum_{x=1}^{t_i}\beta_x,
\end{align*}
where we use Inequality~\eqref{spill_and_fresh} again for the second inequality.
This implies that $v_j(A^t_j) \ge \frac{w_j}{w_i} \cdot v_j(A_i^t \setminus \{o^*\})$, i.e., agent $j$ is weighted envy-free towards agent $i$ up to one item (specifically, the first item picked by agent $i$), concluding the proof of the lemma and therefore the proof of correctness.
\end{proof}
With Lemmas~\ref{lem:pickseq} and \ref{lem:each_pick_wef1} in hand, we are now ready to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:pickseq}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:pickseq}]
It is easy to see that directly after an agent picks an item, her envy towards other agents cannot get any worse than before. Since the partial allocation after the initial round-robin phase is $\mathtt{WEF1}$ and every agent is weighted envy-free up to one item towards every subsequent picker due to Lemmas~\ref{lem:pickseq} and~\ref{lem:each_pick_wef1}, the allocation is $\mathtt{WEF1}$ at every iteration, and in particular at the end of the algorithm. This establishes the correctness of the algorithm.
For the time complexity, note that there are $O(m)$ iterations of the \textbf{while} loop. In each iteration, determining the next picker takes $O(n)$ time, while letting the picker pick her favorite item takes $O(m)$ time. Since we may assume that $m > n$ (otherwise it suffices to allocate at most one item to every agent), the algorithm runs in time $O(m^2)$.
\end{proof}
If $w_i$ equals a positive constant $w$ for every $i \in N$, then Algorithm~\ref{alg_pickseq} degenerates into the traditional round-robin procedure which is guaranteed to return an $\mathtt{EF1}$ allocation for additive valuations, but may not be Pareto optimal; as such, Algorithm~\ref{alg_pickseq} may not produce a $\mathtt{PO}$ allocation either. This is easily seen in the following example: $n=m=2$, $w_1=w_2=1$, $v_1(o_1)=v_1(o_2)=0.5$, $v_2(o_1)=0.8$, and $v_2(o_2)=0.2$. With lexicographic tie-breaking for both agents and items, our algorithm will give us $A_1=\{o_1\}$ and $A_2=\{o_2\}$, which is Pareto dominated by $A'_1=\{o_2\}$ and $A'_2=\{o_1\}$.
On the other hand, if each agent has the same value for all items, the algorithm is equivalent to an apportionment method called \emph{Adams' method} \citep{BalinskiYo01}.\footnote{We are grateful to Ulrike Schmidt-Kraepelin for pointing out this connection.}
In the apportionment setting, agents correspond to states of a country, and items to seats in a parliament.
Since all seats are considered identical, the states can simply ``pick'' any seat from the remaining seats in apportionment, whereas for item allocation it is important that each agent picks her favorite item in her turn.
\section{$\mathtt{WEF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$ allocations}\label{sec:wef1_po}
As the picking sequence that we construct in Section~\ref{sec:picking} yields an allocation that is $\mathtt{WEF1}$ but may fail Pareto optimality, our next question is whether $\mathtt{WEF1}$ can be achieved in conjunction with the economic efficiency notion.
We show that this is indeed possible, by generalizing the classic adjusted winner procedure for two agents and an algorithm of \citet{barman2018finding} for higher numbers of agents.
\subsection{Two Agents}
\label{sec:wef1_po_twoagents}
When agents have equal entitlements, it is known that fairness and efficiency are compatible: \citet{caragiannis2016unreasonable} showed that an allocation maximizing the Nash social welfare satisfies both $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{EF1}$.
Unfortunately, this approach is not applicable to our setting---we show that the $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation may fail to be $\mathtt{WEF1}$.
In fact, we prove a much stronger negative result: for any fixed~$c$, the allocation may fail to be $\mathtt{WEF}c$ even for two agents with identical valuations.
\begin{proposition}
Let $c$ be an arbitrary positive integer. There exists a problem instance with two agents having identical additive valuations for which any $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation is not $\mathtt{WEF}c$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $n=2$, and the weights are $w_1=1$ and $w_2=k$ for some positive integer~$k$ such that $\left(1+\frac{1}{k+c}\right)^k > 2$; such an integer $k$ exists because $\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\left(1+\frac{1}{k+c}\right)^k = e$.
Let $m=k+c+2$, so $O=\{o_1,o_2,\ldots,o_{k+c+2}\}$.
The agents have identical, additive valuations defined by $v_i(o)=1$ for all $i \in N$ and $o \in O$.
Since $\left(1+\frac{1}{k+c}\right)^k > 2$, we have $1\cdot(k+c+1)^k > 2\cdot(k+c)^k$.
Moreover, for $2\leq i\leq k+c$, we have $$\left(1+\frac{1}{k+c+1-i}\right)^k > \left(1+\frac{1}{k+c}\right)^k > 2 > \frac{i+1}{i},$$ and so $i(k+c+2-i)^k > (i+1)(k+c+1-i)^k$.
This means that any $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation $A$ must give one item to agent $1$, say $A_1=\{o_1\}$, and the remaining items to agent $2$, i.e., $A_2=\{o_2,\ldots,o_{k+c+2}\}$. However, even if we remove a set $S_c$ of at most $c$ items from $A_2$, we would still have $v_1(A_2\setminus S_c)/w_2\geq 1+1/k>1=v_1(A_1)/w_1$, so the allocation is not $\mathtt{WEF}c$.
\end{proof}
Given that a $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation may not be $\mathtt{WEF1}$ in our setting, a natural question is whether there is an alternative approach for guaranteeing the existence of a $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation.
We first show that this is indeed the case for two agents: we establish that such an allocation exists and can be computed in polynomial time for two agents, by adapting the classic adjusted winner procedure \cite{brams1996fair} to the weighted setting.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:2agents}
For two agents with additive valuations and arbitrary positive real weights, a complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$ allocation always exists and can be computed in polynomial time.
\end{theorem}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Weighted Adjusted Winner Procedure}
\label{alg_waw}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE $\frac{v_1(o_1)}{v_2(o_1)} \ge \frac{v_1(o_2)}{v_2(o_2)} \ge \dots \ge \frac{v_1(o_m)}{v_2(o_m)}$ w.l.o.g.\\
\STATE $d \leftarrow 1$.
\WHILE{$\frac{1}{w_1}\sum_{r=1}^d v_1(o_r) < \frac{1}{w_2}\sum_{r=d+2}^m v_1(o_r)$}
\STATE $d \leftarrow d+1$.
\ENDWHILE
\STATE $A_1 \leftarrow \{o_1, \dots,o_d\}$.
\STATE $A_2 \leftarrow \{o_{d+1}, \dots,o_m\}$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{proof}
Assume first that both agents have positive values for all items, i.e., $v_1(o)>0$ and $v_2(o)>0$ for every $o \in O$; we will deal with the case where this does not hold later.
We claim that the Weighted Adjusted Winner procedure as delineated in Algorithm~\ref{alg_waw} produces an allocation satisfying the theorem statement.
First note that the left-hand side of the \textbf{while} loop condition is strictly increasing in $d$ and trivially exceeds the right-hand side for $d=m-1$;\footnote{For $d \ge m-1$, we set the right-hand side of the \textbf{while} loop condition to zero.} hence, there always exists $d \in [m-1]$ which satisfies the stop criterion and the loop terminates at the smallest such $d$.
\paragraph{$\mathtt{WEF1}$ property:} If the \textbf{while} loop ends with $d=d^*$, let us denote $o_{d^*}$ by $o^*$. Then, by construction,
$\frac{v_1(A_1)}{w_1} \ge \frac{v_1(A_2)-v_1(o_{d^*+1})}{w_2}$, which implies that agent $1$ is weighted envy-free towards agent $2$ up to one item (specifically, item $o_{d^*+1}$).
On the other hand, by construction, we also get that
\begin{align}
& \frac{v_1(A_1)-v_1(o^*)}{w_1} < \frac{v_1(A_2)}{w_2}.
\label{ineq:waw}
\end{align}
Moreover, due to the ordering of the ratios, we have
\begin{align*}
&\frac{\sum_{r=1}^{d^*} v_1(o_r)}{\sum_{r=1}^{d^*} v_2(o_r)} \ge \frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)} \ge \frac{\sum_{r=d^*+1}^{m} v_1(o_r)}{\sum_{r=d^*+1}^{m} v_2(o_r)}\\
\Rightarrow \quad & \frac{v_1(A_1)}{v_2(A_1)} \ge \frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)} \ge \frac{v_1(A_2)}{v_2(A_2)}\\
\Rightarrow \quad & v_1(A_1) \ge \frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)} \cdot v_2(A_1);\\
& v_1(A_2) \le \frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)} \cdot v_2(A_2).
\end{align*}
Combining with Inequality~\eqref{ineq:waw}, dividing through by $\frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)}$, and simplifying, we get
\begin{align*}
&\frac{v_2(A_1)-v_2(o^*)}{w_1} < \frac{v_2(A_2)}{w_2}.
\end{align*}
Thus, agent $2$ is also weighted envy-free towards agent $1$ up to one item (specifically, item $o^*$).
\paragraph{Pareto optimality: } First note that no incomplete allocation can be Pareto optimal since the realized valuation of either agent could be strictly improved by augmenting her bundle with a withheld item (under our assumption that each agent values each item positively).
Since the allocation $A$ produced by Algorithm~\ref{alg_waw} is complete, it suffices to show that it cannot be Pareto dominated by an alternative complete allocation $A'$. Any such complete allocation can be thought of as being generated by transferring items between $A_1$ and $A_2$.
Suppose that $v_1(A'_1) > v_1(A_1)$ for some complete allocation $A'$ different from $A$. Since $A_1 \cup A_2 = A'_1 \cup A'_2 = O$, this inequality implies that
\begin{align}
v_1(A'_1 \cap A_1) + v_1(A'_1 \cap A_2) &> v_1(A'_1 \cap A_1) + v_1(A'_2 \cap A_1)\notag\\
\Rightarrow \quad v_1(A'_1 \cap A_2) &> v_1(A'_2 \cap A_1).\label{ineq:po}
\end{align}
If $A'_2 \cap A_1 = \emptyset$, then $A'_2 \subset A_2$ (since $A'_2 \neq A_2$). Hence, $v_2(A'_2)<v_2(A_2)$ so that $A'$ cannot Pareto dominate $A$. As such, we will assume that $A'_2 \cap A_1 \neq \emptyset$. Then, due to the ratio ordering and how $A_1, A_2$ are constructed, we must have
\begin{align*}
\frac{v_1(o)}{v_2(o)} &\ge \frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)} \quad \forall o \in A'_2 \cap A_1\\
\Rightarrow \quad \frac{v_1(A'_2 \cap A_1)}{v_2(A'_2 \cap A_1)} = \frac{\sum_{o \in A'_2 \cap A_1} v_1(o)}{\sum_{o \in A'_2 \cap A_1} v_2(o)} &\ge \frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)}.
\end{align*}
By similar reasoning, it holds that
\[\frac{v_1(o^*)}{v_2(o^*)} \ge \frac{v_1(A'_1 \cap A_2)}{v_2(A'_1 \cap A_2)}. \]
Combining with Inequality~(\ref{ineq:po}), we get
\begin{align*}
&\frac{v_1(A'_2 \cap A_1)}{v_2(A'_2 \cap A_1)} \ge \frac{v_1(A'_1 \cap A_2)}{v_2(A'_1 \cap A_2)} > \frac{v_1(A'_2 \cap A_1)}{v_2(A'_1 \cap A_2)}\\
\Rightarrow \quad &v_2(A'_1 \cap A_2) > v_2(A'_2 \cap A_1), \qquad \text{since $v_1(A'_2 \cap A_1) > 0$,}\\
\Rightarrow \quad &v_2(A'_2 \cap A_2) + v_2(A'_1 \cap A_2) > v_2(A'_2 \cap A_2) + v_2(A'_2 \cap A_1)\\
\Rightarrow \quad &v_2(A_2) > v_2(A'_2),
\end{align*}
which contradicts the necessary condition for $A'$ to Pareto dominate $A$: $v_2(A'_2) \ge v_2(A_2)$. Assuming $v_2(A'_2) > v_2(A_2)$ leads us to an analogous conclusion. Hence, $A$ must be Pareto optimal.
\paragraph{Complexity: } The $m$ ratios can be sorted in $O(m \log m)$ time. Each new \textbf{while} loop condition can be checked in $O(1)$ time, so the total time taken by the \textbf{while} loop is $O(m)$. Hence, the algorithm runs in $O(m\log m)$ time. \newline
Let us now address the scenario where there are items of zero value to an agent. Of course, items valued at zero by both agents can be safely ignored.
We will initialize the bundle $A_i$ with items valued positively by agent $i \in \{1,2\}$ only, i.e., $A^0_1 = \{o \in O: v_1(o)>0, v_2(o)=0\}$ and $A^0_2 = \{o \in O: v_2(o)>0, v_1(o)=0\}$. Then we run Algorithm~\ref{alg_waw} on the remaining items and use its output $(A_1,A_2)$ to augment the respective bundles. We will now show that the resulting allocation $(A^0_1 \cup A_1, A^0_2 \cup A_2)$ is $\mathtt{WEF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$.
By the argument in the previous part, there is an item $o' \in A_2 \subseteq A^0_2 \cup A_2$ such that
\[\frac{v_1(A^0_1 \cup A_1)}{w_1} \ge \frac{v_1(A_1)}{w_1} \ge \frac{v_1(A_2)-v_1(o')}{w_2} = \frac{v_1(A^0_2 \cup A_2)-v_1(o')}{w_2},\]
since $v_1(A^0_2)=0$. Thus, agent $1$ is weighted envy-free towards agent $2$ up to one item. An analogous argument shows that agent $2$ is also weighted envy-free towards agent $1$ up to one item.
Since a Pareto optimal allocation cannot be incomplete (because each item has a positive value to at least one agent), it suffices to show that the (complete) allocation under consideration is not Pareto dominated by any complete allocation. Again, any complete allocation can be obtained from $(A^0_1 \cup A_1, A^0_2 \cup A_2)$ by swapping items between agents. It is evident that any allocation in which an item $o \in A^0_1$ (resp., an item $o \in A^0_2$) belongs to agent $2$ (resp., agent $1$) is Pareto dominated by the allocation wherein this item is given to agent $1$ (resp., agent $2$), everything else remaining the same. Hence, it suffices to show that a Pareto improvement cannot be achieved by swapping items in $A_1 \cup A_2$ between the agents---but we already know this from the earlier part of the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Any Number of Agents}\label{sec:wef1po_gen}
Having resolved the existence question of $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{WEF1}$ for two agents, we now investigate whether such an allocation always exists for any number of agents, answering the question in the affirmative.
To this end, we employ a weighted modification of the algorithm by \citet{barman2018finding}, which finds a $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{EF1}$ allocation in pseudo-polynomial time for agents with additive valuations in the unweighted setting.
Like Barman et al., we consider an artificial market where each item has a price and agents purchase a bundle of items with the highest ratio of value to price, called ``bang per buck ratio''. This allows us to measure the degree of fairness of a given allocation in terms of the prices.
Formally, a {\em price vector} is an $m$-dimensional non-negative real vector $\boldsymbol{p}=(p_1,p_2,\ldots,p_m) \in \mathbb{R}^O_{\ge 0}$; we call $p_o$ the {\em price} of item $o \in O$, and write $p(X)=\sum_{o \in X}p_{o}$ for a set of items $X$.
Let $A$ be an allocation and $\boldsymbol{p}$ be a price vector.
For each $i\in N$, we call $p(A_i)$ the {\em spending} and $\frac{1}{w_i}p(A_i)$ the {\em weighted spending} of agent $i$. We now define a weighted version of the price envy-freeness up to one item (pEF1) notion introduced by \citet{barman2018finding}.
\begin{definition
Given an allocation $A$ and a price vector $\boldsymbol{p}$, we say that $A$ is {\em weighted price envy-free up to one item} ($\mathtt{WpEF1}$) with respect to $\boldsymbol{p}$ if for any pair of agents $i,j$, either $A_j=\emptyset$ or $\frac{1}{w_i}p(A_i) \geq \frac{1}{w_j} \min_{o \in A_j}p(A_j \setminus \{o\})$.
\end{definition}
The {\em bang per buck ratio} of item $o$ for agent $i$ is $\frac{v_i(o)}{p_o}$; we write the maximum bang per buck ratio for agent $i$ as $\alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p})$.
We refer to the items with maximum bang per buck ratio for $i$ as $i$'s {\em MBB items} and denote the set of such items by $\mathrm{MBB}_i(\boldsymbol{p})$ for each $i \in N$. The following lemma is a straightforward adaptation of Lemma $4.1$ in \cite{barman2018finding} to our setting; it ensures that one can obtain the property of $\mathtt{WEF1}$ by balancing among the spending of agents under the MBB condition.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:MBBwpEF1}
Given a complete allocation $A$ and a price vector $\boldsymbol{p}$, suppose that allocation $A$ satisfies $\mathtt{WpEF1}$ with respect to $\boldsymbol{p}$ and agents are assigned to MBB items only, i.e., $A_i \subseteq \mathrm{MBB}_i(\boldsymbol{p})$ for each $i \in N$. Then $A$ is $\mathtt{WEF1}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To show that $A$ is $\mathtt{WEF1}$, take any pair of agents $i,j \in N$. If $A_j=\emptyset$, the required condition holds trivially.
Suppose that $A_j\neq\emptyset$.
Since the allocation $A$ is $\mathtt{WpEF1}$ with respect to $\boldsymbol{p}$,
$$
\frac{1}{w_i} p(A_i) \ge \frac{1}{w_j} \min_{o \in A_j} p(A_j \setminus \{o\}).
$$
Multiplying both sides by $\alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p})$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\frac{1}{w_i} \alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p}) \cdot p(A_i) \ge \frac{1}{w_j} \min_{o \in A_j} \alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p}) \cdot p(A_j \setminus \{o\})\\
&\Rightarrow \frac{1}{w_i} \sum_{o \in A_i} \frac{v_i(o)}{p_{o}} p_{o} \ge \frac{1}{w_j} \min_{o \in A_j} \sum_{o' \in A_j\setminus \{o\}} \frac{v_i(o')}{p_{o'}} p_{o'}\\
&\Rightarrow \frac{1}{w_i} \sum_{o \in A_i} v_i(o) \ge \frac{1}{w_j} \min_{o \in A_j} \sum_{o' \in A_j\setminus \{o\}} v_i(o')\\
&\Rightarrow \frac{1}{w_i} v_i(A_i) \ge \frac{1}{w_j} \min_{o \in A_j} v_i(A_j \setminus \{o\}).
\end{align*}
For the transition from the first to the second inequality in the chain, we use the definition of $\alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p})$ and the assumption $A_i \subseteq \mathrm{MBB}_i(\boldsymbol{p})$: by the definition of $\alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p})$, we have $\alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p}) \ge \frac{v_i(o')}{p_{o'}}$ for all $o'\in O$, and by the assumption $A_i \subseteq \mathrm{MBB}_i(\boldsymbol{p})$, it holds that $\alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p}) = \frac{v_i(o)}{p_{o}}$ for all $o\in A_i$.
The last inequality allows us to conclude that $A$ is $\mathtt{WEF1}$.
\end{proof}
It is also known that if each agent $i$ only purchases MBB items, so that $i$ maximizes her valuation under the budget $p(A_i)$, then the corresponding allocation is Pareto optimal.
\begin{lemma}[First Welfare Theorem; \citet{Mas-Colell1995}, Chapter $16$]\label{lem:MBB}
Given a complete allocation $A$ and a price vector $\boldsymbol{p}$, suppose that agents are assigned to MBB items only, i.e., $A_i \subseteq \mathrm{MBB}_i(\boldsymbol{p})$ for each $i \in N$. Then $A$ is $\mathtt{PO}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To show that $A$ is Pareto optimal, suppose towards a contradiction that another allocation $A'$ Pareto dominates $A$.
This means that $v_i(A'_i) \ge v_i(A_i)$ for all $i \in N$, and $v_j(A'_j) > v_j(A_j)$ for some $j \in N$.
Since each agent $i$ maximizes her valuation under the budget $p(A_i)$ in $A$, we have $p(A'_i) \ge p(A_i)$ for all $i \in N$, and $p(A'_j) > p(A_j)$ for some $j \in N$. Indeed, if $p(A_i)>p(A'_i)$ for some $i \in N$, this would mean that
\[
v_i(A_i)= \alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p}) p(A_i) > \alpha_i(\boldsymbol{p}) p(A'_i) \ge \sum_{o \in A'_i} \frac{v_i(o)}{p_o}p_o =v_i(A'_i),
\]
a contradiction. Thus, $p(A'_i) \ge p(A_i)$ for all $i \in N$.
A similar argument shows that $p(A'_j) > p(A_j)$ for some $j\in N$.
However, this implies that
\[
\sum_{o \in O}p_o \ge \sum_{i \in N}p(A'_i) > \sum_{i \in N}p(A_i)= \sum_{o \in O}p_o,
\]
where the last equality holds since $A$ is a complete allocation. We thus obtain the desired contradiction.
\end{proof}
With Lemmas \ref{lem:MBBwpEF1} and \ref{lem:MBB}, the problem of finding a $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation reduces to that of finding an allocation and price vector pair satisfying the MBB condition and $\mathtt{WpEF1}$. We show that there is an algorithm that finds such an outcome in pseudo-polynomial time. Our algorithm follows a similar approach as that of \citet{barman2018finding}; thus the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:POwEF1} is deferred to Appendix~\ref{app:thmproofs}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:POwEF1}
For any number of agents with additive valuations and arbitrary positive real weights, there exists a $\mathtt{WEF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$ allocation. Furthermore, such an allocation can be computed in time $poly(m,n,v_{max},w_{max})$ for any integer-valued inputs, where $v_{max}:=\max_{i\in N, o \in O}v_{i}(o)$ and $w_{max}:=\max_{i \in N} w_i$.
\end{theorem}
The outline of the algorithm is as follows. Our algorithm alternates between two phases: the first phase involves reallocating items from large to small \emph{spenders} (where the ``spending'' of an agent is defined as the ratio between the price for her bundle of items and her weight; see the formal definition in Appendix~\ref{app:thmproofs}), and the second phase involves increasing the prices of the items owned by small spenders. We show that by increasing prices gradually, the algorithm converges to an allocation and price vector pair satisfying the desired criteria when both input weights and valuations are expressed as integral powers of $(1+\epsilon)$ for some $\epsilon>0$. Similarly to \citet{barman2018finding}, we apply our algorithm to the $\epsilon$-approximate instance of the original input and show that for small enough $\epsilon$, the output of the algorithm satisfies the original MBB condition and $\mathtt{WpEF1}$. We note that compared to \citet{barman2018finding}, the analysis becomes more involved due to the presence of weights. In particular, each price-rise phase takes into account not only the valuations but also the weights; as a result, $\epsilon$ needs to be much smaller in order to ensure the equivalence.
\section{$\mathtt{WWEF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$ allocations: Maximum Weighted Nash Welfare}\label{sec:wwef1_po}
In the previous section, we saw that $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocations may fail to satisfy $\mathtt{WEF1}$, showing that the result of \citet{caragiannis2016unreasonable} from the unweighted setting does not extend to the weighted setting via $\mathtt{WEF1}$ (or even $\mathtt{WEF}c$ for any fixed $c$).
Given that these allocations maximize a natural objective, it is still tempting to ask whether they provide any fairness guarantee.
The answer is indeed positive: we show that a $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation satisfies $\mathtt{WWEF1}$, a weaker fairness notion that also generalizes $\mathtt{EF1}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:mwnw}
For any number of agents with additive valuations and arbitrary positive real weights, a $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation is always $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:mwnw} follows a similar outline as the corresponding proof of \citet{caragiannis2016unreasonable}.
$\mathtt{PO}$ follows easily from the definition of $\mathtt{MWNW}$.
For $\mathtt{WWEF1}$, we assume for contradiction that an agent~$i$ weakly envies another agent~$j$ up to more than one item in a $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation.
If every agent has a positive value for every item, we pick an item in agent~$j$'s bundle for which the ratio between $i$'s value and $j$'s value is maximized.
By distinguishing between the cases $w_i\ge w_j$ and $w_i\le w_j$, we show that we can achieve a higher weighted Nash welfare upon transferring this item to agent~$i$'s bundle, which yields the desired contradiction.
The case where agents may have zero value for items is then handled separately.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:mwnw}]
Let $A$ be a $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation, with $N_{\max}$ being the subset of agents having strictly positive realized valuations under $A$. If it were not $\mathtt{PO}$, there would exist an allocation $\hat{A}$ such that $v_i(\hat{A}_i) > v_i(A_i)$ for some $i \in N$ and $v_j(\hat{A}_j) \ge v_j(A_j)$ for every $j \in N \setminus \{i\}$. If $i \in N\setminus N_{\max}$, we would have $v_j(\hat{A}_j) > 0$ for every $j \in N_{\max} \cup \{i\}$, contradicting the assumption that $N_{\max}$ is a largest subset of agents to whom it is possible to give positive value simultaneously. If $i \in N_{\max}$, then $\prod_{j \in N_{\max}} v_j(\hat{A}_j)^{w_j} > \prod_{j \in N_{\max}} v_j(A_j)^{w_j}$, which violates the optimality of the right-hand side. This proves that $A$ is $\mathtt{PO}$.
Like \citet{caragiannis2016unreasonable}, we will start by proving that $A$ is $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ for the scenario $N_{\max}=N$ and then address the case $N_{\max}\neq N$. Assume that $N_{\max}=N$. If $A$ is not $\mathtt{WWEF1}$, then there exists a pair of agents $i,j \in N$ such that $i$ has weak weighted envy towards $j$ up to more than one item. Clearly, there must be at least two items in $j$'s bundle that $i$ values positively.
Moreover, $j$ must value these items positively as well---otherwise we can transfer them to $i$ and obtain a Pareto improvement.
Let $A_j^i := \{o \in A_j: v_i(o)>0\}$. We construct another allocation $A'$ by transferring an item $o^*$ (to be chosen later) from $j$ to $i$ so that $A'_i=A_i \cup \{o^*\}$, $A'_j = A_j \setminus \{o^*\}$, and $A'_r=A_r$ for all $r \in N \setminus \{i,j\}$. We have
\begin{align*}
\frac{\mathtt{WNW}(A')}{\mathtt{WNW}(A)} &= \left( \frac{v_i(A_i \cup \{o^*\})}{v_i(A_i)}\right)^{w_i} \left( \frac{v_j(A_j \setminus \{o^*\})}{v_j(A_j)}\right)^{w_j}\\
&=\left( \frac{v_i(A_i)+v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right)^{w_i} \left( \frac{v_j(A_j)-v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right)^{w_j}\\
&=\left( 1+\frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right)^{w_i} \left( 1-\frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right)^{w_j}.
\end{align*}
First, note that $v_j(o) > 0$ for all $o \in A_j^i$; otherwise the above ratio for $o^*\in A_j^i$ with $v_j(o^*)=0$ equals $\left( 1+\frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right)^{w_i} > 1$, contradicting the assumption that $A$ is a $\mathtt{MWNW}$ allocation. However, even under this condition, we will show that if agents $i,j$ violated the $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ property, the above ratio would still exceed $1$ for some item $o^*$.
\paragraph{Case I} $w_i \ge w_j$.
Let us pick an item $o^* \in \arg\min_{o \in A_j^i} \frac{v_j(o)}{v_i(o)}$ specifically to transfer from $j$ to $i$ for changing the allocation from $A$ to $A'$. This is well-defined by the definition of $A_j^i$. Consider
\begin{align*}
\left[\frac{\mathtt{WNW}(A')}{\mathtt{WNW}(A)} \right]^\frac{1}{w_j} &= \left( 1+\frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right)^\frac{w_i}{w_j} \left( 1-\frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right),
\end{align*}
where $1- \frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}>0$ since $v_j(A_j) > v_j(o^*) > 0$.
Moreover, we have
\[\left( 1+\frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right)^\frac{w_i}{w_j} \ge \left( 1+\frac{w_i}{w_j} \cdot \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right)\]
from Bernoulli's inequality, since $\frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}>0$ and $\frac{w_i}{w_j} \geq 1$.
Algebraic manipulations show that
\begin{align}
&\left( 1+\frac{w_i}{w_j} \cdot \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right) \left( 1- \frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right) > 1 \notag \\
\Leftrightarrow \quad & \frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i} < \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_j(o^*)} \left( \frac{v_j(A_j)-v_j(o^*)}{w_j} \right). \label{case1ineq}
\end{align}
The latter inequality is true under our assumptions for the following reasons: Since agent $i$ with a larger weight has weak weighted envy towards agent $j$ with a smaller weight up to more than one item, we have $\frac{v_i(A_i)}{w_i} < \frac{v_i(A_j)-v_i(o^*)}{w_j}$; in addition, due to our choice of $o^*$,
\[\frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_i(o^*)} \le \frac{\sum_{o \in A_j^i}v_j(o)}{\sum_{o \in A_j^i}v_i(o)} \le \frac{\sum_{o \in A_j}v_j(o)}{\sum_{o \in A_j}v_i(o)} = \frac{v_j(A_j)}{v_i(A_j)}, \]
since $\sum_{o \in A_j \setminus A_j^i}v_j(o) \ge 0$ and $\sum_{o \in A_j \setminus A_j^i} v_i(o) = 0$.
Plugging $v_i(A_j) \le \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_j(o^*)}\cdot v_j(A_j)$ into the above strict inequality and simplifying, we obtain \eqref{case1ineq}. But chaining all these inequalities together, we get
\[\left[\frac{\mathtt{WNW}(A')}{\mathtt{WNW}(A)} \right]^\frac{1}{w_j} > 1 \quad \Rightarrow \quad \mathtt{WNW}(A')>\mathtt{WNW}(A).\]
This is a contradiction, which shows that $A$ is $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ in this case.
\paragraph{Case II} $w_i < w_j$.
As in Case I, we pick an item $o^* \in \arg\min_{o \in A_j^i} \frac{v_j(o)}{v_i(o)}$, so we also have $v_i(A_j) \le \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_j(o^*)} \cdot v_j(A_j)$.
Consider
\begin{align*}
\left[\frac{\mathtt{WNW}(A')}{\mathtt{WNW}(A)} \right]^\frac{1}{w_i} &= \left( 1+\frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right) \left( 1-\frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right)^\frac{w_j}{w_i},
\end{align*}
where $1- \frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}>0$ since $v_j(A_j) > v_j(o^*) > 0$.
Moreover, we have
\[\left(1-\frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right)^\frac{w_j}{w_i} \ge \left( 1- \frac{w_j}{w_i} \cdot \frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right)\]
from Bernoulli's inequality, since $\frac{w_j}{w_i} > 1$ and $0 < \frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)} < 1$.
Algebraic manipulations show that
\begin{align}
&\left( 1+ \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_i(A_i)}\right) \left( 1- \frac{w_j}{w_i} \cdot \frac{v_j(o^*)}{v_j(A_j)}\right) > 1 \notag \\
\Leftrightarrow \quad & \frac{v_i(A_i)+v_i(o^*)}{w_i} < \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_j(o^*)} \cdot \frac{v_j(A_j)}{w_j}. \label{case2ineq}
\end{align}
Since agent $i$ with a smaller weight has weak weighted envy towards agent $j$ with a larger weight up to more than one item, we have $\frac{v_i(A_i)+v_i(o^*)}{w_i} < \frac{v_i(A_j)}{w_j}$.
Plugging $v_i(A_j) \le \frac{v_i(o^*)}{v_j(o^*)} \cdot v_j(A_j)$ into this strict inequality, we obtain \eqref{case2ineq}, and chaining all inequalities leads us to the contradiction $\mathtt{WNW}(A')>\mathtt{WNW}(A)$.
This completes the proof for the scenario where $N_{\max}=N$.
The rest of the proof mirrors the corresponding part in the proof of \citet{caragiannis2016unreasonable}. If $N_{\max} \subsetneq N$, it is easy to see that there can be no weighted envy towards any $i \not\in N_{\max}$ since $v_j(A_i)=0$ for any such $i$ and every $j \in N$. Also, for any $i,j \in N_{\max}$, we can show as in the proof for $N_{\max}=N$ above that there cannot be (weak) weighted envy up to more than one item. Suppose for contradiction that an agent $i \in N \setminus N_{\max}$ is not weighted envy-free towards some $j \in N_{\max}$ up to one item under $A$. This means that $i$ still has positive value for $j$'s bundle even after removing any single item; in particular, $i$ values at least two items in $A_j$ positively. Since $j$ must also value these items positively, we may transfer one of them to $i$ and keep both $i$ and $j$'s valuations positive. This contradicts the maximality of $N_{\max}$. Hence, $i \in N\setminus N_{\max}$ must be weakly weighted envy-free up to one item towards $j \in N_{\max}$.
It follows that $A$ is $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ in all cases.
\end{proof}
\section{$\mathtt{WEF1}$ and other fairness notions}\label{sec:wef1_propMMS}
An allocation that satisfies multiple fairness guarantees is naturally desirable but often elusive in the setting with indivisible items. Hence, we will now explore the implications of the $\mathtt{WEF1}$ property on the other fairness criteria defined in Section~\ref{sec:prelims}.
For additive valuations, \citet{aziz2019polynomial} provided a polynomial-time algorithm for computing a $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{WPROP1}$ allocation, whereas we proved the existence of $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocations in Section~\ref{sec:wef1po_gen}.
It is straightforward to verify that, in the unweighted scenario, any complete envy-free allocation is also proportional for subadditive valuations and any complete $\mathtt{EF1}$ allocation is $\mathtt{PROP1}$ for additive valuations (see, e.g., \cite{aziz2019polynomial}). This begs the question: does the $\mathtt{WEF1}$ property along with completeness also imply the $\mathtt{WPROP1}$ condition? Unfortunately, the answer is no for any $n\ge 3$---in fact, we establish a much stronger result in the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:wprop}
For any number $n \ge 2$ of agents with additive valuations and arbitrary positive real weights, any complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation is $\mathtt{WPROP}(n-1)$.
However, for any $n\ge 3$, there exists an instance in which no complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation is $\mathtt{WPROP}(n-2)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $A$ be a complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation under additive valuations, and fix an agent $i$.
By definition of $\mathtt{WEF1}$, for each $j\in N\setminus\{i\}$, there is a set $S_j\subseteq A_j$ with $|S_j|\leq 1$ such that $\frac{w_j}{w_i} \cdot v_i(A_i) \ge v_i(A_j) - v_i(S_j)$.
Summing up the respective inequalities for all $j\in N \setminus \{i\}$ and noting that $O = \cup_{j \in N} A_j$ due to completeness, we have
$$\frac{\sum_{j \in N \setminus \{i\}} w_j}{w_i} \cdot v_i(A_i) \ge v_i(O) - v_i(A_i) - \sum_{j \in N \setminus \{i\}} v_i(S_j).$$
If we let $S:=\cup_{j \in N \setminus \{i\}}S_j$, the above inequality implies that
$\frac{\sum_{j \in N} w_j}{w_i} \cdot v_i(A_i) \ge v_i(O) - v_i(S)$.
It follows that
$$v_i(A_i)\ge \frac{w_i}{\sum_{j \in N} w_j}\cdot v_i(O) - \frac{w_i}{\sum_{j \in N} w_j}\cdot v_i(S)
\ge
\frac{w_i}{\sum_{j \in N} w_j}\cdot v_i(O) - v_i(S),$$
where the latter inequality follows from $\frac{w_i}{\sum_{j \in N} w_j} < 1$ and $v_i(S)\ge 0$.
Since $|S|\leq n-1$, this shows that $A$ is $\mathtt{WPROP}(n-1)$.
For the second part, let $0 < \epsilon < \frac{1}{n(n-1)}$, and consider an instance with $n \ge 3$ agents where $w_1=1-(n-1)\epsilon$ and $w_i = \epsilon$ for all $i \in N\setminus\{1\}$.
Moreover, assume that there are $m=n$ items, $v_1(o)=\frac{1}{n}$ for every $o \in O$, and every other agent has an arbitrary positive value for each item.
Let $A$ be any complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation.
Note that every agent must receive exactly one item in $A$---otherwise there would be an agent with no item and another agent with two or more items, and these two agents would violate the $\mathtt{WEF1}$ property.
Then, for any set $S\subseteq O\setminus A_1$ with $|S|\leq n-2$, we have
\[\frac{w_1}{\sum_{j \in N} w_j}v_1(O) - v_1(S) \ge \frac{1-(n-1)\epsilon}{1} \cdot 1 - \frac{n-2}{n} = \frac{2}{n} - (n-1)\epsilon > \frac{2}{n} - \frac{1}{n} = \frac{1}{n} = v_1(A_1).\]
Hence, $A$ is not $\mathtt{WPROP}(n-2)$.
\end{proof}
For $n$ symmetric (unweighted) agents with additive valuations, \citet[Prop. 3.6]{amanatidis18comparing} showed that any complete $\mathtt{EF1}$ allocation is $\frac{1}{n}$-$\mathtt{MMS}$, and this approximation guarantee is tight.
Moreover, as \citet[Thm. 4.1]{caragiannis2016unreasonable} proved, a maximum Nash welfare allocation, which is $\mathtt{EF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$, is also $\Theta(1/\sqrt{n})$-$\mathtt{MMS}$. This means that, for a small number of agents, the $\mathtt{EF1}$ property provides a reasonable approximation to $\mathtt{MMS}$ fairness.
Our next proposition stands in stark contrast to these results: For any number of agents with asymmetric weights, it shows that the $\mathtt{WEF1}$ condition does not imply any positive approximation of the $\mathtt{WMMS}$ guarantee, even in conjunction with Pareto optimality.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:wef1_not_apprwmms}
For any constant $\epsilon > 0$ and any number $n\geq 2$ of agents, there exists an instance with additive valuations in which some $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation is not $\epsilon$-$\mathtt{WMMS}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $m=n$ and the weights are $w_1 > w_2 > \dots > w_n > 0$ with $w_n/w_1 < \epsilon$.
The valuation functions are defined by
\begin{align*}
v_1(o_r) &= w_r &\forall r \in [n];\\
v_i(o_r) &=\begin{cases}
1 &\text{if $r=i-1$}\\
0 &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases} &\forall i \in N \setminus \{1\}.
\end{align*}
One can check that $\mathtt{WMMS}_1 = w_1$, obtained from the allocation that gives item $o_i$ to agent $i$ for every $i \in N$. Moreover, the allocation $A$ in which agent $1$ receives $o_n$ and agent $i$ receives $o_{i-1}$ for every $i \in N \setminus \{1\}$ is $\mathtt{PO}$ and $\mathtt{WEF1}$. The $\mathtt{WMMS}$ approximation ratio for agent $1$ under $A$ is $v_1(o_n)/\mathtt{WMMS}_1=w_n/w_1 < \epsilon$.
\end{proof}
For the special case of $n=2$ agents, the first part of Proposition~\ref{prop:wprop} implies that the output of the weighted adjusted winner procedure from Section~\ref{sec:wef1_po_twoagents} is always $\mathtt{WPROP1}$.
However, we show that it comes with no guarantee on the $\mathtt{WMMS}$ approximation.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:weighted-adjusted-bad}
The output of the weighted adjusted winner procedure (Algorithm~\ref{alg_waw}) is always $\mathtt{WPROP1}$. However, for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, it is not necessarily $\epsilon$-$\mathtt{WMMS}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{thm:2agents}, Algorithm~\ref{alg_waw} produces a complete $\mathtt{WEF1}$ allocation for two agents; such an allocation must be $\WP1$ due to Proposition~\ref{prop:wprop}.
Consider an instance with $m=n=2$ and weights $w_1 > w_2 > 0$ with $w_2/w_1 < \epsilon$.
Let $\delta > 0$ be such that $w_2/w_1 > \delta/(1-\delta)$.
Suppose that $v_1(o_i)=w_i$ for $i\in\{1,2\}$, $v_2(o_1) = 1-\delta$, and $v_2(o_2) = \delta$.
Since
\[\frac{v_1(o_2)}{v_2(o_2)} = \frac{w_2}{\delta} > \frac{w_1}{1-\delta}=\frac{v_1(o_1)}{v_2(o_1)},\]
Algorithm~\ref{alg_waw} considers the items in the order $o_2,o_1$.
Then agent 1 receives $o_2$ and agent 2 receives $o_1$.
Hence, agent $1$'s $\mathtt{WMMS}$ approximation ratio is $w_2/w_1<\epsilon$.
\end{proof}
\citet{farhadi2019fair} showed that a $1/n$ approximation of the $\mathtt{WMMS}$ can be obtained using the canonical (unweighted) round-robin algorithm with the added requirement that agents with higher weights go first; it is not hard to check that this algorithm does not guarantee $\mathtt{WWEF}c$ or $\mathtt{WPROP}c$ for any constant~$c$.
On the other hand, while our weighted picking sequence from Section~\ref{sec:picking} ensures $\mathtt{WEF1}$, perhaps surprisingly, it does not come with any $\mathtt{WMMS}$ approximation guarantee.
\begin{proposition}
For any constant $\epsilon > 0$, the output of the Weighted Picking Sequence protocol (Algorithm~\ref{alg_pickseq}) is not necessarily $\epsilon$-$\mathtt{WMMS}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider an instance with $n=2$ and $m=k+1$ for a positive integer $k > 1/\epsilon$.
The weights are $w_1=k$ and $w_2=1$, and both agents have identical valuations with value $k^2$ for one item and $1$ for each of the remaining $k$ items.
We have $\mathtt{WMMS}_1 = k^2$ and $\mathtt{WMMS}_2 = k$.
The picking sequence induced by the algorithm is $1,2,1,1,\dots,1$, so agent 2 only receives value $1$, which is $1/k < \epsilon$ of her $\mathtt{WMMS}$.
In fact, even if we let agent 2 pick first, the picking sequence will be $2,1,1,\dots,1$.
In this case, agent 1 only receives value $k$, which is again $1/k< \epsilon$ of her $\mathtt{WMMS}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:expts}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{numEF_uo1} & \includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{numEF_exp1}\\
(a) Uniform distribution on $[0,1]$ & (b) Exponential distribution with mean $1$\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{numEF_exp2} & \includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{numEF_lognormo1}\\
(c) Exponential distribution with mean $2$ & (d) Log-normal dist. with parameters $(0,1)$\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{numEF_lognorm11} & \includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{numEF_lognorm02}\\
(e) Log-normal dist. with parameters $(1,1)$ & (f) Log-normal dist. with parameters $(0,2)$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Percentages of instances that admit $\mathtt{EF}$ and $\mathtt{WEF}$ allocations for different valuation distributions in our experiments; $n$-UW, depicted by dashed curves (resp., $n$-W, depicted by solid curves) refers to a scenario with $n$ agents with equal weights (resp., weights proportional to agent indices) for all figures. \label{fig:wef_expts_full}}
\end{figure}
Thus far, we have extensively investigated the existence and computational properties of approximations to \emph{weighted envy-freeness} ($\mathtt{WEF}$). While the $\mathtt{WEF}$ notion itself cannot always be satisfied with indivisible items, an interesting question is how ``likely'' it is for a problem instance with weighted agents to admit a $\mathtt{WEF}$ allocation, and how the results compare to those for envy-freeness in the unweighted setting.
In this section, we approach this question experimentally by generating sets of $1000$ instances with $n \in \{2,3,4,5\}$ agents and $m \in \{2,3,\dots,9\}$ items wherein each agent's value for each item is drawn independently from a distribution.
We perform our experiments on three common families of distributions---uniform, exponential, and log-normal---and consider two different weight vectors: $w_i=1$ (unweighted) and $w_i=i$ (weighted) for every $i \in N$.
For each generated instance, we determine by exhaustive search over all allocations whether a $\mathtt{WEF}$ allocation exists.
The results are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:wef_expts_full}; the main observations are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For each fixed distribution and number of agents/items, weighted envy-free allocations are almost always harder to find than their unweighted analogs.
Intuitively, we need more items to satisfy agents with larger weights, and this is not sufficiently compensated by the items that we can save through agents with smaller weights.
\item The more items we have, the more likely it is that a fair allocation exists.
This is to be expected, since more items means higher flexibility in choosing the allocation.
\item By contrast, the more agents there are, the less likely it is that a fair allocation exists. This is again reasonable, as we need to satisfy a larger number of preferences when there are more agents.
\item Fair allocations are rarer when the distribution is uniform than when it is skewed.
This observation aligns with the intuition that in a uniform distribution the values are more evenly distributed, so it is harder to find items for which one agent has high value whereas the remaining agents have low value.
\end{enumerate}
Our experimental results illustrate the difficulty of achieving weighted envy-freeness and further justify our quest for the (strong and weak) relaxations of the $\mathtt{WEF}$ property.
\section{Discussion and Future Work}\label{sec:nonadd}
In this article, we have introduced and studied envy-based notions for the allocation of indivisible items in a general setting where agents can have different entitlements.
As most of our results hold for additive valuation functions, the reader may wonder whether they can be extended to more general classes---after all, in the absence of weights, an $\mathtt{EF1}$ allocation is known to exist for arbitrary monotone valuations \cite{lipton2004approximately}.
We therefore point out some hurdles that we faced while trying to generalize our weighted envy concepts beyond additive valuations.
First, we show that even for simple non-additive valuations, the existence of a $\mathtt{WEF1}$ or $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ allocation can no longer be guaranteed.
Since $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ is weaker than $\mathtt{WEF1}$, it suffices to prove the claim for $\mathtt{WWEF1}$.
\begin{proposition}\label{mwnw_notef1}
There exists an instance with $n=2$ agents such that one of the agents has a (normalized and monotone) submodular valuation,\footnote{A valuation function $v:2^O\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_{\ge 0}$ is said to be \emph{submodular} if for any $O_1\subseteq O_2\subseteq O$ and any item $o\in O\setminus O_2$, we have $v(O_1\cup\{o\})-v(O_1) \geq v(O_2\cup\{o\})-v(O_2)$.} the other agent has an additive valuation, and a complete $\mathtt{WWEF1}$ allocation does not exist.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider an instance with two agents who have weights $w_1=1$ and $w_2=2$, and suppose that there are $m > 5$ items.
The valuation functions are given by $v_1(S)=|S|$ and $v_2(S)=1$ for every $S \in 2^O \setminus \emptyset$, and $v_1(\emptyset)=v_2(\emptyset)=0$.
The functions are normalized and monotone, with $v_1$ additive and $v_2$ submodular.
For any complete allocation $A$, if $|A_1|\ge 2$, we have $v_2(A_1\setminus \{o\})/w_1=1 > 1/2 \ge v_2(A_2)/w_2$ for every $o \in A_1$.
Moreover, it holds that $v_2(A_2\cup\{o\})/w_2 = 1/2 < 1 = v_2(A_1)/w_1$ for every $o\in A_1$. Thus, the only way to make agent $2$ weakly weighted envy-free up to one item towards agent $1$ is to ensure that $|A_1|\leq 1$. Assume without loss of generality that $A_1=\{o_1\}$ (if $A_1=\emptyset$, agent $1$ will be even worse off in the argument that follows), so $A_2=O\setminus \{o_1\}$.
We have $v_1(A_1)=1$ and $v_1(A_2)=|A_2|=m-1$.
Since agent $1$ has an additive valuation and a smaller weight than agent $2$, she would be weakly weighted envy-free up to one item towards agent $2$ if and only if there is an item $o \in A_2$ such that $v_1(A_1 \cup \{o\})/w_1 \ge v_1(A_2)/w_2$.
However, for any $o \in A_2$, we have $v_1(A_1 \cup \{o\})/w_1 = v_1(\{o_1,o\})=2$, whereas $v_1(A_2)/w_2 = (m-1)/2 > 2$ since $m>5$.
This means that no complete allocation can be $\mathtt{WWEF1}$.
\end{proof}
By increasing the lower bound on the number of items in the instance of this proof to $5c$, one can show that a complete $\mathtt{WWEF}c$ allocation is also not guaranteed to exist for any constant $c$.
One of the key ideas in our analysis of the maximum weighted Nash welfare allocation (Theorem~\ref{thm:mwnw}) is what we call the \emph{transferability} property: If agent $i$ has weighted envy towards agent $j$ under additive valuations, then there is at least one item $o$ in $j$'s bundle for which agent $i$ has positive (marginal) valuation---in other words, the item $o$ could be transferred from $j$ to $i$ to augment $i$'s realized valuation.\footnote{Transferability and related properties have been studied by \citet{babaioff2020fair} and \citet{benabbou2020finding} in the context of $\mathtt{EF1}$ and $\mathtt{PO}$ allocations for a subclass of submodular valuations.} Unfortunately, this property no longer holds for non-additive valuations.
\begin{proposition}\label{non_transfer}
There exists an instance such that an agent $i$ with a non-additive valuation function has weighted envy towards an agent $j$ under some allocation $A$, but there is no item in $j$'s bundle for which $i$ has positive marginal valuation---i.e., $\not\exists o \in A_j$ such that $v_i(A_i \cup \{o\}) > v_i(A_i)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider the example in Proposition~\ref{mwnw_notef1}. Under any allocation with $|A_1|=m-1$ and $|A_2|=1$, agent $2$ has weighted envy towards agent $1$ since $v_2(A_2)=1/2<1=v_2(A_1)/w_1$. However, $v_2(A_2 \cup \{o\}) = 1 = v_2(A_2)$ for every $o \in A_1$.
\end{proof}
In light of these negative results, an important direction for future research is to identify appropriate weighted envy notions for non-additive valuations.
Other interesting directions include establishing conditions under which $\mathtt{WEF}$ allocations are likely to exist (cf. Section~\ref{sec:expts}),\footnote{This has been done in the unweighted setting \citep{dickerson2014computational,manurangsi2019when,manurangsi2020closing}} investigating weighted envy in the allocation of \emph{chores} (items with negative valuations) \citep{aziz2019weighted} or combinations of goods and chores \citep{AzizCaIg19,aziz2019polynomial}, incorporating connectivity constraints \citep{BouveretCeEl17,bilo2019almost,BeiIgLu21}, and considering weighted versions of other envy-freeness approximations such as \emph{envy-freeness up to any item (EFX)} \citep{caragiannis2016unreasonable,plaut2018almost}.
From a broader point of view, our work demonstrates that fair division with different entitlements is richer and more challenging than its traditional counterpart in several ways, and much interesting work remains to be done.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was partly done while Chakraborty and Zick were at the National University of Singapore, Igarashi was at the University of Tokyo, and Suksompong was at the University of Oxford.
Chakraborty and Zick were supported by the Singapore NRF Research Fellowship R-252-000-750-733. Igarashi was supported by the KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows
no. 18J00997 and JST, ACT-X.
Suksompong was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under grant no.
639945 (ACCORD); his visit to NUS was supported by MOE Grant R-252-000-625-133.
Preliminary versions of the article appeared in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, May 2020, and Proceedings of the 2nd Games, Agents, and Incentives Workshop, May 2020.
We would like to thank the associate editor and the anonymous reviewers for several helpful comments.
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
|
\section{Introduction}
Voting is a commonplace tool for group decision making, used in political elections, in professional committees, in local assemblies, and also in online platforms such as \url{Doodle.com} and
\url{robovote.org}.
While there is general consensus that people vote strategically, understanding individual
voting behavior is a challenging open question. Due to inherent uncertainty about other people's votes, the strategies that people apply are far from obvious.
Researchers in economics, political science, and more recently in AI and computational social choice, have suggested various models to represent and reason about voters' decision making
under uncertainty.
These include models of \emph{utility maximization, heuristic, and bounded rational} (see below). In a recent paper, Meir, Lev and Rosenschein~\cite{MLR14} suggested different criteria for evaluating models of strategic voting, that included ``theoretic criteria'' (such as generality and discriminative power among actions), ``behavioral criteria'' (such as cognitive plausibility), and ``scientific criteria'' (such as alignment with empirical data). Theoretical analysis of voting models are abundant (see Sec.~\ref{sec:lit_models}), and in this work we focus on the latter two kinds of criteria. \rmr{we tie back the results to these criteria in the conclusion}
\newpar{Research Goal}
The goal of the paper is to study strategic choices of human voters, and in particular to test how their individual behavior fits different types of models. We use real world data from controlled experiments in which human voters either faced a non-binding poll or played a strategic game versus other people.
\kg{the below is standard in AAAI and ML papers, if you want to make a point that you differ from ECON then great, I recommend to remove and save space}
We follow Wright and Leyton-Brown~\shortcite{wright2010beyond}, who separate collected data from strategic games into training and test data, and compared the predictive power of strategic decision-making models based on their predictive performance on the test data.
If a certain model predicts well the behavior of many voters, this is an important indication for the plausibility of this model.Prediction is a standard evaluation metric in behavioral economics~\cite{brandstatter2006priority,erev2017anomalies}.
Thus it should be considered in addition to its theoretical properties, cognitive limitations of the voters and so on.
By further analyzing which models succeed and when they fail, we hope to better understand the considerations that guide people's strategic choices.
\subsection{Theoretical Models}
We briefly describe common approaches for modeling strategic voting behavior in the theoretical literature.
\newpar{Expected utility maximization} A rational voter maximizes her expected utility with respect to a probability distribution over the actions of the other voters.
The distribution itself may be given exogenously (e.g., by a poll), or derived via equilibrium analysis from the uncertain preferences of the other voters.
Such models were developed mainly in the economics literature and are sometimes known as the ``calculus of voting''~\cite{riker1968theory,merrill1981strategic,MW93}.
A somewhat different model was suggested by Bowman et al.~\shortcite{bowman2014potential} for voting on multiple binary issues. The model explicitly estimates the ``attainability'' of each issue (the probability it gets a majority of the votes), and uses this estimate to calculate the expected utility of every possible combinatorial vote.
\newpar{Heuristic decision-making} A voter uses some function that maps any given situation to an action. The voter is not assumed to be rational, and may not even have a cardinal utility measure or an explicit probabilistic representation of the different outcomes. For example, a voter following the
$k$-pragmatist heuristics behaves as if only the $k$ leading candidates are participating~\cite{RE12}.
\newpar{Bounded rationality} A voter makes a rational strategic decision based on a subjective, rather than accurate, belief. These models present a mid-point between utility maximization and heuristics. One example of such a model is \emph{local dominance}~\cite{MLR14}, which assumes that each voter derives a set of possible outcomes based on a poll, and then selects a non-dominated action within these outcomes. Similar probability-free approaches were followed in \cite{OLPRR16,endriss2016strategic}.
\medskip
All the models we work with assume that individual voters may behave differently, but each one follows a deterministic, consistent voting strategy. They are unable to perfectly explain or predict votes that have a random component or where voter behavior changes over time.
Therefore, if the models can still explain the data, it would mean that noise and learning only play a secondary role in people's voting decisions. We go back to this point when analyzing the results.
Other models, such as \emph{quantal-response equilibrium} (QRE)~\cite{mckelvey1995quantal,mckelvey2006theory}, \emph{sampling equilibrium}~\cite{osborne2003sampling} or \emph{trembling hand equilibrium}~\cite{obraztsova2016trembling} assume voters act stochastically. Evaluation of such models is much easier on the aggregate rather than individual level (see below), and therefore they are outside the scope of the current paper. \kg{but you can still compute the prediction of stochastic models on the behavior of individual voters. I think
you should just remove this paragraph.}
\rmr{reviewers explicitly ask about stochastic models. No point in hiding them. There is a good reason no one used them for individual prediction.}
\subsection{Previous Empirical Work}
While the literature is abundant with voting experiments, the vast majority analyze voter behavior in political or organizational election
~\cite{abramson1992sophisticated,felsenthal1993empirical,blais2000calculus,regenwetter2007sophisticated,van2013vote}. These studies test how well historic election results fit various game-theoretic models, without any consideration of individual votes. Further, each voter makes a single strategic decision, and her true preferences are typically unknown
\newpar{Explaining aggregate voting behavior}
Some controlled experiments track voters' decisions in different situations (e.g., \cite{Forsythe1996ThreeCandidateExperiments,van2010strategic,tyszler2016information}).
Most of these experiments included groups of 12-70 subjects who played a repeated strategic voting game, knowing the preferences of others but not how they are going to vote. Yet these papers focused on how well \emph{aggregate behavior} fits the equilibrium models.
For example, in the QRE model used in \citet{tyszler2016information}, voters are assumed to vote for low utility candidates with some probability, which is determined by a parameter of the model.
A model is considered to be an adequate explanation for a dataset if there are some parameters that result in a similar distribution of votes (e.g., a similar rate of strategic compromise) to the one observed in the data. However, such models are not designed to track individual behavior and whether it is consistent. For example, a 20\% rate of strategic compromise could result either from a small group that is consistently strategic, from all voters being occasionally strategic, or even from some random component in the behavior.
\newpar{Explaining individual voting behavior}
Blaise et al. compare individual behavior to rational models, inferring voters' parameters from verbal surveys~\cite{blais2000calculus} or from carefully designing the conditions of a controlled experiment~\cite{blais2014vote}. However, they focused on voting with two candidates, where the only strategic decision is whether to vote or abstain.
We emphasize that all of the above work tested how well empirical data fits the theory \emph{in retrospect}, without dividing the data into separate training and test sets. This approach may cause overfitting, especially in complex models with many parameters.
Tal et al.~\shortcite{TalMG15} study voter behavior under poll information,
but did not compare to any existing decision model, neither suggested a new one.
They demonstrated empirically that there are voters exhibiting different behaviors: in particular, truthful voters, voters who compromise strategically, and voters that tend to vote for the poll leader (``leader biased''). These findings were part of our inspiration to focus on understanding individual votes.
\label{sec:contributions}
Our contributions and results are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We provide a new voting model called the Attainability-Utility (AU) heuristic.
The model
is based on the model suggested by Bowman et al.~\shortcite{bowman2014potential} which considers the attainability of a binary issue (the probability it is accepted in referendum) when computing the expected benefit of a vote.
The AU heuristic extends this model in two ways, first by considering multi-candidate voting settings, second by including a parameter that measures the tradeoff between
how much the voter values candidates' attainability given the poll information versus their \emph{utility} (if selected).
\item We collect the strategic decisions of 520 people in voting experiments with three candidates, where participants each play up to 36 rounds, each round with different poll information and preferences (more than 14,000 decisions in total). All of the data and code will become available for the public using repositories
such as \url{votelib.org}.
\item Using behavioral data from our experiments as well as from \citet{TalMG15} and \citet{tyszler2016information},
we compare the performance of the AU approach to that of theoretical decision models from the literature and to benchmarks set by off-the-shelf machine learning algorithms.
\item Our results show that the AU model outperforms all other voting models, some of them by a large margin, and gets close to the benchmark set by machine learning algorithms. In particular, AU is able to capture much of the behaviors described by the models in Sec.~\ref{sec:lit_models}.
Most errors in the prediction of the AU model can be attributed to participants who played few number of rounds, demonstrated random behavior, and/or changed their strategy during the experiment.
\item Our main insight from the success of the AU model is that people \emph{independently} evaluate each candidate and use simple substitutes to probabilistic calculations. These findings are in line with the more general research on decision making under uncertainty, and at odds with the underlying assumptions of most models from the social choice literature.
\kg{the paragraph below talks about understanding, but doesn't say what we learned.
need to mention the models we used to explain people's behavior, e.g. leader bias, k pragmatics, LD,
and that people reported using that behavior.
when did people use one model, when did they use another? what were the 'types'? otherwise all we have is an empty declaration that we understand behavior}
\end{enumerate}
This is the first paper to provide an empirical evaluation of theoretical decision making models on individual voter behavior under poll information, and the first to test the predictive performance of any voting model in general. Understanding the strategic decisions made by voters of different types,
is crucial to the development, analysis and application of voting rules in strategic environments, and can inform the
design of agents for making voting decisions with other people~\cite{yosef2017haste,Bitan2013SocialRankingsInHumanComputerCommittees}.
\section{Preliminaries}
\def\mathcal {U}{\mathcal {U}}
\def\mathcal {D}{\mathcal {D}}
We consider a single voter who faces a decision, to vote for one of several candidates $C$.
We use the Plurality rule which collects the total number of votes for each candidate, and returns the candidate(s) with the largest number of votes.
The voter has a cardinal utility function $u:C\rightarrow \mathbb R$, where $u(c)$ is the utility of the voter if candidate $c$ wins (different utility for each candidate).
In case of a tie with multiple winners $W\subseteq C$, the utility to the voter is
$u(W)=\frac{1}{|W|}\sum_{c\in W}u(c)$. Denote by $\mathcal {U}(C)$ the set of all utility functions over the set $C$.
Prior to her vote, the voter is faced with non-binding poll information that reflects the popularity of each candidate. Formally, the poll is a vector $\vec s\in \mathbb N^m$, where $s(c)$ is the number of voters expected to vote for $c$. Denote $n=\sum_{c\in C}s(c)$.
We index the candidates $q_1,q_2,\ldots$ from the perspective of the voter, where $q_1$ is the most preferred, then $q_2$, and so on.
\def\varepsilon{\varepsilon}
\medskip
A \emph{decision model} (for Plurality with $m$ candidates and a poll) is a function $M: \mathcal {U}(C) \times \mathbb N^m \rightarrow C$. Here, $M(u,\vec s)\in C$ is the vote of a voter with utility function $u$, using decision model $M$ given a poll $\vec s$. We use a superscript for the name of the decision model, and subscripts to denote voter-specific parameters, if relevant.
For example, a voter who is always truthful regardless of the poll follows the decision model $M^\texttt{Truth}(u, \vec s) := \argmax_{c\in C}u(c)$, which is $q_1$.
To illustrate we introduce a running example with 5 candidates, and specify which candidate the voter will choose under every decision model.
\begin{example}
\label{ex:poll}
The set of candidates is $C=\{q_1,\ldots,q_5\}$,
and the voter's utility is described by the vector $u=(40,30,20,10,0)$ (preferences are lexicographic).
Poll scores are given by $\vec s=(25,70,20,100,80)$, where $n=295$ voters. Figure~\ref{fig:pollExample} (left) shows the poll scores of all candidates graphically.
\end{example}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.61\columnwidth}
\begin{figure}[H] \includegraphics[width=5.2cm]{5_candidate_poll.png}
\end{figure}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.32\columnwidth}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}{l|c}
Decision model & vote\\
\hline
$\texttt{KP}, k=2$& $q_4$\\
$\texttt{KP}, k=4$& $q_1$\\
$\texttt{CV}, \eta=8$& $q_2$\\
$\texttt{CV}, \eta=10000$& $q_4$\\
$\texttt{LD},\ r=0.01$& $q_1$\\
$\texttt{LD}, \quad r=0.08$& $q_2$\\
$\texttt{LDLB}$, $r=0.01$& $q_4$\\
$\texttt{LDLB}$, $r=0.08$& $q_2$\\
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\label{fig:pollExample}
Left: Poll $\vec s$ from Example~\ref{ex:poll}. The utility of each candidate to the voter appears in brackets, and the height of the column is the number of votes. Right: The candidate selected by each decision model. \vspace{-3mm}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Decision models from the literature}\label{sec:lit_models}
We describe decision-making models of voting behavior from the literature.
Figure~\ref{fig:pollExample} (right)
shows the result of using each of the decision models, applied to the voting decision in Example~\ref{ex:poll}.
\newparc{k-pragmatist (KP)} Let $B_k(\vec s)$ contain the $k$ candidates with highest score in $\vec s$, Reijngoud and Endriss~\shortcite{RE12} formalized the $k$-pragmatist heuristic (following early work such as \cite{brams1978approval} which selects the most preferred candidate among $k$ candidates with highest score in $B_k(\vec s)$:
$$M^\texttt{KP}_k(u,\vec s) := \argmax_{c\in B_k(\vec s)}u(c).$$
We allow $k$ to be an individual parameter that differs from voter to voter. When $k=1$ the rule always selects the leader of the poll, and for $k=m$, $M^\texttt{KP}_m\equiv M^{Truth}$.
In Figure~\ref{fig:pollExample} for $k=2$ the voter will vote for the candidate that is most preferred among the two leading candidates ($q_4$ and $q_5$). For $k=4$, the voter considers all candidates except $q_3$ as possible winners, and will vote for her most preferred candidate $q_1$.
\newparc{Calculus of Voting (CV)}
The calculus of voting suggests that a rational voter always votes in a way that maximizes her expected utility~\cite{riker1968theory,MW93}. The complications of the model usually arise from the fact that the voter is assumed to know the other voters' {preferences}, and uses an equilibrium model to predict their votes. We consider a simpler version where the distribution of votes is given exogenously~\cite{merrill1981strategic}, as is the case with poll information.
We denote by $\mathcal {D}(\vec s)$ the distribution on the actual candidate scores, conditional on poll scores $\vec s$.
We say a voter is \emph{pivotal for candidate $y$ over $x$}, if voting for $y$
makes $y$ a joint or unique winner, whereas any other vote results in the victory of candidate $x$. Denote by $P_{\vec s,\mathcal {D}}(x,y)$ the probability that the voter is pivotal for $y$
over $x$ given the distribution over
candidate scores $\mathcal {D}$ induced by poll $\vec s$.
A voter following the calculus of voting (CV) model maximizes her expected utility:
$$M^{\texttt{CV}}_\mathcal {D}(u,\vec s) := \argmax_{c\in C}\sum_{c'\neq c}P_{\vec s,\mathcal {D}}(c',c)(u(c)-u(c')).$$
To make the model concrete, we determine a specific distribution $\mathcal {D}$ in a way that depends on the score of the candidates in the poll $\vec{s}$. We use $P_{\vec s,\eta}$ as a shorthand for $P_{\vec s,\mathcal {D}}$ when $\mathcal {D}(\vec s)$ is a multinomial distribution with $\eta$ voters, and the probability for sampling a vote for each candidate $c$ is $s(c)/n$.
When $\eta=n$ (i.e., the true number of voters), this means that $M^{\texttt{CV}}_\eta$ selects the candidate that exactly maximizes the voter's expected utility
given the true distribution over candidate scores.
However, the $M^\texttt{CV}_\eta$ decision model allows for a more flexible, bounded-rational decision: when $\eta<n$ the voter overestimates her true pivot probability, and thus her influence on the outcome, whereas $\eta>n$ means that she underestimates her influence. In Figure~\ref{fig:pollExample} when $\eta=10000$ the resulting vote is $q_4$ and
when $\eta=8$ the resulting vote is $q_2$.
\newparc{Local Dominance (LD)}
Under the Local dominance model~\cite{MLR14,Meir15}, a bounded-rational voter has an `uncertainty parameter' $r$.
Meir et al.~\shortcite{MLR14} characterize the set of undominated candidates $U(\vec s,u,r)$ in poll $\vec s$ for a voter with utility $u$ and parameter $r$:
\begin{itemize}
\item The set of Possible Winners $PW$ includes all candidates whose score in $\vec s$ is at least $\max_{c\in C}s(c)-2r\cdot n$.
\item If $|PW|\geq 2$, then the undominated candidates are all candidates in $PW$ except the least preferred.
\item If $|PW|=1$, then all candidates are undominated.
\end{itemize}
The decision model of such a voter selects the most preferred undominated candidate, if more than one exists:
$$M^{\texttt{LD}}_r(u,\vec s) := \argmax_{c\in U(\vec s,u,r)}u(c).$$
In Figure~\ref{fig:pollExample} we see that for $r=0.01$ the voter believes that the poll is very accurate (the score of each candidate may change by at most $r\cdot n<3$ votes), and there is only one possible winner ($PW=\{q_4\}$). In this case, all candidates are undominated and the voter remains truthful ($M^\texttt{LD}_{0.01}(u,\vec s) = q_1$).
When $r=0.08$, the voter believes that the poll is not very accurate and $PW=\{q_2,q_4,q_5\}$. In such a case both $q_2,q_4$ are undominated and $M^\texttt{LD}_{0.08}(u,\vec s) = q_2$.
\newparc{Local-Dominance with Leader bias (LDLB)}
Inspired by the findings of Tal et al. \shortcite{TalMG15} on ``leader bias'',
we modify the local dominance model to allow such behavior: when the voter is certain that there is only one possible winner ($|PW| = 1$), she simply votes for the leader (instead of truthfully), i.e., $M^{\texttt{LDLB}}_r(u,\vec s) := M^{\texttt{LD}}_r(u,\vec s)$,
and otherwise $M^{\texttt{LDLB}}_r(u,\vec s) :=PW$.
In Figure~\ref{fig:pollExample} we see that this model acts similarly to the LD model. However when there is only one possible winner, a voter following the LDLB model will vote for the leader ($d$ in this case).
\newparc{Attainability (AT)} Bowman et al.~\shortcite{bowman2014potential} provide a model for voting over multiple binary issues. The attainability of issue $j$ is a measure of certainty that the eventual number of votes cast for $j$ will reach the majority threshold required for approval. It is defined as
$$\hat A_\beta(j,\vec s) := \frac{1}{\pi}\arctan(\beta\cdot(s_j-\frac12))+\frac12,$$
where $s_j$ is the expected number of votes in favor of issue $j$, and $\beta$ is a voter-specific parameter.
The ``candidates'' considered in Bowman et al.\shortcite{bowman2014potential} are all possible subsets of issues, i.e., $C=2^{\{1,\ldots,k\}}$, where w.l.o.g. the voter gains some nonnegative utility $u_j$ from each issue $j$ being approved. Then the utility of a candidate $c \subseteq \{1,\ldots,k\}$ is the sum of utilities of all issues in $c$, and its attainability $\hat A_\beta(c,\vec s)$ is defined as the product of $\hat A_\beta(j,\vec s)$ for all $j\in c$, and $1-\hat A_\beta(j,\vec s)$ for all $j\notin c$.
The voter
selects the candidate $c$ that maximizes the product of its attainability
and utility
($\hat A_\beta(c,\vec s)\cdot u(c)$).
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{beta_fixed.png}\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\label{fig:attScore}The attainability $A_\beta$ for different values of $\beta$ in a poll with 3 candidates. \vspace{-4mm}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
To adapt the decision model to Plurality voting with $m$ candidates, we re-define the attainability function as $A_\beta(c,\vec s) := \frac{1}{\pi}\arctan(\beta\cdot(s(c)-\frac1m))+\frac12,$
and define the attainability choice function (AT) as
$$M^{\texttt{AT}}_\beta(u,\vec s) := \argmax_{c\in C}A_\beta(c,\vec s)\cdot u(c).$$
Figure~\ref{fig:attScore} shows how $\beta$ affects the attainability score. Candidates that are tied have the same attainability. As shown by the figure, high $\beta$ means that a small advantage in score translates to a large gap in attainability.
\section{The Attainability-Utility (AU) model}
\label{sec:auv}
Bowman et al.'s AT model allows voters some flexibility in how they estimate attainability using the $\beta$ parameter.
However it assumes the same model for each voter.
We extend the attainability model by an additional parameter that lets each voter choose a different tradeoff between the attainability and utility of
candidates.
To this end we define the \emph{Attainability-Utility} (AU) decision rule as
$$M^{AU}_{\alpha,\beta}:=\argmax_{c\in C}\left((\varepsilon+u(c))^\alpha \cdot (A_\beta(c,\vec s))^{2-\alpha}\right),$$
where $\varepsilon$ is a small constant added to handle 0 utility ($\varepsilon$ can also be used as a parameter to control the utility range).
Intuitively, the $\alpha$ parameter trades-off the relative importance of attainability and utility, where $\alpha=0$ means the voter always selects the candidate with maximal score, and $\alpha=2$ means the voter is always truthful. Figure~\ref{fig:pollScore} shows how the relative score (and the selected candidate) changes as we increase $\alpha$. When $\alpha$ is small, $\texttt{AU}$ will prefer $q_4$ as it has more votes (higher attainability) and when it is large the $\texttt{AU}$ will prefer $q_1$ as it got higher utility. Note that we get the AT model as a special case when setting $\alpha=1, \varepsilon=0$. We further discuss the meaning of these parameters in Sec.~\ref{sec:AU_cog}.
\kg{there was a discussion here on ties that seemed like a discussion between Reshef and Roy had turned into paper text! I removed it}
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace{-3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{candidate_score.png}
\caption{ \label{fig:pollScore}
The AU scores of all five candidates from Example~\ref{ex:poll} for $\beta=5$ and different values of $\alpha$.\vspace{-3mm}}
\end{figure}
\section{Methodology}
\label{sec:methodology}
\paragraph{Datasets}
We evaluated the different models described above on several datasets as follows.
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.45\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|cccc|}
\hline
& D32 & D36 & TMG15 & TS16 \\
\hline
\# participants & 187 & 335 & 437 & 144 \\
\# voters in poll& 1000 & 1000 & 8 to 10000 & 12 \\
\# rounds & up to 32 & up to 36 & up to 20 & 40 \\
\# instances & 4886 & 9478 & 8011 & 5760 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
Three of the datasets (D32, D36 and TMG15) were collected
using the framework of Tal et al. \shortcite{TalMG15}, in which voters played multiple one-shot voting rounds. A snapshot of the GUI used for this setting is shown
in Figure~\ref{fig:gameOne}.
Each round included a single human participant, that is automatically assigned preferences over candidates, observes a noisy ``poll'' with the expected votes of the entire population (e.g., 1000 voters), and then votes once.
The outcome of the round was generated by sampling each of the other votes i.i.d using the poll scores as the distribution (e.g. in Fig.~\ref{fig:gameOne} we sample 102 ``voters", each of which votes Blue w.p. $\frac{34}{102}$). Participants were only informed that the poll was inaccurate, but not on the exact distribution. The final score of each candidate and the outcome were shown in the end of each round. In all
datasets the reward for participants was determined by the
position of the winning candidate in their preferences, using the average reward if there was more than one winning candidate.
We used this framework to generate datasets D32 and D36, presenting the participants with a different poll each time. All participants were recruited via the Amazon Mechanical Turk platform
The reward was $R_j$ for each round where $q_j$ was elected, where $R_1>R_2>R_3$. For most of the participants, we set $R_1=10\text{\textcent}, R_2=5\text{\textcent}, R_3=0\text{\textcent}$. For some participants we varied the rewards.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{SingleInterface}
\caption{A snapshot from the experiment (taken from \citet{TalMG15}). Blue is the most preferred candidate $q_1$, thus if Blue wins, the participant gets 20 coins ($10$ cents). The bars show the poll scores $s_1,s_2,s_3$.
}
\label{fig:gameOne}
\end{figure}
The
dataset TS16 was generated by Tyzsler and Schram \shortcite{tyszler2016information}. Here, every voting round was a 12-player complete information game with dictated preferences over 3 candidates, and the outcome was the result of all actual votes rather than artificial samples.
We used the other 11 voters' true top preferences (which are visible) as a true ``poll" input to the different decision models.
\medskip
In all datasets, only when $q_1$ is ranked last at the poll, the voter may have a monetary incentive to vote for $q_2$. There is never a monetary incentive to vote for $q_3$.
\newpar{Random Forest (RF) Benchmark}
We applied off-the-shelf machine learning algorithm to build predictive models of voting behavior.
We used two types of features: those relating to the particular voting round (examples: the gap $s_1-s_2$ between the two leaders of the poll, the number of votes $s_2$ in the poll,
the winning candidate in the poll);
and those aggregating the behavior of the voter (examples: the frequency that the voter chose $q_1$, $q_2$ and $q_3$ in the training set, the frequency of a strategic compromise, and the number of dominated actions).
Using these features, we compared the performance of black-box prediction models on the D32 dataset.
We compared Random Forest, Neural Network, AdaBoost algorithms, CART (Decision Tree), Support Vector Machines and Logistics Regression.\footnote{We used the \texttt{sklearn} ensemble python package for this purpose~\cite{sklearn_api}. The full list of features is available at \url{https://github.com/AdamLauz/OneShotVoting/blob/master/Documentation/One_Shot_ML_features_description.pdf}.} The best performance was exhibited by a random forest ensemble model using 100 weak trees as subclassifiers, and a Gini splitting criterion. We thus used this algorithm (henceforth, \emph{RF}) as our benchmark.
\newpar{Evaluation}
We used a ten-fold cross validation method. We divided the data of each voter into 10 folds (when possible).
KP has only three parameter values. For the other models, we discretized the parameter space.
For each of the decision models KP, CV, AT, LD, LDLB and AU,
we used a \emph{basic fitting procedure} to train each model
separately for each voter: 9 folds of data for this voter were used to fit the parameters of the model, and applied the obtained model on the tenth fold to predict the voter's actions.
Since each voter has only few samples and the parameter space of each decision model is small, we used a brute-force search to find the best parameters for each model.
For example, for the LD model, we found for each voter the parameter $r$ such that $M_r^{LD}$ agrees with the largest number of rounds in the training set.
The \emph{prediction error} of a model is the number of wrong predictions on the test set, divided by the total number of rounds.
\section{Results and Analysis}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{heuristics_error_d32.png}\!\!\!\!
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{heuristics_error_d36.png}
\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{heuristics_error_tmg15.png}\!\!\!\!
\includegraphics[scale=0.42]{heuristics_error_ts16.png}
\caption{\label{fig:f_all} Prediction error for each of the decision models on all four datasets. The horizontal orange lines mark the performance of the RF benchmark when trained on the entire data (solid) or restricted to individual data (dotted).\vspace{-3mm}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:f_all} shows the performance of all decision models on the datasets.
We report the prediction error of the models, adding error bars of two standard deviations.
We can see that the AU model outperforms all other decision models, with the LDLB model second, and the models that ignore leader bias (CV, LD) far behind. These results are statistically significant in all datasets ($p<0.05$) except in TS16, where there was no significant difference between the performance of AU and AT.
\subsection{AU performance vs. the benchmark}
Random Forest (RF) uses many features and can create an arbitrarily complicated model, which learns from the entire population of hundreds of voters rather than just from several individual samples. In addition, it uses temporal features and can thus in principle predict even behavior that changes over time. This is why we use RF as a benchmark that is supposed to be hard to beat.
Even so, RF does not perform uniformly better than the behavioral models.
Figure~\ref{fig:scatter} breaks down
the error of the AU model by individual voters (we refer to the different colors in the next subsection). \kg{important - if this figure remains then need to explain the colors} \rmr{we do in the next subsection}
It demonstrates visually that
AU beats RF for many individual voters (about a 100 out of 335), and that the advantage of RF is mainly due to a group of voters for which AU seems to perform substantially worse (those below the dashed line)\rf{This sentence doesn't sound correct. It says that RF succeed only for small number of voters, however its better for voters below the regular line, not the dashed line (which look like at least half). Under the dashed are voters that RF succeed marginally.}. Indeed it is possible that the AU model is appropriate for most voters but not for all (see discussion in Sec.~\ref{sec:types}).
Another factor is the data used for learning: while AU and all other decision models fit their parameters for a particular voter solely based on her own behavior in other rounds, the black-box algorithms had access to votes of other voters as well. When restricted to learn only from the samples that belong to the same individual, the error of RF leaped dramatically (see dotted lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:f_all}). This indicates that information about the entire population could be exploited to further improve the behavioral models. In addition, the performance of RF (as well as the other black-box algorithms we tried) reduces more rapidly when we learn from a small or non-representative sample.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{scatter_plot.PNG}
\caption{\label{fig:scatter} Prediction error of AU versus RF for each voter. Only voters with at least 16 rounds are shown. The prediction of RF for voters below the dashed line was better by at least 10 percentage point.\vspace{-3mm}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Where are the errors?}\label{sec:errors}
We analyze the factors that contributed most to prediction error, with a focus on the AU model.
\newpar{Some voters are harder to predict}
We say that a candidate is \emph{dominated} (in a particular round) if there is another candidate that is associated with a higher score in the poll and is also more preferred by the voter. E.g. $q_3$ in Example~\ref{ex:poll} is dominated by $q_2$. We count the number of dominated actions each voter performed throughout the experiment.
Note that a dominated action is never predicted by any of the decision models we considered.
It is hard to think of any rational justification for voting to a dominated candidate. We thus conjecture that dominated actions are indication for some random component in the behavior of the voter.
We classified voters by the number of times they used a dominated action. In Fig.~\ref{fig:scatter} we can see that the number of dominated actions substantially affects prediction accuracy not just for AU but also for the benchmark RF (and in fact for all models). The prediction error of AU for voters who completely avoid dominated actions is less than 18\%, and increases to almost 50\% for voters with more than 2 dominated actions, indicating that their behavior is almost completely unpredictable. We emphasize that every additional dominated action results in \emph{more than one} (about 1.6-3) predictions errors. This, together with the low performance of RF, corroborates our conjecture that dominated actions are merely an indication for noisy or random voting patterns.
Another factor that substantially affects prediction error is the number of rounds that a voter has played, where prediction error for voters who completed fewer rounds is much higher. See Fig.~\ref{fig:roundsError} which lists error as a function of number of rounds per voter. A likely explanation is that these voters are more prone to overfitting.
The histogram in Fig.~\ref{fig:VotersConsistencyFMeasure} shows that for almost all voters where AU had high error, the reason was random behavior (indicated by dominated actions), or few rounds.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{voters_error.png}\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\label{fig:VotersConsistencyFMeasure} A histogram of all D36 voters by their AU prediction error. We colored groups of voters for which certain conditions apply.
\vspace{-3mm}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.75]{D36_by_round_partial.png}\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\label{fig:roundsError}Prediction error as a function of the number of rounds in D36. \vspace{-3mm}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\medskip
\newpar{Behavior in some polls is hard to predict}
The behavior in polls that present the voter with an obvious dilemma (e.g., when her favorite candidate is trailing behind) is naturally harder to predict. In Table~\ref{tab:by_poll}, we classified all polls into 6 poll types, based on the the order of candidates' popularity in the poll.
\begin{table}[ht!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|cl|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& poll type & D32 & D36 & TMG15 & TS16\\
\hline
& $q_1 > q_2 > q_3$ & 0.085 & 0.113 & 0.076 & 0.047\\
& $q_1 > q_3 > q_2$ & 0.089 & 0.108 & 0.070 & 0.053\\
& $q_2 > q_1 > q_3$ & 0.224 & 0.261 & 0.268 & 0.254\\
& $q_3 > q_1 > q_2$ & 0.202 & 0.268 & 0.268 & 0.338\\
& $q_2 > q_3 > q_2$ & 0.233 & 0.250 & 0.258 & 0.296\\
$*$ & $q_3 > q_2 > q_1$ & 0.363 & 0.403 & 0.419 & 0.470\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:by_poll}$\texttt{AU}$ error for each poll type. The order reflects the popularity of each candidate in the poll.\vspace{-3mm}}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In the scenario most difficult to predict (where $s(q_3)>s(q_2)>s(q_1)$, marked with $*$), the poll order is reversed to the
preference order of the candidates, and all three actions are frequently selected by the voters. For this case the prediction error of the AU model is above 35\% (and remains high even if we focus on voters who played all rounds and avoided dominated actions). The results of the other models behaved similarly. Note that while in Fig.~\ref{fig:f_all} prediction accuracy varies considerably between datasets, this is explained by the frequency of different poll types in each dataset (see Table~\ref{tab:by_poll}).
We emphasize that in TS16, most of the rounds people played as part of the majority group (see first two rows of Table~\ref{tab:by_poll}), and thus faced a trivial decision where all models predicted the same.
This could be the reason we did not obtain statistically significant results on this dataset, and also explains the poor performance of RF (which had few non-trivial rounds to learn from).
\newpar{Negative reward is harder to predict}
In D32, we varied the reward $R_3$, to see the effect of positive/zero/negative reward (see Fig.~\ref{fig:q3reward}).
Higher reward $R_3$ results in higher accuracy (the only statistically significant difference was between negative and zero reward, as we only varied the reward for 25 participants).
\kg{can remove to save space, the eps model is not interesting enough}
A closer look revealed the reason for the excess failures: with a negative reward, $u_3+\varepsilon$ is still negative, and thus the AU model would never select $q_3$. Perhaps surprisingly, participants do not care much about $R_3$ being negative. Adding $\varepsilon$ as a third optimization parameter that may get higher values (so that $u_3+\varepsilon>0$) completely negates that effect, as can be seen by the striped columns in Fig.~\ref{fig:q3reward}.
We also varied the reward $R_2$ to get convex and concave utility scales rather than linear. While higher $R_2$ does lead to more frequent votes to $q_2$, we did not observe a consistent effect on prediction error.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.5cm]{Error_by_R3.png}
\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\label{fig:q3reward} AU and AU$_{\varepsilon}$ accuracy in D32. AU$_{\varepsilon}$ is identical to AU, except that $\varepsilon$ is used as another parameter.\vspace{-3mm} }
\end{figure}
\subsection{Subjective reporting by participants}\label{sec:report}
From each participant in our experiment (datasets D32 and D36), we asked to report their subjective answers about how well they understood the instructions; which strategy they used in the study; and whether they changed a strategy during the game.
\newpar{Descriptions of strategies}
Some of the participants described strategies that are similar to the models we tested from the
voting literature.
Some primary examples appear below.
\begin{itemize}
\item ``I tried to vote for the person most likely to beat the candidate that would give me no coins." Describes \texttt{KP}{} with $k=2$.
\item
\emph{``I voted for either my first or second priority candidate. I was more likely to vote for the one that appeared to have the highest probability of winning."}
- Describe behavior similar to \texttt{AT}{}
\item \emph{``My strategy was to mainly vote for who was leading except when it was a close race and then I voted for who would earn me the most points.''} - describes \texttt{LDLB}{} with low $r$.
\end{itemize}
Interestingly, people did not adhere to their reported strategies in all rounds, and often their behavior was predicted more accurately by a different model than the one they verbally describe.
For example, some people who explicitly declared that they would not vote for the least
preferred candidate did in fact choose this option.
It is not clear whether this results from noisy behavior, from changing the behavior over time, or from poor self-reflection.
\newparn{Do voters use consistent strategies?}
Identifying individual changes in strategy from the data is very difficult with only a handful of samples per voter. However from the subjective self-reports, about 63\% of those who responded in D36, answered that they did not change their strategy, whereas only 18\% did.\footnote{The others provided an answer that could not be easily classified, e.g. ``It took me a few rounds to get the hang of it.''}
There was a strong correlation between how well people understood the instructions (by their self-report) and their consistency: in D36, more than 80\% of those who reported perfect understanding, claimed they kept their strategy. Results in D32 were similar.
Recall the questions from the introduction about consistency and predictability.
The level of (reported) consistency strongly affected the empirical error: the average error of AU for consistent voters in D36 was about 24\% vs. 30\% for inconsistent ones (and 22\% vs. 34\% in D32). This can also be partly seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:VotersConsistencyFMeasure}, where voters who reported strategy change (dotted blue) are responsible for slightly more errors.
\section{Discussion}
Regenwetter et al.~\shortcite{regenwetter2007sophisticated} observe that~~~~~
``\emph{...individual choice research finds actors to behave \textbf{worse than} normative theory requires, whereas the sparse empirical research on social choice appears to suggest that electorates may \textbf{outperform} normative expectations}.''
However, most research they refer to considered \emph{aggregated behavior}, as discussed in the early sections.
Our Attainability-Utility (AU) model explains well (and in particular much better than calculus of voting) the behavior of most subjects in the data, except those with inherent inconsistencies in their actions. This partly settles the discrepancy observed by Regenwetter et al.: on the individual level, most voters follow AU or other heuristics that do not maximize expected utility, just like decision makers in other domains, even if on the aggregate level the vote distribution can be explained by more rational theories like calculus of voting~\cite{Forsythe1996ThreeCandidateExperiments,blais2000calculus}, or quantal response equilibrium~\cite{tyszler2016information}. Interestingly, quantal response can account for the frequency of dominated actions at the aggregate level, even if it cannot predict when a particular action will be dominated. We may therefore get a more complete picture of voters' behavior by combining individual and aggregate analysis (see also future work below).
\subsection{Is AU cognitively plausible?}\label{sec:AU_cog}
\kg{great paragraph; need to add to the intro that we provide a justification
for behavior from classical results in behavioral decision making and cognitive science}
There are two seemingly ``irrational'' components in the AU model (both inherited from Bowman~\cite{bowman2014potential}), that become apparent when we compare it to the ``rational'' Calculus of Voting method.
The first is the fact that the voter asses the chances of each \emph{candidate to win}, rather than of each possible \emph{tie}. The second is that this chance is estimated using a somewhat arbitrary transformation of the candidate's score (the logit-shaped ``attainability function''), rather than by explicit probabilistic calculations.
Both observations are much less surprising when we recall Kahnemann and Tversky's account of judgment under uncertainty~\cite{tversky1974judgment}: they explain that people often use simple substitutes for probabilistic calculation, that require low cognitive effort. For example, rely on how \emph{representative} each event is (in our case, the score of each candidate in the poll).\footnote{We tried a variation of the AU model, where attainability was replaced with the actual winning probability. This did not improve the performance of the model.}
Future experiments can further test this hypothesis by making candidates more prominent in other ways than higher score (e.g., using graphic features), and see if voters' behavior can still be explained when we translate this to greater attainability. The extensive literature on the various heuristics people use to evaluate likely outcomes (e.g.~\cite{bar1973subjective,chater2006probabilistic}) can also be used to develop better models of voting behavior.
\rmr{what we need to do next (not now) is to go back to Bar-Hillel paper and see if we can extract some better `attainability` function from her insights. She showed people polls and measured their similarity - we could use that.}
It is worth mentioning that trying to use a simple substitute for probabilistic calculations was the main motivation behind the Local Dominance model~\cite{MLR14}, but Local Dominance (like the Calculus of Voting) still focuses on ties. The fact that AU better explains the behavior of most voters (and in particular that LD fails to predict leader-biased actions) suggests that perhaps even LD is too cognitively prohibiting.
Indeed, except for KP (which is perhaps too simple), AU is the cognitively easiest heuristic to apply, as it \emph{independently} evaluates each candidate. We note that the differences in cognitive burden become even more accentuated in elections with more candidates. We therefore expect the differences in performance to become more significant as well, and are currently collecting more data to test this hypothesis.
\subsection{Are there voters of different types?}\label{sec:types}
\kg{describe also in intro;}\rmr{I think this would hurt our message. I said we discuss it}While AU had the best performance overall,
there are many individual voters that are better predicted by one of the other models (not necessarily the leading one).
This can be seen in the bottom bar in Figure~\ref{fig:best_model} which shows the number of voters that were optimally predicted by each model. In case of ties we `split' the voter among all leading models.
To illustrate, although 129 voters were best predicted by the AU heuristic, almost as many (120 voters) were best predicted by
the KP heuristic
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{best_models.PNG}
\caption{\label{fig:best_model}
The bottom bar shows, for each model, the number of participants in D32 and D36 for which this model achieved the best accuracy (possibly tied with other models).
The top bar shows the same information, for the subset of voters for which the best prediction error was at most $0.2$.\vspace{-3mm}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
At this point we face a dilemma when trying to explain the reason that so many voters are better predicted by other models:
One hypothesis (H1) is that AU can in principle account for the behavior of all voters, but is overfitting its parameters due to the small dataset of each voter.
An alternative hypothesis (H2) is that there are indeed voters with different inherent behaviors that are better captured by other models, such as LDLB, KP and so on.
Some evidence for H2 is in the self reports where participants described distinct strategies.
However, we believe there is stronger evidence for H1: first, the self reports are often inconsistent with the actual behavior, and AU in fact predicts well many of the voters who described specific strategies.
Also, AU can in principle explain (for some parameter values) almost all voters in the data, but we often fail to select the optimal parameters due to the small training sample so other models have fewer prediction errors. This can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:roundsError} where AU improves faster as voters have more samples to train on
Lastly, the advantage of AU becomes more clear once we focus on voters with low error (top bar in Fig.~\ref{fig:best_model}). These are the voters for which the selected model is more meaningful.
To better answer this question, richer datasets that better distinct between decision models should be generated.
\subsection{Discussion and future work}\label{sec:future}
Finding a model that perfectly explains the behavior of all voters is probably impossible.
Yet, our AU model does well both on the ``behavioral'' and on the ``scientific'' criteria presented in \cite{MLR14}: It is a fairly simple and cognitively plausible model, that captures the behavior of most voters well enough to predict their individual actions in various situations, and even to compete with machine-learning algorithms that use hundreds of features from the entire population. This model trades-off the popularity of a candidate (as a proxy for its winning chances) and its utility to the voter.
Future voting models should be extended to allow behavior that changes over time in some predictable way.
More importantly, deterministic decision models should be combined with stochastic ones like quantal response and trembling hand perfection~\cite{mckelvey2006theory,obraztsova2016trembling} to explain both consistent individual choices and random departures from those choices. New evaluation methods are needed for these combined aggregate and individual choices.
Our findings can inform the development new and better models for strategic voting, much like the PrefLib project~\cite{prefLib2013} is contributing to the study of preference structure, as well as to inform the
design of agents for making voting decisions with other people, which is a growing area of research~\cite{yosef2017haste,Bitan2013SocialRankingsInHumanComputerCommittees}.
Most of the decision models we used, including the new AU heuristic, naturally extend to more candidates and other voting rules. We intend to run
experiments in more diverse settings (e.g. more than 3 candidates). Those experiments can expose behaviors that do not exist in the current data, can help differentiate between the decision models, and serve as a benchmark for the development of new models.
\section{Acknowledgements}
This work was supported in part thanks to the Israeli Science Foundation grant number 773/16. Thanks to Tyszler and Schram for making their data available to us for analysis.
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
\balance
|
\section{Introduction}
Data traffic has been growing rapidly in recent years with content delivery, especially that of multimedia files, contributing a significant part. One important aspect of such traffic is its temporal variation. Network usage during peak demand times could be much higher than the demand in off-peak hours. Caching is a way to alleviate network congestion during peak hours by prefetching popular content nearer to the user during off-peak hours. Depending on the limitations on memory, a part of these files would be prefetched and once the user makes a demand, the rest of the requested file will be transmitted. Early literature on caching focused on cache placement/replacement policies\cite{aggarwal1999caching}, caching architectures\cite{chankhunthod1996hierarchical,michel1998adaptive,povey1997distributed}, web request models \cite{breslau1999web} etc.
Maddah-Ali and Niesen had shown in their seminal paper that coding can achieve significant gain over uncoded caching by making use of multicast opportunities \cite{maddah2014fundamental}. Coded caching achieves an additional \textit{global caching gain}, which is proportional to the number of users.
Their scheme is shown to be order optimal with an information-theoretic lower bound on the number of files needed to be transmitted (known as \textit{rate}). Though the exact lower bound on peak rate is still an open problem several works had investigated this and came up with tighter bounds \cite{sengupta2015improved,ghasemi2017improved,wan2016optimality,yu2017exact}. The problem has been studied in several settings like decentralized caching \cite{maddah2015decentralized}, non-uniform demands \cite{niesen2016coded}, multiple levels of cache \cite{karamchandani2016hierarchical} to name a few. Most of the schemes in these works involve storing the prefetched parts of files in uncoded form.
Coded prefetching is investigated in \cite{chen2016fundamental, tian2018caching, gomez2018fundamental}, where linear combinations of subfiles are stored in caches.
In a few regimes this approach can improve the rate-memory trade-off over uncoded prefetching.
Yan \textit{et al.} developed a structure called \textit{placement delivery arrays} that could model both the placement and delivery schemes in a single array \cite{yan2017placement}. Graphical models for caching have been investigated in \cite{shanmugam2017coded, yan2017bipartite, shangguan2018centralized}.
Schemes can also be derived using combinatorial designs and linear block codes \cite{tang2018coded}. A limitation with the original centralized scheme was the high subpacketization of files \cite{shanmugam2016finite}.
In the original scheme due to \cite{maddah2014fundamental}, the number of subfiles a file is split into,
increases exponentially with the number of users.
These combinatorial models have helped in developing schemes that have lower subpacketization but with a small penalty on rate \cite{shanmugam2017coded, cheng2017coded}.
One area of particular interest is security and privacy in coded caching. In typical coded caching schemes, other users involved in the multicast or eavesdroppers might get to know the identity of the file a particular user demanded and its contents.
Furthermore, users will be able to partially access files which they have not demanded.
This is in part due to the cache that contains contents of files not requested by them and also because, during delivery, they may be able to decode packets not meant for them.
Sengupta \textit{et al.} \cite{sengupta2014fundamental} proposed a method for preventing information leakage to an external wiretapper with the use of cryptographic keys. Visakh \textit{et al.} \cite{ravindrakumar2016fundamental} had recently shown that the contents of a file could be revealed only to the user/users who requested it, using secret sharing techniques.
One aspect that has not been investigated much is the privacy of the user requests in the specific context of coded caching, while it has been studied in closely related areas like index coding \cite{karmoose2017private} and private information retrieval (PIR) \cite{chor1995private}. As we were preparing this manuscript, we became aware of work due to Wan and Caire \cite{wan2019coded} who take a different approach for user request privacy from ours. Another paper by Kamath \cite{kamath2019demand} also addressed the problem of demand privacy and their approach is similar to the one in this work. We point out the specific differences in our results when compared to those from \cite{wan2019coded} and \cite{kamath2019demand} below.
In this work, we explore methods to obtain privacy of each user's requests from the other users in coded caching keeping subpacketization constraints as an important parameter.
Our specific contributions are as follows:
\begin{compactenum}[i)]
\item We focus on the 2-user, 2-file case in detail and provide an achievable multicast transmission rate versus cache storage curve under a demand privacy constraint.
\item For the 2-user, 2-file case with cache storage of 1 file, we show an explicit demand-private scheme achieving a multicast transmission rate of 2/3 with a subpacketization of 3. This scheme cannot be obtained using the general scheme proposed in \cite{kamath2019demand}, which, in fact, requires a subpacketization of 6.
\item For the 2-user, 2-file case, we prove some impossibility results on subpacketization of 2 and uncoded cache storage for linear coded caching with demand privacy. These are some of the first negative results in this new area.
\item Finally, we propose a general $K$-user, $N$-file partially demand-private scheme that provides a trade-off between the level of privacy and reduction in subpacketization.
\end{compactenum}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
In Section~\ref{sec:ps}, we describe the system setup and the problem statement.
In Section~\ref{sec:22}, we provide demand-private schemes and an achievable rate vs cache memory curve for the case of two users and two files. We prove certain impossibility results with respect to packetization and coded prefetching.
In Section~\ref{sec:gen-scheme}, we describe the general scheme for constructing demand-private coded caching schemes from non-private coded caching schemes from \cite{kamath2019demand}, and provide specific instances of the construction from PDAs resulting in lesser subpacketization.
We also introduce the notion of partially private schemes and show how to construct a partially private scheme.
We conclude with a brief discussion on scope for future work in Section~\ref{sec:conc}.
\section{Problem Statement}\label{sec:ps}
\subsection{System setup}
Assume that we have a server with $N$ files.
Each file is assumed to be of $F$ bits and the $i$-th file is denoted $W_i$.
The server is connected to $K$ users via a multicast link.
Each user has a cache of size $MF$ bits.
The cache contents of the $i$-th user are denoted $Z_i$.
The system setup is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:setup}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth, thick]
\draw [thick] (0.95,0) rectangle (2.05,1.8);
\draw[thick] (0.95,0.45)--(2.05,0.45);
\draw[thick] (0.95,0.9)--(2.05,0.9);
\draw[thick] (0.95,1.35)--(2.05,1.35);
\coordinate [below of=s,node distance=0cm] (s) at (1.5,0) {};
\coordinate [below of=s,node distance=1.5cm] (b1) {};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, below left of=b1,node distance=1.2cm] (z2) {$Z_1$};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, left of=z2,node distance=1cm] (z1) {$Z_0$};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, right of=z2,node distance=2.8cm] (zk) {$Z_{K-1}$};
\path[thick] (s) edge node[text width=1cm, right] {$X^D$} coordinate (m) (b1);
\draw[shift={(m)}](-0.1,-0.1)--(0.1,+0.1);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (z1.north);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (z2.north);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (zk.north);
\node [right] at (2.15,0.6) {Server};
\node [above] at (1.5,1.28) {$W_0$};
\node [above] at (1.5,0.83) {$W_1$};
\node [above] at (1.5,0.38) {$\vdots$};
\node [above] at (1.5,-0.07) {$W_{N-1}$};
\path (z2) -- node[auto=false]{\ldots} (zk);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Caching system.}
\label{fig:setup}
\end{figure}
The cache system works in two phases. In the first phase called the \textit{placement phase}, the cache of each user is populated with content by the server. In addition, the server sends metadata or header information $\Theta(Z_i)$ about how the cache content was derived from the files to User~$i$. The header information is assumed to be small in size when compared to the file size but crucial for decoding purposes. Note that during the placement phase the server is unaware of the files demanded by the users. We assume that the transmission of cache content and header takes place over a private link between the server and each user.
In the second phase, called the \textit{delivery phase}, each user requests the server for one of the files from the set of $N$ files.
The demand of the $i$-th user is denoted $D_i$, where $D_i \in [N]\triangleq\{0,1,\ldots,N-1\}$.
The demands of all the users $0$ to $K-1$ is denoted by the demand vector $D= (D_0, D_1, \ldots, D_{K-1})$.
We assume that the $D_i$ are all i.i.d. random variables uniformly distributed over
$[N]$ and that the demands are sent over a private link between the user and the server.
Based on the demands, the server multicasts $\ell$ packets, typically of the same size.
The entire multicast transmission from the server is denoted $X^D$ for a demand vector $D$. It consists of $RF$ bits. The transmission $X^D$ depends on the cache $Z_i$ and the demands $D_i$. The quantity $R$ is called the rate of transmission. In addition to $X^D$, some additional metadata or header information about the transmission is typically multicast in coded caching schemes. This metadata, denoted $\Theta(X^D)$, is usually small compared to the file size and provides critical information for decoding by the users.
The main requirement in a coded caching scheme is that User~$i$ should be able to decode the file $W_{D_i}$ using $Z_i$, $\Theta(Z_i)$, $X^D$ and $\Theta(X^D)$. In other words, we require
\begin{equation}
H(W_{D_i}\;|\;Z_i,\Theta(Z_i), X^D, \Theta(X^D)) = 0.
\end{equation}
We denote a coded caching scheme with $K$
users, $N$ files, local cache size $M$,
and rate $R$ as a $(K,N;M,R)$ coded caching scheme, or as a $(K,N)$ scheme in short.
\subsection{Demand privacy in coded caching}
We will introduce the notion of demand privacy in coded caching with a simple example. Consider the $(2,2)$ coded caching scheme due to Maddah-Ali and Niesen \cite{maddah2014fundamental}
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mn-2-2}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth, thick,baseline=-1.6cm]
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=20pt, minimum height=6mm] (s) {$A$\\$B$};
\coordinate [below of=s,node distance=2cm] (b1) {};
\coordinate [below of=b1,node distance=1cm] (b2) {};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, left of=b2,label=below:$Z_0$, node distance=1.2cm] (z2) {
$A_{0}$, $B_{0}$
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, right of=b2,label=below:$Z_1$,node distance=1.2cm] (z3) {
$A_{1}$, $B_{1}$
};
\path[thick] (s) edge node[text width=3cm, right] {
$X^D$
} (b1);
\draw[-,thick] (s.west) -- (s.east);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (z2.north);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (z3.north);
\end{tikzpicture}%
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\toprule
$D_0D_1$ & X \\ \midrule
$AA$ & $A_1 \oplus A_0$\\
$AB$ & $A_1 \oplus B_0$\\
$BA$ & $B_1 \oplus A_0$\\
$BB$ & $B_1 \oplus B_0$\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Non-private scheme from \cite{maddah2014fundamental} fo
r $N=2$ files, $K=2$ users and demand vector, $D=(D_1, D_2)$.}
\label{fig:mn-2-2}
\end{figure}
Suppose that the demand is $(A, A)$.
This results in the transmission $A_1\oplus A_0$. To recover the files, each user must know what linear combination of subfiles has been transmitted. So, we will suppose that the server sends the linear combination information as header along with the transmission.
It is easy to see that each user can recover the missing portion of the file demanded by them.
However, the scheme has the unfortunate side effect of revealing the demands of each user to the other parties. From the header and scheme details, it is clear to User~0 that User~1 demanded the file $A$ and vice versa.
If the transmission is $A_i\oplus B_j$, then the $i$-th user can infer that the $j$-th user has requested $A$ based on the linear combination header information. In general, users can use the combined information of their cache, demands and header data from the server to learn about another user's demands.
Based on the preceding discussion, to achieve demand privacy in a coded caching scheme, we impose the following additional condition for all demand vectors $D$:
\begin{eqnarray}
I(D_i,Z_i,\Theta(Z_i),X^D,\Theta(X^D);D_j)=0,\quad i\ne j.
\label{eq:dpcond}
\end{eqnarray}
In other words, we require that the $i$-th user is completely uncertain about what the $j$-th user demands, given all information available to User~$i$ in the coded caching scheme. It can be shown that the standard Maddah-Ali-Niesen scheme \cite{maddah2014fundamental} does not satisfy the demand privacy condition in Eq.~\eqref{eq:dpcond}.
\section{$(K=2,N=2)$ coded caching with demand privacy}
\label{sec:22}
We will first consider the case when there are two files and two users. A complete characterization of the $M$ vs $R$ region in the case of two files/users was one of the starting points of the area of coded caching. Therefore, it is important to fully characterize the same region with demand privacy. We have made some partial progress towards this problem.
First, we will show the design of a linear $(2,2;1,2/3)$ coded caching scheme with demand privacy having a subpacketization (number of parts into which each file is divided) of 3. In comparison, directly converting a $(4,2)$-Maddah-Ali-Niesen scheme into a $(2,2;1,2/3)$ demand-private scheme requires a subpacketization of 6 \cite{kamath2019demand}.
\subsection{$(M=1, R=2/3)$ scheme with subpacketization 3}
\label{sec:sub3}
The two files, $A$ and $B$, are divided into 3 parts $A_i$, $i=0,1,2$ and $B_i$, $i=0,1,2$. Table \ref{tab:schN2K2num1} summarizes the entire scheme. \begin{table}[H]
\caption{$(K=2, N=2; M=1, R=2/3)$ demand-private caching scheme with subpacketization 3.
If server assigns the cache $Z_{i0}$ to User~$i$, then $X^{D_0D_1}$ is the transmission for the demand $D_0D_1$. }
\begin{tabular}{c m{5em}}
\toprule
Notation & Possible cache contents \\ \midrule
$Z_{00}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_1 \\
B_0\oplus B_1 \\
A_2\oplus B_1
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$Z_{01}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_1 \\
B_0\oplus B_1 \\
A_1\oplus B_2
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$Z_{10}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_2 \\
B_0\oplus B_2 \\
A_1\oplus B_2
\end{array}
$ \\\midrule[0.2pt]
$Z_{11}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0 \oplus A_2 \\
B_0\oplus B_2 \\
A_2\oplus B_1
\end{array}
$\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular} \qquad
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\toprule
$D_0D_1$ & $X^{D_0D_1}$ \\ \midrule
$AA$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0 \\
B_0
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$AB$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_1 \\
B_1
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$BA$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_2 \\
B_2
\end{array}
$ \\\midrule[0.2pt]
$BB$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_1\oplus A_2 \\
B_0\oplus B_1\oplus B_2
\end{array}
$\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:schN2K2num1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\caption{Files recovered from possible cache pairs and transmission $X$ for the scheme from Table~\ref{tab:schN2K2num1}}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccc|}
\hline
\diagbox{Caches\\$Z_{0}$,$Z_{1}$}{\raisebox{-1\height}{\ $X$}}
& $\begin{array}{c}
A_0 \\
B_0
\end{array}$
& $\begin{array}{c}
A_1 \\
B_1
\end{array}$
& $\begin{array}{c}
A_2 \\
B_2
\end{array}$
& $\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_1\oplus A_2 \\
B_0\oplus B_1\oplus B_2
\end{array}$ \\ \hline
$Z_{00}$,$Z_{10}$ & $A,A$ & $A,B$ & $B,A$ & $B,B$ \\
$Z_{00}$,$Z_{11}$ & $A,B$ & $A,A$ & $B,B$ & $B,A$ \\
$Z_{01}$,$Z_{11}$ & $B,B$ & $B,A$ & $A,B$ & $A,A$ \\
$Z_{01}$,$Z_{10}$ & $B,A$ & $B,B$ & $A,A$ & $A,B$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:schN2K2num2}
}
\end{table}
In the placement phase, the server places either $Z_{i0}$ or $Z_{i1}$, with equal probability, as the cache $Z_i$ for User~$i$. The actual choice is private between the server and User~$i$.
If User~$i$ was assigned the cache $Z_{i0}$, then
the multicast transmissions $X^{D_0D_1}$ for each possible demand $(D_0, D_1)$ are as shown in Table \ref{tab:schN2K2num1}.
It can be seen that all the demands are served.
It can also be checked that the demands are private under this assignment.
For instance, from Table~\ref{tab:schN2K2num2}, we see that there exists another assignment of cache for each user which recovers another file with the same transmission.
Table \ref{tab:rec1} is the set of recoverable files under each possible cache content for a given transmission.
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\caption{Files recovered from possible caches for a $(2, 2; 1, 2/3)$ private scheme.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|cccc|}
\hline
& $X^{AB}$ & $X^{BA}$ & $X^{BB}$ & $X^{AA}$ \\ \hline
$Z_{00}$ & $A$ & $B$ & $B$ & $A$ \\
$Z_{01}$ & $B$ & $A$ & $A$ & $B$ \\
$Z_{10}$ & $B$ & $A$ & $B$ & $A$ \\
$Z_{11}$ & $A$ & $B$ & $A$ & $B$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:rec1}
\end{table}
For the same transmission, each user is able to recover either file $A$ or file $B$ with the two possible cache contents. Since the actual cache content is private, we readily see that this scheme satisfies the demand privacy condition in Eq.~\eqref{eq:dpcond}.
\subsection{Dual private schemes}
We show that a $(2,2; M=M_1, R=R_1)$ scheme with demand privacy can be converted into a $(2,2; M=R_1, R=M_1)$ demand-private scheme and this results in symmetric $R$ vs $M$ capacity bounds for the $(2,2)$ case.
One can observe that the roles of caches and transmissions can be interchanged in the symmetric file recovery matrix in Table \ref{tab:rec1}. Hence, from the scheme given in Table~\ref{tab:schN2K2num1}, we can arrive at a scheme given in Table~\ref{tab:schN2K2dual} with rate $R=1$ for $M=2/3$. We call this scheme the dual of the original scheme.
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\caption{Dual private $(2, 2; 2/3, 1)$ scheme from the private $(2,2; 1,2/3)$ scheme given in Table~\ref{tab:schN2K2num1}. For cache $Z_{i0}$ at User~$i$, $X^{D_0D_1}$ is the transmission for the demand $D_0D_1$. }
\parbox{.56\linewidth}{
\begin{tabular}{c m{7em}}
\toprule
Notation & Possible Cache Contents \\ \midrule
$Z_{00}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_1 \\
B_1
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$Z_{01}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_2 \\
B_2
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$Z_{10}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_1\oplus A_2 \\
B_0\oplus B_1\oplus B_2
\end{array}
$ \\\midrule[0.2pt]
$Z_{11}$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0 \\
B_0
\end{array}
$\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}} \quad
\parbox{.38\linewidth}{
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\toprule
$D_1D_2$ & $X^{D_0D_1}$ \\ \midrule
$AA$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_2 \\
B_0\oplus B_2 \\
A_2\oplus B_1
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$AB$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_1 \\
B_0\oplus B_1 \\
A_2\oplus B_1
\end{array}
$\\\midrule[0.2pt]
$BA$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_1 \\
B_0\oplus B_1 \\
A_1\oplus B_2
\end{array}
$ \\\midrule[0.2pt]
$BB$ & $
\begin{array}{c}
A_0\oplus A_2 \\
B_0\oplus B_2 \\
A_1\oplus B_2
\end{array}
$\\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tab:schN2K2dual}
\end{table}
Our next result generalizes the above for all $(2,2)$ private schemes that use one of two caches uniformly at random.
\begin{lemma}[Duality of transmissions and caches]\label{th:duality}
Suppose that there exists a $(2, 2 ; M=M_1, R=R_1) $ private scheme where the server places one of two possible cache contents uniformly at random. Then, there exists a $(2, 2; M=R_1, R=M_1) $ private scheme.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider a $(2, 2 ; M, R) $ private scheme constructed with users having two options to populate their caches. Let $\{Z_{00}, Z_{01}\}$ be the set of two cache options for User~0 and $\{Z_{10}, Z_{11}\}$ be the set of two cache options for User~1. Let $X^{D_1D_2}$ be the transmission corresponding to the user demands $D=(D_1, D_2)$ and cache $Z_{i0}$ at User~$i$. The sets $\mathcal{Z}=\{Z_{00}, Z_{01}, Z_{10}, Z_{11}\}$ and $\mathcal{X}=\{X^{AA}, X^{AB}, X^{BA}, X^{BB}\}$ are able to recover files $A$ and $B$ as given in Table~\ref{tab:rec1}. Let the size of $Z_i$ be $R_1F$ bits and that of $X^{W_0W_1}$ be $M_1F$ bits. We can interchange the role of these caches and transmissions. Let $\{X^{AB}, X^{BA}\}$ be the set of two cache options for User~0 and $\{X^{BB}, X^{AA}\}$ be the set of two cache options for User~1. Then if $Z_{11}$ is transmitted and the Users 0 and 1 are assigned $\{X^{AB}\}$ and $\{X^{BB}\}$ as their caches, both can recover file $A$. Instead if User~1 had $X^{BA}$ in its cache, the users would have recovered $B$ and $A$, respectively. This way of interchangeability between caches and transmissions gives rise to a new scheme for 2 users and 2 files, where the cache size is $M_1$ bits and transmission size is $R_1$ bits.
\end{proof}
A consequence of the above duality is that the achievable trade-off between memory and rate for
$(2,2)$ private schemes is symmetric about the line $M=R$.
\begin{lemma}[Time sharing with file splitting]\label{lm:timesharing} Given two achievable $(M,R)$ pairs for a
$(2,2)$ private scheme, all values of $(M,R)$ along the line joining these points are achievable.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider $0 \leq \alpha \leq 1$.
Split the file $A$ into two parts $A_\alpha$ and $A_{\bar{\alpha}}$ of size
$\alpha F$ bits and $(1-\alpha)F$ bits respectively.
Similarly, split $B$ into $B_\alpha $ and $B_{\bar{\alpha}}$.
Denote the two achievable private caching schemes as $(2, 2; M, R) $ and $(2, 2; M', R') $
respectively.
We can use the $(2, 2; M, R)$ scheme for sharing $A_\alpha$ and $B_{\alpha}$
and the $(2, 2; M', R') $ scheme for sharing $A_{\bar{\alpha}}$, and $B_{\bar{\alpha}}$.
The overall scheme shares $A$ and $B$ with effective cache size $(\alpha M +(1-\alpha) M')F$ bits
and transmission $(\alpha R+(1-\alpha)R')F$ bits
giving a $(2, 2; \alpha M+(1-\alpha)M', \alpha R+(1-\alpha)R' ) $ private scheme.
\end{proof}
Note that the time sharing scheme in Lemma~\ref{lm:timesharing} has a subpacketization that is
equal to the sum of the two
schemes used for time sharing.
Using Lemma~\ref{lm:timesharing}, and Lemma~\ref{th:duality} we can plot the upper bounds for the achievable $(M,R)$ pair for $(2, 2)$ private schemes.
The plot is symmetric about the line $M=R$ as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:mr}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
width=7cm, height=7cm,
axis x line=center,
axis y line=middle,
xlabel=$M$,ylabel=$R$,
xmin=0, xmax=2.5,
ymin=0, ymax=2.5,
domain=0:pi/2,
xtick={
0, 0.66, 1, 2
},
xticklabels={
0, $\frac{2}{3}$, 1, 2
},
ytick={
0.66, 1, 2
},
yticklabels={
$\frac{2}{3}$, 1, 2
}
]
\addplot[color=blue,mark=*] coordinates {
(0,2)
(0.66,1)
(1,0.66)
(2,0)
};
\draw [black, thin,dashed] (0,1) -- (0.66,1);
\draw [black, thin,dashed] (0,0.66) -- (1,0.66);
\draw [black, thin,dashed] (1,0) -- (1,0.66);
\draw [black, thin,dashed] (0.66,0) -- (0.66,1);
\end{axis}%
\end{tikzpicture}%
\caption{Achievable $(M,R) $ region for $(2, 2; M, R)$ private schemes.
The $(2, 2; 1, 2/3)$ scheme and its dual scheme $(2, 2; 1, 2/3)$ have a subpacketization of three subfiles.
The straight lines are due to Lemma~\ref{lm:timesharing}. For these schemes, the subpacketization need not be three. }
\label{fig:mr}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Towards lower bounds and optimal subpacketization}
In the non-private case, the $M$ vs $R$ region is fully characterized for two users and two files. For the case with demand privacy, it is not clear whether any of the points in the achievable $M$ vs $R$ curve shown in Fig. \ref{fig:mr} are optimal, or if the subpacketizations are optimal.
While we do not have lower bounds and optimality results yet, we present a few basic impossibility results involving subpacketization and coding of cache contents.
In the non-private case for two users/files, subpacketization of 2 suffices to result in optimal rate of $R=1/2$ for $M=1$. For the private case, we have the following result.
\begin{lemma}
Consider $N=2$, $K=2$ with subpacketization of 2 and $M=1$. A rate $R=1/2$ cannot be achieved with demand privacy when using a linear scheme.
\label{lem:nosub2}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
A proof is given in Appendix~\ref{sec:nogo}.
\end{proof}
For subpacketization of 3, the scheme in Section \ref{sec:sub3} uses coded cache contents, which is not typical in the non-private setting. In the setting considered here for demand privacy, we have the following result on coding in cache contents.
\begin{lemma}
Consider $N=2$, $K=2$ with subpacketization of 3 and $M=1$. If the cache contents are not allowed to be coded (i.e. linear combinations of two or more file parts are not allowed to be stored in cache), a rate $R=2/3$ cannot be achieved with demand privacy when using a linear scheme.
\label{lem:nosub3noncoded}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
A proof is given in Appendix~\ref{sec:no-uncoded}.
\end{proof}
\section{General Scheme and Partial Privacy}\label{sec:gen-scheme}
In this section, we describe the general scheme from \cite{kamath2019demand} that provides the design of a demand-private coded caching scheme from non-private schemes.
\begin{theorem}[Existence of private schemes \cite{kamath2019demand}]\label{th:existence}
If there exists a $(KN,N;M,R)$ coded caching scheme, then there exists a private $(K,N;M,R)$ scheme.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Assume that we have a $(KN, N; M, R)$ non-private scheme.
Let the cache contents of each of the users be given as
$Z_i'$, where $0\leq i <NK$.
Partition the users into sets of size $N$.
Without loss of generality we partition the $NK$ users as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{U}_k= \{(k-1)N \leq j <k N \}. \label{eq:users-in-k}
\end{eqnarray}
Denote the cache of the $k$th user of the private scheme as $Z_k$.
This is chosen as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
{Z}_k &=& Z_{(k-1)N+r_k}' \label{eq:cache-zk-npsch}
\end{eqnarray}
where $r_k$ is uniformly distributed
on $\{0, 1, \ldots, N-1 \}$.
During delivery the server receives the demand vector $(d_0,\ldots, d_{K-1})$.
The server then generates the transmission corresponding to the demand vector of the
non-private scheme.
This demand vector is of length $NK$ and denoted $D'=(d_j')$.
We can assign any random permutation of the demands $[N] $ to the users in
$\mathcal{U}_k$ subject to the condition that
$d_{r_k+(k-1)N}' = d_k$.
Formally,
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
\pi_k&:&\mathcal{U}_k \rightarrow [N] \label{eq:pi-k}\\
d_j'&=& \pi_k(j)\label{eq:pi-k-1}\\
d_{r_k+(k-1)N}'&=& \pi_k(r_k+(k-1)N) =d_k\label{eq:pi-k-2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
Denote the demand vector of the non-private
$(KN, N)$ scheme as
$D'=(d_j')_{j\in [NK]}$
Since the non-private scheme can accommodate all demands, it can also serve this demand.
Transmit $X^{D'}$ as per the non-private scheme.
Then each user of the private scheme is able to receive the file requested.
Demand privacy can be shown as follows.
The $i$-th user of the private scheme is able to recover the file he or she requested.
The same transmission can be used to recover all the files by the caches
$Z_{(j-1)K}', \ldots, Z_{jK-1}'$.
However, the $i$-th user does not know which of these caches has been assigned to the $j$-th user.
Since all of them are equally likely to be assigned to $j$-th user by construction, the uncertainty about the demand $D_j$ given $D_i, X, Z_i$ is $H(D_j)$.
Thus, the privacy of demands is preserved.
Observe that the cache size of users in the private scheme is same as the size of the cache in the non-private scheme.
Similarly, the rate of transmission for the
private scheme is exactly the same as that of the non-private scheme.
From this it follows the demand private scheme has the parameters $(K, N; M, R)$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}[Extended demand vector]
While creating the extended demand vector $D'$ we can make a simple choice for
$\pi_k$.
The demand of the $j$th user of the non-private scheme
is given as
\begin{eqnarray}
d_j' = d_k-r_k+j \bmod N \mbox{ for } (k-1)N\leq j<kN,\label{eq:dd-np-KN-N}
\end{eqnarray}
where $0\leq k <K$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Constructions using Maddah-Ali-Niesen schemes and PDAs}
Using the Maddah-Ali-Niesen scheme \cite{maddah2014fundamental} as the non-private scheme in Theorem \ref{th:existence}, we obtain the following:
\begin{corollary}
There exists a demand private $(K, N; M, R)$ scheme for integer values of $KM$, where the rate
\begin{align}
R =
\begin{cases}
\frac{K(N-M)}{(1+KM)} & \text{if } M \geq \frac{K-1}{K} \\
N-M & \text{if } M < \frac{K-1}{K}
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
This follows from Theorem~\ref{th:existence} using the scheme proposed by Maddah Ali and Niesen \cite[Theorem~1]{maddah2014fundamental}.
In this case, for integer values of $KM$ we can construct a $(NK, N; M , R)$ non-private scheme.
If $KM\geq K-1$, then
$R=\frac{K(N-M)}{(1+KM)}$.
If $1\leq KM < K-1$, then $R=N-M$.
We can map each user to a user in the non-private scheme using Eq.~\eqref{eq:cache-zk-npsch} and extend the demand vector of the private $(K,N;M,R)$ scheme to the non-private scheme using Eq.~\eqref{eq:dd-np-KN-N}. Then the scheme from \cite{maddah2014fundamental} gives the cache contents that should be stored in each user and a transmission for each demand from which each user can recover their files. The cache memory and rate required in the private scheme will be the same as that in the non-private scheme.
\end{proof}
Note that there is no coding gain when $KM < K-1$.
A general framework for non-private coded caching schemes was proposed in \cite{yan2017placement} using placement delivery arrays (PDAs).
We can convert many of these schemes to private coded caching schemes.
Some of them improve upon those derived from schemes \cite{maddah2014fundamental} in subpacketization or other parameters. For positive integers $K$, $f$, $Z$ and $S$, a $(K, f, Z, S)$ placement delivery array is a $f\times K $ matrix $(P=[p_{j,k}]\mbox{ with }j\in[F],k\in[K])$ containing either a ``$\Asterisk$'' or integers from $\{0,1,\ldots,S-1\}$ in each cell such that they satisfy a few conditions \cite{yan2017placement}.
Here, $f$ is the subpacketization, and $S$ is the total number of transmissions each of size $1/f$ of the file.
For any $N$, we can obtain a $(K,N;\frac{NZ}{f},\frac{S}{f})$ coded caching scheme from a $(K, f, Z, S)$ placement delivery array.
\begin{corollary}[Private schemes from PDAs]\label{co:pda}
If there exists a $(NK, f, Z, S)$ placement delivery array, we can obtain a private $(K, N; \frac{NZ}{f},\frac{S}{f})$ coded caching scheme, for any $N$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Given a $(NK, f, Z, S)$ placement delivery array, there exists a non-private $(NK,N;\frac{NZ}{f},\frac{S}{f})$ (see \cite{yan2017placement} for details). From this we can obtain the private $(K,N;\frac{NZ}{f},\frac{S}{f})$ scheme using Theorem~\ref{th:existence}.
\end{proof}
We now present an example of a private scheme with $N=2$, $K=3$, derived from a PDA.
Consider the PDA from \cite[Eq.~(7)]{yan2017placement} corresponding to 6 users and 4 subfiles.
\begin{align}
P=\left[\begin{array}{llllll}{*} & {1} & {*} & {2} & {*} & {0} \\ {0} & {*} & {*} & {3} & {1} & {*} \\ {*} & {3} & {0} & {*} & {2} & {*} \\ {2} & {*} & {1} & {*} & {*} & {3}\end{array}\right]\label{eq:pda}
\end{align}
We assume that each file $W_i$ is split into
$f$ subfiles which are denoted as $W_{i,j}$, where
$0\leq j<f$.
In the non-private scheme, the cache contents of the $i$-th user are given below.
\begin{align*}
Z_{0}' &=\left\{W_{i, 0}, W_{i, 2} : i \in[0,6)\right\} \\
Z_{1}' &=\left\{W_{i, 1}, W_{i, 3} : i \in[0,6)\right\} \\
Z_{2}' &=\left\{W_{i, 0}, W_{i, 1} : i \in[0,6)\right\} \\
Z_{3}' &=\left\{W_{i, 2}, W_{i, 3} : i \in[0,6)\right\} \\
Z_{4}' &=\left\{W_{i, 0}, W_{i, 3} : i \in[0,6)\right\} \\
Z_{5}' &=\left\{W_{i, 1}, W_{i, 2} : i \in[0,6)\right\}
\end{align*}
The transmission for demand vector $\boldsymbol{d}'=(d_0', \ldots , d_5')$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
X^{d'}=\left \{\begin{array}{c}
W_{d'_0,1} \oplus W_{d'_2,2} \oplus W_{d'_5,0}\\
W_{d'_1,0} \oplus W_{d'_2,3} \oplus W_{d'_4,1}\\
W_{d'_0,3} \oplus W_{d'_3,0} \oplus W_{d'_4,2}\\
W_{d'_1,2} \oplus W_{d'_3,1} \oplus W_{d'_5,3}
\end{array}
\right\}.\label{eq:dp-26-pda-X-d}
\end{eqnarray}
For $N=2$ files, $A$ and $B$, we can create a private (3, 2; 1, 1) scheme as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:schN2K3}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth, thick,
every fit/.style={
rounded corners,
draw,
inner ysep=0.5cm
}
]
\tikzstyle{block} = [rectangle, draw,thick,fill=blue!0,
text centered, rounded corners, minimum height=1em]
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=20pt, minimum height=6mm] (s) {$A$\\$B$};
\coordinate [below of=s,node distance=2.5cm] (b1) {};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, fill=gray!50, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, below of=b1,label=below:$Z_{10}$,node distance=1.8cm] (z2) {%
\begin{varwidth}{4em}
$A_2$, $A_3$, $B_2$, $B_3$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, left of=z2,label=below:$Z_{00}$,node distance=2cm] (z0) {%
\begin{varwidth}{4em}
$A_1$, $A_3$, $B_1$, $B_3$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, fill=gray!50, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, below of=z0,label=below:$Z_{01}$,node distance=1.5cm] (z1) {%
\begin{varwidth}{4em}
$A_0$, $A_2$, $B_0$, $B_2$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, below of=z2,label=below:$Z_{11}$,node distance=1.5cm] (z3) {%
\begin{varwidth}{4em}
$A_0$, $A_1$, $B_0$, $B_1$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, fill=gray!50, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, right of=z2,label=below:$Z_{20}$,node distance=2cm] (z4) {%
\begin{varwidth}{4em}
$A_1$, $A_2$, $B_1$, $B_2$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, below of=z4,label=below:$Z_{21}$,node distance=1.5cm] (z5) {%
\begin{varwidth}{4em}
$A_0$, $A_3$, $B_0$, $B_3$
\end{varwidth}
};
\path[thick] (s) edge node[text width=2cm, right] {
$B_1 \oplus A_2 \oplus A_0$,
$A_0 \oplus A_3 \oplus B_1$,
$B_3 \oplus B_0 \oplus B_2$,
$A_2 \oplus B_1 \oplus A_3$,
} (b1);
\node[draw,dotted,fit=(z0) (z1),minimum width=1.5cm, label=below:User~0] (u1){} ;
\node[draw,dotted,fit=(z2) (z3),minimum width=1.5cm, label=below:User~1] (u2) {} ;
\node[draw,dotted,fit=(z4) (z5),minimum width=1.5cm, label=below:User 2] (u3) {} ;
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (u1.north);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (u2.north);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (u3.north);
\draw[-,thick] (s.west) -- (s.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A $(3,2; 1, 1)$ private scheme for $D=(A, A, B)$ from a $(6,2; 1, 1) $ non-private scheme from the PDA given in \eqref{eq:pda}.}
\label{fig:schN2K3}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Case of two files, two users}
For the $N=2$, $K=2$ case considered earlier, the $M=1$, $R=2/3$ construction presented in Section \ref{sec:sub3} is not derived from a non-private scheme but constructed directly. In fact, a construction from the Maddah-Ali-Niesen scheme using Theorem \ref{th:existence} results in a subpacketization of 6, when compared to the subpacketization of 3 needed for the scheme in Section \ref{sec:sub3}. This shows that direct construction has the benefits of improved subpacketization.
\subsection{Partial privacy and reduction in subpacketization}
The scheme modified from the non-private scheme can have less subpacketization if full privacy is not needed. For instance, suppose that 2-file privacy suffices. That is, at the end of the multicast transmission, every user has an ambiguity of one of two files about any other user's demand.
For 2-file privacy, we need to provide only two options to populate the cache content of a user. Hence, we can use a $(2N,K)$ non-private scheme to arrive at an $(N,K)$ partially private scheme where any user's demand is possibly one of two files to another user. These schemes are important particularly when we have large number of files compared to users. For example, if $N=10$ and $K=2$, then a fully private scheme modified from the non-private scheme would require the non-private scheme to have $K'=NK = 20$. With $M=5$, such a scheme would require a subpacketization $f = \binom{K'}{\frac{K'M}{N}} = \binom{20}{10} = 184756$. But under 2-file privacy for this setup, $K'=2 K=4$, and we can use a subpacketization as low as $f = \binom{4}{2} = 6$. In Fig.~\ref{fig:schN4K4partial}, we show a partially private $(2,4; 2, 2/3)$ scheme from a $(4,4; 2, 2/3) $ non-private scheme providing an ambiguity of two files.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth, thick,
every fit/.style={
rounded corners,
draw,
inner ysep=0.5cm
}
]
\node (s) [rectangle split, rectangle split parts=4, minimum width=2cm, draw, anchor=center] {A\nodepart{second}B\nodepart{third}C\nodepart{fourth}D} ;
\coordinate [below of=s,node distance=3cm] (b1) {};
\coordinate [below of=b1,node distance=2.2cm] (b2) {};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, fill=gray!50, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, left of=b2,label=below:$Z_{01}$,node distance=1.1cm] (z1) {%
\begin{varwidth}{5em}
$A_{01}$, $A_{12}$, $A_{13}$, $B_{01}$, $B_{12}$, $B_{13}$,
$C_{01}$, $C_{12}$, $C_{13}$, $D_{01}$, $D_{12}$, $D_{13}$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, left of=z1,label=below:$Z_{00}$,node distance=1.8cm] (z0) {%
\begin{varwidth}{5em}
$A_{01}$, $A_{02}$, $A_{03}$, $B_{01}$, $B_{02}$, $B_{03}$,
$C_{01}$, $C_{02}$, $C_{03}$, $D_{01}$, $D_{02}$, $D_{03}$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, fill=gray!50, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, right of=b2,label=below:$Z_{10}$,node distance=1.1cm] (z2) {%
\begin{varwidth}{5em}
$A_{02}$, $A_{12}$, $A_{23}$, $B_{02}$, $B_{12}$, $B_{23}$,
$C_{02}$, $C_{12}$, $C_{23}$, $D_{02}$, $D_{12}$, $D_{23}$
\end{varwidth}
};
\node[draw, thick, align=center, inner xsep=2pt, minimum height=6mm, right of=z2,label=below:$Z_{11}$,node distance=1.8cm] (z3) {%
\begin{varwidth}{5em}
$A_{03}$, $A_{13}$, $A_{23}$, $B_{03}$, $B_{13}$, $B_{23}$,
$C_{03}$, $C_{13}$, $C_{23}$, $D_{03}$, $D_{13}$, $D_{23}$
\end{varwidth}
};
\path[thick] (s) edge node[text width=3cm, right] {
$D_{12} \oplus B_{02} \oplus D_{01}$,
$D_{13} \oplus B_{03} \oplus C_{01}$,
$D_{23} \oplus D_{03} \oplus C_{02}$,
$B_{23} \oplus D_{13} \oplus C_{12}$
} (b1);
\node[draw,dotted,fit=(z0) (z1),minimum width=1.5cm, label=below:User~0] (u1){} ;
\node[draw,dotted,fit=(z2) (z3),minimum width=1.5cm, label=below:User~1] (u2) {} ;
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (u1.north);
\draw[->,thick] (b1) -- (u2.north);
\draw[-,thick] (s.west) -- (s.east);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A $(2,4; 2, 2/3)$ partially private scheme from a $(4,4; 2, 2/3) $ non-private scheme. The scheme has a privacy of two files. The gray boxes show the cache assigned by the server. The demands corresponding to unassigned caches for User $k$ are selected at random from the set $\{W_{j,j\in[N]}\}\setminus D_k$. Transmission shown is for the demand vector $D=\{B, D\}$ and the extended demand vector $D=\{D, B, D, C\}$. Observe that cache contents $Z_{00}$, $Z_{01}$, $Z_{10}$, $Z_{11}$ recover the files
$D$, $B$, $D$, $C$, respectively. From the point of view of the User~1, the User~0 could have requested either $D$ or $B$ giving the necessary privacy.}
\label{fig:schN4K4partial}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conc}
We have investigated here the problem of demand privacy in systems employing coded caching techniques with a focus on minimizing subpacketization. For the 2-user, 2-file case, we provided a new construction with a subpacketization of 3. Additionally, we proved that the subpacketization of $3$ is indeed minimal for a linear code for the 2-user, 2-file case. Also, we proposed partially private caching schemes and showed how to construct such private schemes with less subpacketization in the general $K$-user, $N$-file case.
|
\section{Introduction}
In solid state physics, perfect insulators are modeled by periodic operators with spectral gaps. When two sufficiently distinct insulators are glued (imperfectly) along an edge, robust currents propagate along the interface. Strikingly, the existence of such currents depends on the bulk structure rather than on the nature of the interface.
This phenomenon is called the bulk-edge correspondence. It is a universal principle that reaches beyond electronics, for instance in accoustics \cite{Yea:15}, photonics \cite{HR:07,RH:08}, fluid mechanics \cite{DMV:17,PDV:19} and molecular physics \cite{F:19}. While bulk and edge indices were introduced as early as \cite{Ha:82,TKNN:82,BES:94}, the mathematical formulation of the bulk-edge correspondence started with \cite{Ha:93}. It has been the object of various improvements, covering Landau Hamiltonians \cite{KRS:02,EG:02,KS:04a,KS:04b}, strong disorder \cite{EGS:05,GS:18,Ta:14}, $\mathbb{Z}_2$-topological insulators \cite{GP:13,ASV:13}, K-theoretic aspects \cite{BKR:17,Ku:17,BR:18,Br:19} and periodic forcing \cite{GT:18,ST:19}.
In this work, we derive the bulk-edge correspondence for PDEs that are periodic away from the interface. The most important characteristics of our approach is the use of microlocal techniques in a field traditionally dominated by K-theory and functional analysis. It opens two promising perspectives:
\begin{itemize}
\item The quantitative analysis of topologically protected transport;
\item The geometric calculation of bulk/edge indices in terms of eigenvalue crossings.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Setting and main result} We study the Schr\"odinger evolution of electrons in a two-dimensional material, $i{\partial}_t \psi = P\psi$. The Hamiltonian $P$ is an elliptic selfadjoint second order differential operator on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5h}
P \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_\alpha(x) D_x^\alpha, \ \ \ a_\alpha(x) \in C^\infty_b(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C}), \ \ \ D_x \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \dfrac{1}{i} \dd{}{x}, \ \ \ \alpha = (\alpha_1,\alpha_2) \in \mathbb{N}^2.
\end{equation}
The class \eqref{eq:5h} covers for instance Schr\"odinger operators with a potential $V(x) \in C^\infty_b(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{R})$ and a (transverse) magnetic field ${\partial}_{x_1} A_2 - {\partial}_{x_2} A_1$, where $A(x) \in C_b^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{R}^2)$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1t}
-\big(\nabla_{\mathbb{R}^2} + iA(x)\big)^2 + V(x).
\end{equation}
It also includes the stationary form of the wave equation
that appears in photonics and meta-material realizations of topological insulators \cite{HR:07,RH:08,Kea:13,LWZ:18}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0l}
-{\operatorname{div}}_{\mathbb{R}^2}\big( \sigma(x) \cdot \nabla_{\mathbb{R}^2} \big), \ \ \ \ \sigma(x) \in C^\infty_b\big(\mathbb{R}^2,M_2(\mathbb{C})\big) \ \
\text{Hermitian-valued.}
\end{equation}
In relation with solid state physics, we assume that for some $L > 0$, the coefficients $a_\alpha(x)$ behave like $\mathbb{Z}^2$-periodic functions in the bulk regions $x_2 \geq L$ and $x_2 \leq -L$, see \eqref{eq:5i}. The periodic structures above and below the strip $|x_2| \leq L$ may be different.
Hence, $P$ represents the junction along $|x_2| \leq L$ of two (potentially distinct) perfect crystals, respectively modeled by $\mathbb{Z}^2$-periodic operators
\begin{equation}
P_+ \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_{\alpha,+}(x) D_x^\alpha, \ \ \ \
P_- \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_{\alpha,-}(x) D_x^\alpha, \ \ \ \ a_{\alpha,\pm}(x) \in C^\infty_b(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C}) \ \ \ \mathbb{Z}^2\text{-periodic.}
\end{equation}
The class \eqref{eq:5h} inherently covers bulk materials with non-squared periodicity, see \S\ref{sec:21}. We refer to Figure \ref{fig:1} for a pictorial representation of $P$.
In the bulk ($|x_2| \geq L$), $P_+$ and $P_-$ govern the quantum dynamics. We assume that this region is insulating at energy $\lambda_0$. Mathematically, this means
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5j}
\lambda_0 \notin \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_+) \ \textstyle{\bigcup} \ \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_-).
\end{equation}
In other words, $P_+$ and $P_-$ do not allow for plane wave-like propagation at energy $\lambda_0$. Thanks to periodicity and to \eqref{eq:5j}, the generalized eigenspace of $P_+$ with energy below $\lambda_0$ induces a (Bloch) vector bundle $\pazocal{E}_+$ over the $2$-torus $({\mathbb{T}}^2)^* = \mathbb{R}^2/(2\pi\mathbb{Z})^2$, see \S\ref{sec:41}. The Chern integer $c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$ is a topological invariant of $\pazocal{E}_+$, associated to $P_+$. One defines similarly $\pazocal{E}_-$ and $c_1(\pazocal{E}_-)$ associated to $P_-$.
While $P$ behaves like an insulator at energy $\lambda_0$ in the bulk $|x_2| \geq L$, it may still support currents along the strip $|x_2| \leq L$. Following \cite{KRS:02,EG:02,EGS:05}, we define the interface conductivity as \vspace*{-1mm}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5t}
\pazocal{I}_e(P) \ \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \ \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \Big( i\big[ P, f(x_1) \big] \cdot g'(P) \Big), \ \
\end{equation}
where $f \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$ and $g \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$ are such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0j}
f(x_1) = \systeme{1 & \text{ for } x_1 \geq \ell \ \ \\ 0 & \text{ for } x_1 \leq -\ell}, \ \ \ \ g(\lambda) = \systeme{1 \ \ \ \text{ for } \lambda \leq \lambda_0-\epsilon_0 \\ 0 \ \ \ \text{ for } \lambda \geq \lambda_0+\epsilon_0}.
\end{equation}
In \eqref{eq:0j}, $\ell$ is an arbitrary positive number; and $\epsilon_0$ is any positive number such that $[\lambda_0-2\epsilon_0,\lambda_0+2\epsilon_0]$ does not intersect $\sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_-) \cup \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_+)$.
Since $-g'(\lambda)$ is a probability density, $-g'(P)$ is a density of states with energy near $\lambda_0$. The operator $e^{itP} \cdot i [P,f(x_1)] \cdot e^{-itP} = {\partial}_t e^{itP} f(x_1) e^{-itP}$ measures the quantum flux of charges from $\{ f(x_1) = 0\}$ to $\{f(x_1) = 1\}$: the current moving left to right. Hence, \eqref{eq:5t} represents a density of current per unit energy (near $\lambda_0$). In analogy with Ohm's law, $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ is a (quantum) conductivity. See Figure \ref{fig:2}; and \S\ref{sec:22} for properties of $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$.
Our main result is:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:0} Let $P$ be an elliptic selfadjoint operator of the form \eqref{eq:5h} equal to $P_+$ for $x_2 \geq L$ and $P_-$ for $x_2 \leq -L$. If $\lambda_0$ satisfies \eqref{eq:5j} then
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5l}
2\pi \cdot \pazocal{I}_e(P) = c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) - c_1(\pazocal{E}_-).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}
{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {\includegraphics[height=2in]{potential2}};
\draw[ultra thick,red,dashed] (-5.4,.8) -- (5.4,.8);
\draw[ultra thick,red,dashed] (-5.4,-.8) -- (5.4,-.8);
\node[red] at (6.2,.8) {$x_2 = L$};
\node[red] at (6.4,-.8) {$x_2 = -L$};
\draw[decoration={brace,mirror,raise=5pt},decorate,thick]
(5.2,.9) -- node[black,right=8pt] {$\text{bulk}$} (5.2,2.4);
\draw[decoration={brace,mirror,raise=5pt},decorate,thick]
(5.2,-2.4) -- node[black,right=8pt] {$\text{bulk}$} (5.2,-.9);
\draw[decoration={brace,mirror,raise=5pt},decorate,thick]
(-5.2,.7) -- node[black,left=8pt] {$\text{interface}$} (-5.2,-.7);
\draw[thick,->] (7.8-15,-.1+1.8-.8+.2) -- (7.8-15,1.2+1.8-.8+.2);
\draw[thick,->] (5.9+1.8-15,0+1.8-.8+.2) -- (7.2+1.8-15,0+1.8-.8+.2);
\node at (5.6+1.8-15,1.2+1.8-.8+.2) {$x_2$};
\node at (7.2+1.8-15,-.3+.5+1.8-.8+.2) {$x_1$};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\caption{\label{fig:1} Pictorial representation of a material covered in this work. A horizontal interface, $ |x_2| \leq L$, with arbitrary analytic structure, separates two distinct periodic medias (bulk), $x_2 \geq L$ and $x_2 \leq -L$. }
\end{figure}
Theorem \ref{thm:0} is the bulk-edge correspondence: the bulk and edge indices are equal.
Theorem \ref{thm:0} is non-trivial for systems with broken time-reversal symmetry (TRS):
$P \neq \ove{P}$. These include, for instance, Schr\"odinger operators with magnetic fields \eqref{eq:1t} and in meta-materials \eqref{eq:0l}. The formula \eqref{eq:5l} implies both quantization and topological robustness of $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$. Indeed, \eqref{eq:5l} shows that $2\pi \cdot \pazocal{I}_e(P) \in \mathbb{Z}$; and that an (even large) compact perturbation of $P$ preserves $P_+$ and $P_-$, hence the bundles $\pazocal{E}_+$ and $\pazocal{E}_-$ as well as the indices $c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$, $c_1(\pazocal{E}_-)$ and $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$.
When $c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) \neq c_1(\pazocal{E}_-)$, Theorem \ref{thm:0} shows that $\pazocal{I}_e(P) \neq 0$; hence $g'(P) \neq 0$. A consequence is $\lambda_0 \in \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P)$. Physically speaking, the junction of two topologically distinct insulators must always be a conductor.
\subsection{Strategy} The proof of Theorem \ref{thm:0} derives \eqref{eq:5l} starting from the formula \eqref{eq:5t} for $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$. At the most conceptual level, our inspiration comes from Fedosov's proof of the index theorem \cite{Fe:70} -- see also H\"ormander's account \cite[\S19.3]{Ho:85}.
While our main result is not semiclassical (there is no asymptotic parameter $h \rightarrow 0$ in Theorem \ref{thm:0}), a key step of the proof is to deform $P$ to a semiclassical operator. Specifically, we construct in \S\ref{sec:24} an $h$-dependent operator
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5z}
P_h \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(hx,x) D_x^\alpha \ : \ L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \rightarrow L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)
\end{equation}
which is equal to $P$ when $h|x_2| \geq 1$, but whose coefficients admit a two-scale structure: $c_\alpha(x,y) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2)$, ${\mathbb{T}}^2 = \mathbb{R}^2/\mathbb{Z}^2$.
Lemma \ref{lem:1f} states that $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ depends only on $P_+$ and $P_-$; in particular, $\pazocal{I}_e(P) = \pazocal{I}_e(P_h)$. The scaling \eqref{eq:5z} is semiclassical (in an unusual sense): if $U(x,y) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2)$ and $u(x) = U(hx,x)$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:1a}
P_h u(x) = \big(\mathbb{P}_h U\big)(hx,x) \ \ \ \ \text{where} \ \ \ \
\mathbb{P}_h \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(x,y) (D_y+hD_x)^\alpha.
\end{equation}
The (leading) semiclassical symbol of $\mathbb{P}_h$ in $x$ is operator-valued. It equals
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1b}
\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(x,y) (D_y+\xi)^\alpha \ : \ L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2) \ \rightarrow \ L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2).
\end{equation}
We emphasize that $\pazocal{I}_e(P) = \pazocal{I}_e(P_h)$. Therefore, Theorem \ref{thm:0} reduces to a formula for a (semiclassically scaled) index $\pazocal{I}_e(P_h)$. This enables us to give a semiclassical proof.
\begin{figure}
\caption{The conductivity $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ measures the flux of particles of energy $\sim \lambda_0$, moving from $\{f(x_1)=0\}$ (left) to $\{f(x_1) = 1\}$ (right), along the interface, $|x_2| \leq L$. See Figure \ref{fig:1} for bulk and interface regions.}\label{fig:2}
{\hspace*{-2mm}\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {\includegraphics[height=2in]{potential}};
\draw[ultra thick, dashed] (-1.2,-2.5) -- (-1.2,2.7);
\draw[ultra thick, dashed] (1.2,-2.5) -- (1.2,2.7);
\node at (1.4,-2.7) {$x_1=\ell$};
\node at (-1.5,-2.7) {$x_1=-\ell$};
\draw[ultra thick, red, ->] (-2.3,0) -- (2.3,0);
\draw[decoration={brace,mirror,raise=5pt},decorate,thick]
(5.2,2.4) -- node[black,above=6pt] {$\{f(x_1)=1\}$} (1.3,2.4);
\draw[decoration={brace,mirror,raise=5pt},decorate,thick]
(-1.3,2.4) -- node[black,above=6pt] {$\{f(x_1)=0\}$} (-5.2,2.4);
\draw[ultra thick,red,dashed] (-5.4,.8) -- (5.3,.8);
\draw[ultra thick,red,dashed] (-5.4,-.8) -- (5.3,-.8);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\end{figure}
We rely on the spectral theory of two-scale operators \eqref{eq:5z}, developed in G\'erard--Martinez--Sj\"ostrand \cite{GMS:91}. It constructs a space $\pazocal{H}_1 \subset {\pazocal{S}}'(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2)$, isomorphic to $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, such that $P_h$ on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and $\mathbb{P}_h$ on $\pazocal{H}_1$ are conjugated. Roughly speaking, distributions in $\pazocal{H}_1$ are -- up to normalization -- $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$-multiples of the Dirac mass on
\begin{equation}
\left\{ (x,y) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2 :\ x = h(y+m) , \ m \in \mathbb{Z}^2\right\}.
\end{equation}
See \S\ref{sec:31}. The equivalence between $P_h$ and $\mathbb{P}_h$ realizes $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ as a semiclassical trace: we will see that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:0m}
\pazocal{I}_e(P) = \pazocal{I}_e(P_h) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \Big( \big[ P_h, f(hx_1) \big] g'(P_h) \Big)
\\
= \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1} \Big( \big[ \mathbb{P}_h, f(x_1) \big] g'(\mathbb{P}_h) \Big) = \pazocal{I}_e(\mathbb{P}_h).
\end{equations}
Semiclassical trace expansions have a long history. The most celebrated example is the semiclassical Weyl law, see e.g. \cite[\S9]{DS:99}, \cite[\S14]{Zw:12} and references given there. For the present work, the most relevant papers are due to Dimassi, Zerzeri and Duong \cite{Di:93,DZ:03,DD:14}. For instance, \cite{Di:93} shows that if ${\varphi} \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R})$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{supp}({\varphi}) \ \text{$\textstyle{\bigcap}$} \bigcup_{\substack{|x| \geq M , \ \xi \in \mathbb{R}^2 }} \sigma_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}\big( \mathbb{P}(x,\xi) \big) \ = \ \emptyset
\end{equation}
for some $M>0$,
then ${\varphi}(P_h)$ is trace-class on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and as $h \rightarrow 0$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0k}
\Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( {\varphi}(P_h) \big) \ \sim \ \sum_{j \geq 0} b_j \cdot h^{j-2}, \ \ \ \ b_0 = \int_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times ({\mathbb{T}}^2)^*} \Tr_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \big( {\varphi}\big( \mathbb{P}(x,\xi) \big) \ \dfrac{dxd\xi}{(2\pi)^2}.
\end{equation}
Since $P_h$ on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and $\mathbb{P}_h$ on $\pazocal{H}_1$ are conjugated, \eqref{eq:0k} also holds for $\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1} \big( {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h) \big)$. Hence, Dimassi's result suggest that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1x}
\pazocal{I}_e(\mathbb{P}_h) \ \sim \ \sum_{j=0}^\infty a_j \cdot h^{j-2}, \ \ \ \ h \rightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
But $\pazocal{I}_e(\mathbb{P}_h) = \pazocal{I}_e(P)$ does not depend on $h$. Thus, if \eqref{eq:1x} holds, then $a_j = 0$ for all $j \neq 2$; and $a_2 = \pazocal{I}_e(P)$. The framework of G\'erard--Martinez--Sj\"ostrand \cite{GMS:91} reduces $\mathbb{P}_h$ to a discrete effective Hamiltonian $E_{22}(\lambda)$, realized as a pseudodifferential operator with matrix-valued symbol, $E_{22}(x,\xi;\lambda)$. The singular values of $E_{22}(\lambda)$ describe the spectral aspects of $\mathbb{P}_h$ relevant in the computation of $\pazocal{I}_e(\mathbb{P}_h)$.
The bulk-edge correspondence for discrete Hamiltonians has been analyzed in \cite{KRS:02,EG:02,EGS:05}. Here we need an approach adapted to both our microlocal framework and to singular value problems. Section \ref{sec:33} extends arguments from \cite{EGS:05} to singular (versus eigenvalue) problems. We will eventually express $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ in terms of the asymptotics $E_\pm(\xi;\lambda)$ of $E_{22}(x,\xi;\lambda)$:
\begin{equation}
\pazocal{I}_e(P) = {\pazocal{J}}(E_+) - {\pazocal{J}}(E_-),
\end{equation}
and provide an explicit formula for ${\pazocal{J}}(E_+)$ and ${\pazocal{J}}(E_-)$ -- see \eqref{eq:5d} below.
Without further considerations, recovering the Chern integers $c_1(\pazocal{E}_\pm)$ from ${\pazocal{J}}(E_\pm)$ is technically difficult. In \S\ref{sec:4}, we design a specific effective Hamiltonian which tremendously simplifies the calculation. This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:0}.
\subsection{Relation to earlier work} The bulk-edge correspondence has been intensely studied in relation to the integer quantum Hall effect, where the magnetic field is constant. We refer to \cite{KRS:02,EG:02,EGS:05} for discrete models; \cite{KS:04a,KS:04b} for K-theory proofs in the continuum; \cite{CG:05} for properties of the edge index; and \cite{Ta:14} for results covering strong disorder.
The analysis on continuous (versus discrete) models is more intricate. One reason is that after increasing the number of degrees of freedom, discrete periodic Hamiltonians are asymptotically constant.
More importantly, there is a subtle situation that can only happen in the continuous setting. For discrete Hamiltonians on $\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^2,\mathbb{C}^d)$, the Bloch eigenbundle below sufficiently high energy is necessarily trivial: it is simply $({\mathbb{T}}^2)^* \times \mathbb{C}^d$. However, for continuous Hamiltonians, there may not exist $\lambda_2 > \lambda_0$ with $\lambda_2 \notin \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_+)$ such that the Bloch eigenbundle below energy $\lambda_2$ has trivial topology.
This generates major difficulties in the proof. In particular, while we reduce our continuous Hamiltonian to a discrete system, the relevant spectral quantities become singular (characteristic) values rather than eigenvalues. In the discrete case, the Hamiltonian is already in reduced form; those singular values are eigenvalues; and our proof considerably simplifies. In that case it would resembles that of \cite{EGS:05}.
While most of the aforementioned bulk-edge correspondence works rely on functional analysis or K-theory, our approach to Theorem \ref{thm:0} is fully based on PDE techniques. It suggests a microlocal conjecture related to the quantitative aspects of transport in topological systems. We refer to \S\ref{sec:14} for the corresponding discussion.
For the sake of simplicity, Theorem \ref{thm:0} focuses on second-order operators. The microlocal aspects of the proof generalize to all elliptic pseudodifferential operators whose spectrum is bounded below. The present work relies on the effective Hamiltonian theory developed by G\'erard--Martinez--Sj\"ostrand \cite{GMS:91}. This paper also covers constant magnetic fields: $A(x) = [B_1 x_2, B_2 x_1]^\top$ in \eqref{eq:1t}. Consequently, we expect that our proof extends to this case.
\subsection{Perspectives}\label{sec:14} Our microlocal framework suggests exciting perspectives. In the discussion below, we assume that ${\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_+) = {\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_-) = n$.
Let $\mathbb{P}_h$ be the semiclassical Hamiltonian \eqref{eq:1a} with symbol $\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) : L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2) \rightarrow L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$, see \eqref{eq:1b}. It does not depend on $x_1$, see \S\ref{sec:24}. Below, we emphasize this independence via the notations $\mathbb{P}(x_2,\xi) = \mathbb{P}(x,\xi)$ and $c_\alpha(x_2,y) = c_\alpha(x,y)$. The family $\big\{ \mathbb{P}(x_2,\xi) : \xi \in [0,2\pi]^2 \big\}$ forms the Floquet decomposition (see e.g. \cite[\S16]{RS:78}) of
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{P}(x_2) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \
\sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(x_2,y) D_y^\alpha \ : \ L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \ \rightarrow \ L^2(\mathbb{R}^2).
\end{equation}
For $x_2$ sufficiently positive, $\mathbb{P}(x_2) = P_+$ hence $\lambda_0 \notin \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( \mathbb{P}(x_2) \big)$. Since ${\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_+) = n$, $\lambda_0$ lies precisely in the $n$-th gap of $\mathbb{P}(x_2)$, which is a fortiori open. Let $\lambda_1(x_2,\xi) \leq \dots \leq \lambda_j(x_2,\xi) \leq \dots$ be the eigenvalues of $\mathbb{P}(x_2,\xi)$.
Suppose for a moment that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5x}
\forall (x_2,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times [0,2\pi]^2, \ \ \ \ \lambda_n(x_2,\xi) < \lambda_{n+1}(x_2,\xi),
\end{equation}
Note that the condition \eqref{eq:5x} is weaker than assuming that $\mathbb{P}(x_2)$ has an open $n$-th $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$-gap for every $x_2 \in \mathbb{R}$. Yet, it allows for the construction of a smooth, $x_2$-parametrized family of (Bloch) bundles $\pazocal{E}(x_2) \rightarrow ({\mathbb{T}}^2)^* = \mathbb{R}^2/(2\pi\mathbb{Z})^2$, whose fibers at $\xi \in ({\mathbb{T}}^2)^*$ are the first $n$ eigenspaces of $\mathbb{P}(x_2,\xi)$. These bundles depend continuously on $x_2$. For $x_2$ sufficiently positive, $\pazocal{E}(x_2) = \pazocal{E}_+$. We deduce that
\begin{equations}
n = {\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_+) = \lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty} {\operatorname{rk}}\big(\pazocal{E}(x_2)\big) = \lim_{n\rightarrow -\infty} {\operatorname{rk}}\big(\pazocal{E}(x_2)\big).
\end{equations}
The assumption ${\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_-) = {\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_+) = n$ ensures that $\pazocal{E}(x_2) = \pazocal{E}_-$ for $x_2$ sufficiently negative. Therefore the family of bundles $\pazocal{E}(x_2)$ interpolates smoothly between $\pazocal{E}_+$ and $\pazocal{E}_-$ as $x_2$ runs through $\mathbb{R}$. We deduce that when \eqref{eq:5x} holds, $c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) = c_1(\pazocal{E}_-)$. Theorem \ref{thm:0} yields $\pazocal{I}_e(P) = 0$.
In other words, if $\pazocal{I}_e(P) \neq 0$, then the $n$-th and $n+1$-th dispersion surfaces must intersect. The union of Bloch varieties $\left\{ (x,\xi;\lambda) \ : \ \lambda \in \sigma_{L^2}\big(\mathbb{P}(x_2,\xi) \big) \right\}$
must have singularities along the $n$-th and $n+1$-th dispersion surfaces.
This observation motivates a conjecture that highlights microlocal aspects of the bulk-edge correspondence. Introduce the midpoint
\begin{equation}
\mu(x_2,\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \dfrac{\lambda_n(x_2,\xi) + \lambda_{n+1}(x_2,\xi)}{2}.
\end{equation}
For $\delta > 0$, fix $G \in C^\infty\big(\mathbb{R}^2 \times ({\mathbb{T}}^2)^* \times \mathbb{R}\big)$ with
\begin{equation}
G(x,\xi;\lambda) = \systeme{1 \ \ \ \text{ for } \lambda \leq \mu(x_2,\xi)-\delta \\ 0 \ \ \ \text{ for } \lambda \geq \mu(x_2,\xi)+\delta}.
\end{equation}
Set $\mathbb{W}(x,\xi) = {\partial}_\lambda G\big(x,\xi;\mathbb{P}(x_2,\xi)\big)$. This symbol is valued in linear operators on $L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$; its support lies in the set
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{Z}}_\delta \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \
\left\{ (x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2 \ : \ \big| \lambda_{n+1}(x_2,\xi) - \lambda_n(x_2,\xi) \big| \leq 2\delta \right\}.
\end{equation}
See Figure \ref{fig:3}. As $\delta \rightarrow 0$, ${\pazocal{Z}}_\delta$ converges to the set of eigenvalue crossings (singularities in the Bloch variety), ${\pazocal{Z}}_0 = \{ (x,\xi) : \lambda_n(x_2,\xi) = \lambda_{n+1}(x_2,\xi)\}$. Hence,
the quantization $\mathbb{W}_h$ of $\mathbb{W}(x,\xi)$ microlocalizes at arbitrarily small distance to ${\pazocal{Z}}_0$. It acts on the same space $\pazocal{H}_1$ as $\mathbb{P}_h$. As $h \rightarrow 0$, we expect that $\mathbb{W}_h$ plays the role of $g' (\mathbb{P}_h)$ in \eqref{eq:0m}:
\begin{figure}
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={right,center},capbesidewidth=3in}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
{\hspace*{-5mm}\caption{Pictorial representation of dispersion surfaces, $\lambda_n$ (blue) and $\lambda_{n+1}$ (red), with midpoint area of width $2\delta$ (gray). The symbol $\mathbb{W}$ is supported where $\big|\lambda_{n+1}(x_2,\xi) - \lambda_n(x_2,\xi)\big| \leq 2\delta$, that is, where dispersion surfaces intersect the gray area.}\label{fig:3}}
{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {\includegraphics[height=2.3in]{micro1f}};
\node at (3.8,-3) {$(x,\xi)$};
\node at (-4.2,2.8) {$\lambda$};
\node at (-1.8,-2) {supp$(\mathbb{W})$};
\node[red] at (2,2.2) {$\lambda_{n+1}(x_2,\xi)$};
\node[blue] at (3,-1.4) {$\lambda_n(x_2,\xi)$};
\node[black!70] at (-4.5,.25) {$2\delta$};
\node[black!70] at (3.3,.95) {$\mu(x_2,\xi)$};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\vspace*{-.3cm}
\end{figure}
\begin{conj}\label{conj:1} Assume ${\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_+) = {\operatorname{rk}}(\pazocal{E}_-) =n$. There exists $\delta_0 > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2b}
\delta \in (0,\delta_0) \ \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \
\pazocal{I}_e(P) =
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}} \Big( \big[ \mathbb{P}_h, f(x_1) \big] \cdot \mathbb{W}_h \Big) + O(h^\infty).
\end{equation}
\end{conj}
Our conjecture predicts that, in the semiclassical limit, functions that are microlocalized away from the wavefront set ${\operatorname{WF}}_h(\mathbb{W}_h) \subset {\pazocal{Z}}_\delta$ do not contribute to $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$.
It suggests that a set of edge states microlocalized on ${\pazocal{Z}}_0$ controls the fundamental aspects of topological transport. They should be WKB-type solutions of a normal form equation for $\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)$ near ${\pazocal{Z}}_0$ -- expressed as a pseudodifferential system. We refer to \cite{Bu:87,GRT:88,HS:90,DGR:02,PST:03a,PST:03b,DGR:04,FT:16} for WKB solutions in two-scale backgrounds of the form \eqref{eq:5z}. The work \cite{FT:16} also address Bloch bands with non-trivial topology, most relevant here.
The fundamental role played by ${\pazocal{Z}}_0$ highlights the significance of eigenvalue crossings. When ${\pazocal{Z}}_0 = \emptyset$ -- equivalently, when \eqref{eq:5x} holds -- our conjecture is true. Indeed, on one hand, we saw that \eqref{eq:5x} implies $\pazocal{I}_e(P) = 0$; on the other hand, ${\pazocal{Z}}_\delta = \emptyset$ for $\delta$ sufficiently small, thus $\mathbb{W}_h = 0$ -- see Figure \ref{fig:4}.
\begin{figure}
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={right,center},capbesidewidth=3in}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
{\hspace*{-5mm}\caption{If the $n$-th and $n$-th dispersion surfaces do not intersect for all $(x,\xi)$, then for $\delta$ small enough they do not cross the midpoint area. The support of $\mathbb{W}$ is empty. }\label{fig:4}}
{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {\includegraphics[height=2.3in]{micro1g}};
\node at (3.8,-3) {$(x,\xi)$};
\node at (-4.2,2.8) {$\lambda$};
\node[red] at (3,2.75) {$\lambda_{n+1}(x_2,\xi)$};
\node[blue] at (3.2,-1.6) {$\lambda_n(x_2,\xi)$};
\node[black!70] at (3.3,.9) {$\mu(x_2,\xi)$};
\node[black!70] at (-4.5,.25) {$2\delta$};
\node at (-2,-2.2) {$\mathrm{supp}(\mathbb{W}) = \emptyset$};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\vspace*{-.3cm}
\end{figure}
The simplest types of eigenvalue crossings are Dirac point, which typically appear in honeycomb structures \cite{FW:12}; see also \cite{BC:18,FLW:18,LWZ:18,Aea:18}. For small gap-opening perturbations and a scaling that is closer to homogenization than semiclassical analysis, \cite{FLW:16,LWZ:18} constructed genuine edge states. They exhibit spectral concentration near the momentum associated to the conical crossing.\footnote{These are however not concentrated in position. This seems to be a feature of the homogenization -- rather than semiclassical -- scaling.} This supports the conjecture.
In \cite{Dr:19a,DW:19}, we completed the analysis via a full identification of edge states. These papers essentially provide a converse to \cite{FLW:16,LWZ:18}: all edge states are of the form derived there. This yields the explicit value of $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$;\footnote{In \cite{Dr:19a,DW:19}, we defined the edge index as a spectral flow. Modulo a factor $2\pi$, it equals \eqref{eq:5t} -- see e.g. \cite[Proposition 3]{ASV:13}.} see also \cite{Dr:19b} for the separate bulk index computation. For instance, if a weak magnetic field breaks TRS,
\begin{equation}
2\pi \cdot \pazocal{I}_e(P) = \pm 2 = c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) - c_1(\pazocal{E}_-).
\end{equation}
The sign depends only on the orientation of the bulk magnetic field seen by Dirac point Bloch modes. Hence \cite{Dr:19a,Dr:19b,DW:19} supports our conjecture: bulk/edge indices can computed from a local understanding of the operator near eigenvalue crossings.
A more sophisticated case concerns eigenvalue crossings arising along a topologically non-trivial loop. For a 1D model built up from \cite{FLW:17,DFW:18}, we computed the bulk/edge indices as the winding number of a function from this loop to $\mathbb{C}\setminus \{0\}$ \cite{Dr:18}. This result also corroborates our conjecture.
\subsection{Notations}
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathbb{C}^+$ denotes the upper half-plane $\{ \lambda \in \mathbb{C} : \Im \lambda > 0\}$.
\item ${\mathbb{T}}^2$ is the two-torus $\mathbb{R}^2/\mathbb{Z}^2$. We use the notations ${\mathbb{T}}^2_* = ({\mathbb{T}}^2)^* = \mathbb{R}^2/(2\pi\mathbb{Z})^2$ for its dual.
\item $C^\infty_b(\mathbb{R}^2)$ denotes smooth functions with bounded derivatives at any order; ${\pazocal{S}}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ denotes the Schwartz class.
\item $P$ is the original Hamiltonian. It has bulk modeled by periodic operators $P_+$ and $P_-$ which have a spectral gap $[\lambda_0-2\epsilon,\lambda_0+2\epsilon]$ centered at $\lambda_0$, see \S\ref{sec:21}.
\item $P_h$ is a two-scale deformation of $P$ that preserves $P_+$ and $P_-$, see \S\ref{sec:24}.
\item $\mathbb{P}_h$ is a semiclassical operator that is unitarily equivalent to $P_h$. It acts on a space $\pazocal{H}^1 \subset {\pazocal{S}}'(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2)$. It has semiclassical symbol $\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)$ acting on $L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$, see \S\ref{sec:32}. For $\pm x_2 \geq 1$, it equals $P_\pm(\xi)$, see \eqref{eq:1y}.
\item $Q$, $Q_h$, ${\mathbb{Q}}_h$, ${\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi)$ and ${\mathbb{Q}}_\pm(\xi)$ are respectively equal to $\psi(P)$, $\psi(P_h)$, $\psi(\mathbb{P})$, $\psi\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)\big)$ and $\psi\big(\mathbb{P}_\pm(\xi)\big)$, where $\psi$ satisfies \eqref{eq:3k}.
\item $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ is the edge index of $P$, eventually denoted $\pazocal{I}(P_-,P_+)$. Its definition requires two functions $f$ and $g$, see \S\ref{sec:21}. For convenience, we will use ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P) = -i \cdot \pazocal{I}_e(P)$ past \S\ref{sec:21}.
\item $\tilde{g}$ is an almost analytic extension of $g$; $\Omega$ is a bounded neighborhood of $\mathrm{supp}(\tilde{g})$; and $\Omega' \subset \Omega$ satisfies \eqref{eq:1z}.
\item The real part of an operator $T$ is the selfadjoint operator $\Re(T) = \frac{T+T^*}{2}$.
\item If $u_1, \dots, u_n$ are vectors, $[u_1, \dots, u_n]$ denotes the subspace $\mathbb{C} u_1 \oplus \dots \oplus \mathbb{C} u_n$.
\item Given an order function $m$ and $a \in S(m)$, the (classical) Weyl quantization of $a$ is ${\operatorname{Op}}(a) \in \Psi(m)$ (see \S\ref{sec:22}) and the semiclassical Weyl quantization of $a$ is ${\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) \in \Psi_h(m)$ (see \S\ref{sec:31}).
\item We will use functional spaces $\pazocal{H}_1$ and $\pazocal{H}_2$ defined in \cite{GMS:91}, associated to classes of symbols $S^{(jk)}(m)$ and operators $\Psi_h^{(jk)}(m)$, see \S\ref{sec:314}.
\item $\pazocal{E}_\pm$ are vector bundles over $({\mathbb{T}}^2)^*$, associated to $P_\pm$ and $\lambda_0$. They have Chern number $c_1(\pazocal{E}_\pm)$, see \S\ref{sec:41}.
\item $d^1\lambda$ denotes a one-dimensional line element in $\mathbb{C}$ and $d^2\lambda$ denotes the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb{C}$.
\item We use the notation $\pm$ when a statement is true for both $+$ and $-$. For instance, ``$\pm u(x) \geq 0$ or $\mp v(x) = 0$" means both ``$u(x) \geq 0$ or $-v(x) \geq 0$" and ``$-u(x) \geq 0$ or $v(x) \geq 0$".
\item In some statements, we use the exponent $-\infty$ to express that the statement holds for any exponent $-s$, $s > 0$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgments.} I am grateful to F. Faure, J. Shapiro, M. I. Weinstein and M. Zworski for valuable discussions. I thankfully acknowledge support from NSF DMS-1440140 (MSRI, Fall 2019) and DMS-1800086, and from the Simons Foundation through M. I. Weinstein's Math+X investigator award \#376319.
\section{The edge index}
We review here the properties of the edge index $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$,
owing to \cite{KRS:02,EG:02,EGS:05,CG:05,Ba:19a}. From Theorem \ref{thm:0}, we anticipate that $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ depends only on
\begin{equation}
\Pi_\pm \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \mathds{1}_{(-\infty,\lambda_0]}(P_\pm).
\end{equation}
This is supported by standard results, recalled in \S\ref{sec:21}. We provide our own proofs in \S\ref{sec:23}, relying on pseudodifferential calculus (reviewed in \S\ref{sec:22}). They initiate the reader to the semiclassical techniques of \S\ref{sec:3}.
This independence property motivates the search for a formula expressing $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ in terms of $\Pi_\pm$ only: the bulk-edge correspondence. On one hand, \eqref{eq:5t} defines $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ as the trace of a classical ($h=1$) pseudodifferential operator. On the other hand, a widely developed area of spectral asymptotics expands semiclassical ($h \rightarrow 0$) traces in powers of $h$. This suggests to look for a deformation of $P$ to a semiclassical operator, that preserves the edge index. We realize this in \S\ref{sec:24}.
\subsection{Edge index}\label{sec:21}
Let $P$ be a partial differential operator of order $2$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5s}
P \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_\alpha(x) D_x^\alpha, \ \ \ \ a_\alpha(x) \in C_b^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2), \ \ \ \ \text{such that:}
\end{equation}
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textbf{(a)}] $P$ is symmetric on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, i.e. $\lr{u,Pv}_{L^2} = \lr{Pu,v}_{L^2}$ when $u, v \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R}^2)$;\vspace*{.8mm}
\item[\textbf{(b)}] $P$ is elliptic, i.e. $\sum_{|\alpha|=2} \Re\big( a_\alpha(x) \big) \xi^\alpha \geq c |\xi|^2$ for some $c > 0$ and all $(x,\xi)$; \footnote{Note that from \textbf{(a)}, $a_\alpha(x) = \ove{a_\alpha(x)}$ thus the ellipticity condition is equivalent to the more standard one $\sum_{|\alpha|=2} a_\alpha(x) \xi^\alpha \geq c |\xi|^2$.}
\item[\textbf{(c)}] $P$ has $\mathbb{Z}^2$-periodic coefficients for $|x_2| \geq L$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5i}
\exists a_{\alpha,\pm}(x) \in C^\infty_b(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C}), \ \text{ $\mathbb{Z}^2$-periodic with } \
a_\alpha(x) = \systeme{a_{\alpha,+}(x) & \text{ for } x_2 \geq L \ \ \\ a_{\alpha,-}(x) & \text{ for } x_2 \leq -L}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Under these conditions, $P$ extends uniquely to a selfadjoint operator on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, with domain $H^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. In the region $\pm x_2 \geq L$, $P$ is equal to the periodic operator
\begin{equation}
P_\pm \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_{\alpha,\pm}(x) D_x^\alpha \ : \ L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \rightarrow L^2(\mathbb{R}^2).
\end{equation}
We observe that the class of operators $P$ of the form \eqref{eq:5s}, satisfying \textbf{(a)} and \textbf{(b)} above, is invariant under linear substitutions. Such change of variables correspond to conjugating $P$ by a unitary transform. Hence the class \eqref{eq:5s} inherently models rational interfaces between materials that are (commensurately) periodic with respect to (non-necessarily squared) $\mathbb{Z}^2$-lattices .
In the rest of the paper, we fix $\lambda_0 \notin \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_+) \bigcup \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_-)$. The equation $(P_\pm - \lambda_0)u = 0$ has no bounded solutions. Physically, $\lambda_0$ is an insulating energy: there are no plane waves with energy $\lambda_0$ in systems modeled by $P_\pm$.
In relation with solid state physics, the operator $P$ models the junction of two perfect insulators along an imperfect interface $|x_2| \leq L$. Even though such materials are insulating in $\pm x_2 \geq L$, they can still support currents at energy $\lambda_0$ along the interface $|x_2| \leq L$. Fix $\epsilon \in (0,1)$ with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0a}
\sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_\pm) \cap [\lambda_0-2\epsilon,\lambda_0+2\epsilon] =\emptyset
\end{equation}
and two functions $f(x_1) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$, $g(\lambda) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2a}
f(x_1) = \systeme{ 0 & \text{ for } x_1 \leq -\ell \\ \ell & \text{ for } x_1 \geq \ell \ \ }, \ \ \ \ g(\lambda) = \systeme{ 0 \ \text{ for } \lambda \geq \lambda_0+\epsilon \\ 1 \ \text{ for } \lambda \leq \lambda_0-\epsilon}.
\end{equation}
Following \cite{KRS:02,EG:02,EGS:05,CG:05},
we introduce the conductivity at energy $\lambda_0$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5u}
\pazocal{I}_e(P) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big(i \big[P,f(x_1)\big] \cdot g'(P)\big).
\end{equation}
Before justifying that \eqref{eq:5u} is well-defined, we provide a physical interpretation of $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ as a conductivity. Using cyclicity of the trace, we observe that for all $t \in \mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}
\pazocal{I}_e(P) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \Big( e^{itP} i \big[P,f(x_1)\big] e^{-itP} \cdot g'(P)\Big) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \left(\dd{e^{itP} f(x_1) e^{-itP}}{t} \cdot g'(P)\right).
\end{equation}
From a quantum mechanics point of view:
\begin{itemize}
\item ${\partial}_t e^{itP} f(x_1) e^{-itP}$ measures the quantum flux between $\{f(x_1) = 0\}$ and $\{f(x_1) = 1\}$, per unit time. Indeed, it is the time derivative of the Heisenberg evolution of $f(x_1)$ -- which measures the probability of a particle to sit in $\{f(x_1) = 1\}$.
\item $-g'(P)$ is a density of quantum states with energy near $\lambda_0$. Indeed, $-g'(\lambda)$ is a probability density.
\item Taking the trace corresponds to summing over all quantum states.
\end{itemize}
Therefore, $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ measures the number of particles moving left to right per unit time and per unit energy (near $\lambda_0$). This is the quantum current along the interface, per unit energy. In analogy with Ohm's law, it represents the quantum conductivity at energy $\lambda_0$. This explains the physical significance of $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$.
In \S\ref{sec:20}, we will also interpret $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ as an algebraic number of traveling waves (with plus or minus count depending on the direction of propagation): a spectral flow -- see e.g. \cite[Proposition 3]{ASV:13}.
The definition of $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ requires a standard result:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1c} The operator $[P,f(x_1)] g'(P)$ is trace-class on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$.
\end{lem}
While not immediately apparent on \eqref{eq:5u}, $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ is spectacularly robust. The first property ensures independence on $f$:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:2a} $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ is independent of $f$ satisfying \eqref{eq:2a}.
\end{lem}
The second one is independence on the nature of the interface:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1f} Let $P_1$ and $P_2$ satisfy the assumptions \textbf{(a)}, \textbf{(b)} and \textbf{(c)} above. If $P_1-P_2$ has coefficients supported in a strip $\{ |x_2| \leq L'\}$, then $\pazocal{I}_e(P_1) = \pazocal{I}_e(P_2)$.
\end{lem}
According to Lemma \ref{lem:1f}, $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ depends only on $P_+$ and $P_-$. We state a last independence property that is perhaps subtler. We will use at the end of the proof, \S\ref{sec:4}. Let $\lambda_1, \lambda_2$ with $\lambda_1 +2\epsilon \leq \lambda_0 \leq \lambda_2-2\epsilon$ and $\psi \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ a two-level rearrangement:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3k}
\psi \ \ \text{nondecreasing} \ \ \text{ and } \ \
\psi(\lambda) = \systeme{ \lambda_1 & \ \text{for } \ \lambda \leq \lambda_0-2\epsilon \\
\lambda & \ \text{for } \ |\lambda -\lambda_0| \leq \epsilon \\
\lambda_2& \ \text{for } \ \lambda \geq \lambda_0 + 2\epsilon}.
\end{equation}
See Figure \ref{fig:5}.
\begin{figure}
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={right,center},capbesidewidth=3in}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
{\hspace{1cm}\caption{Pictorial representation of $\psi(\lambda)$. We note that $\psi(P_+)$ and $\psi(P_-)$ have no spectrum outside $\{\lambda_1,\lambda_2\}$.}\label{fig:5}}
{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {\includegraphics{psi}};
\node at (-1.7,-2) {$\lambda_0-\epsilon$};
\node at (0,-2) {$\lambda_0+\epsilon$};
\node at (2.9,-1.35) {$\lambda$};
\node at (-3.15,-.7) {$\lambda_1$};
\node at (-3.15,1.3) {$\lambda_2$};
\node[red] at (2.2,1.65) {$\psi(\lambda)$};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\vspace*{-.3cm}
\end{figure}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1e} If $\psi$ satisfies \eqref{eq:3k} then $\big[ \psi(P), f(x_1) \big] g'\circ \psi(P)$ is trace-class and
\begin{equation}
\pazocal{I}_e(P) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( \big[ \psi(P), f(x_1) \big] g'\circ \psi(P) \big) = \pazocal{I}_e\big(\psi(P)\big).
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
From Lemma \ref{lem:1e}, $\pazocal{I}_e(P) = \pazocal{I}_e\big(\psi(P)\big)$. Because of Lemma \ref{lem:1c}, it is reasonable to expect that $\pazocal{I}_e\big(\psi(P)\big)$ depends only on $\psi(P_\pm)$. From \eqref{eq:0a} and \eqref{eq:3k},
\begin{equation}
\psi(P_\pm) = \lambda_1 \cdot \Pi_\pm + \lambda_2 \cdot ({\operatorname{Id}}-\Pi_\pm), \ \ \ \ \Pi_\pm \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \mathds{1}_{(-\infty,\lambda_0]}(P_\pm).
\end{equation}
Since $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ does not depend on $\lambda_1, \lambda_2$, we anticipate that $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ depends only on~$\Pi_\pm$.
Lemma \ref{lem:1c}-\ref{lem:1e} are morally known; see e.g. \cite{KRS:02,EG:02} for Lemma \ref{lem:1c}, \cite[Theorem 1]{CG:05} for Lemma \ref{lem:1f} and \cite[Lemma A.4]{EG:02} or \cite[Lemma 4.7]{Ba:19a} for Lemma \ref{lem:1e}. We give our own proofs in \S\ref{sec:23}. They rely on pseudodifferential calculus (reviewed in \S\ref{sec:22}). They provide a good introduction to the semiclassical techniques of \S\ref{sec:3}.
\subsection{Dynamics, spectral flow and edge index}\label{sec:20} We give here an interpretation of $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ as the signed number of independent elementary waves propagating along the interface $|x_2| \leq L$.
Thanks to Lemma \ref{lem:1f}, $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ depends only on $P_+$ and $P_-$. After a perturbation of $P$ in the strip $\{ |x_2| \leq L\}$, we can assume here that $P$ is periodic w.r.t. $\mathbb{Z} e_1$. In this case, for each $\zeta \in [0,2\pi]$, $P$ acts on the space
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{L}}^2_\zeta \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \left\{ u \in L^2_{\text{loc}}(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C}) : \ u(x+e_1) = e^{i\zeta} u(x), \ \int_{[0,1] \times \mathbb{R}} \big|u(x)\big|^2 dx < \infty \right\}.
\end{equation}
We denote the resulting operator by $P_\zeta$ -- the Floquet--Bloch decomposition of $P$ along $\mathbb{Z} e_1$. The essential spectrum of $P_\zeta$ comes from large values of $|x_2|$: we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0i}
\sigma_{{\pazocal{L}}^2_\zeta,{\operatorname{ess}}}(P_\zeta) \ = \ \sigma_{{\pazocal{L}}^2_\zeta,{\operatorname{ess}}}(P_{+,\zeta}) \ \textstyle{ \bigcup } \ \sigma_{{\pazocal{L}}^2_\zeta,{\operatorname{ess}}}(P_{-,\zeta}) \ \subset \ \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_+) \ \textstyle{ \bigcup } \ \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_-),
\end{equation}
where $P_{\pm,\zeta}$ denote $P_\pm$ acting on ${\pazocal{L}}^2_\zeta$. In particular, \eqref{eq:0i} shows that $P_\zeta$ has an essential spectral gap containing $\lambda_0$.
The spectral flow of $P_\zeta$ is the algebraic number of ${\pazocal{L}}^2_\zeta$-eigenvalues that traverse this gap as $\zeta$ sweeps $[0,2\pi]$; see \cite{W:16} for a smooth introduction and Figure \ref{fig:7} for a pictorial representation. From \cite[Proposition 3]{ASV:13}, $2\pi \cdot \pazocal{I}_e(P)$ coincide with the spectral flow of $\zeta \mapsto P_\zeta$, when $P$ is $\mathbb{Z} e_1$-invariant.
\begin{figure}
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={right,center},capbesidewidth=3in}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
{\hspace*{-8mm}\caption{Essential (gray) and discrete (red) spectra of $P_\zeta$ as functions of $\zeta$. The spectral flow is the intersection number of the eigenvalue curves with the energy level $\lambda_0$. Here it equals $1$.}\label{fig:7}}
{\begin{tikzpicture}
\node at (0,0) {\includegraphics{sf}};
\draw [decorate,decoration={brace},thick] (-3.8,3*.8-1) -- (-3.8,3*.8);
\draw [decorate,decoration={brace},thick] (-3.8,-2.3) -- (-3.8,-3*.8+1.2);
\node at (3.4,3*.8+.3) {$\lambda$};
\node at (-4.5,2.2) {ess.};
\node at (-4.5,1.8) {spec.};
\node at (-4.5,-1.6) {ess.};
\node at (-4.5,-2) {spec.};
\node[red] at (-4.3,.7) {disc.};
\node[red] at (-4.3,.3) {spec.};
\node at (4,-3*.8+.3) {$\zeta$};
\node at (-3.4,-2.7) {$0$};
\node at (3.2,-2.7) {$2\pi$};
\node[blue] at (4,.3-.3) {$\lambda_0$};
\node at (.6,-2.7) {$\zeta_0$};
\node[blue] at (-2.5,-.3) {$+1$};
\node[blue] at (0,-.3) {$-1$};
\node[blue] at (2.2,-.3) {$+1$};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\vspace*{-.3cm}
\end{figure}
From a dynamical point of view, a curve of simple eigenvalues $\lambda(\zeta)$ of $P_\zeta$ with $\lambda(\zeta_0) = \lambda_0$ generates a wave propagating parallel to $\mathbb{R} e_1$, with group velocity ${\partial}_\zeta\lambda(\zeta_0)$. Hence, the spectral flow and $\pazocal{I}_e(P)$ count elementary waves at energy $\lambda_0$ that travel along the interface $|x_2| \leq L$, signed according to the direction of propagation, ${\operatorname{sgn}} \big( {\partial}_\zeta \lambda(\zeta_0) \big)$.
\subsection{Classical pseudodifferential operators}\label{sec:22} We review here the classical pseudodifferential calculus. The results below are exposed in Dimassi--Sj\"ostrand \cite[\S7-8]{DS:99} and Zworski \cite[\S4 and \S14]{Zw:12} (set $h=1$).
For more advanced results, we refer to H\"ormander \cite[\S18-20]{Ho:85}.
Given $a(x,\xi) \in C^\infty_0\big(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2\big)$, the Weyl quantization of $a$ is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5n}
\big({\operatorname{Op}}(a) u\big)(x) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \int_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2} e^{i\xi(x-x')} \cdot a \left( \dfrac{x+x'}{2},\xi \right) u(x') \ \dfrac{dx'd\xi}{(2\pi)^2}, \ \ \ \ u \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R}^2).
\end{equation}
Operators of the form \eqref{eq:5n} are called pseudodifferential (Pdos); they generalize differential operators. We review here key facts on pseudodifferential calculus, with an emphasis on order functions; composition; resolvents; and trace-class properties.
\subsubsection{Order functions} See \cite[\S4.4]{Zw:12} and \cite[\S7]{DS:99}. Let $a \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Conditions so that \eqref{eq:5n} still defines a bounded operator on the Schwartz class ${\pazocal{S}}(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C})$ are typically encoded in order functions, i.e. functions $m(x,\xi) \in C^0(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2)$ with
\begin{equation}
w, \ w' \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2 \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ m(w) \leq C \lr{w-w'}^N m(w').
\end{equation}
Specifically, \eqref{eq:5n} defines ${\operatorname{Op}}(a)$ as a bounded operator on ${\pazocal{S}}(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C})$ if for some order function $m$, for all $\alpha \in \mathbb{N}^4$ there exists $C_\alpha > 0$ with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5o}
(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2 \ \ \Rightarrow \ \
\left| {\partial}^\alpha a(x,\xi) \right| \leq C_\alpha \cdot m(x,\xi).
\end{equation}
Symbols $a$ satisfying \eqref{eq:5o} form the class $S(m)$, naturally equipped with a Frechet space structure. We set $\Psi(m) = {\operatorname{Op}}\big(S(m)\big)$. Given an order function $m \geq 1$, we say that $a \in S(m^{-\infty})$ if for every $s \in \mathbb{N}$, $a \in S(m^{-s})$.
Standard examples of order functions include $1$, $\lr{x}^s$ and $\lr{\xi}^s$ for any $s \in \mathbb{R}$; lesser known examples are
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2f}
m_{j,\pm}(x,\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \systeme{ 1 & \text{ for } \pm x_j \geq 0 \\ \lr{x_j}^{-1} & \text{ for } \pm x_j \leq 0 }.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Composition of Pdos}\label{sec:222} See \cite[\S4.4-4.5]{Zw:12} and \cite[\S7]{DS:99}. If $m_1$ and $m_2$ are order functions, then so is $m_1 m_2$. The composition of two Pdos is a Pdo:
\begin{equation}
{\operatorname{Op}}(a) \in \Psi(m_1), \ \ {\operatorname{Op}}(b)\in \Psi(m_2) \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ {\operatorname{Op}}(a){\operatorname{Op}}(b) \in \Psi(m_1m_2).
\end{equation}
Moreover, the symbol of ${\operatorname{Op}}(a) {\operatorname{Op}}(b)$ in $S(m_1m_2)$ depends continuously on $(a,b) \in S(m_1) \times S(m_2)$.
\subsubsection{Resolvents}\label{sec:223} See \cite[\S8]{DS:99}. We now turn to resolvents. Let $P$ given by \eqref{eq:5s} be elliptic and selfadjoint. We note that $P \in \Psi(\lr{\xi}^2)$. For any $\lambda$ with $\Im \lambda > 0$, the operator $P-\lambda$ is an isomorphism from $H^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ to $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. A classical result of Beals \cite{Be:77} implies that $(P-\lambda)^{-1} \in \Psi\big( \lr{\xi}^{-2}\big)$:
\begin{equation}
\forall \lambda \in \mathbb{C}^+, \ \
\exists r(\cdot;\lambda) \in S\big(\lr{\xi}^{-2}\big), \ \ \ \
(P-\lambda)^{-1} = {\operatorname{Op}}\big(r(\cdot;\lambda)\big).
\end{equation}
In the proofs below, we will need uniform estimates on $r(\cdot;\lambda)$ in $S(1)$: for every $R > 0$, $\alpha \in \mathbb{N}^4$, there exists $c_{\alpha,R} > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5r}
|\lambda| \leq R, \ \ \Im \lambda > 0 \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \sup_{(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2}\left| {\partial}^\alpha r(x,\xi;\lambda) \right| \leq c_{\alpha,R} \cdot |\Im \lambda|^{-6-|\alpha|}. \ \ \footnote{The power $6$ is specific to the dimension $n=2$; in general it is $2n+2$.}
\end{equation}
This shows that the constant $C_\alpha$ for $r(\cdot;\lambda)$ and $m=1$ in \eqref{eq:5o} blow up at worst polynomially in $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$ when $|\lambda|$ remains bounded.
\subsubsection{Trace-class properties}\label{sec:225} See \cite[\S8]{DS:99}. Assume that $m \in L^1$. Then for any $a \in S(m)$, ${\operatorname{Op}}(a)$ extends to a trace class operator on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Moreover there exists $C > 0$ independent of $a$ such that
\begin{equation}
\big\| {\operatorname{Op}}(a) \big\|_\Tr \leq C |m|_{L^1} \cdot \sup_{|\alpha| \leq 5} C_\alpha,\footnote{The number $5$ is specific to $n=2$; in general it is $2n+1$.}
\end{equation}
where the constants $C_\alpha$ are those of \eqref{eq:5o}.
\subsubsection{Functional calculus}\label{sec:224} See \cite[\S3.1 and \S14.3]{Zw:12} and \cite[\S8]{DS:99}. An almost analytic extension of $\rho(\lambda) \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R})$ is a function $\tilde{\rho}(\lambda) \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{C}^+)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\rho}\big|_\mathbb{R} = \rho; \ \ \ \text{and} \ \ \ {\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} \tilde{\rho}(\lambda) = O\left(|\Im \lambda|^\infty\right) \ \ \text{as} \ \ \Im \lambda \rightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
Almost analytic extensions always exist.
If $\tilde{\rho}$ is an almost analytic extension of $\rho$ then ${\partial}_\lambda \tilde{\rho}$ is an almost analytic extension of $\rho'$. Indeed, $({\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} \tilde{\rho})\big|_\mathbb{R} = 0$; ${\partial}_\lambda + {\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}}$ is tangent to $\mathbb{R}$ and $({\partial}_\lambda + {\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}}) \big|_\mathbb{R}$ is the standard derivative; and $\tilde{\rho}|_\mathbb{R} = \rho$. Thus we have
\begin{equation}
({\partial}_\lambda \tilde{\rho}) \big|_\mathbb{R} = \big(({\partial}_\lambda + {\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}}) \tilde{\rho}\big) \big|_\mathbb{R} = ({\partial}_\lambda + {\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}}) \big|_\mathbb{R} \big(\tilde{\rho}\big|_\mathbb{R}\big) = \big(\tilde{\rho}\big|_\mathbb{R}\big)' = \rho'.
\end{equation}
Moreover, since ${\partial}_\lambda (\Im \lambda)^s = (2i)^{-1}s \cdot (\Im \lambda)^{s-1}$, we have ${\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}_\lambda \tilde{\rho} = O(|\Im \lambda|^\infty)$. This proves that ${\partial}_\lambda \tilde{\rho}$ is an almost analytic extension of $\rho'$.
To emphasize that almost analytic extensions are not analytic, we use the notation $\tilde{\rho}(\lambda) = \tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})$ in the rest of the paper. A central application of almost analytic extensions is the Helffer--Sj\"ostrand formula. It asserts that for every $z \in \mathbb{C}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2d}
\rho(z) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{\tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot (z-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
The identity \eqref{eq:2d} allows for a functional calculus developed in terms of resolvents. If $T$ is a (possibly unbounded) selfadjoint operator then $\big\| (T-\lambda)^{-1} \big\| \leq |\Im \lambda|^{-1}$. In particular we can express $\rho(T)$ as an absolutely convergent integral:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2e}
\rho(T) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{\tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot (T-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
While the functional calculus based on \eqref{eq:2e} goes back to Dyn'kin \cite{Dy:75}, its popular use in the semiclassical literature seems to start with \cite{HS:89}; see \cite{HS:90,SZ:91,Di:93} for subsequent developments.
\subsection{Proofs of Lemma \ref{lem:1c}-\ref{lem:1e}}\label{sec:23} For convenience, starting now we will use:
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ -i \pazocal{I}_e(P) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \Big( \big[P,f(x_1)\big] g'(P) \Big).
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:1c}]
\textbf{1.} We need to show that $[P,f(x_1)] g'(P)$ is trace-class on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Our strategy is to show that $[P,f(x_1)] g'(P)$ is a Pdo whose symbol decays sufficiently.
We first focus on the term
\begin{equation}
\big[P,f(x_1)\big] =
\big(1-f(x_1)\big) P f(x_1) - f(x_1) P \big(1-f(x_1)\big).
\end{equation}
We observe that $f(x_1) \in \Psi(m_{1,+}^{\infty})$ and $1-f(x_1) \in \Psi(m_{1,-}^\infty)$, where $m_{1,\pm}$ are the order functions defined in \eqref{eq:2f}. The Weyl symbol of $P$ belongs to $S\big(\lr{\xi}^2\big)$. Since $m_{1,+} m_{1,-} = \lr{x_1}^{-1}$, we deduce from the composition theorem (\S\ref{sec:222}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2g}
\big[P,f(x_1)\big] \in \Psi\left(\lr{\xi}^2 \lr{x_1}^{-\infty}\right).
\end{equation}
\textbf{2.} Fix $s\in \mathbb{N}$. We focus on $g'(P)$. Let $\rho(\lambda) \in C_0^\infty(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{C})$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5p}
\lambda \in \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P) \ \ \Rightarrow \ \
\rho'(\lambda) = g'(\lambda) (\lambda+i)^s.
\end{equation}
Note that $\rho$ exists: \eqref{eq:5p} specifies $\rho'$ on $\sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P)$, which is bounded below; and it suffices to arrange so that $\rho'$ integrates to $0$ on $\mathbb{R}$.
Let ${\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R},[0,1])$ with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4a}
{\tilde{\chi}}_+(x_2) = \systeme{ 0 & \text{ for } x_2 \leq -1 \\ 1 & \text{ for } x_2 \geq 1 \ \ },
\ \ \ \ {\tilde{\chi}}_- = 1-{\tilde{\chi}}_+.
\end{equation}
Since ${\tilde{\chi}}_+ + {\tilde{\chi}}_-=1$, we have
\begin{equation}
g'(P) = \sum_\pm {\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) g'(P) = \sum_\pm {\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) \rho'(P) (P+i)^{-s}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, $P_\pm$ has no spectrum in the support of $g'$; since
$\sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_\pm) \subset \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P)$, \eqref{eq:5p} implies that $\rho'(P_\pm) = 0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2c}
g'(P) = \sum_{\pm} {\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) \big( \rho'(P) - \rho'(P_\pm) \big) (P+i)^{-s}.
\end{equation}
Let $\tilde{\rho}$ be an almost analytic extension of $\rho$. Then ${\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} \tilde{\rho}$ is an almost analytic extension of $\rho'$.
We write \eqref{eq:2c} using the Helffer--Sj\"ostrand formula \eqref{eq:2e}:
\begin{equations}\label{eq:5q}
g'(P) = \sum_{\pm} \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{\lambda {\partial}{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot {\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) \left( (P-\lambda)^{-1} - (P_\pm-\lambda)^{-1} \right) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi} \cdot (P+i)^{-s}
\\
= \sum_{\pm} \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2 \tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{\lambda {\partial}{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot {\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) (P-\lambda)^{-1} (P_\pm-P) (P_\pm-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi} \cdot (P+i)^{-s}.
\end{equations}
\textbf{3.} We now observe that ${\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) \in \Psi(m_{2,\pm}^s)$ and that $P_\pm-P \in \Psi(m_{2,\mp}^s\lr{\xi}^2)$. Moreover $(P-\lambda)^{-1}$ and $(P_\pm-\lambda)^{-1}$ are in $\Psi(1)$, with symbolic bounds blowing up at worst polynomially in $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$, see \eqref{eq:5r}. Since ${\partial}^2_{\lambda{\overline{\lambda}}} \tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) = O(|\Im \lambda|^\infty)$ and $m_{2,+} m_{2,-} = \lr{x_2}^{-1}$, we deduce from the composition theorem (\S\ref{sec:222}):
\begin{equation}
\dd{^2 \tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{\lambda {\partial}{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot {\tilde{\chi}}_\pm(x_2) (P-\lambda)^{-1} (P_\pm-P) (P_\pm-\lambda)^{-1} \in \Psi\left(\lr{x_2}^{-s} \lr{\xi}^2\right),
\end{equation}
uniformly in $\lambda$. We integrate this identity on $\mathbb{C}^+$ and multiply by $(P+i)^{-s}$ (which belongs to $\Psi(\lr{\xi}^{-2s})$, see \S\ref{sec:223}). We deduce from \eqref{eq:5q}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2h}
\forall s \in \mathbb{N}, \ \
g'(P) \in \Psi \left(\lr{x_2}^{-s}\lr{\xi}^{2-2s} \right), \ \ \ \ \text{i.e.} \ \ g'(P) \in \Psi \left(\lr{x_2}^{-\infty}\lr{\xi}^{-\infty} \right).
\end{equation}
\textbf{4.} We combine \eqref{eq:2g} and \eqref{eq:2h} to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2r}
[P,F(x_1)] g'(P) \ \in \ \Psi \left( \lr{x_1}^{-\infty} \lr{x_2}^{-\infty} \lr{\xi}^{-\infty} \right) = \Psi \left( \lr{x}^{-\infty} \lr{\xi}^{-\infty} \right).
\end{equation}
Hence $[P,F(x_1)] g'(P)$ is trace class, see \S\ref{sec:225}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:2a}] It suffices to show that if $f_0(x_1) \in C_0^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ then
\begin{equation}
\Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( [P,f_0(x_1)] g'(P) \big) = 0.
\end{equation}
We have $f_0 \in \Psi\big(\lr{x_1}^{-\infty}\big)$. Using \eqref{eq:2h}, we deduce that both $P f_0(x_1) g'(P)$ and $f_0(x_1) P g'(P)$ are in $\Psi\big(\lr{x}^{-\infty}\lr{\xi}^{-\infty}\big)$. Hence both are trace-class. In particular,
\begin{equation}
0 = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( P f_0(x_1) G'(P) \big) - \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( f_0(x_1) G'(P) P \big) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( [P, f_0(x_1) ] G'(P) \big).
\end{equation}
This completes the proof. \end{proof}
As in \cite{CG:05}, the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:1f} requires a preliminary result.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1d} Let $P_1$ and $P_2$ satisfying \textbf{(a)}, \textbf{(b)} and \textbf{(c)} in \S\ref{sec:21}, and such that $P_1-P_2$ vanishes outside a compact set. Then ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_1) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_2)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} \textbf{1.} Let $s, \rho$ as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:1c} so that for $j=1,2$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5v}
[P_j,f(x_1)] g'(P_j) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{\lambda {\partial} {\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot [P_j,f(x_1)](P_j-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi} \cdot (P_j+i)^{-s}.
\end{equation}
Our goal is to write the difference of \eqref{eq:5v} for $j=1,2$ in terms of commutators of trace-class operators. This will produce a vanishing trace and complete the proof.
\textbf{2.} We integrate \eqref{eq:5v} by parts w.r.t. $\lambda$:
\begin{equation}
[P_j,f(x_1)] g'(P_j) = - \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{\tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{ {\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \big[ P_j,f(x_1) \big](P_j-\lambda)^{-2} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi} \cdot (P_j+i)^{-s}.
\end{equation}
We permute $\big[ P_j,f(x_1) \big]$ with one of the terms $(P_j-\lambda)^{-1}$. This allows us to write
\begin{equations}\label{eq:2o}
[P_j,f(x_1)] g'(P_j) = - \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} A_j(\lambda) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi},
\end{equations}
$\text{where} \ A_j(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ {\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} \tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) \big( B_j(\lambda) + C_j(\lambda) \big), \text{ with:}$ \begin{align}\label{eq:2l}
B_j(\lambda) & \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ - (P_j-\lambda)^{-1}[P_j,f(x_1)](P_j-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_j+i)^{-s}
\\
& \ = \left[(P_j-\lambda)^{-1},f(x_1)\right] \cdot (P_j+i)^{-s} = \left[(P_j-\lambda)^{-1},f(x_1)(P_j+i)^{-s} \right];
\\
C_j(\lambda) & \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \left[(P_j-\lambda)^{-1}, [P_j,f(x_1)]\right] (P_j-\lambda)^{-1}\cdot (P_j+i)^{-s}
\\
& \ = \left[(P_j-\lambda)^{-1}, [P_j,f(x_1)](P_j-\lambda)^{-1}(P_j+i)^{-s}\right].
\end{align}
\textbf{3.} We derive a formula for $(P_1+i)^{-s} - (P_2+i)^{-s}$, obtained e.g. by taking $s-1$ derivatives with respect to $\mu$ of
\begin{equation}
(P_1-\mu)^{-1} - (P_2-\mu)^{-1} = (P_1-\mu)^{-1} (P_2-P_1) (P_2-\mu)^{-1}
\end{equation}
and setting $\mu=-i$.
Leibniz's formula and ${\partial}_\mu^{s_j} (P_1-\mu)^{-1} = s_j! \cdot (P_1-\mu)^{-s_j-1}$ yield
\begin{equations}
(P_1+i)^{-s} - (P_2+i)^{-s} = \sum_{s_1+s_2=s-1} \dfrac{s_1!^2 s_2!^2}{(s-1)!} (P_1+i)^{-s_1-1} (P_2-P_1) (P_2+i)^{-s_2-1}.
\end{equations}
It follows that
\begin{equations}
B_1(\lambda) - B_2(\lambda) = \left[(P_1-\lambda)^{-1} (P_2-P_1) (P_2-\lambda)^{-1},f(x_1)(P_1+i)^{-s}\right]
\\
+ \left[ (P_2-\lambda)^{-1},f(x_1)\sum_{s_1+s_2=s-1} \dfrac{s_1!^2 s_2!^2}{(s-1)!} (P_1+i)^{-s_1-1} (P_2-P_1) (P_2+i)^{-s_2-1}\right].
\end{equations}
Similarly, we find that $C_1(\lambda) - C_2(\lambda)$ is equal to
\begin{equations}
\left[(P_1-\lambda)^{-1} (P_2-P_1) (P_2-\lambda)^{-1}, [P_1,f(x_1)](P_1-\lambda)^{-1}(P_1+i)^{-s}\right]
\\
+ \left[ (P_2-\lambda)^{-1},[P_1-P_2,f(x_1)](P_1-\lambda)^{-1}(P_1+i)^{-s} \right]
\\
+ \left[ (P_2-\lambda)^{-1},[P_2,f(x_1)](P_1-\lambda)^{-1}(P_2-P_1)(P_2-\lambda)^{-1}(P_1+i)^{-s} \right]
\\
+ \left[ (P_2-\lambda)^{-1},[P_2,f(x_1)](P_1-\lambda)^{-1} \hspace*{-3mm}\sum_{s_1+s_2=s-1} \dfrac{s_1!^2 s_2!^2}{(s-1)!} (P_1+i)^{-s_1-1} (P_2-P_1) (P_2+i)^{-s_2-1}\right].
\end{equations}
\textbf{4.} The expressions of Step 3 allow us to expand $A_1(\lambda)-A_2(\lambda)$ as a finite sum of commutators $\sum_k\big[D_k(\lambda),E_k(\lambda) \big]$ with the following property. For each $k$, $D_k(\lambda) E_k(\lambda)$ and $E_k(\lambda) D_k(\lambda)$ are finite products of precisely one of each factor ${\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} \tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})$ and $P_1-P_2$; at most three factors among $(P_j-\lambda)^{-1}$; one factor of the form $f(x_1)$ or $[P_j,f(x_1)]$; and $s$ or $s+1$ factors of the form $(P_j+i)^{-1}$.
We note that $P-Q \in \Psi(\lr{x}^{-1} \lr{\xi}^2)$; that $(P_j+i)^{-1} \in \Psi\big(\lr{\xi}^{-2}\big)$; that $(P_j-\lambda)^{-1} \in \Psi(1)$ with symbolic bounds blowing up polynomially as $\Im \lambda \rightarrow 0$ -- see \eqref{eq:5r}; and that ${\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} \tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) \in O(|\Im \lambda|^\infty)$. Therefore we deduce that for any $s \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{equation}
D_k(\lambda) E_k(\lambda), \ E_k(\lambda) D_k(\lambda) \in \Psi\big(\lr{x}^{-s} \lr{\xi}^{-2s+4}\big),
\end{equation}
uniformly in $\lambda$. In particular both $D_k(\lambda) E_k(\lambda)$ and $E_k(\lambda) D_k(\lambda)$ are trace class. We deduce that $A_1(\lambda)-A_2(\lambda)$ is (uniformly in $\lambda$) trace class with vanishing trace. The formula \eqref{eq:2o} completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:1f}]
\textbf{1.} In comparison with Lemma \ref{lem:1d}, the operator $P_1 - P_2$ vanishes now in a (non-compact) strip $|x_2| \leq L'$. We prove lemma \ref{lem:1f} using Lemma \ref{lem:1d} and an approximation argument.
Fix $\varepsilon > 0$, $\chi(x) \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{R})$ equal to $1$ for $|x| \leq 1$ and $P_3 = \Re\big(P_1 + \chi(\varepsilon x) (P_2-P_1)\big)$, where we recall that $\Re(T) = \frac{T^*+T}{2}$. We note that $P_3$ is an elliptic selfadjoint operator of order $2$, equal to $P_1$ outside a compact set. From Lemma \ref{lem:1d}, ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_1) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_3)$ thus
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_2) - {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_1) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_2) - {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_3).
\end{equation}
\textbf{2.} Let $s, \rho$ as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:1c}.
We write for $j=2, 3$:
\begin{equation}
[P_j,f(x_1)] g'(P_j) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{\rho}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{\lambda {\partial} {\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot [P_j,f(x_1)](P_j-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_j+i)^{-s} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
We observe that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:2s}
[P_2,f(x_1)](P_2-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_2+i)^{-s} - [P_3,f(x_1)](P_3-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_3+i)^{-s}
\\
= [P_2-P_3,f(x_1)](P_2-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_2+i)^{-s}
\\
+
[P_3,f(x_1)](P_2-\lambda)^{-1}(P_3-P_2)(P_3-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_3+i)^{-s}
\\
+
[P_3,f(x_1)](P_2-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot \sum_{s=s_2+s_3} \dfrac{s_2!^2 s_3!^2}{(s-1)!} (P_2+i)^{-s_2-1}(P_3-P_2)(P_3+i)^{-s_3-1}.
\end{equations}
\textbf{3.} The bounds that we prove below are all uniform as $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$. We observe that
\begin{equation}
P_3-P_2 = \Re\big((\chi(\varepsilon x)-1\big) (P_2-P_1)\big).
\end{equation}
This vanishes when $|x| \leq \varepsilon^{-1}$. In particular, $P_3-P_2 \in \varepsilon \lr{x_1} \cdot \Psi(\lr{\xi}^2)$ with uniform symbolic bounds as $\varepsilon \rightarrow 0$.
Since $[P_3-P_2,f]$ and $[P_3,f]$ are in $\Psi(\lr{x_1}^{-\infty} \lr{\xi}^2)$, we deduce from \eqref{eq:2s} that
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{1}{\varepsilon} \left([P_2,f(x_1)](P_2-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_2+i)^{-s} - [P_3,f(x_1)](P_3-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot (P_3+i)^{-s} \right)
\end{equation}
is in $\Psi\big(\lr{\xi}^{4-2s}\big)$. The symbolic bounds blow up polynomially as $\Im \lambda \rightarrow 0$. Thus
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2q}
[P_2,f(x_1)]g'(P_2) - [P_3,f(x_1)]g'(P_3) \ \in \ \varepsilon \cdot \Psi(\lr{\xi}^{-\infty}).
\end{equation}
\textbf{4.} From \eqref{eq:2r}, we also have $[P_j,f(x_1)]g'(P_j) \in \Psi(\lr{\xi}^{-\infty} \lr{x}^{-\infty})$. We deduce that \eqref{eq:2q} belongs to $\Psi(\lr{\xi}^{-\infty} \lr{x}^{-\infty})$. Interpolating at the symbolic level, we get
\begin{equation}
[P_2,f(x_1)]g'(P_2) - [P_3,f(x_1)]g'(P_3) \ \in \ \varepsilon^{1/2} \cdot \Psi\big(\lr{\xi}^{-\infty}\lr{x}^{-\infty}\big).
\end{equation}
In particular, $[P_2,f(x_1)]g'(P_2) - [P_3,f(x_1)]g'(P_3)$ is trace-class and its trace is $O(\varepsilon^{1/2})$. We conclude that
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_1) - {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_2) = O(\varepsilon^{1/2})
\end{equation}
for every $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$; this completes the proof.\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:1e}] \textbf{1.} From the properties of $\psi$, $g' \circ \psi = g'$. Moreover, since the spectrum of $P$ is bounded below, there exists ${\varphi}(\lambda) \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R})$ such that $\psi(P) = \lambda_2 + {\varphi}(P)$ and $\psi'(P) = {\varphi}'(P)$. It follows that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:3a}
\big[ \psi(P), f(x_1) \big] g' \circ \psi(P) = \big[ {\varphi}(P), f(x_1) \big] g'(P).
\end{equations}
We use the Helffer--Sj\"ostrand formula to write
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3c}
{\varphi}(P) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{{\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot (P-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
Since $(P-\lambda)^{-1} \in \Psi(1)$ with bounds blowing up polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$, ${\varphi}(P) \in \Psi(1)$. As for \eqref{eq:2g}, $\big[ {\varphi}(P), f(x_1) \big] \in \Psi(\lr{x_1}^{-\infty})$. From \eqref{eq:2h}, $g'(P) \in \Psi\big( \lr{x_2}^{-\infty} \lr{\xi}^{-\infty} \big)$. We deduce from \eqref{eq:3a} that
\begin{equation}
\big[ \psi(P), f(x_1) \big] g' \circ \psi(P) \ \in \ \Psi\left(\lr{x}^{-\infty} \lr{\xi}^{-\infty}\right).
\end{equation}
Hence $\big[ \psi(P), f(x_1) \big] g' \circ \psi(P)$ is trace-class and ${\pazocal{J}}_e\big( \psi(P) \big)$ is properly defined, with
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e\big( \psi(P) \big) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \big( \big[ {\varphi}(P), f(x_1) \big] g'(P) \big).
\end{equation}
\textbf{2.} Because of \eqref{eq:3c},
\begin{equations} \label{eq:2x}
[{\varphi}(P),f(x_1)] g'(P) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{{\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \left[(P-\lambda)^{-1},f(x_1) \right] g'(P) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}
\\
= -\int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{{\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot (P-\lambda)^{-1} \big[P,f(x_1)\big] (P-\lambda)^{-1} g'(P) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equations}
Recall that $g'(P) \in \Psi\big(\lr{x_2}^{-\infty} \lr{\xi}^{-\infty}\big)$; $(P-\lambda)^{-1} \in \Psi(1)$ (with bounds blowing up polynomially in $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$); and $[f(x_1),P] \in \Psi\big(\lr{x_1}^{-\infty} \lr{\xi}^2\big)$. Since ${\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} {\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) = O( |\Im \lambda|^\infty )$, we deduce that
\begin{equation}
\dd{{\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \left[f(x_1),P\right] (P-\lambda)^{-1} g'(P) \ \in \ \Psi\left( \lr{x}^{-\infty}\lr{\xi}^{-\infty} \right),
\end{equation}
uniformly in $\lambda$. Thus we can trace \eqref{eq:2x} and permute trace and integral. We can also move $(P-\lambda)^{-1}$ cyclically from the left to the right. We end up with
\begin{equations}
{\pazocal{J}}_e\big( \psi(P) \big)
= - \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{{\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \left( (P-\lambda)^{-1} \big[P,f(x_1)\big] (P-\lambda)^{-1} g'(P) \right) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}
\end{equations}
\begin{equations}\label{eq:5k}
= - \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{{\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \left( \big[P,f(x_1)\big] (P-\lambda)^{-2} g'(P) \right) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equations}
We observe that $(P-\lambda)^{-2} = {\partial}_\lambda (P-\lambda)^{-1}$. We integrate \eqref{eq:5k} w.r.t. $\lambda$:
\begin{equations}
{\pazocal{J}}_e\big( \psi(P) \big) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2{\tilde{\vp}}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{\lambda {\partial}{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \left( \big[P,f(x_1)\big] (P-\lambda)^{-1} g'(P) \right) \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equations}
We permute trace and integral once again and end up with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3y}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}\big([P,f(x_1)] {\varphi}'(P)g'(P)\big).
\end{equation}
This completes the proof because ${\varphi}'(P) = \psi'(P)$ and $\psi'(\lambda) = 1$ on the support of $g'$: the RHS of \eqref{eq:3y} is ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Deformation to a semiclassical operator}\label{sec:24} We recall that $\Re(T) = \frac{T+T^*}{2}$. Let $\chi_+(x_2), \ \chi_-(x_2) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ and $\chi_0(x_2) \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R})$ such that
\begin{equation}
\chi_+(x_2) = \systeme{1 & \text{ for } x_2 \geq 2 \\ 0 & \text{ for } x_2 \leq 1}, \ \ \ \chi_+(x_2) = \systeme{1 & \text{ for } x_2 \leq - 2 \\ 0 & \text{ for } x_2 \geq -1}, \ \ \ \chi_0 = 1-\chi_--\chi_+.
\end{equation}
See Figure \ref{fig:6}.
Given $h > 0$, we introduce
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1c}
P_h \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Re\Bigg(\sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} b_\alpha(hx,x) D_x^\alpha \Bigg) +\Re\Big( \chi_0(hx_2) P_0 \Big)
, \ \ \ \text{where} \\
b_\alpha(x,y) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \chi_+(x_2)a_{\alpha,+}(y) + \chi_-(x_2) a_{\alpha,-}(y), \ \ \ \ P_0 \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ -\Delta + |\lambda_0| + 2.
\end{equations}
\begin{figure}
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={right,center},capbesidewidth=2.8in}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
{\caption{Graphs of $\chi_-, \chi_0$ and $\chi_+$.}\label{fig:6}}
{\begin{tikzpicture}
\definecolor{grine}{rgb}{.34, .52, .25}
\node at (0,0) {\includegraphics{chi2}};
\node[red] at (-3,1.3) {$\chi_-(x_2)$};
\node[blue] at (3.15,1.3) {$\chi_+(x_2)$};
\node[grine] at (0,1.3) {$\chi_0(x_2)$};
\node at (-1.8,-1.5) {$-2$};
\node at (1.6,-1.5) {$2$};
\node at (-0.8,-1.5) {$-1$};
\node at (0.8,-1.5) {$1$};
\node at (4,-.8) {$x_2$};
\node at (-4.3,.85) {$1$};
\end{tikzpicture}}
\vspace*{-.3cm}
\end{figure}
The operator $P_h$ is a symmetric differential operator of order $2$. Below, we write
\begin{equation}
P_h = \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(hx,x) D_x^\alpha,
\end{equation}
rather than \eqref{eq:1c}. The coefficients $c_\alpha(x,y)$ have a two-scale structure: they belong to $C^\infty_b(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2)$. Their dependence in $h$ is polynomial, in particular they remain uniformly bounded as $h \rightarrow 0$.
If $u(x) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2)$ has support in $\{ \pm hx_2 \geq 2 \}$ then the coefficients $b_\alpha(hx,x)$ are equal to $a_{\alpha,\pm}(x)$ on the support of $u$ and
\begin{equation}
Pu = \Re\Bigg(\sum_{|\alpha|\leq 2} a_{\alpha,\pm}(x) D_x^\alpha\Bigg) u = \Re(P_\pm) u = P_\pm u.
\end{equation}
This implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5w}
c_\alpha(x,y) = \systeme{a_{\alpha,+}(y) & \text{ for } x_2 \geq 2 \ \ \\ a_{\alpha,-}(y) & \text{ for } x_2 \leq -2 } .
\end{equation}
In other words, $P_h$ is equal to $P$ outside $|hx_2| \leq 2$. We similarly observe that if $u$ has support in $\{ |hx_2| \leq 1 \}$ then $P_h u = P_0u$. Since $\sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} (P_0) = [|\lambda_0|+2,\infty)$, $P_0$ heuristically behaves as a barrier between $P_+$ and $P_-$ at energies below $|\lambda_0|+2$. This can be ignored in \S\ref{sec:3}. It will play a role in \S\ref{sec:4}.
Finally, we observe that $P_h$ is elliptic. Indeed, since $P$ is elliptic, $P_\pm$ are elliptic (with, say, ellipticity constant $0 < c \leq 1$) and
\begin{equations}
\sum_{|\alpha| = 2} \Re\big( b_\alpha(hx,x) \big) \xi^\alpha + \chi_0(hx_2) |\xi|^2 = \sum_\pm \chi_\pm(hx_2) \sum_{|\alpha| = 2} \Re\big(a_{\alpha,\pm}(x)\big) \xi^\alpha + \chi_0(hx_2) |\xi|^2
\\
\geq \big( \chi_+(hx_2) + \chi_-(hx_2) + \chi_0(hx_2)\big) \cdot c|\xi|^2 = c|\xi|^2.
\end{equations}
This proves that $P_h$ satisfies the assumptions of \S\ref{sec:21}. From Lemmas \ref{lem:2a} and \ref{lem:1f},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1e}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_h) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}\Big( \big[ P_h,f(hx_1) \big] g'(P_h) \Big).
\end{equation}
The key observation is that $P_h$ is, in an appropriate sense, a semiclassical operator. We give here a formal explanation and we postpone the rigorous version \cite{GMS:91} to \S\ref{sec:3}. Let $U(x,y) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2)$ and set $u(x) = U(hx,x)$. Then
\begin{equation} \label{eq:1d}
P_h u(x) = \big(\mathbb{P}_h U\big)(x,hx) \ \ \ \ \text{where} \ \ \ \
\mathbb{P}_h \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(x,y) (D_y+hD_x)^\alpha.
\end{equation}
The operator $\mathbb{P}_h$ is semiclassical in $x$ with operator valued-symbol $\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) + O(h)$, where
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(x,y) (D_y+\xi)^\alpha + O(h).
\end{equation}
\section{Semiclassical deformation and effective Hamiltonian}\label{sec:3}
In the rest of the paper, we compute ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P)$ using the operator $P_h$ defined in \eqref{eq:1c}. To emphasize that ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P)$ depends only on $P_+$ and $P_-$, we write below
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ {\pazocal{J}}_e(P).
\end{equation}
Operators $P_h$ of the form \eqref{eq:1c} first appeared in solid state physics in the 70's. The first mathematical works constructed WKB quasimodes \cite{Bu:87,GRT:88}. Here, a key paper is G\'erard--Martinez--Sj\"otrand \cite{GMS:91}. It establishes a unitary equivalence between $P_h$ acting on $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and $\mathbb{P}_h$ -- see \eqref{eq:1d} -- acting on
\begin{equation}
\pazocal{H}_1 \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Bigg\{ \sum_{m \in \mathbb{Z}^2} v(x) \delta(x-hy+hm), \ v \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \Bigg\} \subset {\pazocal{S}}'\left(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2\right).\footnote{This space is denoted $L_0$ in \cite{GMS:91} and \cite[\S13]{DS:99}. It identifies with $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$, see \S\ref{sec:314}.}
\end{equation}
This equivalence yield a semiclassical formula for the edge index:
from \eqref{eq:1e},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3f}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = \Tr_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)} \left( \big[ P_h,f(x_1)\big] g'(P_h) \right) = \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1} \left( \big[ \mathbb{P}_h,f(x_1)\big] g'(\mathbb{P}_h) \right).
\end{equation}
Another important advance of \cite{GMS:91} is the construction of an effective Hamiltonian $E_{22}(\lambda)$ for $P_h$. This provides a discrete singular value problem whose solutions are precisely the eigenvalues of $P_h$ (within a given spectral window).
Dimassi, Zerzeri and Duong \cite{Di:93,DZ:03,DD:14} used \cite{GMS:91} to provide various semiclassical trace expansions for operators in the form \eqref{eq:1c}, see for instance \eqref{eq:0k}. In principle, the coefficients $b_j$ in \eqref{eq:0k} can be expressed from semiclassical symbols. We expect a similar expansion here:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4m}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1} \left( \big[ \mathbb{P}_h,f(x_1)\big] g'(\mathbb{P}_h) \right) \ \sim \ \sum_{j \geq 0} a_j \cdot h^{j-2} \ \ \ \ \text{as } h \rightarrow 0,
\end{equation}
with coefficients $a_j$ computable via symbolic calculus.
However, \eqref{eq:3f} indicates that \eqref{eq:4m} does not depend on $h$. Hence all terms $a_j, j \neq 2$ in the expansion \eqref{eq:4m} must vanish and $a_2 = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$.
From the technical point of view, \S\ref{sec:3} is closer to \cite{GMS:91,Di:93} than to previous papers on the bulk-edge correspondence. As in \cite{Di:93}, we will pose a Grushin problem and construct a discrete (finite difference) effective Hamiltonian whose singular values describe accurately $\mathbb{P}_h$ near energy $\lambda_0$.
We will use symbolic calculus to derive a formula for $a_2$.
Specifically, we will adapt calculations of Elgart--Graf--Schenker \cite{EGS:05} from the eigenvalue setting to the singular value setting. This will prove that ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ is (up to summation) a double semiclassical commutator. This proves $a_0=a_1 = 0$; and allows us to compute $a_2$ in terms of the leading symbol of the effective Hamiltonian, $E_{22}(x,\xi;\lambda)$ -- see Theorem \ref{thm:1}. An algebraic manipulation reduces the formula for $a_2$ to an integral involving only asymptotics of $E_\pm(\xi;\lambda)$ of $E_{22}(x,\xi;\lambda)$ as $x_2 \rightarrow \pm \infty$ -- see Theorem \ref{thm:2}.
We will connect $E_\pm(\xi;\lambda)$ to Chern numbers in \S\ref{sec:4}, completing the proof of~Theorem~\ref{thm:0}.
\subsection{Semiclassical calculus}\label{sec:31} We start this section with a review of semiclassical calculus. While pseudodifferential calculus purely measures regularity, semiclassical calculus allows for the quantitative study of frequencies of order $h^{-1}$, $h \rightarrow 0$. The textbooks \cite{DS:99,Zw:12} provide excellent introductions. The results exposed below are presented in \cite[\S7-8 and \S13]{DS:99}; see also \cite[\S4 and \S13]{Zw:12}.
We say that a symbol $a(x,\xi) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2)$ (implicitly depending on $h$) belongs to $S(m)$ if \eqref{eq:5o} holds with bounds $C_\alpha$ uniform in $h \in (0,1]$. We then define
\begin{equation}
\big({\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) u\big)(x) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \dfrac{1}{(2\pi h)^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2} e^{i\frac{\xi}{h}(x-x')} a \left( \dfrac{x+x'}{2},\xi \right) u(x') dx'd\xi, \ \ \ \ u \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R}^2).
\end{equation}
Such operators have bounded extensions on ${\pazocal{S}}(\mathbb{R}^2)$ and we denote the corresponding class by $\Psi_h(m) = {\operatorname{Op}}_h\big( S(m) \big)$. In the sequel, we will allow for symbols valued in Hilbert spaces, typically $\mathbb{C}^d$ or $L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$.
\subsubsection{Composition} See \cite[\S7]{DS:99} and \cite[\S4.3-4.4]{Zw:12}. If $a \in S(m_1)$ and $b \in S(m_2)$ then ${\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) {\operatorname{Op}}_h(b) \in \Psi_h(m_1m_2)$. We denote its symbol by $a \# b$. One clear advantage of semiclassical over pseudodifferential calculus is the composition formula: for any $K$,
\begin{equation}
a\# b(x,\xi) = \sum_{k=0}^K \dfrac{i^k h^k}{k!} \left. \left(\dfrac{D_\xi D_{x'}-D_xD_{\xi'}}{2}\right)^k \big( a(x,\xi) b(x',\xi') \big) \right|_{\substack{x'=x \\ \xi'=\xi}} + O_{S(m_1m_2)}\left(h^{K+1}\right).
\end{equation}
It implies that $a\#b(x,\xi)$ depends only of $a$ and $b$ locally near $(x,\xi)$, modulo a small remainder, $O(h^\infty)$. We will use the explicit expansion only for $K=0$ and $K=1$:
\begin{itemize}
\item ${\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) {\operatorname{Op}}_h(b)$ has symbol $ab + O_{S(m_1m_2)}(h)$;
\item $\big[{\operatorname{Op}}_h(a), {\operatorname{Op}}_h(b)\big]$ has symbol
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{h}{2i} \big(\{a,b\} - \{b,a\}\big) + O_{S(m_1m_2)}\left(h^2\right),\ \footnote{This reduces to $\frac{h}{i}\{a,b\}$ when $a$ or $b$ is scalar-valued; however most operators considered below will be matrix and operator-valued.} \ \ \ \ \text{where} \ \ \{a,b\} \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{j=1}^2 \dd{a}{\xi_j} \dd{b}{x_j} - \dd{a}{x_j} \dd{b}{\xi_j}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
From the composition formula, if $a(x,\xi) \in S(1)$ satisfies $\inf_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2} \big|a(x,\xi)\big| > 0$ then ${\operatorname{Op}}_h(a)$ is invertible for $h$ sufficiently small. The semiclassical version of a theorem of Beals \cite{Be:77} implies that its inverse is in $\Psi_h(1)$.
\subsubsection{Resolvents and functional calculus}\label{sec:312} See \cite[\S8]{DS:99}. Let $a \in S(1)$ be Hermitian-valued. Then ${\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) \in \Psi_h(1)$ is a selfadjoint operator. Moreover, for every $\lambda \in \mathbb{C}^+$, the resolvent $({\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) -\lambda)^{-1}$ is also in $\Psi_h(1)$.
If $r(\cdot;\lambda) \in S(1)$ is such that ${\operatorname{Op}}_h\big(r(\cdot,\lambda)\big) = ({\operatorname{Op}}_h(a)-\lambda)^{-1}$, then for any $R > 0$, the following estimates hold uniformly for $\lambda \in \mathbb{D}(0,R)$ and $h \in (0,1]$:
\begin{equations}\label{eq:0g}
r(\cdot;\lambda) = \big( a - \lambda)^{-1} + O_{S(1)}\left( h \cdot |\Im \lambda|^{-8}\right);
\\
\sup_{(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2} \left| {\partial}^\alpha r(x,\xi;\lambda) \right| \leq c_{\alpha,R} \cdot \max\left( 1, \dfrac{h^{1/2}}{|\Im \lambda|} \right)^5 \cdot |\Im \lambda|^{-|\alpha|-1}. \
\end{equations}
Using the estimates \eqref{eq:0g} and the Helffer--Sj\"ostrand formula \eqref{eq:2d}, we can develop the functional calculus of selfadjoint semiclassical operators. If ${\varphi}(\lambda) \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R})$, then ${\varphi}\big( {\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) \big) \in \Psi_h(1)$ and its symbol is
\begin{equation}
{\varphi}\big( a(x,\xi) \big) + O_{S(1)}(h).
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Trace class} See \cite[\S8]{DS:99}. Similarly to \S\ref{sec:224}, if $m$ is an order function in $L^1$ then operators in $\Psi_h(m)$ are trace-class. Moreover, there exists $C > 0$ such that for any $a \in S(m)$,
\begin{equation}
\big\| {\operatorname{Op}}_h(a) \big\|_\Tr \leq Ch^{-2} \cdot |m|_{L^1} \cdot \sup_{|\alpha| \leq 5} C_\alpha \ \footnote{The numbers $2$ and $5$ are specific to dimension $n=2$; in general they are $n$ and $2n+1$, respectively.}
\end{equation}
where the constants $C_\alpha$ are those of \eqref{eq:5o}.
\subsubsection{Periodic and equivariant classes}\label{sec:314} See \cite[\S13]{DS:99}. We will need to consider classes of operator-valued symbols satisfying certain (pseudo-)periodic conditions. Fix $d \in \mathbb{N}$. We introduce:
\begin{itemize}
\item The class $S^{(22)}(m) \subset S(m)$ of symbols $a(x,\xi) \in C^\infty\big(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2, M_d(\mathbb{C})\big)$ such that
\begin{equation}
a(x,\xi+2k\pi) = a(x,\xi), \ \ \ k \in \mathbb{Z}^2;
\end{equation}
\item The class $S^{(12)}(m) \subset S(m)$ of symbols $R(x,\xi) \in C^\infty\big(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2, \mathcal{B}\big(\mathbb{C}^d,L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)\big)\big)$ -- i.e. with values in linear operators from $\mathbb{C}^d$ to $L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$ -- such that
\begin{equation}
R(x,\xi+2k\pi) = e^{-2ik\pi y} \cdot R(x,\xi), \ \ \ k \in \mathbb{Z}^2;
\end{equation}
\item The class $S^{(21)}(m)$ of adjoints of symbols in $S^{(12)}(m)$;
\item The class $S^{(11)}(m) \subset S(m)$ of symbols $\mathbb{W}(x,\xi) \in C^\infty\big(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2, \mathcal{B}\big(L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)\big)\big)$~with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1w}
\mathbb{W}(x,\xi+2k\pi) = e^{-2ik\pi y} \cdot \mathbb{W}(x,\xi) \cdot e^{2ik\pi y}, \ \ \ k \in \mathbb{Z}^2.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
We let $\Psi_h^{(jk)}(m) = {\operatorname{Op}}_h\big(S^{(jk)}(m)\big)$ be the corresponding operator classes; we observe that $\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) \in \Psi_h^{(11)}\big(\lr{\xi}^2\big)$. Because of the (pseudo-)periodic conditions, if $m$ decays with $\xi$ then $\Psi^{(jk)}_h(m) = \{0\}$. The order function $m$ may nonetheless decay with $x$.
The classes $\Psi_h^{(jk)}(m)$ appear in relation with the effective Hamiltonian method of \cite{GMS:91}. From the general theory of Pdos, they act on tempered distributions; for instance, operators in $\Psi_h^{(11)}(m)$ act on ${\pazocal{S}}'(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2)$. The pseudo-periodic conditions yield additional mapping properties. If $m$ is uniformly bounded in $x$, then operators in $\Psi_h^{(jk)}(m)$ map $\pazocal{H}_j$ to $\pazocal{H}_k$, where
\begin{equations}\label{eq:0n}
\pazocal{H}_1 = \Bigg\{ \sum_{m \in \mathbb{Z}^2} v(x) \delta(x-hy+hm), \ v \in L^2\big(\mathbb{R}^2\big) \Bigg\} \subset {\pazocal{S}}'\left(\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2\right),
\\
\pazocal{H}_2 \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Bigg\{ \sum_{m \in \mathbb{Z}^2} v_m \delta(x-hm), \ v \in \ell^2\big(\mathbb{Z}^2,\mathbb{C}^d\big) \Bigg\} \subset {\pazocal{S}}'\left(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C}^d\right).
\end{equations}
The space $\pazocal{H}_2$ is naturally isomorphic to $\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}^2,\mathbb{C}^d)$. Similarly, $\pazocal{H}_1$ is isomorphic to $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$. Indeed, for any $v(x) \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$,
\begin{equation}
\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2} \sum_{m \in \mathbb{Z}^2} v(x) \delta(x-hy+hm) \cdot h^2 dy = v(x),
\end{equation}
where equality holds in the sense of distributions on $\mathbb{R}^2$.
A consequence is that $\mathbb{P}_h$ acts on $\pazocal{H}_1$. In this sense, the elements of $\pazocal{H}_1$ identify with the two-scale functions $U(hy,y)$ considered in \S\ref{sec:24}: in \eqref{eq:0n}, the Dirac masses constrain $x = hy$ modulo $(h\mathbb{Z})^2$.
A result due to Dimassi \cite[\S1]{Di:93} -- and fundamental here -- asserts if $a \in S^{(22)}\big(\lr{x}^{-3}\big)$ then ${\operatorname{Op}}_h(a)$ is trace-class on $\pazocal{H}_2$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0f}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2}\big({\operatorname{Op}}_h(a)\big) = \dfrac{1}{(2\pi h)^2} \int_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}_*^2} a(x,\xi) \ dx d\xi + O(h^\infty). \ \footnote{Strictly speaking, \cite[Remark 1.3a]{Di:93} and \cite[Lemma 13.29]{DS:99} are stated for symbols in $S^{(22)}(1)$ that are compactly supported in $x$; the proof applies (with no change) to sufficiently decaying symbols.}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Grushin problem} Here we recall basic properties of
Grushin problems; see for instance \cite[\S13]{DS:99} and \cite{SZ:07} for various applications. Assume $Q : \pazocal{H}_1 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_1$, $R_{12} : \pazocal{H}_2 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_1$ and $R_{21} : \pazocal{H}_2 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_1$ are three operators such that for $\lambda$ in a neighborhood of $\mathbb{C}$, the operator
\begin{equation}
\matrice{Q-\lambda & R_{12} \\ R_{21} & 0} \ : \ \pazocal{H}_1 \oplus \pazocal{H}_2 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_1 \oplus \pazocal{H}_2
\end{equation}
is invertible. We write the inverse as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1m}
\matrice{Q-\lambda & R_{12} \\ R_{21} & 0}^{-1} = \matrice{E_{11}(\lambda) & E_{12}(\lambda) \\ E_{21}(\lambda) & E_{22}(\lambda)}.
\end{equation}
Then the operators $E_{jk}(\lambda)$ depend analytically on $\lambda$. Moreover, $Q - \lambda$ is invertible on $\pazocal{H}_1$ if and only if $E_{22}(\lambda)$ is invertible on $\pazocal{H}_2$; and
\begin{equations}\label{eq:3x}
(Q - \lambda)^{-1} = E_{11}(\lambda) - E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} E_{21}(\lambda),
\\
E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} = - R_{21} (Q - \lambda)^{-1} R_{12}.
\end{equations}
\subsection{Review of the effective Hamiltonian method}\label{sec:32} In the sequel, $\Omega$ is a bounded neighborhood in $\mathbb{C}^+$ of $\mathrm{supp}(\tilde{g}) \cap \mathbb{C}^+$, and $\Omega' \subset \Omega$ is a neighborhood of $\mathrm{supp}(\tilde{g})$ with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1z}
\ove{\Omega'} \cap \mathbb{R} \subset [\lambda_0-\epsilon,\lambda_0+\epsilon].
\end{equation}
We set $\lambda_+ = \sup\{ 2|\lambda| : \ \lambda \in \Omega \}$.
The idea behind the effective Hamiltonian method is to produce a singular value problem for a discrete Hamiltonian, that describe accurately low-energy spectral aspects of $\mathbb{P}_h$.
We follow the construction of \cite{GMS:91}. It consists in finding $d \in \mathbb{N}$ and a pseudodifferential operator $R_{12} : \pazocal{H}_1 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_2$ with its adjoint $R_{21} : \pazocal{H}_2 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1h}
\matrice{\mathbb{P}_h - \lambda & R_{12} \\ R_{21} & 0} \ : \ \pazocal{H}_1 \oplus \pazocal{H}_2 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_1 \oplus \pazocal{H}_2
\end{equation}
is invertible for all $\lambda$ in $\Omega$. We refer to \cite[\S13]{DS:99} for a comprehensive presentation.
Following \cite{GMS:91}, there exists ${\varphi}_1(y,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(y,\xi) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2)$, satisfying
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1k}
{\varphi}_j(y+\ell,\xi+2\pi k) = e^{-2i\pi ky} \cdot {\varphi}_j(y,\xi); \ \ \ \ \big\langle{\varphi}_m(\cdot, \xi),{\varphi}_n(\cdot, \xi)\big\rangle_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} = \delta_{nm},\end{equations}
such that for all $(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1f}
u \in \big[ {\varphi}_1(\cdot,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\cdot,\xi)\big]^\perp \ \Rightarrow \
\blr{\big( \mathbb{P}(x,\xi) - \lambda_+) u ,u }_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq 3 |u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equation}
For technical reasons, we prefer to work with the operator ${\mathbb{Q}}_h = \psi(\mathbb{P}_h)$, where $\psi$ satisfies \eqref{eq:3k}. We note that ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_h) = {\pazocal{J}}_e\big(\psi(P_h)\big)$, see Lemma \ref{lem:1f} and \ref{lem:1e}. Using the unitary equivalence between $P_h$ and $\mathbb{P}_h$, we deduce that
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1} \Big( \big[ {\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1) \big] g'({\mathbb{Q}}_h) \Big).
\end{equation}
The operator ${\mathbb{Q}}_h$ is in $\Psi_h^{(11)}(1)$ and its leading symbol is the bounded operator
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi) = \psi\big( \mathbb{P}(x,\xi) \big) \ : \ L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2) \rightarrow L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2),
\end{equation}
because $\psi(\mathbb{P}_h) = \lambda_2 + {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h)$ for some ${\varphi}(\lambda) \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R})$; and because of \S\ref{sec:312}.
We now extend \eqref{eq:1f} to ${\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi) = \psi\big( \mathbb{P}(x,\xi) \big)$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1a} If \eqref{eq:1f} holds then there exists $\lambda_2 \geq \lambda_0+2\epsilon$ and $\psi$ satisfying \eqref{eq:3k} such that for every $(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1i}
u \in \big[ {\varphi}_1(\cdot,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\cdot,\xi)\big]^\perp \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \blr{\left(\psi\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)\big) - \lambda_+ \right)u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq |u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}^2.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} \textbf{1.} We note that ${\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi) \in S^{(11)}(1)$. In particular, it satisfies the pseudoperiodic condition \eqref{eq:1w}. Moreover, $\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)$ depends on $x$ only if $x$ is within a compact set $K$. Therefore, it suffices to prove \eqref{eq:1i} for $(x,\xi) \in K \times [0,2\pi]^2$.
Fix $(x,\xi) \in K \times [0,2\pi]^2$ and $u \in H^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$. We split $u = u_1 + u_2$ where $u_2 = \Pi(\xi)u \in L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$ is the projection of $u$ to $\big[ {\varphi}_1(\cdot,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\cdot,\xi)\big]$. In particular $u_1 \in H^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$ satisfies the assumption of \eqref{eq:1f} and we have
\begin{equations}
\blr{ \big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) - \lambda_+ \big) u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} = \sum_{j,k=1}^2
\blr{ \big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) - \lambda_+ \big) u_j,u_k}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}
\\
\geq 3|u_1|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 2\left|\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) u_2\right|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \cdot 3|u_1|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - \left|\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) - \lambda \big) u_2\right|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \cdot |u_2|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equations}
The space $\big[ {\varphi}_1(\cdot,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\cdot,\xi)\big]$ is finite dimensional. There exists a constant $C \geq 1$ uniform in $(x, \xi) \in K \times [0,2\pi]^2$ such that
\begin{equation}
\big| \mathbb{P}(x,\xi) u_2\big|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} + \left|\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) - \lambda \big) u_2\right|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \leq C |u_2|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equation}
We deduce that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1j}
\blr{ \big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi) - \lambda_+ \big) u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq |u_1|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 2C^2 |u_2|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}
\\
\geq |u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 3C^2 |u_2|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} = |u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 3C^2 |\Pi(\xi) u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equations}
\textbf{3.} Fix $\lambda_2 =3C^2+1 + \lambda_+$. We split $u = u_-+u_+$ where $u_- = \mathds{1}_{(-\infty,\lambda_2)}\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)\big) u$ and $u_+ = \mathds{1}_{[\lambda_2,\infty)}\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)\big) u$. Note that by elliptic regularity, $u_- \in H^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$. If $\psi$ satisfies \eqref{eq:3k}, then we have
\begin{equation}
\blr{\big(\psi\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)\big) -\lambda_+\big) u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq \blr{\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)-\lambda_+\big)u_-,u_-}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} + \big(\lambda_2-\lambda_+ \big) |u_+|^2.
\end{equation}
We obtain from \eqref{eq:1j}:
\begin{equations}
\blr{\big(\psi\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)\big) -\lambda_+\big) u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq |u_-|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 3C^2 |\Pi(\xi) u_-|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} + \big(\lambda_2 - \lambda_+ \big) |u_+|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}
\\
\geq |u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 3C^2 |\Pi(\xi) u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} + \big(\lambda_2 - \lambda_+ -1 \big) |u_+|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 3C^2 |\Pi(\xi) u_+|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equations}
Since $\lambda_2 = 3C^2+1 + \lambda_+$, we obtain
\begin{equations}
\blr{\big(\psi\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)\big) -\lambda_+\big) u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq |u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} - 3C^2 |\Pi(\xi) u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equations}
This completes the proof: $\Pi(\xi) u = 0$ if $u$ satisfies the condition of \eqref{eq:1i}. \end{proof}
In the rest of the paper we assume given ${\varphi}_1, \dots {\varphi}_d$ satisfying \eqref{eq:1k} and \eqref{eq:1f}; and we fix $\psi$ such that \eqref{eq:1i} holds. Introduce
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1r}
R_{12}(\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_j t_j \cdot {\varphi}_j(y,\xi); \ \ \ \ \big(R_{21}(\xi)u\big)_j \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \lr{{\varphi}_j(\cdot,\xi),u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equations}
The symbols $R_{12}(\xi)$ and $R_{21}(\xi)$ are respectively in $S^{(12)}(1)$ and $S^{(21)}(1)$.
A general argument based on \eqref{eq:1i} -- see e.g. \cite[Appendix 13.A]{DS:99} -- implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1l}
\matrice{{\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi) - \lambda & R_{12}(\xi) \\ R_{21}(\xi) & 0} \ : \ L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2) \oplus \mathbb{C}^d \ \rightarrow \ L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2) \oplus \mathbb{C}^d
\end{equation}
is invertible for all $(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2$ and $\lambda \in \mathbb{D}(0,|\lambda_+|)$. Note that this disk contains $\ove{\Omega}$.
The operator
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0b}
\matrice{{\mathbb{Q}}_h - \lambda & R_{12} \\ R_{21} & 0} \ : \ \pazocal{H}_1 \oplus \pazocal{H}_2 \ \rightarrow \ \pazocal{H}_1 \oplus \pazocal{H}_2
\end{equation}
is a bloc-by-bloc semiclassical operator, with blocs in $\Psi_h^{(jk)}(1)$. Its leading symbol is \eqref{eq:1l}, which is invertible. Hence \eqref{eq:0b} is invertible; and its inverse is a semiclassical operator acting on the same space. We write it in the form
\begin{equation}
\matrice{{\mathbb{Q}}_h - \lambda & R_{12} \\ R_{21} & 0}^{-1} = \matrice{E_{11}(\lambda) & E_{21}(\lambda) \\ E_{21}(\lambda) & E_{22}(\lambda)}, \ \ \ \ \text{where} \ \ E_{jk}(\lambda) \in \Psi_h^{(jk)}(1).
\end{equation}
\subsection{Reduction}\label{sec:33} We combine the Helffer--Sj\"ostrand formula with the effective Hamiltonian expression \eqref{eq:3x} for $({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda)^{-1}$. This gives
\begin{equations}
g'({\mathbb{Q}}_h) = \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}
\\
= \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \left( E_{11}(\lambda) - E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} E_{21}(\lambda) \right) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}
\end{equations}
This integral splits in two parts, one of them involving $E_{11}(\lambda)$. This term is holomorphic in $\Omega$, which is a neighborhood of $\mathrm{supp}(\tilde{g})$ in $\mathbb{C}^+$. An integration by parts with respect to ${\overline{\lambda}}$ removes $E_{11}(\lambda)$ and we end up with:
\begin{equations}\label{eq:3s}
g'({\mathbb{Q}}_h) = - \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} E_{21}(\lambda) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equations}
Let $\Phi_0(x_1) \in C_0^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ such that $\Phi_0(x_1) = 1$ on $[-1,1]$; define $\Phi(x) = \Phi_0(x_1) \Phi_0(x_2)$. We insert $\Phi$ in \eqref{eq:3s} to write ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1} (\pazocal{T}_\Phi + \pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi})$, where
\begin{equations}\label{eq:3o}
\pazocal{T}_\Phi \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ - \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \big[ {\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1)\big] \cdot E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) E_{21}(\lambda) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equations}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1k} The operator $\pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi}$ is trace-class on $\pazocal{H}_1$ and $\| \pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi} \|_\Tr = O(h^\infty)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} \textbf{1.} Let $\chi_\pm(x_2) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ satisfying \eqref{eq:4a}. We define ${\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm} = \psi(\mathbb{P}_{h,\pm})$, where $\mathbb{P}_{h,\pm}$ are the asymptotic Hamiltonians of $\mathbb{P}_h$:
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{P}_{h,\pm} \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_{\alpha,\pm}(y) (D_x+hD_y)^\alpha.
\end{equation}
Then we have
\begin{equation}
({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda)^{-1} = \sum_{\pm} \chi_\pm(x_2)({\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm}-\lambda)^{-1} + \sum_{\pm} \chi_\pm(x_2) ({\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm}-\lambda)^{-1} ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-{\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm}) ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda)^{-1}.
\end{equation}
The term $({\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm}-\lambda)^{-1}$ is analytic for $\lambda \in \Omega'$. Recall that $\psi(\mathbb{P}_h) = \lambda_2 + {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h)$, where ${\varphi}(\lambda) \in C_0^\infty(\mathbb{R})$. Arguing as in Steps 3-4 in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:1c}, we see that
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb{Q}}_h-{\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm} = {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h) - {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_{h,\pm})
\in \Psi_h^{(11)}\left( m_{2,\mp}^{\infty} \right).
\end{equation}
Moreover $\chi_\pm(x_2) \in \Psi_h^{(11)}(m_{2,\pm}^{\infty})$. We deduce that $({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda)^{-1}$ is a sum of two terms: the first one is analytic in $\lambda \in \Omega'$; the second one belongs to $\Psi_h^{(11)} ( \lr{x_2}^{-\infty} )$, with bounds blowing up at worst polynomially in $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$ .
\textbf{2.} We recall that $E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} = -R_{21} ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda)^{-1} R_{12}$. Hence $E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} = T_1(\lambda) + T_2(\lambda)$, with $T_1(\lambda)$ is analytic in $\lambda \in \Omega'$; and $T_2(\lambda)$ in $\Psi_h^{(22)} \left( \lr{x_2}^{-\infty} \right)$:
\begin{equations}\label{eq:4d}
T_1(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ -\sum_{\pm} R_{21} \cdot \chi_\pm(x_2)({\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm}-\lambda)^{-1} \cdot R_{12},
\\
T_2(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ -\sum_{\pm} R_{21} \cdot \chi_\pm(x_2) ({\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm}-\lambda)^{-1} ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-{\mathbb{Q}}_{h,\pm}) ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda)^{-1}\cdot R_{12}.
\end{equations}
Pairings of analytic terms with almost-analytic functions vanish. Therefore,
\begin{equations}\label{eq:0d}
\pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi} =
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \big[ {\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1)\big] \cdot E_{12}(\lambda) T_2(\lambda) \big( 1-\Phi(x) \big) E_{21}(\lambda) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equations}
\textbf{3.} As in \eqref{eq:2g}, $[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)] \in \Psi_h^{(11)}\big(\lr{x_1}^{-\infty}\big)$. We deduce that for any $s \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0c}
\hspace*{-2mm} \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) = \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) \lr{x_1}^s \cdot \lr{x_1}^{-s} \ \in \ \Psi_h^{(12)}(1) \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)}\big(\lr{x_1}^{-s}\big),
\end{equation}
with uniform bounds as $|\Im \lambda| \rightarrow 0$.
As in \eqref{eq:2h}, $T_2(\lambda) \in \Psi_h^{(22)}\big(\lr{x_2}^{-\infty}\big)$, with bounds blowing up polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$. Combining with \eqref{eq:0c}, we deduce that for any $s \in \mathbb{N}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0e}
\big[ {\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1)\big] \cdot E_{12}(\lambda) T_2(\lambda) \big( 1-\Phi(x) \big) \ \in \ \Psi^{(12)}_h(1) \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)}\big(\lr{x}^{-s}\big),
\end{equation}
with bounds blowing up polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$. For $s \geq 3$, operators in $\Psi_h^{(22)}\big(\lr{x}^{-s}\big)$ are trace-class on $\pazocal{H}_2$. Moreover, ${\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} \tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) = O(|\Im \lambda|^\infty)$. We deduce from \eqref{eq:0d} that $\pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi}$ is trace class on $\pazocal{H}_1$.
\textbf{4.} We take the trace of \eqref{eq:0d} and permute trace and integral. The identity \eqref{eq:0e} allows us to move cyclically $E_{21}(\lambda)$ from the right to the left. We obtain
\begin{equation}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1}\big(\pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi}\big) =
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2}\Big(E_{21}(\lambda)\big[ {\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1)\big] \cdot E_{12}(\lambda) T_2(\lambda) \big( 1-\Phi(x) \big) \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
We show that this trace is $O(h^\infty)$ using \eqref{eq:0f}: we prove that the symbol is $O(h^\infty)$.
Fix $N \in \mathbb{N}$. Recall that $f'$ has support in $[-1,1]$. We use
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3q}
[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)] = [{\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h),f(x_1)] = \big( 1 -f(x_1) \big){\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h)f(x_1) - f(x_1) {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h) \big(1-f(x_1)\big)
\end{equation}
with the composition theorem. This shows that there exists $a_N \in S^{(11)}\big(\lr{x_1}^{-\infty} \big)$, with support in $[-1, 1] \times \mathbb{R}^3$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3t}
\big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big] = {\operatorname{Op}}_h(a_N) + h^N \cdot \Psi_h^{(11)} \left( \lr{x_1}^{-\infty} \right).
\end{equation}
Via a similar argument, there exists $b_N(\cdot;\lambda) \in S^{(22)}(\lr{x_2}^{-\infty})$, with support in $\mathbb{R} \times [-1, 1] \times \mathbb{R}^2$ and seminorms blowing up at worst polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$, with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3u}
T_2(\lambda) = {\operatorname{Op}}_h\big(b_N(\cdot;\lambda)\big) + h^N \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)} \left( \lr{x_2}^{-\infty} \right).
\end{equation}
It uses the Helffer--Sj\"ostrand formula for ${\mathbb{Q}}_h - {\mathbb{Q}}_{h,+} = {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_h) - {\varphi}(\mathbb{P}_{h,+})$; $\mathrm{supp} \chi_+ \subset [-1,+\infty)$; and that the coefficients of $\mathbb{P}_h-\mathbb{P}_{h,+}$ have support in $\mathbb{R} \times (-\infty,1]$.
We note that the (three-way) intersection of the supports of $a_N, b_N$ and $1-\Phi$ is empty. Using \eqref{eq:3t}, \eqref{eq:3u} and the composition theorem, we deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3v}
E_{21}(\lambda) \big[ {\mathbb{Q}}_h, f(x_1)\big] \cdot E_{12}(\lambda) T_2(\lambda) \big( 1-\Phi(x) \big) \ \in \ h^N \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)} \left( \lr{x}^{-\infty} \right)
\end{equation}
with symbolic bounds blowing up polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$. In particular the $\pazocal{H}_2$-trace of \eqref{eq:3v} is $O(h^N |\Im\lambda|^{-\alpha_N})$ for some $\alpha_N> 0$. This completes the proof because ${\partial}^2_{{\overline{\lambda}}\lambda} \tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) = O(|\Im \lambda|^\infty)$.
\end{proof}
Applying Lemma \ref{lem:1k}, we split
\begin{equation}
[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)]g'({\mathbb{Q}}_h) = \pazocal{T}_\Phi + \pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi}
\end{equation}
where both $\pazocal{T}_\Phi$ and $\pazocal{T}_{1-\Phi}$ are trace-class; it proves that ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1}(\pazocal{T}_\Phi) + O(h^\infty)$.
The operator $\pazocal{T}_\Phi$ is an integral involving ${\partial}^2_{{\overline{\lambda}}\lambda} \tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3p}
\big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big]E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) E_{21}(\lambda).
\end{equation}
We observe that $\Phi(x) \in \Psi_h^{(22)} \left( \lr{x}^{-\infty} \right)$, thus it is trace-class on $\pazocal{H}_2$. The other operators in \eqref{eq:3p} are bounded with bounds blowing up polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$. Since ${\partial}^2_{{\overline{\lambda}}\lambda} \tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) = O(|\Im \lambda|^\infty)$, we can permute trace and integral in $\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1}(\pazocal{T}_\Phi)$. Thus,
\begin{equation}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1}(\pazocal{T}_\Phi) =
- \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_1} \Big( \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big] \cdot E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) E_{21}(\lambda) \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
We move the term $E_{21}(\lambda)$ cyclically and end up with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4h}
- \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( E_{21}(\lambda) \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big]E_{12}(\lambda) \cdot E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
To summarize, ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ equals \eqref{eq:4h} modulo $O(h^\infty)$. In a sense, the next result extends the definition \eqref{eq:5u} of ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P)$ to singular value problems:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:1} We have
\begin{equations}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)
=
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2 \lambda}{\pi} + O(h^\infty).
\end{equations}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof} \textbf{1.} The starting point is \eqref{eq:4h}. We use the matrix identity \eqref{eq:1m} for the $(1,2)$ and $(2,1)$ components. It yields
\begin{equations}
E_{21}(\lambda) \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big]E_{12}(\lambda) = E_{21}(\lambda) ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda) f(x_1) E_{12}(\lambda) - E_{21}(\lambda) f(x_1) ({\mathbb{Q}}_h-\lambda) E_{12}(\lambda)
\\
= -E_{22}(\lambda) R_{21} f(x_1) E_{12}(\lambda) + E_{21}(\lambda) f(x_1) R_{12} E_{22}(\lambda).
\end{equations}
Then we use \eqref{eq:1m} for the $(2,2)$ component.
This gives
\begin{equations}
E_{21}(\lambda) \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big]E_{12}(\lambda)
\\
-E_{22}(\lambda) f(x_1) + f(x_1) E_{22}(\lambda) -E_{22}(\lambda) \big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) + E_{21}(\lambda) \big[f(x_1), R_{12}\big] E_{22}(\lambda)
\\
=
\big[f(x_1), E_{22}(\lambda)\big] -E_{22}(\lambda) \big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) + E_{21}(\lambda) \big[f(x_1), R_{12}\big] E_{22}(\lambda).
\end{equations}
We multiply on both sides by $E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x)$ to end up with
\begin{equations}\label{eq:4b}
E_{21}(\lambda) \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big]E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x)
=
\big[f(x_1), E_{22}(\lambda)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x)
\\
-
E_{22}(\lambda) \big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) + E_{21}(\lambda) \big[f(x_1), R_{12}\big] \Phi(x).
\end{equations}
\textbf{2.} The function $\Phi$ has compact support. Therefore it induces a trace-class operator on $\pazocal{H}_2$. This allows us to separately trace each term in \eqref{eq:4b}. The third trace is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4i}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( E_{21}(\lambda) \big[f(x_1), R_{12}\big] \Phi(x) \Big).
\end{equation}
It is analytic for $\lambda \in \Omega$; an integration by parts with respect to ${\overline{\lambda}}$ gets rid of it.
\textbf{3.} We focus on the second trace:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4c}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( E_{22}(\lambda) \big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big).
\end{equation}
We move $E_{22}(\lambda)$ cyclically to the right and commute it with $\Phi(x)$. The term $E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}$ cancels out with $E_{22}(\lambda)$, producing an analytic term. Only the commutator produces non-analytic terms. In other words, \eqref{eq:4c} equals
\begin{equation}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \big[\Phi(x), E_{22}(\lambda)\big]\Big),
\end{equation}
modulo an analytic function.
We recall that $E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}$ splits as $T_1(\lambda) + T_2(\lambda)$, where $T_1(\lambda)$, $T_2(\lambda)$ are defined in \eqref{eq:4d}. Since $T_1(\lambda)$ is analytic in $\lambda$, an integration by parts w.r.t. ${\overline{\lambda}}$ replaces \eqref{eq:4c} by
\begin{equation}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) T_2(\lambda) \big[\Phi(x), E_{22}(\lambda)\big]\Big).
\end{equation}
\textbf{4.} Fix $N \in \mathbb{N}$. Since $\Phi$ has compact support and $\Phi'$ vanishes in $[-1,1]^2$, there exists $c_N(\cdot;\lambda) \in \Psi_h^{(22)}(1)$ with compact support, vanishing in $[-1,1]^2$, analytic in $\lambda$ such that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:4e}
\big[\Phi(x), E_{22}(\lambda)\big] = {\operatorname{Op}}_h\big(c_N(\cdot;\lambda)\big) + h^N \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)} \left( \lr{x}^{-\infty} \right).
\end{equations}
From \eqref{eq:3u}, there exists $b_N(\cdot;\lambda) \in S^{(22)}(1)$, with support in $\mathbb{R} \times [-1, 1] \times \mathbb{R}^2$ and with seminorms blowing up at worst polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$, such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4f}
T_2(\lambda) = {\operatorname{Op}}_h\big(b_N(\cdot;\lambda)\big) + h^N \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)} (1).
\end{equation}
Finally, there exists $d_N(\cdot;\lambda) \in \Psi_h^{(22)}(1)$ with support in $[-1,1] \times \mathbb{R}^3$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4g}
\big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) = {\operatorname{Op}}_h\big(d_N(\cdot;\lambda)\big) + h^N \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)} (1).
\end{equation}
We remark that $b_N(\cdot;\lambda)$, $c_N(\cdot;\lambda)$ and $d_N(\cdot,\lambda)$ have disjoint supports.
From the composition theorem applied to \eqref{eq:4e}, \eqref{eq:4f} and \eqref{eq:4g} we deduce that
\begin{equation}
\big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) T_2(\lambda) \big[\Phi(x), E_{22}(\lambda)\big] \in h^N \cdot \Psi_h^{(22)} \left( \lr{x}^{-\infty} \right)
\end{equation}
with bounds blowing up at worst polynomially with $|\Im \lambda|^{-1}$. Therefore, there exists $\alpha_N > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4j}
\Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[ R_{21}, f(x_1)\big] E_{12}(\lambda) T_2(\lambda) \big[\Phi(x), E_{22}(\lambda)\big]\Big) = O\left( \dfrac{h^N}{|\Im \lambda|^{\alpha_N}} \right).
\end{equation}
\textbf{6.} We go back to \eqref{eq:4b} and we recall that \eqref{eq:4i} is analytic. Moreover, \eqref{eq:4c} equals $O\left( h^N|\Im \lambda|^{-\alpha_N} \right)$ modulo an analytic term. Since ${\partial}_\lambda\tilde{g}$ is almost analytic, we deduce that for any $N$, ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ equals
\begin{equations}
- \int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda}\cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( E_{21}(\lambda) \big[{\mathbb{Q}}_h,f(x_1)\big]E_{12}(\lambda) \cdot E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2 \lambda}{\pi} + O(h^\infty)
\\
=
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+} \dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}} {\partial}\lambda} \cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2 \lambda}{\pi} + O(h^N).
\end{equations}
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We next use Theorem \ref{thm:1} to express ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ in terms of asymptotic quantities. We first introduce the asymptotic leading symbols of the effective Hamiltonian:
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1y}
E_\pm(\xi;\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ - R_{21}(\xi) \big( {\mathbb{Q}}_\pm(\xi) - \lambda\big)^{-1} R_{12}(\xi), \ \ \ \ \text{where}
\\
{\mathbb{Q}}_\pm(\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \psi\big(\mathbb{P}_\pm(\xi)\big), \ \ \ \ \mathbb{P}_\pm(\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_{\alpha,\pm}(y) (D_y+\xi)^\alpha.
\end{equations}
We define an index for $E_\pm(\xi;\lambda)$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5d}
{\pazocal{J}}(E_\pm) = -\int_{{\partial}\Omega} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2_*}\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \left(\left(\dd{E_\pm}{\xi_1} E_\pm^{-1} \dd{ \big({\partial}_\lambda E_\pm \cdot E_\pm^{-1}\big)}{\xi_2} \right)(\xi;\lambda) \right) \dfrac{d\xi}{(2\pi)^2} \dfrac{d^1\lambda}{2i\pi},
\end{equation}
where we recall that ${\mathbb{T}}^2_* = ({\mathbb{T}}^2)^*$ is the two-torus $\mathbb{R}^2/(2\pi\mathbb{Z})^2$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:2} We have
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}(E_+) - {\pazocal{J}}(E_-).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} \textbf{1.} Theorem \ref{thm:1} shows that modulo lower order terms, ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ is equal to
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+}\dd{^2\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{\lambda {\partial} {\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
We integrate by parts with respect to $\lambda$. This produces the term
\begin{equations}
\dd{}{\lambda} \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big) = t_1(\lambda) + t_2(\lambda), \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{where:}
\\
t_1(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}'(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big)
\\
t_2(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ - \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x) \Big).
\end{equations}
In $t_2(\lambda)$, we commute $E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}$ with $\Phi(x)$, then move it cyclically to the left. This shows that $t_2(\lambda) = t_3(\lambda) + t_4(\lambda)$, where
\begin{equations}
t_3(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ - \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \big[E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}, \Phi(x)\big] \Big),
\\
t_4(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ - \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}\big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \Phi(x)\big] \Big)
\\
= \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( E_{22}'(\lambda) \big[E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1},f(x_1)\big] \Phi(x) \Big).
\end{equations}
In particular, $t_1(\lambda) + t_4(\lambda) = 0$ since it is the trace of trace-class commutators:
\begin{equations}
t_1(\lambda) + t_4(\lambda) = \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1},f(x_1)\big] \Phi(x) \Big)
\\
= \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}\Phi(x),f(x_1)\big] \Big) = 0.
\end{equations}
We conclude that modulo $O(h^\infty)$, ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ is equal to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4z}
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+}\dd{\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \Tr_{\pazocal{H}_2} \Big( \big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \big[E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}, \Phi(x)\big] \Big) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
\textbf{2.} We use Dimassi's formula \eqref{eq:0f}. The equation \eqref{eq:4z} becomes
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4o}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) =
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+}\dd{\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \int_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2_*}\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \big( \sigma(x,\xi;\lambda) \big) \dfrac{dx d\xi}{(2\pi h)^2} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi} + O(h^\infty),
\end{equation}
where $\sigma(\cdot;\lambda) \in S^{(22)}(1)$ is the symbol of
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4n}
\big[E_{22}(\lambda),f(x_1)\big] E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1} \big[E_{22}'(\lambda)E_{22}(\lambda)^{-1}, \Phi(x)\big].
\end{equation}
\textbf{3.} Because of \eqref{eq:0g} and \eqref{eq:3x}, we can write
\begin{equations}
E_{22}(\lambda) = {\operatorname{Op}}_h\big(E(\cdot;\lambda)\big) + O_{\Psi^{(22)}_h(1)}\big(h |\Im \lambda|^{-8}\big), \ \ \ \ \text{where}
\\
E(x,\xi;\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ -R_{21}(\xi) \big( {\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi)-\lambda \big)^{-1} R_{12}(\xi).
\end{equations}
The composition theorem applied to \eqref{eq:4n} shows that \begin{equations}\label{eq:5a}
\sigma(\cdot;\lambda) = h^2\sigma_0(\cdot;\lambda)+ O_{S^{(22)}(1)}\big(h^3 |\Im \lambda|^{-16}\big) \ \ \ \ \text{where}
\\
\sigma_0(x,\xi;\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \
\left(\dfrac{1}{i} \big\{ E, f \big\} E^{-1} \cdot \dfrac{1}{i} \big\{ {\partial}_\lambda E \cdot E^{-1}, \Phi \big\}\right)(x,\xi;\lambda).
\end{equations}
We observe that neither $\sigma_0$ not ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ depend on $h$. Hence, \eqref{eq:4o} reduces to a $h$-independent formula:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4p}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) =
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+}\dd{\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \int_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2_*}\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \big( \sigma_0(x,\xi;\lambda) \big) \dfrac{dx d\xi}{(2\pi)^2} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
\textbf{4.} We simplify the expression \eqref{eq:5a} for $\sigma_0$. Recall that $\Phi(x) = \Phi_0(x_1) \Phi_0(x_2)$ where $\Phi_0$ is equal to $1$ on $[-1,1]$. For $x \in \mathrm{supp}(f')$, ${\partial}_{x_1} \Phi (x) = \Phi_0(x_2) \Phi_0'(x_1) = 0$. The support of ${\partial}_{x_2} \Phi$ does not intersect the strip $\mathbb{R} \times (-1,1)$. Therefore we can write
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{supp}({\partial}_{x_2} \Phi) = S_+ \cup S_-, \ \ \ \ S_\pm \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \mathrm{supp}({\partial}_{x_2} \Phi) \cap \{ \pm x_2 \geq 1\}.
\end{equation}
For $x \in S_\pm$, $E(x,\xi;\lambda) = E_\pm(\xi;\lambda)$.
We deduce that for $\pm x_2 > 0$,
\begin{equations}
\sigma_0(x,\xi;\lambda) = - \left(\dd{E_\pm}{\xi_1} E_\pm^{-1} \dd{ \big({\partial}_\lambda E_\pm \cdot E_\pm^{-1}\big)}{\xi_2} \right)(\xi;\lambda) \cdot \dd{f(x_1)}{x_1} \dd{ \Phi(x)}{x_2}.
\end{equations}
\textbf{5.} On the support of $f'$, $\Phi(x) = \Phi_0(x_1) \Phi_0(x_2) = \Phi_0(x_2)$. Therefore
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{R} \times \mathbb{R}^\pm} \dd{f(x_1)}{x_1} \dd{\Phi(x)}{x_2} dx = \int_{\mathbb{R}^\pm} \dd{\Phi_0(x_2)}{x_2} dx_2 = \mp 1.
\end{equation}
It follows that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:4q}
F(\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \int_{\mathbb{R}^2 \times {\mathbb{T}}^2_*}\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \big( \sigma_0(x,\xi;\lambda) \big) \dfrac{dx d\xi}{(2\pi)^2}
\\
= \sum_\pm \pm \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2_*}\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \left(\left(\dd{E_\pm}{\xi_1} E_\pm^{-1} \dd{ \big({\partial}_\lambda E_\pm \cdot E_\pm^{-1}\big)}{\xi_2} \right)(\xi;\lambda) \right) \dfrac{d\xi}{(2\pi)^2}.
\end{equations}
\textbf{6.} From \eqref{eq:4p} and the definition \eqref{eq:4q} of $F$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4r}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) =
\int_{\mathbb{C}^+}\dd{\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}})}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot F(\lambda) \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}.
\end{equation}
We remove the dependence in $\tilde{g}$. We observe that $F$ is meromorphic in $\lambda \in \Omega$. Assume now that $\lambda_\star \in \Omega$ is a pole of $F$. Then there exists $\xi_\star$ such that $E_+^{-1}$ or $E_-^{-1}$ has a pole at $(\xi_\star;\lambda_\star)$. From \eqref{eq:1y}, $\lambda_\star \in \sigma_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}\big({\mathbb{Q}}_+(\xi)\big) \cup \sigma_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}\big({\mathbb{Q}}_-(\xi)\big)$. From the spectral gap assumption, $g(\lambda) = 1$ near $\lambda_\star$.
We integrate \eqref{eq:4r} by parts with respect to ${\overline{\lambda}}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4s}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) =
-\int_{\mathbb{C}^+}\tilde{g}(\lambda,{\overline{\lambda}}) \cdot \dd{F(\lambda)}{{\overline{\lambda}}} \cdot \dfrac{d^2\lambda}{\pi}
\end{equation}
where we see ${\partial}_{\overline{\lambda}} F$ as a distribution, whose singular support is within poles of $F$. To simplify \eqref{eq:4s}, we expand $F$ as a Lorenz series near the pole $\lambda_\star$. From the identities
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{(-1)^j}{\pi}\dd{}{{\overline{\lambda}}}(\lambda-\lambda_\star)^{-j-1} = \delta^{(j)}(\lambda-\lambda_\star) \ \ \text{on} \ \ {\pazocal{D}}'(\mathbb{C}^+); \ \ \ \ g^{(j)}(\lambda_\star) =
\systeme{1 \ \text{ if } \ j =0 \\ 0 \ \text{ if } \ j \geq 1},
\end{equation}
we see that only terms of the form $(\lambda-\lambda_\star)^{-1}$ in the Lorenz development of $F$ contribute to \eqref{eq:4s}; and more precisely,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1v}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = -\sum_{\lambda_\star} {\operatorname{Res}}(F,\lambda_\star) = -\int_{{\partial}\Omega} F(\lambda) \dfrac{d^1\lambda}{2i\pi}.
\end{equation}
This completes the proof: \eqref{eq:5d} appear in the RHS of \eqref{eq:1v}. \end{proof}
\section{Relation to the Chern index}\label{sec:4}
In this section we complete the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:0}. Deriving the Chern number $c_1(\pazocal{E}_\pm)$ from ${\pazocal{J}}(E_\pm)$ turns out to be surprisingly involved. We first prove
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0) + {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+),
\end{equation}
where $P_0$ was defined in \S\ref{sec:24}.
This formula explicitly splits ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+)$ in components for $x_2 \geq 1$ and $x_2 \leq -1$. This allows us to pick separate effective Hamiltonians for $x_2 \leq -1$ and $x_2 \geq 1$. Hence, Theorem \ref{thm:0} follows from the separate (and similar) computation of ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0)$ and ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+)$.
Theorem \ref{thm:2} computes ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+)$ in terms of an effective Hamiltonian $E_{22}(\lambda)$. There remains quite a bit of flexibility in the choice of $E_{22}(\lambda)$. We design an effective Hamiltonian $\widetilde{E}_{22}(\lambda)$ that is suitable for the computation of ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+)$. This tremendously simplifies the derivation of $2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$.
However $\widetilde{E}_{22}(\lambda)$ may not be suitable for the calculation of ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0)$. But the same approach will design another suitable effective Hamiltonian and prove $2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0) = -c_1(\pazocal{E}_-)$. This will complete the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:0}.
\subsection{Chern number}\label{sec:41} We review how to define the bulk index of $P_+$. We recall that $\lambda_0 \notin \sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}(P_+)$. By Floquet--Bloch theory \cite{RS:78,Ku:16}, for any $\xi \in \mathbb{R}^2$, $\lambda_0 \notin \sigma_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}\big( P_+(\xi)\big)$, where
\begin{equation}
P_+(\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} a_{\alpha,+}(y) (D_y+\xi)^\alpha \ : \ L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2) \rightarrow L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2).
\end{equation}
Let $\pazocal{F}_+$ be the smooth vector bundle over $\mathbb{R}^2$ whose fiber at $\xi \in \mathbb{R}^2$ is
\begin{equation}
\pazocal{F}_+(\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ {\operatorname{Range}}\big( \Pi_+(\xi) \big), \ \ \ \ \Pi_+(\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \mathds{1}_{(-\infty,\lambda_0]} \big( P_+(\xi)\big).
\end{equation}
For any $k \in \mathbb{Z}^2$ and $\xi \in \mathbb{R}^2$,
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1g}
e^{-2ik\pi y} P_+(\xi) e^{2ik\pi y} = P_+(\xi+2k\pi), \ \ \ \ e^{-2ik\pi y} \Pi_+(\xi) e^{2ik\pi y} = \Pi_+(\xi+2k\pi), \ \ \ \ \text{thus}
\\
k \in \mathbb{Z}^2, \ \ \xi \in \mathbb{R}^2 \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \pazocal{F}_+(\xi+2k\pi) = e^{-2ik\pi y} \cdot\pazocal{F}_+(\xi).
\end{equations}
These relations show that $\pazocal{F}_+ \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$ induces a bundle $\pazocal{E}_+ \rightarrow {\mathbb{T}}^2_*$, defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:0h}
\pazocal{E}_+ \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \pazocal{F}_+/_\sim, \ \ \ \ \text{where} \ \ (\xi,v) \sim (\xi',v') \ \ \Leftrightarrow \ \ \systeme{ \xi-\xi' \in (2\pi \mathbb{Z})^2 \\ e^{i\xi y}v = e^{i\xi'y}v },
\end{equation}
see e.g. \cite[\S2]{Pa:07}. Another way to define $\pazocal{E}_+$ consists of looking at $P_+$ on spaces of pseudoperiodic functions, see e.g. \cite[\S2]{Dr:19b}.
Complex vector bundles over ${\mathbb{T}}^2_*$ are classified by their rank and their Chern number, $c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$. This integer is defined by integrating a curvature on $\pazocal{E}_+$. Analogously to the Gauss--Bonnet theorem, the final result does not depend on the choice of curvature: it is a topological invariant. Taking for instance the Berry curvature \cite{Be:84,Si:83},
\begin{equation}
c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) = \dfrac{i}{2\pi} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2_*} \Tr_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \Big( \Pi_+(\xi) \big[ {\partial}_1\Pi_+(\xi), {\partial}_2 \Pi_+(\xi) \big] \Big) d\xi.
\end{equation}
If $c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) = 0$, then $\pazocal{E}_+$ is trivial: it admits a smooth orthonormal equivariant frame -- i.e. transforming like \eqref{eq:0h}. In other words, there exist smooth functions ${\varphi}_1(y,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_n(y,\xi) \in C^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2)$, such that for any $\xi$,
\begin{equations}
\pazocal{E}_+(\xi) = \big[ {\varphi}_1(\cdot,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_n(\cdot,\xi) \big] \ \ \ \text{and}
\\
{\varphi}_j(y,\xi+2k\pi) = e^{-2ik\pi y}, \ \ k \in \mathbb{Z}^2; \ \ \ \ \big\langle {\varphi}_j(\cdot,\xi), {\varphi}_\ell(\cdot,\xi) \big\rangle_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} = \delta_{jl}.
\end{equations}
We refer to \cite[\S3]{Mo:17} for the proof.
\subsection{A concatenation formula}\label{sec:6.1} Let $\rho_0(x_2) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})$ be independent of $x_1$, with
\begin{equation}
\rho_0(x) = \systeme{ 0 & \text{ for } x_2 \leq 0 \\ x_2 & \text{ for } x_2 \geq 1}.
\end{equation}
We define $\rho(x) = \big(0,\rho_0(x_2)\big)$ and we set
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{P}_h \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Re\Bigg( \sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(\rho(hx),x) D_x^\alpha \Bigg) \ : \ L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \rightarrow L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)
\end{equation}
The same arguments as \S\ref{sec:24} show that $\widetilde{P}_h$ is a selfadjoint elliptic operator of order $2$. We observe that $c_\alpha(\rho(hx),x) = c_\alpha(0,x)$ for $x_2 \leq 0$; and $c_\alpha(\rho(hx),x) = c_\alpha(hx,x)$ for $hx_2 \geq 1$. Thus, the asymptotics of $\widetilde{P}_h$ for $hx_2 \geq 1$ and $hx_2 \leq 0$ are respectively $P_0$ -- see \eqref{eq:1c} -- and $P_+$. We deduce that ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(\widetilde{P}_h)$.
Moreover, $\widetilde{P}_h$ is unitarily equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\mathbb{P}}_h \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Re\Bigg(\sum_{|\alpha| \leq 2} c_\alpha(\rho(x),y) (D_y+hD_x)^\alpha \Bigg) \ : \ \pazocal{H}_1 \rightarrow \pazocal{H}_1.
\end{equation}
This operator is semiclassical, with leading symbol
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\mathbb{P}}(x,\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ \Re\Bigg(\sum_{|\alpha| = 2} c_\alpha(\rho(x),y) (D_y+\xi)^\alpha \Bigg) = \Re\big( \mathbb{P}(\rho(x),\xi) \big) = \mathbb{P}\big(\rho(x),\xi\big).
\end{equation}
In particular, if ${\varphi}_1, \dots, {\varphi}_d$ satisfy \eqref{eq:1k} and \eqref{eq:1f}, then they also satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1q}
u \in \big[ {\varphi}_1(\cdot,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\cdot,\xi)\big]^\perp \ \Rightarrow \
\big\langle \big( \widetilde{\mathbb{P}}(x,\xi) - \lambda_+) u ,u \big\rangle_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq 3 |u|^2_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equation}
Thus (a) we can construct an effective Hamiltonian $\widetilde{E}_{22}(\lambda)$ for $\widetilde{\mathbb{P}}$, with leading symbol $\widetilde{E}(x,\xi;\lambda) = E\big(\rho(x),\xi;\lambda\big)$; (b) we can apply Theorem \ref{thm:2} and get
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1o}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}\big(\widetilde{E}_+\big) - {\pazocal{J}}\big(\widetilde{E}_-\big), \ \ \ \ \text{where}
\\
\widetilde{E}_-(\xi;\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ E(0,\xi;\lambda), \ \ \ \ \widetilde{E}_+(\xi;\lambda) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ E_+(\xi;\lambda).
\end{equations}
The key point is $\widetilde{E}_-(\xi;\cdot) = (\lambda-\lambda_2) \cdot {\operatorname{Id}}_{\mathbb{C}^d}$. Indeed, from \eqref{eq:1c}, $\mathbb{P}(0,\xi) = (D_y+\xi)^2 + |\lambda_0| + 2$. In particular,
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)}\big(\mathbb{P}(0,\xi)\big) \subset \big[ |\lambda_0|+2,\infty \big).
\end{equation}
This implies $\psi\big(\mathbb{P}(0,\xi)\big) = \lambda_2 \cdot {\operatorname{Id}}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}$. We deduce from \eqref{eq:3x} that
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{E}_-(\xi;\lambda)^{-1} = -R_{21}(\xi) \big( \psi\big({\mathbb{Q}}(0,\xi)\big)-\lambda \big)^{-1} R_{12}(\xi) = (\lambda-\lambda_2)^{-1} \cdot {\operatorname{Id}}_{\mathbb{C}^d}.
\end{equation}
Hence $\widetilde{E}_-(\xi;\cdot) = (\lambda-\lambda_2) \cdot {\operatorname{Id}}_{\mathbb{C}^d}$.
From \eqref{eq:5d}, ${\pazocal{J}}(\widetilde{E}_-) = 0$. From \eqref{eq:1o}, ${\pazocal{J}}(\widetilde{E}_+) = {\pazocal{J}}(E_+)$. Therefore, ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}(E_+)$. The same analysis applies to the pair $(P_-,P_0)$ and yields ${\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0) = -{\pazocal{J}}(E_-)$. We conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1s}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}(E_+) - {\pazocal{J}}(E_-) = {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0) + {\pazocal{J}}(P_0,P_+).
\end{equation}
In \S\ref{sec:43} we design a good effective Hamiltonian for the pair $(P_0,P_+)$. Thanks to \eqref{eq:1s}, it does not need to be also good for the pair $(P_-,P_0)$. The choice of \S\ref{sec:43} tremendously simplifies the derivation of the Chern numbers in \S\ref{sec:44}:
\begin{equation}
2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = 2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}\big(\widetilde{E}_+\big) = c_1(\pazocal{E}_+).
\end{equation}
The same argument proves $2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0) = -c_1(\pazocal{E}_-)$ and ends the proof of~Theorem~\ref{thm:0}.
\subsection{A convenient effective Hamiltonian}\label{sec:43}
\begin{lem}\label{lem:1l} There exist ${\varphi}_1, \dots, {\varphi}_d$ satisfying \eqref{eq:1k} such that for all $(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2$,
\begin{equations}\label{eq:1p}
{\operatorname{Range}}\big( \Pi_+(\xi) \big) \ \subset \ \big[ {\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\xi) \big];
\\
u \in \big[ {\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\xi) \big]^\perp \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \blr{\big(P(x,\xi) -\lambda_+\big)u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq 3|u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}^2.
\end{equations}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} \textbf{1.} Since the fibers of $\pazocal{F}_+$ have (constant) finite dimensions and are contained in $H^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$, there exists $C > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4y}
\xi \in [0,2\pi]^2, \ \
u \in \pazocal{F}_+(\xi) \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ |\Delta u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \leq C |u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equation}
Let $\nu = c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$. We construct $u_0(\xi,y) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2,{\mathbb{T}}^2)$ such that the line bundle $\pazocal{F}_0 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$ satisfies:
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textbf{(i)}] $\pazocal{F}_0(\xi+2k\pi) = e^{-2ik\pi y} \cdot \pazocal{F}_0(\xi)$ when $\xi \in \mathbb{R}^2, k \in \mathbb{Z}^2$ -- i.e. $\pazocal{F}_0$ is equivariant;
\item[\textbf{(ii)}] The induced bundle $\pazocal{E}_0 \rightarrow {\mathbb{T}}^2_*$ (see \S\ref{sec:41}) has Chern number $-\nu = -c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$;
\item[\textbf{(iii)}] $\pazocal{F}_0$ and $\pazocal{F}_+$ are in direct sum.
\end{itemize}
To this end, let $a(\xi) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2,\mathbb{C}^2)$ such that the line $\mathbb{C} a(\xi)$ induces a vector bundle $\mathbb{C} a \rightarrow {\mathbb{T}}^2_*$, with Chern number $-\nu$. We prove the existence of $a$ in Appendix \ref{app:1}. Fix $v_1(y,\xi), v_2(y,\xi) \in C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2)$ such that
\begin{equation}
v(y+\ell,\xi+2\pi k) = e^{-2i\pi k y} \cdot v_j(y,\xi), \ \ \ \ (\ell,k)\in \mathbb{Z}^2.
\end{equation}
Let $m_0 \in \mathbb{N}^2$ sufficiently large (in a sense specified below); and define
\begin{equation}
u_0(y,\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ e^{2i\pi m_0 y} \cdot \sum_{j=1}^2 a_j(\xi) \cdot v_j(y,\xi).
\end{equation}
We note that $|u_0|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} = 1$. The bundle $\pazocal{F}_0 = \mathbb{C} u_0 $ over $\mathbb{R}^2$ is equivariant and isomorphic to $\mathbb{C} a \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$. Thus it induces a bundle $\pazocal{E}_0 \rightarrow {\mathbb{T}}^2_*$ with Chern number $-\nu$; this proves \textbf{(i)} and \textbf{(ii)} above.
We note that $|\Delta u_0|_{L^2_0} = (2\pi m_0)^2 + O(|m_0|)$ for large $m_0$. We adjust $m_0$ so that $|\Delta u_0|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq 2C$, where $C$ appears in \eqref{eq:4y}. Then $u_0(\xi) \notin \pazocal{F}_+(\xi)$. This shows \textbf{(iii)}: $\pazocal{F}_0$ and $\pazocal{F}_+$ are in direct sum.
From the additivity properties of Chern numbers, $c_1(\pazocal{F}_0 \oplus \pazocal{F}_+)= 0$. Therefore the bundle $\pazocal{F}_0 \oplus \pazocal{F}_+$ admits a smooth equivariant frame, see e.g. \cite[\S3]{Mo:17}. Moreover, as in \eqref{eq:4y}, there exists $C' > 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4u}
\xi \in [0,2\pi]^2, \ \
u \in \pazocal{F}_0(\xi) \oplus \pazocal{F}_+(\xi) \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ |\Delta u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \leq C' |u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equation}
\textbf{2.} Fix ${\tilde{\vp}}_1, \dots, {\tilde{\vp}}_D$ satisfying \eqref{eq:1k} and such that
\begin{equation}
(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2, \ \ u \in \big[ {\tilde{\vp}}_1(\xi), \dots, {\tilde{\vp}}_D(\xi) \big]^\perp \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \blr{\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)-\lambda_+\big)u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq 3 |u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}^2.
\end{equation}
Let ${\varphi}_0 \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R}^2)$ with support in $(0,1)^2$ such that $\Delta {\varphi}_0 \not\equiv 0$. We fix $t > 0$ (large enough in a sense progressively specified below), $y_1, \dots, y_D \in (0,1)^2$ pairwise distinct, and we set
\begin{equation}
{\varphi}_j(y,\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ {\tilde{\vp}}_j(y,\xi) + \sum_{m \in \mathbb{Z}} e^{i\xi m} {\varphi}_0\big(t (y-y_j-m)\big).
\end{equation}
We observe that $\big|{\varphi}_j(\xi)-{\tilde{\vp}}_j(\xi)\big|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} = O(t^{-1/2})$: for $t$ sufficiently large, ${\varphi}_j(\xi)$ is a small perturbation of ${\tilde{\vp}}_j(\xi)$. \cite[Proposition A.3]{DS:99} implies that for every $(x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4v}
u \in \big[ {\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_D(\xi) \big]^\perp \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \blr{\big(\mathbb{P}(x,\xi)-\lambda_+\big)u,u}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq 3 |u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}^2.
\end{equation}
\textbf{3.} Fix $\xi \in [0,2\pi]^2$. Let $u$ in $\big[ {\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_D(\xi) \big]$, with $|u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \leq 1$. We write
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4t}
u(y) = \sum_{j=1}^D a_j \cdot {\varphi}_j(y,\xi) = \sum_{j=1}^D a_j \cdot {\tilde{\vp}}_j(y,\xi) + \sum_{m \in \mathbb{Z}} e^{i\xi m}\sum_{j=1}^D a_j \cdot {\varphi}_0\big(t (y-y_j-m)\big).
\end{equation}
We note that $\lr{u,{\tilde{\vp}}_j(\xi)}_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} = a_j + O(t^{-1/2})$, uniformly in $u$. In particular, after increasing $t$, we can assume that $|a_j| \leq 2$. We take the Laplacian of \eqref{eq:4t} and bound below the $L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$-norm:
\begin{equations}
|\Delta u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq \left| \sum_{j=1}^D a_j t^2 \cdot (\Delta {\varphi}_0)\big(t(\cdot-y_j)\big) \right|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} -\left| \sum_{j=1}^D a_j \Delta {\tilde{\vp}}_j(\xi) \right|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}
\\
\geq \left( \sum_{j=1}^D a_j^2 t^2 \cdot |\Delta {\varphi}_0|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}^2 \right)^{1/2} - 2\sum_{j=1}^D |\Delta {\tilde{\vp}}_j(\xi)|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}
\\
\geq t \cdot |\Delta {\varphi}_0|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \cdot |a|_{\mathbb{C}^D} - 2\sum_{j=1}^D |\Delta {\tilde{\vp}}_j(\xi)|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}.
\end{equations}
In the second line we used that for $t$ sufficiently large and $j=1, \dots, D$, the supports of ${\varphi}_0\big(t (\cdot-y_j)\big)$ do not intersect.
The functions ${\tilde{\vp}}_j(\xi)$ do not depend on $t$. Therefore, if we pick $t$ sufficiently large, $|\Delta u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq 2C'$, where $C'$ is the constant in \eqref{eq:4u}. It follows that for all $\xi \in [0,2\pi]^2$, the vector spaces $\pazocal{F}_0(\xi) \oplus \pazocal{F}_+(\xi)$ and $\big[ {\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_D(\xi) \big]$ are in direct sum. The equivariance property extends this relation to all $\xi \in \mathbb{R}^2$.
We set $d = D+n+1$ and denote a smooth equivariant section of $\pazocal{F}_0 \oplus \pazocal{F}_+$ by ${\varphi}_{D+1}, \dots, {\varphi}_d$ (it exists by Step 1). Then
\begin{equation}
{\operatorname{Range}}\big(\Pi_+(\xi)\big) = \pazocal{F}_+(\xi) \subset \big[{\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\xi)\big].
\end{equation}
The equation \eqref{eq:4v} a fortiori implies \eqref{eq:1p}. After performing a Gran--Schmidt process on ${\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\xi)$, redefining these vectors if necessary, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Conclusion}\label{sec:44} Let ${\varphi}_1, \dots, {\varphi}_d$ be given by Lemma \ref{lem:1l} and $R_{12}(\xi)$, $R_{21}(\xi)$ defined according to \eqref{eq:1r}. Because of Lemma \ref{lem:1l}, \eqref{eq:1q} holds. Lemma \ref{lem:1a} implies
\begin{equation}
u \in \big[ {\varphi}_1(\cdot,\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\cdot,\xi)\big]^\perp \ \ \Rightarrow \ \ \big \langle \big( \widetilde{\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi) - \lambda_+ \big)u,u \big\rangle_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)} \geq |u|_{L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)}^2,
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{\mathbb{Q}}(x,\xi)= \psi\big(\widetilde{\mathbb{P}}(x,\xi)\big)$. We note that for $x_2$ sufficiently large, $\widetilde{\mathbb{P}}(x,\xi) = P_+(\xi)$.
Following \S\ref{sec:6.1}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5b}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}(E_+), \ \ \ \ E_+(\xi;\lambda) = -R_{21}(\xi) \big( Q_+(\xi) - \lambda \big)^{-1} R_{12}(\xi),
\end{equation}
where $Q_+(\xi) = \psi\big(P_+(\xi)\big)$. The operator $P_+$ has an $L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)$-spectral gap $[\lambda_0-2\epsilon,\lambda_0+2\epsilon]$. Moreover, we recall that for some $\lambda_1 \leq \lambda_0 -2\epsilon$, $\lambda_2 \geq \lambda_0+2\epsilon$,
\begin{equation}
\psi(\lambda) = \systeme{\lambda_1 \ \text{ if } \ \lambda \leq \lambda_0-2\epsilon \\
\lambda_2 \ \text{ if } \ \lambda \geq \lambda_0+2\epsilon}.
\end{equation}
It follows that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:5c}
Q_+(\xi) = \psi\big(P_+(\xi) \big) = \lambda_1 \Pi_+(\xi) + \lambda_2 \big( {\operatorname{Id}} - \Pi_+(\xi)\big).
\end{equations}
From \eqref{eq:5b} and \eqref{eq:5c}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
E_+(\xi;\lambda)^{-1} = R_{21}(\xi) \left( \dfrac{\Pi_+(\xi)}{\lambda-\lambda_1} + \dfrac{{\operatorname{Id}}-\Pi_+(\xi)}{
\lambda-\lambda_2}\right) R_{12}(\xi).
\end{equation}
Let $u_1(y,\xi), \dots, u_n(y,\xi) \in C^\infty({\mathbb{T}}^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2)$ be an orthonormal frame of the bundle $\pazocal{F}_+ \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^2$. It exists because $\mathbb{R}^2$ is contractible \cite[\S1]{Mo:01}. In general, this frame is not equivariant.
Because of \eqref{eq:1r}, $R_{21}(\xi) R_{12}(\xi) = {\operatorname{Id}}_{\mathbb{C}^d}$. Moreover, (a) ${\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\xi)$ form an orthonormal system in $L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$; (b) $u_{1}(\xi), \dots, u_{n}(\xi)$ form an orthonormal system in $L^2({\mathbb{T}}^2)$; (c) $\big[u_{1}(\xi), \dots, u_{n}(\xi)\big] \subset \big[ {\varphi}_1(\xi), \dots, {\varphi}_d(\xi)\big]$. Hence $R_{21}(\xi)u_1(\xi), \dots, R_{21}(\xi)u_n(\xi)$ form an orthonormal system in $\mathbb{C}^d$. There are fundamental consequences. First,
\begin{equation}
\Pi_1(\xi) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ R_{21}(\xi) \Pi_+(\xi) R_{12}(\xi) = \sum_{j=1}^n R_{21}(\xi)u_{j}(\xi) \otimes R_{21}(\xi)u_{j}(\xi)
\end{equation}
is an orthogonal projection in $\mathbb{C}^d$, which depends periodically on $\xi$. This allows us to define a bundle $\pazocal{G}_+ \rightarrow {\mathbb{T}}^2_*$ with fibers ${\operatorname{Range}} \big( \Pi_1(\xi) \big) \subset \mathbb{C}^d$. Second, the map $R_{12}(\xi)$ induces a bundle isomorphism between $\pazocal{E}_+ \rightarrow {\mathbb{T}}^2_*$ and $\pazocal{G}_+ \rightarrow {\mathbb{T}}^2$.
In particular, these two bundles have the same topology. This expresses $c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$ using the Berry curvature associated to $\Pi_1(\xi)$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5f}
c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) = \dfrac{i}{2\pi} \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2_*} \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \Big( \Pi_1(\xi) \big[ {\partial}_1 \Pi_1(\xi), {\partial}_2 \Pi_2(\xi) \big] \Big) d\xi.
\end{equation}
We now set $\Pi_2(\xi) = {\operatorname{Id}} - \Pi_1(\xi)$ and we obtain
\begin{equations}\label{eq:5e}
E_+(\xi;\lambda)^{-1} = \dfrac{\Pi_1(\xi)}{\lambda-\lambda_1} + \dfrac{\Pi_2(\xi)}{\lambda-\lambda_2}, \ \ \ \
E_+(\xi;\lambda) = (\lambda-\lambda_1) \Pi_1(\xi) + (\lambda-\lambda_2) \Pi_2(\xi).
\end{equations}
In particular, ${\partial}_\lambda E_+ = {\operatorname{Id}}_{\mathbb{C}^d}$. The formula \eqref{eq:5d} for ${\pazocal{J}}(E_+)$ simplifies substantially:
\begin{equations}
{\pazocal{J}}(E_+) \ \mathrel{\stackrel{\makebox[0pt]{\mbox{\normalfont\tiny def}}}{=}} \ -\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2_*}\int_{{\partial}\Omega} \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \left(\left(\dd{E_+}{\xi_1} E_+^{-1} \dd{ \big({\partial}_\lambda E_+ \cdot E_+^{-1}\big)}{\xi_2} \right)(\xi;\lambda) \right) \dfrac{d^1\lambda}{2i\pi} \dfrac{d\xi}{(2\pi)^2}
\\
= -\int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2_*}\int_{{\partial}\Omega} \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \left(\left(\dd{E_+}{\xi_1} E_+^{-1} \dd{ E_+^{-1}}{\xi_2} \right)(\xi;\lambda) \right) \dfrac{d^1\lambda}{2i\pi} \dfrac{d\xi}{(2\pi)^2}.
\end{equations}
Thanks to \eqref{eq:5e},
\begin{equations}
\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d} \left(\left( \dd{E_+}{\xi_1} E_+^{-1} \dd{E_-^{-1}}{\xi_2} \right)(\xi;\lambda) \right)
= \sum_{j,k,\ell = 1,2} \dfrac{\lambda-\lambda_j}{(\lambda-\lambda_k) (\lambda-\lambda_\ell)} \cdot \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d}\Big( \big({\partial}_1 \Pi_j \cdot \Pi_k \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_\ell\big)(\xi)\Big).
\end{equations}
We recall that ${\partial}\Omega$ encloses $\lambda_1$ but not $\lambda_2$. Hence, the integral
\begin{equation}
\int_{{\partial}\Omega} \dfrac{\lambda-\lambda_j}{(\lambda-\lambda_k) (\lambda-\lambda_\ell)} \dfrac{d\lambda}{2i\pi}
\end{equation}
equals $1$ if $j=k=\ell=1$; $j=2$, $k=\ell=1$; $j=k=2$, $\ell=1$; and $j=\ell=2$, $k=1$. It vanishes in all other cases. We deduce that
\begin{equations}\label{eq:0o}
\int_{{\partial}\Omega} \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d}\left(\left( \dd{E_+}{\xi_1} E_+^{-1} \dd{({\partial}_\lambda E_+ \cdot E_+^{-1})}{\xi_2}\right)(\xi;\lambda) \right) \dfrac{d^1\lambda}{2i\pi} \vspace*{-2mm}
\end{equations}
\begin{equations}
= \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d}\Big( \Big({\partial}_1 \Pi_1 \cdot \Pi_1 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_1 + {\partial}_1 \Pi_2 \cdot \Pi_1 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_1 + {\partial}_1 \Pi_2 \cdot \Pi_2 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_1 + {\partial}_1 \Pi_2 \cdot \Pi_1 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_2\Big)(\xi)\Big).
\end{equations}
The first and second term cancel out: ${\partial}_1 (\Pi_1 + \Pi_2) = 0$. We use ${\partial}_j \Pi_2 = -\Pi_1$ in the third and fourth term. Thus \eqref{eq:0o} equals
\begin{equations}
\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d}\Big( \Big(-{\partial}_1 \Pi_1 \cdot \Pi_2 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_1 + {\partial}_1 \Pi_1 \cdot \Pi_1 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_1\Big) (\xi) \Big).
\end{equations}
Since $\Pi_1 \Pi_2 = 0$, we get ${\partial}_1 \Pi_1 \cdot \Pi_2 = -\Pi_1 {\partial}_1 \Pi_2 = \Pi_1 {\partial}_1 \Pi_1$. Thus we end up with
\begin{equations}
\Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d}\Big( \Big(-\Pi_1 \cdot {\partial}_1\Pi_1 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_1 + {\partial}_1 \Pi_1 \cdot \Pi_1 \cdot {\partial}_2 \Pi_1\Big)(\xi) \Big) = - \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d}\Big( \Pi_1(\xi) \big[{\partial}_1\Pi_1(\xi),{\partial}_2 \Pi_1(\xi)\big]\Big).
\end{equations}
From this identity and \eqref{eq:5f}, we conclude that
\begin{equation}
{\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = {\pazocal{J}}(E_+) = \int_{{\mathbb{T}}^2_*} \Tr_{\mathbb{C}^d}\Big( \Pi_1(\xi) \big[{\partial}_1\Pi_1(\xi),{\partial}_2 \Pi_1(\xi)\big]\Big) \dfrac{d\xi}{(2\pi)^2} = -\dfrac{i}{2\pi} c_1(\pazocal{E}_+).
\end{equation}
In particular, $2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_0,P_+) = c_1(\pazocal{E}_+)$. The same procedure shows that $2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_0) = -c_1(\pazocal{E}_-)$. The formula \eqref{eq:1s} and $\pazocal{I}_e(P) = i {\pazocal{J}}_e(P)$ end the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:0}:
\begin{equation}
2i\pi \cdot {\pazocal{J}}_e(P_-,P_+) = c_1(\pazocal{E}_+) - c_1(\pazocal{E}_-).
\end{equation}
|
\section*{\Large Appendix}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/copied_1gram_frac_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Percent of all story unigrams that are in the prompt.}
\label{fig:copied_1gram}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/copied_2gram_frac_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Percent of all story bigrams that are in the prompt.}
\label{fig:copied_2gram}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/copied_3gram_frac_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Percent of all story trigrams that are in the prompt.}
\label{fig:copied_3gram}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{$n$-gram similarity between prompt and story, for $n=1,2,3$, for both models and all $k$. GPT2-117 copies many more $n$-grams from the prompt than the Fusion Model. See Section \ref{sec:story-prompt} for discussion.}
\label{fig:copied_ngram}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/prompt_entity_usage_rate_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{The proportion of all prompt named entities that are used in the story.}
\label{figs:p-en-usage}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{2em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/num_unique_entities_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{The number of unique named entities that appear in the story.}
\label{figs:num-en}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{Prompt entity usage rate (left) and mean number of unique named entities in the story (right), for both models and all $k$.
GPT2-117 generally uses a larger proportion of the prompt named entities, and more named entities overall, than the Fusion Model.
Both models generally use fewer named entities than human text when $k$ is less than vocabulary size.
See Section \ref{sec:story-prompt} for discussion.
}
\label{fig:entity-usage}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/avg_sent_len_word_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Mean sentence length for both models and all $k$. For both models, sentence length increases as $k$ increases. The spike at $k=1$ is due to long repeating sequences with no sentence-ending token.
See Section \ref{sec:syn} for discussion.}
\label{fig:sent_len}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/unique_1gram_ratio_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Distinct-1 (ratio of unique unigrams in the story to total number of generated unigrams in the story).}
\label{fig:unique_1gram_ratio}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/unique_2gram_ratio_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Distinct-2 (ratio of unique bigrams in the story to total number of generated bigrams in the story).}
\label{fig:unique_2gram_ratio}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/unique_3gram_ratio_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Distinct-3 (ratio of unique trigrams in the story to total number of generated trigrams in the story).}
\label{fig:unique_3gram_ratio}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{Distinct-$n$ for $n=1,2,3$, for both models and all $k$.
The ratios, which represent lexical diversity, increase as $k$ increases, with GPT2-117 reaching human levels at $k=2000$ for unigrams, $k=800$ for bigrams and $k=600$ for trigrams.
Lexical diversity is slightly higher for GPT2-117 than for the Fusion Model for equal $k$, but the primary determining factor is $k$.
See Section \ref{sec:diversity} for discussion.}
\label{fig:unique_ngram_ratio}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/postag_distinct_1.pdf}
\caption{POS tag distinct-1 (ratio of unique POS unigrams in the story to total number of generated POS unigrams in the story).}
\label{fig:postag_distinct1}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/postag_distinct_2.pdf}
\caption{POS tag distinct-2 (ratio of unique POS bigrams in the story to total number of generated POS bigrams in the story).}
\label{fig:postag_distinct2}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/postag_distinct_3.pdf}
\caption{POS tag distinct-3 (ratio of unique POS trigrams in the story to total number of generated POS trigrams in the story).}
\label{fig:postag_distinct3}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{POS tag distinct-$n$ metric for $n=1,2,3$, for both models and all $k$.
The ratios, which represent syntactic diversity, increase as $k$ increases, with GPT2-117 reaching human levels at $k=6000$ for unigrams, $k=9000$ for bigrams, and $k=6000$ for trigrams.
Syntactic diversity is slightly higher for GPT2-117 than for the Fusion Model for equal $k$, but the primary determining factor is $k$.
See Section \ref{sec:syn} for discussion.}
\label{fig:postag_distinctn}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\captionsetup[subfigure]{width=0.95\textwidth,justification=raggedright}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_VERB_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_NOUN_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_ADV_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_ADJ_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_DET_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_PRON_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_NUM_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.8in]{figures/postag_PROPN_usage.pdf}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Usage of different POS tags in the generated stories.
GPT2-117 tends to fit the human distribution more closely than the Fusion Model as $k$ approaches vocabulary size, in particular producing more specific POS categories such as Numeral and Proper Noun. When $k$ is small, generated text is characterized by more verbs and pronouns, and fewer nouns, adjectives, numerals and proper nouns, than human text.
See Section \ref{sec:syn} for discussion.}
\label{fig:postag_usage}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/mean_log_unigramprob_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{The mean log unigram probability of generated words.
Higher values indicate using fewer rare words while lower values indicate using more rare words.}
\label{fig:unigram_prob}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{2em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/stopwords_frac_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{The percent of generated words that are stopwords, for both models, across different $k$. We use the NLTK English stopword list.}
\label{fig:stopwords}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{Rare word usage metrics for both models and all $k$.
GPT2-117 produces slightly more rare words (left) and slightly fewer stopwords (right) than the Fusion Model, for equal values of $k$.
These rareness metrics do not reach human levels until $k$ is close to vocabulary size. See Section \ref{sec:diversity} for discussion.}
\label{fig:rareness_metrics}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/fusion_story_logprob_vs_k.pdf}
\label{fig:fusion_story_logprob_vs_k}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{2em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/gpt2_story_logprob_vs_k.pdf}
\label{fig:gpt2_story_logprob_vs_k}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{The mean total log probability of the story (150 words), as measured by the models on their own generated output and on human-written stories.
Interestingly, the Fusion Model (left) converges to the same probability it assigns to human-written stories as $k$ approaches vocabulary size, whereas GPT2-117 (right) converges to a lower probability. See Section \ref{sec:surprise} for discussion.}
\label{fig:story_logprob}
\end{figure*}
\clearpage
\begin{table*}[ht]
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{l}{\multirow{2.3}{*}{\textbf{Prompt:} A man finally discovers his superpower... well into his 80's.}}\\
\\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{l}{} \\
\textbf{Fusion Model ($k=10$)}: & \textbf{GPT2-117 ($k=10$)}: \\
\multirow{7}{*}{\begin{minipage}{3in} I \verbcol{be}{34.2225} a \nouncol{child}{77.08840000000002} . \verbcol{bear}{78.85439999999998} into a \nouncol{world}{69.88959999999999} of \nouncol{darkness}{61.622499999999995} , and in the \nouncol{world}{69.88959999999999} , there \verbcol{be}{34.2225} only a few \nouncol{people}{77.7924} . My \nouncol{mother}{73.96} and I \verbcol{be}{34.2225} always alone . She \verbcol{have}{38.1924} never \verbcol{be}{34.2225} like this . But , she \verbcol{have}{38.1924} no \nouncol{idea}{31.472100000000005} what we \verbcol{be}{34.2225} together to \verbcol{be}{34.2225} . We \verbcol{be}{34.2225} always alone . We \verbcol{be}{34.2225} always together . And , of \nouncol{course}{61.15240000000001} , she \verbcol{have}{38.1924} never \verbcol{exist}{40.7044} . But , I never \verbcol{think}{41.088100000000004} about it , \verbcol{be}{34.2225}cause she \verbcol{be}{34.2225} always alone . In the \nouncol{world}{69.88959999999999} , it was n't like she \verbcol{have}{38.1924} a \nouncol{power}{36.4816} . I \verbcol{be}{34.2225} always alone , and there \verbcol{be}{34.2225} a \nouncol{time}{49.9849} when the \nouncol{light}{67.40410000000001} \verbcol{would}{26.2144} \verbcol{turn}{55.35359999999999} on . There \verbcol{be}{34.2225} a \nouncol{time}{49.9849} when I \verbcol{could}{28.5156} \verbcol{see}{51.9841} the \nouncol{light}{67.40410000000001} , and I \verbcol{could}{28.5156} \verbcol{see}{51.9841} it in her \nouncol{eye}{79.21000000000001}s , and I \verbcol{could}{28.5156} \verbcol{see}{51.9841} the \nouncol{light}{67.40410000000001} , and I \verbcol{could}{28.5156} \verbcol{see}{51.9841} it \\ \\ Mean \nouncol{noun}{35} concreteness: 3.892 \\ Mean \verbcol{verb}{35} concreteness: 2.173 \end{minipage}} & \multirow{7}{*}{\begin{minipage}{3in}A \nouncol{man}{77.26409999999998} in an old white \nouncol{coat}{80.46089999999998} \verbcol{sit}{77.44000000000001} in a \nouncol{corner}{74.1321}. He \verbcol{wear}{57.91209999999999} a black \nouncol{jacket}{78.49959999999999} with a blue \nouncol{tie}{77.61609999999997}. His \nouncol{hair}{80.46089999999998} \verbcol{be}{34.2225} grey. His \nouncol{eye}{79.21000000000001}s \verbcol{be}{34.2225} black, but his \nouncol{voice}{66.09689999999999} \verbcol{be}{34.2225} deep and clear. He \verbcol{look}{48.4416} to where the \nouncol{man}{77.26409999999998} \verbcol{be}{34.2225} \verbcol{sit}{77.44000000000001}, and he \verbcol{see}{51.9841} a \nouncol{smile}{72.25} on his \nouncol{lip}{80.28160000000001}s. It \verbcol{be}{34.2225} a \nouncol{smile}{72.25} he \verbcol{know}{32.2624} he \verbcol{would}{26.2144} \verbcol{see}{51.9841} from his own \nouncol{eye}{79.21000000000001}s. But he \verbcol{be}{34.2225} too late. He \verbcol{be}{34.2225} on the \nouncol{sidewalk}{80.28160000000001} by the \nouncol{river}{79.03210000000001} when the \nouncol{man}{77.26409999999998} \verbcol{come}{45.15840000000001}. He \verbcol{be}{34.2225} \verbcol{wear}{57.91209999999999} a black \nouncol{coat}{80.46089999999998} with a purple \nouncol{tie}{77.61609999999997}. He \verbcol{have}{38.1924} a black \nouncol{tie}{77.61609999999997} and a white \nouncol{shirt}{79.92360000000002}. But he \verbcol{be}{34.2225} still \verbcol{wear}{57.91209999999999} a white \nouncol{suit}{80.46089999999998}. And it \verbcol{seem}{33.0625} he \verbcol{would}{26.2144} \verbcol{look}{48.4416} back at him. A \nouncol{smile}{72.25} on his \nouncol{face}{78.67690000000002}. A \verbcol{look}{48.4416} his \nouncol{friend}{49.9849} \verbcol{do}{41.7316} n't \verbcol{recognize}{36.8449}. He \verbcol{have}{38.1924} no \\ \\ Mean \nouncol{noun}{35} concreteness: 4.720 \\ Mean \verbcol{verb}{35} concreteness: 2.488\end{minipage}} \\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{l}{} \\
\textbf{Fusion Model ($k=1000$)}: & \textbf{GPT2-117 ($k=1000$)}: \\
\multirow{7}{*}{\begin{minipage}{3in}For a brief \nouncol{moment}{31.472100000000005}, the dark \nouncol{green}{65.12490000000001} of his \nouncol{eye}{79.21000000000001}s \verbcol{flash}{58.8289} the last \nouncol{line}{72.25}s of \nouncol{reality}{32.718399999999995} into \nouncol{existence}{30.6916}, finally \verbcol{fade}{41.99040000000001} slowly into \nouncol{existence}{30.6916} so that he \verbcol{could}{28.5156} not \verbcol{feel}{39.438399999999994} it. Only the \nouncol{million}{47.61000000000001}s of \nouncol{pixel}{62.884899999999995}s \verbcol{float}{65.12490000000001} in his peripheral \nouncol{vision}{54.612100000000005} almost \verbcol{disappear}{47.05959999999999}. His \nouncol{radio}{76.3876} \verbcol{respond}{44.089600000000004} to the pinging very hard \nouncol{silence}{53.7289} of the outside \nouncol{world}{69.88959999999999}. Seven \nouncol{people}{77.7924} \verbcol{have}{38.1924} \verbcol{visit}{62.7264} his main internal \nouncol{network}{51.84} for what \verbcol{seem}{33.0625} like a \nouncol{lifetime}{37.822500000000005} but this \nouncol{time}{49.9849}, the only \nouncol{switch}{65.12490000000001} to an external \nouncol{supply}{55.204899999999995} \nouncol{system}{48.163599999999995} that he \verbcol{could}{28.5156} simply \verbcol{take}{49.84360000000001} \nouncol{advantage}{36.0} of. Unable to \verbcol{convey}{32.718399999999995} \nouncol{feeling}{32.2624}s about the last \nouncol{word}{57.153600000000004}s he \verbcol{would}{26.2144} \verbcol{have}{38.1924} to \verbcol{endure}{36.0}, but it \verbcol{have}{38.1924} \verbcol{respond}{44.089600000000004} to the innumerable \nouncol{message}{63.52090000000001}s and countless sleepless \nouncol{hour}{50.41}s. Most of them \verbcol{be}{34.2225} always available on its \nouncol{surface}{68.2276}, just to \verbcol{make}{44.4889} sure. In his \nouncol{quest}{47.1969} for to \verbcol{spend}{48.024899999999995} \nouncol{eternity}{29.8116} on \nouncol{death}{59.752900000000004}, he \verbcol{send}{44.89} \\ \\ Mean \nouncol{noun}{35} concreteness: 3.201 \\ Mean \verbcol{verb}{35} concreteness: 2.435 \end{minipage}} & \multirow{7}{*}{\begin{minipage}{3in}( First \nouncol{time}{49.9849} \nouncol{poster}{74.9956}, \verbcol{hope}{27.5625} its \nouncol{ok}{37.33209999999999} ) The young \nouncol{boy}{76.7376}, \verbcol{watch}{74.1321} \nouncol{tv}{81.0}, \verbcol{spot}{67.40410000000001} the \nouncol{television}{77.9689} \nouncol{onscreen}{55.0564}, before \verbcol{glance}{55.95040000000001} around to \verbcol{see}{51.9841} the \nouncol{screen}{73.96} \verbcol{start}{45.0241} the \nouncol{countdown}{53.29} on the \nouncol{tv}{81.0}, \verbcol{point}{54.612100000000005} to the \nouncol{screen}{73.96} in `` It 's both the same. '' ``... \verbcol{let}{39.187599999999996} 's... \verbcol{let}{39.187599999999996} 's \verbcol{try}{38.68840000000001} this and... we \verbcol{will}{44.089600000000004} \verbcol{team}{60.6841} up so that... we \verbcol{can}{73.1025}... \verbcol{have}{38.1924} the same \nouncol{power}{36.4816}....like... so we \verbcol{can}{73.1025} \verbcol{use}{45.96839999999999} this \nouncol{superpower}{47.1969} over and over again. '' A brief \nouncol{silence}{53.7289}. Only a familiar \nouncol{conversation}{52.99839999999999}, \verbcol{interrupt}{49.0} his mad \nouncol{dash}{54.612100000000005} \nouncol{movement}{58.216899999999995}, \verbcol{follow}{52.7076} with his high \verbcol{pitch}{64.0} slurred and \verbcol{wither}{45.0241} \nouncol{voice}{66.09689999999999} : `` I ca n't \verbcol{stand}{66.5856} \nouncol{anyone}{44.89} \verbcol{talk}{65.12490000000001} like that son*s*. '' More casual \nouncol{conversation}{52.99839999999999} that \verbcol{interrupt}{49.0} his childish \nouncol{step}{72.93159999999999} \verbcol{be}{34.2225} \verbcol{rush}{47.61000000000001} to the \nouncol{scissor}{79.21000000000001}s. \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ Mean \nouncol{noun}{35} concreteness: 3.793 \\ Mean \verbcol{verb}{35} concreteness: 3.162 \end{minipage}} \\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\
\\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Generated stories from both models, under $k=10$ and $k=1000$.
Nouns are highlighted in green and verbs in yellow.
The highlighting intensity reflects the word's concreteness rating.
For equal $k$, GPT2-117 generally generates more concrete words than the Fusion Model.
For both models, low $k$ is characterized by high noun concreteness (e.g. physical objects such as \textit{jacket}) and low verb concreteness (e.g. non-physical actions such as \textit{be}).
Conversely, high $k$ is characterized by low noun concreteness (e.g. abstract concepts such as \textit{reality}) and high verb concreteness (e.g. physical actions such as \textit{talk}).
See Section \ref{sec:concrete} for discussion.}
\label{fig:concrete_ex}
\end{table*}
\clearpage
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/mean_concreteness_noun_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Mean concreteness rating (1-5) of nouns in the story.}
\label{fig:concreteness_noun}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{2em}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2in]{figures/mean_concreteness_verb_vs_k.pdf}
\caption{Mean concreteness rating (1-5) of verbs in the story.}
\label{fig:concreteness_verb}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{1em}
\caption{Mean concreteness rating of the nouns and verbs in the story, for both models and all $k$.
GPT2-117 generally produces nouns and verbs that are more concrete than the Fusion Model for the same $k$.
For both models, as $k$ increases, noun concreteness reduces and verb concreteness increases.
See Section \ref{sec:concrete} for discussion.}
\label{fig:concreteness}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}[b]
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l}
\hline \\
\begin{minipage}{6in} \begin{flushleft}\textbf{Prompt:} \textit{In an alternative reality where sleep is non-existent among living beings, our protagonist (spontaneously or after an event) falls asleep in which he/she experiences for the first time in human history what a dream is.} \end{flushleft}\end{minipage} \\ \\ \hline \\
\begin{minipage}{6in} \begin{flushleft}\textbf{GPT2-117 ($k=1000$):} \textit{I sat in my bed as my girlfriend sat behind me, buzzing into her e-reader, letting the day's stories write themselves on her's monitor. Like a blur, all the usual high-asyllabic drivel and senseless ramblings that normally attracted the attention of a horrid sleeping creature huddled about me like a faucet. She did not know how I placed this car with her. But I tried, first tried to ignore that I had hired the services of a dog to help and then quietly used it in a desperate bid to drive the car through the lawn. Each and every day, I watched her drool down an old dusty hardwood mattress her beady eyes trying desperately to think of this rotting dream.} [...] \end{flushleft}\end{minipage} \\ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{An example of syntactically natural but nonsensical text, generated with high $k$. Though the text is fluent and readable, it is surreal and bizarre. See Section \ref{sec:conclusion} for discussion.}
\label{tab:weird}
\end{table*}
\end{document} |
\section{Introduction}
\label{sect:intro}
There has been some recent progress in the microscopical explanation of the entropy of BPS AdS black holes, initiated with the counting of microstates for static magnetically charged AdS$_4\times S^7$ black holes \cite{Benini:2015eyy} and continued, more recently, with partial counting for electrically charged and rotating black holes in AdS$_5\times S^5$ \cite{Cabo-Bizet:2018ehj,Choi:2018hmj,Benini:2018ywd}. These results have been extended to other compactifications and other dimensions. The microscopic counting is achieved by computing, using localization, the logarithm $\log Z(\nu^I)$ of the grand-canonical partition function of the holographically dual field theory, which corresponds either to the topologically twisted index or the superconformal one, and obtaining the entropy via a Legendre transform with respect to a set of chemical potentials $\nu^I$. The gravitational counterpart of this computation is usually encoded in an {\it attractor mechanism} in the spirit of \cite{Ferrara:1996dd,Ferrara:1995ih,Ooguri:2004zv,Sen:2005wa}. In this approach, the black hole entropy is obtained by extremizing an entropy functional $\mathcal{I}(\nu^I)$ with respect to the horizon value $\nu^I$ of a set of scalar fields and other modes. For example, the field theory computation for AdS$_4$ black holes performed in \cite{Benini:2015eyy} perfectly matches with the attractor mechanism in $\mathcal{N}=2$ gauged supergravity \cite{Cacciatori:2009iz,DallAgata:2010ejj}. Since not for all black holes the attractor mechanism has been studied and found in supergravity, it is often useful to write directly, using combined field theory and gravity intuition, an entropy functional $\mathcal{I}(\nu^I)$ that reproduces the entropy of existing black holes. This approach was successfully used for electrically charged and rotating AdS$_5\times S^5$ black
holes in \cite{Hosseini:2017mds}, where it has been shown that the entropy functional has the remarkably simple form in terms of chemical potentials $\Delta^a$, $a = 1,2,3$, and $\omega_i$, $i=1,2$, conjugated, respectively, to the electric charges $Q_a$ and angular momenta $J_i$,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{HHZ}
\mathcal{I}(\Delta_a,\omega_i)= \mathrm{i} \pi N^2 \, \frac{\Delta^1\Delta^2\Delta^3}{\omega_1\omega_2} + 2 \pi \mathrm{i} \left (\sum_{a=1}^3 \Delta^a Q_a - \sum_{i=1}^2 \omega_i J_i\right) ,
\ee
with the constraint $\Delta^1+\Delta^2+\Delta^3 +\omega_1+\omega_2 = 1$, where $N$ is the number of colors of the dual $\mathcal{N}=4$ super Yang-Mills (SYM) theory. This result has been used in the later developments \cite{Cabo-Bizet:2018ehj,Choi:2018hmj,Benini:2018ywd}. Entropy functional for other electrically charged and rotating black holes in diverse dimensions has been later found in \cite{Hosseini:2018dob,Choi:2018fdc} and, in some cases, successfully compared to quantum field theory expectations, at least in particular limits. These entropy functionals can be also obtained by computing the zero-temperature limit of the on-shell action of a class of supersymmetric but nonextremal Euclidean black holes \cite{Cabo-Bizet:2018ehj,Cassani:2019mms}.
In this paper we provide a (field theory inspired) unifying entropy functional for spherical black holes and strings in AdS$_4\times S^7$ and AdS$_5\times S^5$ with arbitrary rotation and generic electric and magnetic charges. These include dyonic rotating black holes with a twist in AdS$_4\times S^7$ \cite{Cacciatori:2009iz,Katmadas:2014faa,Halmagyi:2014qza,Hristov:2018spe}, rotating black strings in AdS$_5\times S^5$ \cite{Benini:2013cda,Hosseini:2019lkt}, dyonic Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_4\times S^7$ \cite{Cvetic:2005zi,Hristov:2019mqp} and Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_5\times S^5$ \cite{Gutowski:2004ez,Kunduri:2006ek}.
In order to give a unifying picture it is convenient to use a four-dimensional point of view. All the above mentioned black objects can be dimensionally reduced to give four-dimensional rotating black hole solutions of an $\mathcal{N}=2$ gauged supergravity coupled to vector multiplets that can be studied using the methods in \cite{Hristov:2018spe,Hristov:2019mqp}. The relevant gauged supergravity arises as a consistent truncation of type IIB or M-theory and it is completely specified by a prepotential $\mathcal{F} (X^\Lambda)$ and a set of gauging, or Fayet-Iliopoulos parameters, $\{g^\Lambda,g_\Lambda \}$.
Our main result is the following. Consider a black hole with magnetic and electric charges encoded in the symplectic vector $\{ p^\Lambda, q_\Lambda \}$ and angular momentum $\mathcal{J}$.\footnote{The BPS conditions impose a linear constraint on the magnetic charges and some non-linear constraints among the remaining conserved quantities. These constraints are reflected in the constraints among chemical potentials.} The corresponding entropy functional
is given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{gluing}
\mathcal{I} ( p^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega) \equiv \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \left (\sum_{\sigma = 1}^2 \mathcal{B} \big(X^\Lambda_{(\sigma)} , \omega_{(\sigma)} \big) -2 \mathrm{i} \chi^\Lambda q_\Lambda - 2 \omega \mathcal{J} \right )\, ,
\ee
where $\chi^\Lambda$ and $\omega$ are the chemical potentials conjugated to $q_\Lambda$ and $\mathcal{J}$, respectively. The entropy functional is obtained by gluing a quantity that we dub \emph{gravitational block}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{B} (X^\Lambda , \omega) \equiv - \frac{\mathcal{F}(X^\Lambda)}{\omega} \, .
\ee
For black holes that are topologically twisted in four dimensions we use the \emph{$A$-gluing}
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}\label{Agluing}
X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} & = \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \omega \? p^\Lambda \, , \qquad && \omega_{(1)} = \omega \, , \\
X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} & = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \omega \? p^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{(2)} = - \omega \, .
\eea
while for the others we use the \emph{identity gluing} (\emph{id}-gluing)
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}\label{identitygluing}
X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} & = \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \omega \? p^\Lambda\, , \qquad && \omega_{(1)} = \omega \, , \\
X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} & = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \omega \? p^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{(2)} = \omega \, .
\eea
The functional $\mathcal{I}$ must be extremized with respect to the chemical potentials $\chi^\Lambda$ and $\omega$ conjugated to $q_\Lambda$ and $\mathcal{J}$, respectively, and subject to a constraint that depends on the model.
Details of the model, type of gluing and constraint are explicitly given in the following table for all the above mentioned black holes:
\begin{table}[H]
\begin{center}
\label{tab:table1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\, Black object & Gluing &Constraint & $\mathcal{F}(X^\Lambda)$ \\
\hline
\emph{m}AdS$_4$ & $A$-gluing & $g_\Lambda \chi^\Lambda = 2$ & $2\mathrm{i} \sqrt{X^0 X^1 X^2 X^3}$ \\
\hline
AdS$_5$ BS & $A$-gluing & $g_\Lambda \chi^\Lambda = 2$ & $\displaystyle\frac{X^1 X^2 X^3}{X^0_{~}}$\rule{0pt}{1.25\normalbaselineskip} \\
\hline
KN-AdS$_4$ & \emph{id}-gluing & $g_\Lambda \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \omega = 2$ & $2 \mathrm{i} \sqrt{X^0 X^1 X^2 X^3}$ \\
\hline
KN-AdS$_5$ & $A$-gluing & $g_\Lambda \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \omega \tanh (\delta) = 2$ & $\displaystyle\frac{X^1 X^2 X^3}{X^0_{~}}$\rule{0pt}{1.25\normalbaselineskip} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{In this table, \emph{m}AdS$_4$ refers to magnetically charged black holes in AdS$_4$ with a twist, BS$=$black strings and KN$=$Kerr-Newman. All the black objects in AdS$_5$ are considered after dimensional reduction to four dimensions. The prepotential and gaugings can be read off from the existing consistent truncations of AdS$_4\times S^7$ and AdS$_5\times S^5$. The gaugings are purely electric. In suitable normalizations we can set $g_\Lambda=1$ for AdS$_4$ black holes, $g_\Lambda=\{0,1,1,1\}$ for AdS$_5$ BS and $g_\Lambda =\sqrt{2}\{\cosh (\delta),1,1,1\}$ for KN-AdS$_5$. The extra parameter $\delta$ appearing in KN-AdS$_5$ is an artifact of dimensional reduction and its role is explained in section \ref{sec:KNAdS5}. Notice that KN black holes have no twist in five dimensions but acquire one upon dimensional reduction to four.}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The previous construction gives an explicit realization of the {\it attractor mechanism}. The extremal value of the functional $\mathcal{I}$ reproduces the entropy of the black hole
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S_{\text{BH}} (p^\Lambda , q_\Lambda , \mathcal{J}) = \mathcal{I} ( p^\Lambda, \chi^\Lambda , \omega) \Big|_{\text{crit.}} \, ,
\ee
and, as we will show, the extremal values of the quantities $X^\Lambda_{(1)}$ and $X^\Lambda_{(2)}$ can be identified with the values of the supergravity sections $X^\Lambda$ at the South pole (SP) and the North pole (NP) of the sphere in the near horizon region (see Fig.\,\ref{fig:1:GB}).
From this point of view, we can associate the two gravitational blocks entering in the gluing to the SP and NP of the sphere. The poles of the sphere are special because they are the two fixed points of the rotational symmetry.
This is in the spirit of previous formulations with rotation \cite{Astefanesei:2006dd,Hristov:2018spe}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\label{fig:1:GB}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[font=\footnotesize, scale=0.4]
\draw ellipse (2 and 4);
\draw (0,4) arc(90:270:4) ;
\draw[fill=blue] (-4,0) circle(0.3);
\node[left] at (-4.2,0) {${\rm SP}$};
\node[left] at (-4.9,-2) {$\mathcal{F}(X_{(1)}^\Lambda)$};
\draw (8,4) arc(90:270:2 and 4) ;
\draw[dashed] (8,-4) arc(-90:90:2 and 4) ;
\draw(8,-4) arc(-90:90:4) ;
\draw[fill=blue] (12,0) circle(0.3);
\node[right] at (12.2,0) {${\rm NP}$};
\node[right] at (12.9,-2) {$\mathcal{F}(X_{(2)}^\Lambda)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Gluing gravitational blocks}\label{fig:1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The entropy functional $\mathcal{I}$ reproduces all the known results in the literature and generalizes them. In particular, the functional with an $A$-gluing correctly reduces for $\omega=0$ to the standard attractor mechanism for static black holes with horizon geometry AdS$_2\times S^2$ \cite{Cacciatori:2009iz,DallAgata:2010ejj} for an arbitrary prepotential $\mathcal{F}$. Indeed, in the limit $\omega \rightarrow 0$, \eqref{gluing} becomes
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{sm}AdS$_{4}$}} ( p^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda) = \mathrm{i} \frac{\pi}{2 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \left ( p^\Lambda F_\Lambda(\chi) - q_\Lambda \chi^\Lambda \right ) ,
\ee
where, as usual, $F_\Lambda \equiv \partial_{\chi^\Lambda} \mathcal{F}$. This is equivalent to the attractor mechanism \cite{Cacciatori:2009iz,DallAgata:2010ejj}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S^{\text{\emph{sm}AdS$_{4}$}}_{\text{BH}} (p^\Lambda , q_\Lambda) = -\mathrm{i} \frac{\pi}{G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \frac{p^\Lambda F_\Lambda - q_\Lambda X^\Lambda}{g^\Lambda F_\Lambda - g_\Lambda X^\Lambda} \, ,
\ee
once we choose the convenient gauge $g_\Lambda X^\Lambda=2$ and we identify $X^\Lambda=\chi^\Lambda$.%
\footnote{Recall that the symplectic sections $X^\Lambda$ in supergravity are only defined up to rescaling. We will use this freedom often to find a convenient normalization for our quantities.
Recall also that in our models the magnetic gaugings vanish, $g^\Lambda=0$.} The quantity $\mathcal{I}$ also correctly reproduces the entropy functional \eqref{HHZ} for Kerr-Newman AdS$_5\times S^5$ black holes and the analogous one for
Kerr-Newman AdS$_4\times S^7$ black holes, as we discuss in sections \ref{sec:KNAdS4} and \ref{sec:KNAdS5}.
Furthermore, our entropy functional \eqref{gluing} extends these known results to the case of rotating twisted black holes in AdS$_4$ and to the case of Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_4$ with flavor magnetic charges.
The entropy functional for rotating black strings in AdS$_5$ was already discussed in \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt} and inspired this investigation.
Our gravitational construction is inspired and closely related to the construction of three-dimensional supersymmetric partition functions by gluing holomorphic blocks \cite{Beem:2012mb}.%
\footnote{The idea of ``gluing'' or ``sewing'' building blocks to compose field theory observables has been put forward in different context also earlier, \textit{cf.}\;\cite{Belavin:1984vu} and \cite{Nekrasov:2003vi} and references thereof. See also \cite{Pasquetti:2011fj,Hwang:2012jh,Imamura:2013qxa,Yoshida:2014ssa,Hwang:2015wna,Benini:2015noa,Nieri:2015yia,Gukov:2017kmk,Closset:2018ghr} for other related developments.}
In this context, most of the three-dimensional supersymmetric partition functions, and in particular the topologically twisted index and the superconformal one, can be written by gluing two holomorphic blocks according to the formula
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{Zhol}
Z(\Delta^\Lambda | \omega) = \sum_\alpha B^\alpha ( \Delta^\Lambda_{(1)} | \omega_{(1)} ) B^\alpha ( \Delta^\Lambda_{(2)} | \omega_{(2)} ) \, .
\ee
Here, the holomorphic block, $B^\alpha(\Delta^\Lambda |\omega)$, depends on the chemical potentials $\Delta^\Lambda$ for global symmetries and the equivariant parameter $\omega$, as well as
on a choice of Bethe vacuum for the two-dimensional theory obtained by reducing the theory on a circle. In applications to holography, we typically work in a saddle point approximation where one Bethe vacuum
dominates the sum \eqref{Zhol}. In this context, our gravitational blocks are holographically dual to holomorphic blocks in the Cardy limit (see \textit{e.g.}\;\cite[(2.22)]{Beem:2012mb} and \cite[(F.15)]{Closset:2018ghr})
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{Bethehol}
B^\alpha ( \Delta^\Lambda | \omega ) \underset{\omega \to 0}{\sim} \exp \bigg( \! -\frac{1}{\omega} \mathcal{W} ( x^\alpha , \Delta^\Lambda ) \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where $\mathcal{W} (x , \Delta^\Lambda )$ is the effective twisted superpotential of the two-dimensional theory and the Bethe vacua $x^\alpha$ are its critical points. It has been shown indeed in \cite{Hosseini:2016tor,Hosseini:2016cyf} that, upon the identification of $\Delta^\Lambda$ with $X^\Lambda$, and up to normalizations, the twisted superpotential evaluated on the Bethe vacuum which is relevant for holography%
\footnote{The on-shell twisted superpotential of many three-dimensional $\mathcal{N}=2$ Chern-Simons-matter gauge theories with holographic duals were computed in \cite{Hosseini:2016ume,Ray:2019lqb,Wearetookind:2019euv}.}
can be identified with the supergravity prepotential
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\label{ident}
& \mathcal{W} ( x^\alpha , \Delta^\Lambda ) \Big|_{\text{BA}} \equiv \widetilde \mathcal{W} (\Delta^\Lambda) = \mathcal{F} (X^\Lambda) \, ,
\eea
for all the theories that we discuss in this paper. The analogy can be pushed further. As discussed in section \ref{sec:mAdS4} and \ref{sec:BS}, the gravitational $A$-gluing \eqref{Agluing} precisely corresponds to the field theory gluing used for the topologically twisted index \cite{Nieri:2015yia}. The identity gluing \eqref{identitygluing} is not exactly identical to the one used for the superconformal index \cite{Nieri:2015yia}. However, the identification \eqref{ident} is valid for a particular range of the complex variables $\Delta^\Lambda$ that is not always respected by the field theory gluing. We expect that, taking into account the necessary redefinitions, the physics of the two gluings is the same. It is not impossible that there is an alternative and more clever way of rewriting \eqref{identitygluing}.
It would be interesting to derive our entropy functional from field theory. In particular, it is natural to conjecture that the large $N$ limit of the Legendre transform of the logarithm of the relevant topologically twisted index or superconformal index is given by the functional $\mathcal{I}$, either in full generality or in suitable limits. Many partial checks of this already exist in the literature.%
\footnote{This has been checked at large $N$ in full generality for static \emph{m}AdS$_4$ black holes \cite{Benini:2015eyy,Benini:2016rke}, rotating black strings in AdS$_5$ \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt}, KN-AdS$_5$ black holes with equal angular momenta \cite{Benini:2018ywd} and at large $N$ but in the Cardy limit for general purely electric KN-AdS$_4$ and KN-AdS$_5$ \cite{Choi:2018hmj,Choi:2019zpz}. It is still not known if the large $N$ limit of the superconformal index of $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM reproduces the entropy functional, and therefore the entropy, in the case of KN-AdS$_5$ black holes with \emph{unequal} angular momenta.}
We see that our functional seems to arise from a saddle point approximation of \eqref{Zhol} and it would be interesting to make this statement more precise.
The $\omega\rightarrow 0$ limit of \eqref{Zhol} has been analyzed in \cite{Closset:2018ghr} and shown to reproduce the Bethe ansatz formula that has been used to derive the entropy functional for static black holes in \emph{m}AdS$_4$. Unfortunately, a field theory computation
for rotating black holes in \emph{m}AdS$_4$ is still missing.
On the other hand, the entropy functional for rotating black strings in AdS$_5$ has been derived explicitly from the topologically twisted index in \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt} and it would be interesting to rederive the same result from \eqref{Zhol}. Our result suggests that the very crude Cardy approximation \eqref{Bethehol} gives the right result also for finite $\omega$, at least in the large $N$ limit. Finally, a similar but slightly different approach based on factorization of partition functions has been used to derive the entropy of Kerr-Newman AdS$_4$ black holes without magnetic charges in the Cardy limit in \cite{Choi:2019zpz} and it would be interesting to extend it to other cases as well.%
\footnote{See also \cite{Nian:2019pxj} for a different approach.}
Our entropy functional can be generalized to black objects in six and seven dimensions, including Kerr-Newman black holes \cite{Chow:2008ip,Cvetic:2005zi,Chow:2007ts} and magnetically charged twisted black objects \cite{Hosseini:2018usu,Benini:2013cda} in the AdS$_6 \times_w S^4$ background of massive type IIA supergravity \cite{Brandhuber:1999np} and in AdS$_7\times S^4$. The structure of the higher-dimensional gravitational blocks is discussed in section \ref{sec:higher}.
As a final note, we observe that the entropy functional \eqref{gluing} is strongly suggesting that some equivariant localization is at work in gravity. We will comment more on this in the discussion section.
This paper is organized as follows. In section \ref{sec:mAdS4} we discuss the general class of rotating black holes in AdS$_4$ with non-vanishing magnetic charge for the R-symmetry found in \cite{Hristov:2018spe}. In section \ref{sec:BS} we discuss the rotating black strings in AdS$_5$ found in \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt} and their reduction to four dimensions. In section \ref{sec:KNAdS4} we discuss the case of Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_4$ with magnetic charges for the flavor symmetries found in \cite{Hristov:2019mqp}. In section \ref{sec:KNAdS5} we discuss the case of Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_5\times S^5$ \cite{Gutowski:2004ez,Kunduri:2006ek} and their reduction to four dimensions, generalizing \cite{Hosseini:2017mds}. For all these examples we show that the extremization of the entropy functional \eqref{gluing} reproduces the entropy and that the values of the sections $X^\Lambda$ at the NP and SP of the sphere are directly related to the gluing quantities \eqref{Agluing} and \eqref{identitygluing} evaluated at the critical point of $\mathcal{I}$. In particular, this provides general analytical formulae for the critical point of the functional \eqref{gluing} that would be difficult to find with other methods.
In section \ref{sec:higher} we discuss the natural generalization of our construction to higher dimensions.
We conclude with discussion and outlook in section \ref{sect:Discussion}. Appendix \ref{app:A} contains some technical aspects of the relevant $\mathcal{N}=2$ gauged supergravity and the black hole solutions of \cite{Hristov:2018spe,Hristov:2019mqp}.
Appendix \ref{app:B} contains an example of our techniques applied to asymptotically flat black holes in four dimensions.
\section[Rotating black holes in \texorpdfstring{\emph{m}}{m}AdS\texorpdfstring{$_4$}{(4)}]{Rotating black holes in \emph{m}AdS$_4$}
\label{sec:mAdS4}
We first look at rotating black holes in AdS$_4$ with non-vanishing magnetic charge for the R-symmetry and near horizon AdS$_2 \times_w S^2$ \cite{Hristov:2018spe}.
The entropy of this class of black holes is supposed to be reproduced by the refined topologically twisted index of the holographically dual field theory on $S^2_\omega \times S^1$ \cite{Benini:2015noa}.
These solutions admit a static limit, originally found in \cite{Cacciatori:2009iz} in the purely magnetic case and in \cite{Katmadas:2014faa,Halmagyi:2014qza} in the dyonic case.
The non-vanishing magnetic charge means that the solutions are only asymptotically {\it locally} AdS$_4$, and the particular asymptotic spacetime was dubbed {\it magnetic} AdS$_4$ or just \emph{m}AdS$_4$ in \cite{Hristov:2011ye}.
This amounts to a partial topological $A$-twist on the two-sphere in the boundary field theory \cite{Hristov:2013spa}, so that some supersymmetry is preserved.
From the start we commit ourselves to the so-called \emph{magnetic} STU model of four-dimensional $\mathrm{U}(1)$ gauged supergravity.
It admits an embedding in the maximal $\mathrm{SO}(8)$ gauged supergravity in four dimensions and a further uplift on $S^7$ to eleven-dimensional supergravity \cite{Cvetic:1999xp}.
The dual field theory is ABJM \cite{Aharony:2008ug}, and in the absence of rotation this particular model provided the first successful microscopic counting for asymptotically AdS black holes \cite{Benini:2015eyy}.
The magnetic STU model is characterized by a prepotential
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{F} (X^\Lambda) = 2 \mathrm{i} \sqrt{X^0 X^1 X^2 X^3} \, ,
\ee
together with a purely electric gauging
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
G = \{g^{\Lambda}; g_{\Lambda} \} \, , \qquad g_\Lambda \equiv g \, , \qquad g^\Lambda = 0 \, .
\ee
We further choose to set $g=1$, thus fixing the AdS$_4$ scale $l^{2}_{\text{AdS}_4} = 1 / 2$.
See appendix \ref{app:A1} for a summary of the main features of four-dimensional ${\cal N}=2$ supergravity and the notations we employ for symplectic vectors and the quartic invariant $I_4$ we that will use in the following.
We are interested in the solution of \cite[sect.\,5]{Hristov:2018spe}, particularly in the near horizon geometry and attractor mechanism for the scalars. The full solution is characterized uniquely by the symplectic vector of gauging parameters $G$ introduced above, the conserved angular momentum $\mathcal{J}$, and the symplectic vector of conserved electromagnetic charges
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\Gamma = \{ p^\Lambda ; q_\Lambda \} \, .
\ee
The twisting condition imposes the following relation between the magnetic charges,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{twist1}
\sum_{\Lambda = 0}^{3} p^\Lambda = -1 \, .
\ee
All the relevant quantities can be expressed in terms of the quartic invariant
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}\label{eq:mSTUI4}
I_4(\Gamma)=&\? - (p^0 q_0 - p^i q_i)^2 + 4\,q_0 q_1 q_2 q_3 + 4\, p^0 p^1 p^2 p^3 \\
&\? + 4\? (p^1 p^2 q_1 q_2 + p^1 p^3 q_1 q_3 + p^2 p^3 q_2 q_3) \, .
\eea
The full solution for the metric, gauge fields and scalars is summarized in appendix \ref{app:A2}
and depends on the symplectic vector $\mathcal{H}_0$ and the extra parameter ${\rm j}$, which are then related to $\mathcal{J}, \Gamma, G$ via the attractor equations \eqref{eq:attr-twisted} and \eqref{eq:bigJ-twisted}.
The solution for $\mathcal{H}_0$ and ${\rm j}$ can be explicitly found in \cite[sect.\,5]{Hristov:2018spe}.
The main quantity of interest, the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, reads
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{BHmAdS4}
S^{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}}_{\text{BH}} (p , q, \mathcal{J}) = \frac{\pi}{2 \sqrt{2} G^{(4)}_{\text{N}}} \sqrt{F_2 + \sqrt{\Theta - 16 \mathcal{J}^2}} \, ,
\ee
where we defined
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
F_2 \equiv \frac14 I_4(\Gamma, \Gamma, G, G) \, , \qquad \Theta \equiv (F_2)^2 - 16\? I_4 (\Gamma) \, ,
\ee
in agreement with $\Theta$ and $F_2$ in \cite[app.\,A]{Benini:2015eyy}.
In the case of vanishing electric charges, $\Gamma = \{p^{\Lambda}; 0\}$,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
F_2 = \sum_{\Lambda < \Omega} p^\Lambda p^\Omega - \sum_{\Lambda = 0}^3 ( p^\Lambda )^2 \, , \qquad \Theta = (F_2)^2 - 64\? p^0 p^1 p^2 p^3 \, ,
\ee
while in general when $q_\Lambda \neq 0$ the explicit expressions are rather long and not particularly illuminating.
The chemical potential $w$ conjugate to the angular momentum \cite{Hristov:2018spe} is given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{w:mAdS4}
w = \frac{2 \sqrt{2}\? {\cal J}}{\sqrt{\Theta - 16\? {\cal J}^2}\? \sqrt{F_2 + \sqrt{\Theta - 16 \mathcal{J}^2}} } \, .
\ee
We will first look at the general attractor mechanism predicted from the gluing procedure. After that we will describe the solution for the symplectic sections $X^\Lambda$ at the near horizon,
initially in a simplified setting with reduced number of charges and then in general.
\subsection{Attractor mechanism}
From here on we use a ``field theoretical normalization'' for the magnetic charges $\mathfrak{p}^\Lambda = - 2 p^\Lambda$, that allows for a better comparison with existing literature \cite{Benini:2015eyy,Benini:2016rke}.
The twisting condition \eqref{twist1} becomes
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\sum_{\Lambda=0}^3 \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda =2 \, ,
\ee
corresponding to the fact that the superpotential of ABJM \cite{Aharony:2008ug} has R-charge two.
In a model with a topological twist, we need to use the $A$-gluing \eqref{Agluing} that, in the new normalization, reads
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} & = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , \qquad && \omega_{(1)} = \omega \, , \\
X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} & = \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{(2)} = - \omega \, ,
\eea
and the constraint on chemical potentials is
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{const:mAdS4}
\sum_{\Lambda=0}^3 \chi^\Lambda =2 \, ,
\ee
where we have set $g_\Lambda=1$.
The entropy functional is then given by \eqref{gluing}:
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{entropy:functional:mAdS}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) \equiv \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}}
\left( \mathcal{E}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) - 2 \mathrm{i} \chi^\Lambda q_\Lambda - 2 \omega \mathcal{J} \right )
+ \lambda \bigg( \sum_{\Lambda = 0}^3 \chi^\Lambda - 2 \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) = - \frac{2 \mathrm{i}}{\omega} \left ( \sqrt{X_{(1)}^0 X_{(1)}^1 X_{(1)}^2 X_{(1)}^3} -\sqrt{X_{(2)}^0 X_{(2)}^1 X_{(2)}^2 X_{(2)}^3} \right ) ,
\ee
and we introduced a Lagrange multiplier to enforce the constraint on chemical potentials \eqref{const:mAdS4}.
Note that due to the presence of a square root there are sign ambiguities to take into account when performing the extremization. They correspond to different branches in the parameter space of the black hole solution. Notice that not all solutions that lead to a positive value for $\mathcal{I}$ correspond to regular black holes. One should also check that there are no other singularities in the metric and this may restrict the range of the allowed conserved charges. This analysis can be only done case by case.
We first state the general result. The attractor mechanism works as follows. The values of the sections at the SP $(\theta = 0)$ and the NP $(\theta = \pi)$ of the sphere are given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{eq:mads4sections}
X^\Lambda_{\text{SP, NP}} =\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \Big( \bar \chi^\Lambda \pm \mathrm{i} \frac{\bar \omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \Big) \, , \qquad \Lambda = 0 , \ldots, 3 \, ,
\ee
where $\bar \chi$ and $\bar \omega$
are the critical points of the functional \eqref{entropy:functional:mAdS}. We see that the values of the sections can be identified with the critical values of the gluing quantities $X^{\Lambda}_{(\sigma)}$ as
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
X^\Lambda_{\text{SP}} =\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \, X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} \, \Big|_{\text{crit.}} \, , \qquad\qquad X^\Lambda_{\text{NP}} =\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \, X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} \, \Big|_{\text{crit.}} \, , \qquad \Lambda = 0 , \ldots, 3 \, .
\ee
Moreover, we find that
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation} S^{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}}_{\text{BH}} (p^\Lambda , q_\Lambda, \mathcal{J} ) = \mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \bar \chi^\Lambda , \bar \omega ) \, . \ee
The entropy functional \eqref{entropy:functional:mAdS} generalizes the known result for static black holes, $\mathcal{J} = 0$, by taking the limit $\omega \rightarrow 0$,\footnote{Here we have taken the negative determination for the square root that is the one leading to regular black hole solutions \cite{Benini:2015eyy}. We inherit from \cite{Hristov:2018spe} an unfortunate choice of sign for the prepotential that leads to ambiguities in the comparison with the literature and we apologize to the reader for that.}
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{\emph{sm}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda) &= - \sqrt{\chi^0 \chi^1 \chi^2 \chi^3} \sum_{\Lambda = 0}^3 \frac{\mathfrak{p}^\Lambda}{\chi^\Lambda}
\, , \\
S^{\text{\emph{sm}AdS$_{4}$}}_{\text{BH}} (p^\Lambda , q_\Lambda) &= \mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{sm}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda) \Big|_{\text{crit.}} \, .
\eea
This is precisely the result obtained in \cite{Benini:2015eyy,Benini:2016rke} upon identifying the variables $\Delta^\Lambda$ used in \cite{Benini:2015eyy,Benini:2016rke} with $\pi \chi^\Lambda$. In order to compare with field theory one also needs to use
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{AdS4:CFT3:dict}
\frac{1}{G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} = \frac{4 \sqrt{2}}{3} N^{3/2} \, .
\ee
\subsection[The purely magnetic \texorpdfstring{T$^3$}{T**3} model]{The purely magnetic T$^3$ model}
The T$^3$ model is obtained by setting
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{three:eq:sections}
\chi^{1,2,3} = \chi \, , \qquad \chi^0 = 2 - 3 \chi \, ,
\ee
and, similarly, for the magnetic fluxes
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{three:eq:fluxes}
\mathfrak{p}^{1,2,3} = \mathfrak{p} \, , \qquad \mathfrak{p}^0 = 2 - 3 \mathfrak{p} \, ,
\ee
while here for simplicity we set the electric charges to zero.
Therefore,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
F_2 = - ( 1 - 6 \mathfrak{p} + 6 \mathfrak{p}^2 ) \, , \qquad \Theta = ( 1 - 2 \mathfrak{p} )^3 ( 1 - 6 \mathfrak{p} ) \, .
\ee
The values of the sections $X^0 (\theta)$ and $X^1 (\theta) = X^2 (\theta) = X^3 (\theta)$ at the horizon can be computed using \eqref{horsec} and when specified to the NP ($\theta = \pi$) and SP ($\theta = 0$) read
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& X^\Lambda_{\text{SP}} - X^\Lambda_{\text{NP}} = w \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , \qquad \Lambda = 0 , \ldots, 3 \, , \\
& X^0_{\text{SP}} + X^0_{\text{NP}} = \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2\? \sqrt{\Theta - 16\? \mathcal{J}^2}}\? \left( 3 - 12 \mathfrak{p} (1 - \mathfrak{p}) + \sqrt{\Theta - 16\? \mathcal{J}^2} \right) , \\
& X^1_{\text{SP}} + X^1_{\text{NP}} = \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2\? \sqrt{\Theta - 16\? \mathcal{J}^2}}\? \left( -1 + 4 \mathfrak{p} (1 - \mathfrak{p}) + \sqrt{\Theta - 16\? \mathcal{J}^2} \right) ,
\end{aligned}
\ee
where we need to take $\mathfrak{p} < 0$ in order to find regular black hole solutions, and the angular momentum is constrained in the range $|\mathcal{J}| < \sqrt{\Theta} / 4$.%
\footnote{More generally, in the full STU model with vanishing electric charges, the regions of positivity for $\mathfrak{p}^{1,2,3}$ where regular black holes exist were determined in \cite[app.\,A]{Benini:2015eyy} and the rotation is bounded above, $|\mathcal{J}| < \sqrt{\Theta} / 4$. In the most general case with electric charges one again requires positive scalars and $\Theta > 0$ with the same bound on $\mathcal{J}$, but due to the big number of free parameters the regions of positivity are much harder to determine and we have not pursued this here.}
We have then checked numerically that the values of the sections at the SP and the NP of the sphere are given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
X^\Lambda_{\text{SP, NP}} =\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \Big( \bar \chi^\Lambda \pm \mathrm{i} \frac{\bar \omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \Big) \, , \qquad \Lambda = 0 , \ldots, 3 \, ,
\ee
where $\bar \chi$ and $\bar \omega = - 2 w$
are the critical points of the functional $\mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}} (\mathfrak{p} , \chi , \omega)$ in \eqref{entropy:functional:mAdS}. We have also checked that the critical value of the entropy functional reproduces the entropy \eqref{BHmAdS4} of the rotating black holes
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S^{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}}_{\text{BH}} ( p^\Lambda , q_\Lambda, \mathcal{J} ) = \mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \bar \chi^\Lambda , \bar \omega ) \, ,
\ee
where again, just as in the static case, one has to take the negative determination for the square root in $\mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}}$.
Notice the supergravity attractor mechanism provides general \emph{analytic} formulae for the critical point of the functional \eqref{entropy:functional:mAdS} that are very difficult to find by a direct extremization.
\subsection{The general case}
In the general case there are at most six free parameters $\mathfrak{p}^{1,2,3}, \mathcal{J}, q_{1,2}$, since the electric charges are constrained by the requirement that there are no NUT charges, see \eqref{eq:twistedconstraint}. One needs indeed to ensure that
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
I_4 (G, \Gamma, \Gamma, \Gamma) = I_4 (\Gamma, G, G, G) = 0\ .
\ee
The second constraint gives a linear constraint that can be easily solved by $q_0 = -(q_1+q_2+q_3)$ while the first constraint gives a more complicated cubic relation among charges.
The general expressions in the case of arbitrary charges are much more involved, but one can check numerically that the black hole entropy is still given by the critical value of $\mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{m}AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega )$. \eqref{eq:mads4sections} holds in full generality as well.
In the static case $\mathcal{J}=0$ there is a microscopic counting of the entropy using field theory methods that identifies $\frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \mathcal{E}( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \bar \chi^\Lambda , 0)$ with the logarithm of the topologically twisted index of ABJM \cite{Benini:2015eyy,Benini:2016rke}. An analogous computation for rotating black holes would involve the \emph{refined} topologically twisted index defined in \cite{Benini:2015noa} and is still missing. As already mentioned in the introduction, our result suggests that the Cardy approximation \eqref{Bethehol} is actually exact and gives the right result also for finite $\omega$, at least in the large $N$ limit.
\section[Rotating black strings in AdS\texorpdfstring{$_5$}{(5)}]{Rotating black strings in AdS$_5$}
\label{sec:BS}
Our next example comes from the recently spelled out solutions of rotating AdS$_5$ black strings with near horizon BTZ$\times_w S^2$ \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt}.
Just like our previous example, the solutions we discuss here preserve supersymmetry by a twist on $S^2$ and admit a static limit.
The static solutions, with only magnetic charges, were originally found and understood as holographic RG flows across dimensions in \cite{Benini:2013cda}.
In particular, we have a flow from a UV four-dimensional $\mathcal{N}=1$ theory compactified on $S^2$ to a two-dimensional $(0,2)$ theory in the IR whose exact central charges can be obtained employing $c$-extremization \cite{Benini:2012cz,Benini:2013cda}.
Due to the 4D/5D connection \cite{Gaiotto:2005gf,Behrndt:2005he} between solutions in gauged supergravity,
one can also understand these AdS$_5$ black strings as four-dimensional black holes in an asymptotically runaway spacetime \cite{Hristov:2014eza} and exploiting the relation also add electric charges \cite{Hristov:2014hza}.
Following \cite{Hosseini:2016cyf}, the \emph{refined} topologically twisted indices \cite{Benini:2015noa} of $\mathcal{N}=1$ quiver gauge theories on $S^2_\omega \times T^2$ dual to rotating AdS$_5$ strings
were recently computed in \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt} in the Cardy limit giving a microscopic derivation of the entropy of this class of solutions.
Consider the \emph{electric} STU model in four dimensions. It is related to the five-dimensional gauged STU model via the 4D/5D connection
and thus it also admits an embedding in maximal $\mathrm{SO}(6)$ gauged supergravity in five dimensions. A further uplift on $S^5$ gives a solution of type IIB supergravity in ten dimensions \cite{Cvetic:1999xp}.
The holographically dual field theory is therefore $\mathrm{SU}(N)$ $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM.
The electric STU model is characterized by a prepotential
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{F} (X^\Lambda) = \frac{X^1 X^2 X^3}{X^0} \, ,
\ee
and we have the purely electric gauging coming from the Kaluza-Klein reduction of the five-dimensional theory
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
G = \{g^{\Lambda}; 0 , g_{i} \} \, , \qquad g_i \equiv g \, , \qquad g^\Lambda = 0 \, .
\ee
We set $g=1$ for simplicity.\footnote{This choice amounts to setting the five-dimensional gauge coupling constant to $g_{(5)} = 1/\sqrt{2}$.} The symplectic vector of electromagnetic charges in this case reads
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\Gamma = \{ 0 , p^i ; q_\Lambda \} \, ,
\ee
with the twisting condition
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\sum_{i = 1}^{3} p^i = -1 \, .
\ee
The condition $p^0 = 0$ stems from the fact that a compactification down to four dimensions along the length of the black string does \emph{not} introduce any magnetic charge.
The quartic invariant for the electric STU model can be written as
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\label{eq:I4electricstu}
I_4 (\Gamma) =& 4\? q_0 p^1 p^2 p^3 - \sum_{i = 1}^3 (p^i q_i)^2 + 2 \sum_{i<j}^3 q_i p^i q_j p^j\\
&- p^0 \bigg( 4\? q_1 q_2 q_3 + p^0 (q_0)^2 + 2\? q_0\? \sum_{i=1}^3 p^i q_i \bigg) \, ,
\eea
where the second row vanishes in the present case.
Again, the solution can be completely described in terms of ${\rm j}$ and $\mathcal{H}_0$ that are uniquely fixed by the symplectic vectors $G, \Gamma$, as well as the angular momentum $\mathcal{J}$ as summarized in appendix \ref{app:A2}.
The explicit solution for ${\rm j}$ and $\mathcal{H}_0$ can be found in \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt}.
In order to have a regular solution with a vanishing NUT charge we further require that, see \eqref{eq:twistedconstraint},
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
q_3 = \frac{p^1 ( p^1 - p^2 - p^3 ) q_1 - p^2 ( p^1 - p^2 + p^3 ) q_2}{p^3 ( p^1 + p^2 - p^3 )} \, .
\ee
We then find the following expression for the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the four-dimensional black holes,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S^{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}}_{\text{BH}} \left( \mathfrak{p}^i , q_\Lambda , \mathcal{J} \right) = \frac{\pi}{G^{(4)}_{\text{N}}}\? \sqrt{\frac{- I_4(\Gamma)- {\cal J}^2}{\Theta}} \, ,
\ee
where we used
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \Pi = ( - p^1 + p^2 + p^3) ( p^1 - p^2 + p^3 ) ( p^1 + p^2 - p^3 ) \, , \\
& \Theta = \sum_{i=1}^3 (p^i)^2 - 2 \sum_{i < j}^3 p^i p^j \, , \qquad \Theta - \Pi = 8\? p^1 p^2 p^3 \, .
\end{aligned}
\ee
The chemical potential conjugate to the angular momentum is also given by \eqref{eq:twsitedchempotJ},
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
w = -\frac{{\cal J}}{\sqrt{\Theta (- I_4(\Gamma) - {\cal J}^2)}} \, .
\ee
Finally, the sections in the near horizon region are found to be
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^0 (\theta) & = 2\? \frac{p^1 p^2 p^3}{\sqrt{\Theta \? \Xi (\theta)}} \, , \\
X^i (\theta) & = \frac{ p^i {\cal J} \cos (\theta)}{\sqrt{\Theta \? \Xi (\theta)}}
+ \mathrm{i}\? \frac{ p^i ( 2\? p^i + 1 )}{\Theta}
+2\? \frac{p^1 p^2 p^3}{( 2\? p^i + 1 ) \sqrt{\Theta\? \Xi (\theta)}} \bigg( \! q_i - \sum_{i=1}^3 q_i \! \bigg) \, , \quad i = 1, 2 , 3 \, ,
\eea
where we defined
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\Xi (\theta) \equiv (- I_4(\Gamma) - {\cal J}^2) + \frac{\Theta}{\Pi} {\cal J}^2 \sin^2 (\theta) \, .
\ee
\subsection{Attractor mechanism}
Since the theory is still topologically twisted in four dimensions, we need to use
again the $A$-gluing \eqref{Agluing}:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} & = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , \qquad && \omega_{(1)} = \omega \, , \\
X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} & = \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{(2)} = - \omega \, .
\eea
where we used the ``field theory'' magnetic charges $\mathfrak{p}^\Lambda = - 2 p^\Lambda$.
There are only three non-vanishing magnetic charges and they satisfy
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation} \sum_{i=1}^3 \mathfrak{p}^i =2 \, ,\ee
corresponding to the fact that the superpotential of $\mathcal{N}=4$ super Yang-Mills (SYM) has R-charge two.
The entropy functional \eqref{gluing} is given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{BSI}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}} ( \mathfrak{p}^i , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) \equiv \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}}
\left( \mathcal{E}_{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}}( \mathfrak{p}^i , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) - 2 \mathrm{i} \chi^\Lambda q_\Lambda - 2 \omega \mathcal{J} \right )
+ \lambda \bigg( \sum_{i = 1}^3 \chi^i - 2 \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{BSI2}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}} ( \mathfrak{p}^i , \chi^\Lambda , \omega) = - \frac{\mathrm{i}}{\chi^0} \left( \chi^1 \chi^2 \mathfrak{p}^3 + \chi^3 \chi^1 \mathfrak{p}^2 + \chi^2 \chi^3 \mathfrak{p}^1 - \frac{\omega^2}{4} \mathfrak{p}^1 \mathfrak{p}^2 \mathfrak{p}^3 \right) .
\ee
Here, we introduced the Lagrange multiplier $\lambda$ to enforce the constraint on the chemical potentials.
Notice that we can also write
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}} ( \mathfrak{p}^i , \chi^\Lambda , \omega) = - \mathrm{i} \sum_{i=1}^3 \mathfrak{p}^i \frac{\partial \mathcal{F}(\chi) } {\partial \chi^i} + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega^2}{24} \sum_{i,j,k=1}^3 \mathfrak{p}^i \mathfrak{p}^j \mathfrak{p}^k \frac{\partial^3 \mathcal{F}(\chi) } {\partial \chi^i\partial \chi^j\partial \chi^k} \, .
\ee
As a difference with the \emph{m}AdS$_4$ black holes of section \ref{sec:mAdS4}, here the Taylor series expansion of the entropy functional \eqref{gluing} truncates at order $\mathcal{O}(\omega^2)$ since the prepotential is cubic in the
variables $X^1$, $X^2$ and $X^3$ associated with nonzero magnetic charges.
As it has already been checked in \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt}, the attractor mechanism works perfectly. The values of the sections at the SP $(\theta = 0)$ and the NP $(\theta = \pi)$ are given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
X^\Lambda_{\text{SP, NP}} =\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \Big( \bar \chi^\Lambda \pm \mathrm{i} \frac{\bar \omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \Big) \, , \qquad \Lambda = 0 , \ldots, 3 \, ,
\ee
where $\bar \chi$ and $\bar \omega = - 2 w$
are the critical points of the functional $\mathcal{I}_{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}} ( \mathfrak{p}^i , \chi^\Lambda , \omega )$. Moreover,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S^{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}}_{\text{BH}} (p^i , q_\Lambda , \mathcal{J}) = \mathcal{I}_{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}} ( \mathfrak{p}^i , \bar \chi^\Lambda , \bar \omega) \, .
\ee
In order to compare with \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt} we need the redefinitions
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
& \beta = - \frac{\mathrm{i} \pi}{2} \chi^0 \, , \qquad &&\omega_{\text{there}} = \mathrm{i} \pi \omega_{\text{here}} \, , \\
& \Delta_i = \pi \chi^i \, , && i = 1 , 2 , 3 \, , \\
& e_0 = \frac{1}{2 \sqrt{2} G^{(4)}_{\text{N}}} q_0 \, , && J = - \frac{1}{2 G^{(4)}_{\text{N}}} \mathcal{J} \, , \\
& e_i = \frac{1}{2 \sqrt{2} g_{(5)} G^{(4)}_{\text{N}}} q_i \, , && i = 1 , 2 , 3 \, .
\eea
We note also the holographic relations
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
G^{(4)}_{\text{N}} = \frac{1}{2 \pi} G^{(5)}_{\text{N}} \, , \qquad \frac{1}{g_{(5)}^3 G^{(5)}_{\text{N}}} = \frac{2}{\pi} N^{2} \, .
\ee
In \cite{Hosseini:2019lkt} the functional $\mathcal{E}_{\text{AdS$_{5}$\,BS}}$ \eqref{BSI} was explicitly derived as the logarithm of the refined topologically twisted index of $\mathcal{N}=4$ SYM in the Cardy limit, thus providing a microscopic explanation of the entropy
of the four-dimensional black holes discussed in this section.
\section[Kerr-Newman-AdS\texorpdfstring{$_4$}{(4)}]{Kerr-Newman-AdS$_{4}$}
\label{sec:KNAdS4}
Now let us we focus on the \emph{dyonic} Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_4$ with vanishing magnetic charge for the R-symmetry \cite{Hristov:2019mqp},
whose entropy is supposed to be reproduced by the generalized superconformal index of the holographically dual field theory on $S^2 \times S^1$ \cite{Kapustin:2011jm}.
Due to the vanishing magnetic flux for the R-symmetry, the asymptotic spacetime in this case is \emph{global} AdS$_4$ and thus full superconformal symmetry is preserved at the boundary.
However, we allow for magnetic fluxes for the extra flavor symmetries that are coming from the additional $\mathrm{U}(1)$ vector multiplets in the supergravity model. These additional fluxes break half of the supersymmetries at the boundary, in accordance with the generalized superconformal index.
We again consider the magnetic STU model with an uplift on $S^7$ to eleven dimensions.
The model is specified by the prepotential
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{F} (X^\Lambda) = 2 \mathrm{i} \sqrt{X^0 X^1 X^2 X^3} \, ,
\ee
and the purely electric gauging
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
G = \{g^{\Lambda}; g_{\Lambda} \} \, , \qquad g_\Lambda \equiv g \, , \qquad g^\Lambda = 0 \, .
\ee
We again set $g = 1$, fixing the AdS$_4$ length scale $l^{2}_{\text{AdS}_4} = 1 / 2$. The charge vector reads
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\Gamma = \left\{ p^\Lambda ; q_\Lambda \right\} \, ,
\ee
with the same quartic invariant as in \eqref{eq:mSTUI4} and with the constraint that the R-symmetry magnetic flux vanishes,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{P:constraint:KNAdS4}
\sum_{\Lambda = 0}^3 p^\Lambda = 0 \, .
\ee
The equations governing the solution, and consequently the solutions themselves, are much more involved in this case than for the twisted cases of the previous two sections. However, conceptually one again finds that the solution is entirely fixed by the symplectic vectors $G$ and $\Gamma$. Note that the angular momentum $\mathcal{J}$ in this case is never vanishing and is also uniquely fixed in terms of the electromagnetic charges. The near horizon solution is summarized in appendix \ref{app:A3} and fixed in terms of the symplectic vector $\mathcal{C}$, which by the algebraic attractor equations depends on the charges, see \eqref{attr:eq:KNAdS4}. Unfortunately, in this case we cannot present in full generality a formula that gives $\mathcal{C}$ in terms of $G$ and $\Gamma$, but one can always write down a complete solution in terms of auxiliary parameters entering $\mathcal{C}$ and then express all physical quantities in terms of them.
A very general solution, corresponding to four independent electric and one independent magnetic charge, can be written by the following parameterization of the vector $\mathcal{C}$,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{eq:C-parameterization}
\mathcal{C} = \left\{ - \alpha , \alpha , - \alpha \? \frac{\beta_0 - \beta_1}{\beta_2 - \beta_3} , \alpha \? \frac{\beta_0 - \beta_1}{\beta_2 - \beta_3} ; \beta_\Lambda \right\} .
\ee
This form of $\mathcal{C}$ already satisfies the regularity constraints, see \eqref{eq:KNregularity}, and contains five out of the maximally allowed six independent parameters satisfying these conditions. It contains the purely electric KN-AdS$_4$ in the general STU model \cite{Cvetic:2005zi,Hristov:2019mqp}, the general dyonic $X^0 X^1$ model \cite{Hristov:2019mqp}, as well as more general solutions.
The values of the conserved charges, the sections and the macroscopic entropy can be determined in terms of the parameters $\alpha, \beta_\Lambda$ in \eqref{eq:C-parameterization} via the formulae given in appendix \ref{app:A3}.
We first turn to the gluing formula and then check explicitly that it correctly predicts the attractor mechanism in several special cases of particular interest, therefore showing the general validity of the gluing procedure.
We choose not to present explicitly the most general allowed solution for $\mathcal{C}$ since expressions soon become very cumbersome.
\subsection{Attractor mechanism}
Since there is no topological twist, we use the identity gluing \eqref{identitygluing}:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} & = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , \qquad && \omega_{(1)} = \omega \, , \\
X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} & = \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{(2)} = \omega \, ,
\eea
where we use again the notation $\mathfrak{p}^\Lambda = - 2 p^\Lambda$. The entropy functional \eqref{gluing} is given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{eq:entropyfunctionalnotwist}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) = \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \left (\mathcal{E}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega )
- 2 \mathrm{i} \chi^\Lambda q_\Lambda - 2 \omega \mathcal{J} \right )
- \lambda \bigg( \sum_{\Lambda = 0}^3 \chi^\Lambda - 2 - \mathrm{i} \omega \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{eq:entropyfunctionalnotwist2}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) = - \frac{2 \mathrm{i}}{\omega} \left( \sqrt{X_{(1)}^0 X_{(1)}^1 X_{(1)}^2 X_{(1)}^3} + \sqrt{X_{(2)}^0 X_{(2)}^1 X_{(2)}^2 X_{(2)}^3} \right) ,
\ee
and, as usual, we have introduced the constraint $\sum_{\Lambda = 0}^3 \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \omega=2$ through a Lagrange multiplier.
As in section \ref{sec:mAdS4}, due to the presence of a square root there are sign ambiguities when performing the extremization.
They correspond to different branches in the range of parameters, \textit{i.e.}\;conserved charges, for the black hole solution.
The attractor mechanism in this case works as follows. For a suitable choice of determination of the square root in \eqref{eq:entropyfunctionalnotwist2}, the values of the sections at the SP $(\theta = 0)$ and the NP $(\theta = \pi)$ are related to the critical points
of the functional $\mathcal{I}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \chi^\Lambda , \omega )$ by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{eq:nontwistedsectionscritical}
\big( X^\Lambda_{\text{SP}} \big)^* = - \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \left( \bar\chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\bar\omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \right) \, , \qquad
X^\Lambda_{\text{NP}} = - \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \left( \bar\chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \frac{\bar\omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \right) \, ,
\ee
for $\Lambda = 0, \ldots, 3$. Notice that here the values of the sections can be identified with the critical values of the gluing quantities $X^{\Lambda}_{(\sigma)}$ up to a complex conjugate
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\big (X^\Lambda_{\text{SP}}\big)^* = -\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \, X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} \, \Big|_{\text{crit.}} \, , \qquad\qquad X^\Lambda_{\text{NP}} = -\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \, X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} \, \Big|_{\text{crit.}} \, , \qquad \Lambda = 0 , \ldots, 3 \, .
\ee
Moreover,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{eq:nontwistedentropycritical}
S^{\text{KN-AdS$_{4}$}}_{\text{BH}} ( p^\Lambda , q_\Lambda , \mathcal{J} ) = \mathcal{I}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda , \bar \chi^\Lambda , \bar \omega) \, ,
\ee
\subsection{The purely electric STU model}
We first consider the case with $\mathfrak{p} = 0$, corresponding to the Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_4$ originally found in \cite{Cvetic:2005zi} for pairwise equal charges and generalized to arbitrary charges in \cite{Hristov:2019mqp}. We can set the magnetic charges to zero by choosing $\alpha = 0$ in \eqref{eq:C-parameterization}, as one can check from \eqref{attr:eq:KNAdS4}.
In the case with $\mathfrak{p} = 0$ we recover the entropy functional discussed in \cite{Choi:2018fdc}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{\emph{e}KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \chi^\Lambda , \omega) = - 4 \mathrm{i} \frac{\sqrt{\chi^0 \chi^1 \chi^2 \chi^3}}{\omega} = - \frac{2 \mathcal{F} (\chi^\Lambda)}{\omega} \, ,
\ee
and we further retrieve
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\big( X^\Lambda_{\text{SP}} \big)^* = - \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}\? \bar\chi^\Lambda \, , \qquad \quad
X^\Lambda_{\text{NP}} = - \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}\? \bar\chi^\Lambda \, ,
\ee
at the critical point, which satisfies \eqref{eq:nontwistedentropycritical}.
This can be compared with \cite[(2.20)]{Choi:2018fdc} using the following dictionary,
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \omega_{\text{there}} = - \pi \omega_{\text{here}} \, , \qquad && \Delta_i = \mathrm{i} \pi \chi^i \, , \quad &&& i = 1 , 2, 3 \, , \\
& \Delta_4 = \mathrm{i} \pi \chi^0 \, , && Q_4 = - \frac{1}{2 G_{\text{N}}} q_0 \, , \\
& J = \frac{1}{2 G_{\text{N}}} \mathcal{J} \, , && Q_i = - \frac{1}{2 G_{\text{N}}} q_i \, , &&& i = 1 , 2, 3 \, , \\
& g_{\text{there}} = \sqrt{2} \, , && g_{\text{here}} = 1 \, .
\end{aligned}
\ee
Explicitly, in the notations of \cite{Choi:2018fdc} we have%
\footnote{It has been noticed in \cite{Cabo-Bizet:2018ehj,Cassani:2019mms} that there are two choices of constraints, $\sum_i \Delta_i - \omega = \pm 2 \pi \mathrm{i}$, that lead to the same entropy and can be explained by the supersymmetry conditions for a class of Euclidean solutions. This observation extends to other cases and it is a consequence of the symmetries of the functional $\mathcal{I}$. It would be interesting to see if there is a more physical explanation in terms of the attractor mechanism.}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{Choi}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{e}KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \chi^\Lambda , \omega) = \mathrm{i} \frac{4 \sqrt{2} N^{3/2}}{3} \frac{\sqrt{\Delta_1 \Delta_2 \Delta_3 \Delta_4}}{\omega}
+ \sum_{i = 1}^{4} \Delta_i Q_i + \omega J + \lambda \bigg( \sum_{i=1}^4 \Delta_i - \omega - 2 \pi \mathrm{i} \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where we used \eqref{AdS4:CFT3:dict} to translate $G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}$ into $N$.
A microscopic explanation for the entropy functional \eqref{Choi} was provided recently in \cite{Choi:2019zpz} by evaluating the three-dimensional superconformal index of ABJM and related theories.%
\footnote{See also \cite{Nian:2019pxj}.}
The method in \cite{Choi:2019zpz} does not use explicitly the holomorphic block picture \eqref{Zhol} but a closely related approach, which also uses the factorization
of the partition function. It indeed involves the gluing of two vortex generating functions, according to the same rules valid for holomorphic blocks. The field theory identity gluing uses
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} & = \chi^\Lambda , \qquad && \omega_{(1)} = \omega \, , \\
X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} & = - \chi^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{(2)} = -\omega \, ,
\eea
and looks superficially different from the gravitational one \eqref{identitygluing}.
However, the Cardy and large $N$ limit of the vortex partition functions in \cite{Choi:2019zpz} are taken along particular directions in the complex plane of the chemical potentials and the final result is the same as \eqref{Choi}.\footnote{In particular, in the regime considered in \eqref{Choi} the minus sign in the chemical potential is equivalent to a complex conjugate. This might explain the complex conjugate we detect in gravity, see \eqref{eq:nontwistedsectionscritical}.}
The main difficulty in comparing the gravitational and field theory identity gluing is that the known field theory computations use asymptotic expansions of special functions that are valid in a particular region in the complex plane.
Typically, the field theory identity gluing does not respect them and therefore further redefinitions of parameters are necessary.
\subsection[The dyonic \texorpdfstring{$X^0 X^1$}{X[0] X[1]} model]{The dyonic $X^0 X^1$ model}
The truncation is specified by the following identification of the sections and the charges
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
& X^2 = X^0 \, , \qquad && X^3 = X^1 \, , \\
& q_2 = q_0 \, , && q_3 = q_1 \, , \\
& p^2 = p^0 \, , && p^3 = p^1 \, , \qquad p^1 = - p^0\, ,
\eea
where the last relation guarantees \eqref{P:constraint:KNAdS4}. From here on we set $p^0 \equiv - p$.
The attractor equations \eqref{attr:eq:KNAdS4} then read
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
p & = - \frac{\alpha}{4 \alpha^2 - 4 \beta_0 \beta_1 + 1} \, , \\
q_0 & = q_2 = \frac{\beta_0}{4 \alpha^2 - 4 \beta_0 \beta_1 + 1} \, , \\
q_1 & = q_3 = \frac{\beta_1}{4 \alpha^2 - 4 \beta_0 \beta_1 + 1} \, ,
\eea
which can be easily solved for $(\alpha , \beta_1 , \beta_2)$.
The angular momentum is given by \eqref{JKNAdS4}, and can be easily rewritten as
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{JJ}
\mathcal{J} = \frac{q_0 + q_1}{2} \left( 1 - \sqrt{1 - 16 \left( p^2 - q_0 q_1 \right)} \right) \, .
\ee
Notice that there are only three independent parameters in this model, and the angular momentum can be expressed in terms of the other charges.
Finally the entropy is given by \eqref{SKNAdS4},%
\footnote{We correct a misprint in the formula for the entropy in \cite{Hristov:2019mqp}. Note also that we have redefined the angular momentum as $\mathcal{J}_{\text{there}} = - \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{J}_{\text{here}}$ (see footnote \ref{J:rscale:HKT}).}
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
S_{\text{BH}}^{X^0 X^1} ( p , q_0 , q_1 , \mathcal{J} ) & = \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)} } \left( - 1 + \sqrt{1 - 16 \left( p^2 - q_0 q_1 \right)} \right) \\
& = - \frac{\pi}{2 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \frac{\mathcal{J}}{( q_0 + q_1 )} \, ,
\eea
where we take the branch of solutions considered in \cite{Hristov:2019mqp}, \textit{i.e.}\;$q_{0, 1} > 0$.
The horizon values of the sections at the SP and NP of the sphere can be computed from \eqref{XKNAdS4}. They read
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\begin{aligned}
X^0_{\text{SP}} & = - \mathrm{i} \frac{\alpha ( 1 + 2 \alpha ) - ( \mathrm{i} + 2 \beta_0 ) \beta_1}{1 - 4 \alpha^2 + 2 \mathrm{i} \beta_1 + 2 \beta_0 ( \mathrm{i} + 2 \beta_1 )} \, , \\
X^1_{\text{SP}} & = \mathrm{i} \frac{\alpha ( 1 - 2 \alpha ) +\beta_0 ( \mathrm{i} + 2 \beta_1 )}{1 - 4 \alpha^2 + 2 \mathrm{i} \beta_1 + 2 \beta_0 ( \mathrm{i} + 2 \beta_1 )} \, , \\
X^0_{\text{NP}} & = - \mathrm{i} \frac{\alpha ( 1 - 2 \alpha ) - ( \mathrm{i} - 2 \beta_0 ) \beta_1}{1 - 4 \alpha^2 - 2 \mathrm{i} \beta_1 - 2 \beta_0 ( \mathrm{i} - 2 \beta_1 )} \, , \\
X^1_{\text{NP}} & = \mathrm{i} \frac{\alpha ( 1 + 2 \alpha ) + \beta_0 ( \mathrm{i} - 2 \beta_1 )}{1 - 4 \alpha^2 - 2 \mathrm{i} \beta_1 - 2 \beta_0 ( \mathrm{i} - 2 \beta_1 )} \, .
\end{aligned}
\ee
Our $\mathcal{E}$-functional reduces to that of \cite[Eq.\,(1)]{Hristov:2019mqp} in this case, \textit{i.e.}\;
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{4}$}} ( \mathfrak{p} , \chi^\Lambda , \omega) \Big|_{X^0 X^1}= \frac{4 \mathrm{i} \chi^0 \chi^1}{\omega} + \mathrm{i} \omega \mathfrak{p}^2 \, ,
\ee
where we chose to work with the negative determination for the square roots in \eqref{eq:entropyfunctionalnotwist2}, which correctly reproduces the branch of solutions we are looking at.
Recall that, $\mathfrak{p}^0 = \mathfrak{p}^2 = - \mathfrak{p}^1= - \mathfrak{p}^3 = - \mathfrak{p}$ and $\mathfrak{p}=-2 p$.
We thus need to extremize
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{KNAdS4:X0X1:I-functional}
\mathcal{I}_{X^0 X^1} ( \mathfrak{p} , \chi^\Lambda , \omega)
= \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \bigg( \frac{4 \mathrm{i} \chi^0 \chi^1}{\omega} + \mathrm{i} \omega \mathfrak{p}^2 - 4 \mathrm{i} \sum_{i=0}^1 q_i \chi^i - 2 \omega \mathcal{J} \bigg) \, ,
\ee
under the constraint
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\chi^0 + \chi^1 - \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \omega = 1 \, .
\ee
The extremization equations read
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\frac{\partial \mathcal{I}_{X^0 X^1}}{\partial \chi^0} & = 0 = \left( 2 ( q_0 - q_1 ) - \mathrm{i} \right) \omega + 4 \chi^0 - 2 \, , \\
\frac{\partial \mathcal{I}_{X^0 X^1}}{\partial \omega} & = 0 = 4 ( \chi^0 - 1 ) \chi^0 + \omega^2 \left( \mathfrak{p}^2 + 2 \mathrm{i} ( \mathcal{J} - q_1 ) \right) .
\eea
The critical points are then given by
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\bar\chi^0 & = \frac{1}{2} \left( 1 \mp \frac{\mathrm{i} - 2 ( q_0 - q_1 )}{\sqrt{4 \left( 2 \mathrm{i} \mathcal{J} + \mathfrak{p}^2 \right) + 4 \left( ( q_0 - q_1 )^2 - \mathrm{i} ( q_0 + q_1 ) \right) - 1}} \right) , \\
\bar\omega & = \mp \frac{2}{\sqrt{4 \left( 2 \mathrm{i} \mathcal{J} + \mathfrak{p}^2 \right) + 4 \left( ( q_0 - q_1 )^2 - \mathrm{i} ( q_0 + q_1 ) \right) - 1}} \, ,
\eea
and the value of the entropy functional \eqref{KNAdS4:X0X1:I-functional} at its critical point is found to be
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\mathcal{I}_{X^0 X^1} \Big|_{\text{crit.}} = \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}} \left( - 1 - 2 \mathrm{i} ( q_0 + q_1 ) \mp \mathrm{i} \sqrt{4 \left( 2 \mathrm{i} \mathcal{J} + \mathfrak{p}^2 \right) + 4 \left( ( q_0 - q_1 )^2 - \mathrm{i} ( q_0 + q_1 ) \right) - 1} \right) .
\eea
Although not immediately obvious from this expression, upon using the constraint \eqref{JJ} and taking the solution that leads to a real positive entropy, one obtains
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S_{\text{BH}}^{X^0 X^1} ( p , q_0 , q_1 , \mathcal{J} ) = \mathcal{I}_{X^0 X^1} ( \mathfrak{p} , \bar\chi^0 , \bar\omega) \, .
\ee
\subsection{The general case}
We can also consider the entropy functional \eqref{eq:entropyfunctionalnotwist} in the general case of taking the symplectic vector $\mathcal{C}$ in \eqref{eq:C-parameterization} without further simplifications. The resulting formulae for the conserved charges $\Gamma$ in terms of the parameters $(\alpha, \beta_\Lambda)$, as well as subsequent expressions for the sections and entropy, are not really presentable and offer no specific insight. We have checked numerically that the expected relations \eqref{eq:nontwistedsectionscritical} and \eqref{eq:nontwistedentropycritical} hold once again, for a suitable choice of determination of the square root in \eqref{eq:entropyfunctionalnotwist2}, letting us to conclude the proposed attractor mechanism is valid in full generality for these solutions.
A field theory explanation for the entropy functional \eqref{eq:entropyfunctionalnotwist} for generic magnetic charges is still missing.
It would be interesting to provide it using \eqref{Zhol} or the factorization method of \cite{Choi:2018fdc}.
\section[Kerr-Newman-AdS\texorpdfstring{$_5$}{(5)}]{Kerr-Newman-AdS$_{5}$}
\label{sec:KNAdS5}
Our last example deals with the Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_5$.
The five-dimensional solutions in minimal gauged supergravity were first found in \cite{Gutowski:2004ez} and generalized to two rotations in \cite{Chong:2005hr}.
The most general solutions of the STU model were then spelled out in \cite{Kunduri:2006ek}.
The near horizon geometry is a fibration of AdS$_2$ over a non-homogeneously squashed three-sphere \cite{Kunduri:2007qy}.
The holographically dual four-dimensional boundary theory remains superconformal in this case.
Various results have been obtained recently in evaluating the superconformal index of the dual field theory on $S^3 \times S^1$ \cite{Kinney:2005ej,Romelsberger:2005eg}
in various limits and matching the answer to the macroscopic entropy \cite{Cabo-Bizet:2018ehj,Choi:2018hmj,Benini:2018ywd}.%
\footnote{See \cite{,Honda:2019cio,ArabiArdehali:2019tdm,Kim:2019yrz,Cabo-Bizet:2019osg,Amariti:2019mgp,Larsen:2019oll,Lezcano:2019pae,Lanir:2019abx} for further developments.}
For our present purposes we shall consider the 4D/5D connection, as done in \cite{Hosseini:2017mds}.
In this case in order to preserve supersymmetry one is led to do a more general Scherk-Schwarz reduction \cite{Andrianopoli:2004im,Looyestijn:2010pb}
and supersymmetry in the lower-dimensional theory is thus preserved with a partial topological $A$-twist on the $S^2$ inside the original $S^3$.
From a four-dimensional perspective the KN-AdS$_5$ black holes therefore fit in the class of solutions of \cite{Hristov:2018spe} of rotating attractors with a twist.
We consider the electric STU model with prepotential
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{F} (X^\Lambda) = \frac{X^1 X^2 X^3}{X^0} \, ,
\ee
and purely electric gauging coming from the Scherk-Schwarz reduction \cite{Hosseini:2017mds,Hristov:2018spe}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
G = \{g^{\Lambda}; \sqrt{2} \cosh (\delta) , g_i \} \, , \qquad g_i \equiv g \, , \qquad g^\Lambda = 0 \, .
\ee
We set $g=\sqrt{2}$.
The dimensional reduction of the black hole in \cite{Kunduri:2006ek} to four dimensions was already performed in \cite{Hristov:2018spe}. The set of four-dimensional electromagnetic charges
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\Gamma = \{ p^\Lambda ; q_\Lambda \} \, ,
\ee
can be written in terms of the variables $\mu_i$ and $\Xi_{a,b}$ appearing in the original solution \cite{Kunduri:2006ek} as \cite{Hristov:2018spe}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
p^0 = -\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\? \cosh (\delta)} \, , \qquad
p^i = 0 \, , \quad i = 1 ,2 , 3 \, ,
\ee
and
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
q_0 &= -\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2} \cosh(\delta)} \left( \Big( 1 + \gamma_1+ \frac{\gamma_2}{2} \Big) \cosh (\delta) - (1+\gamma_1+\gamma_2+\gamma_3) \right) \, , \\
q_i &= -\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2} \cosh(\delta)} \left( \mu_i + \frac{\gamma_2}{2} - \frac{\gamma_3}{\mu_i} \right) \, , \qquad i = 1 , 2 , 3 \, .
\eea
For a lighter notation we defined
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\gamma_1 \equiv \mu_1 + \mu_2 + \mu_3 \, , \qquad \gamma_2 \equiv \mu_1 \mu_2 + \mu_1 \mu_3 + \mu_2 \mu_3 \, , \qquad \gamma_3 \equiv \mu_1 \mu_2 \mu_3 \, ,
\ee
and
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\sinh(\delta) = \frac{\Xi_a - \Xi_b}{2 \sqrt{\Xi_a \Xi_b}} \, , \qquad \cosh (\delta) = \frac{\Xi_a + \Xi_b}{2 \sqrt{\Xi_a \Xi_b}} \, .
\ee
Notice that the angle along which we reduce in the solution of \cite{Kunduri:2006ek} has period $4\pi \cosh (\delta)$.
As already mentioned, the reduction along the Hopf fibre of $S^3$ introduces a magnetic charge $p^0$. The theory is thus topologically twisted with the twisting condition
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
g_0 p^0 =-1 \, .
\ee
The quartic invariant is again given by \eqref{eq:I4electricstu} and the main features of the solution are summarized in appendix \ref{app:A2}. The four-dimensional near horizon solution for the parameters ${\rm j}, \mathcal{H}_0$ is spelled out in \cite[sect.\,4.3.2]{Hristov:2018spe}. In terms of the variables $\delta$ and $\mu_i$, the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S^{\text{KN-AdS$_{5}$}}_{\text{BH}} \left( p^0 , q_i , \mathcal{J} \right) = \frac{\pi^2}{4 G^{(5)}_{\text{N}}} \Pi(\delta, \mu_i) \, ,
\ee
where we defined
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\Pi \equiv 2 \sqrt{ \gamma_3 ( 1 + \gamma_1) - \frac14 \gamma_2^2 + 2 ( 1 - \cosh(\delta) ) \prod_{i=1}^3 ( 1 + \mu_i )} \, ,
\ee
and
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\frac{1}{G^{(4)}_{\text{N}}} = \frac{4 \pi \cosh (\delta)}{G^{(5)}_{\text{N}}} \, .
\ee
The angular momentum in four dimensions is given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{J} = - \frac{\sinh (\delta)}{8 \cosh^2 (\delta)} \left( 1+\gamma_1+\frac{\gamma_2}{2} \right) ,
\ee
and its corresponding chemical potential reads
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
w = \frac{\sinh ( 2 \delta )}{\Pi(\delta, \mu_i)} \, .
\ee
We can also write down the symplectic sections at the near horizon region if we further use the definition
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\Theta(\delta, \mu_i) \equiv 3 - 2 \cosh (\delta) + \gamma_1 \, .
\ee
At the NP and SP of the sphere ($\theta = \pi$ and $\theta = 0$, respectively), we find
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^0_{\text{SP}} - X^0_{\text{NP}} &= - 2 w p^0 \, ,\\
X^0_{\text{SP}} + X^0_{\text{NP}} & = \frac{2 \sqrt{2}}{\Theta} \left( \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} - \frac{1 + \gamma_1 + \frac{\gamma_2}{2} - \Theta \cosh ( \delta )}{\Pi } \right) .
\eea
We also obtain
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^i_{\text{SP}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2} \Theta \Pi } & \bigg( \mathrm{i} \Pi (\Theta - 1 - \mu_i) + \frac{\gamma_3}{\mu_i} ( 2 + \gamma_1 - \mu_i ) + \mu_i \bigg( \mu_{i}^2 - \sum_{i = 1}^3 \mu_{i}^2 \bigg) \\
& - 4 \left( 1 - \cosh ( \delta ) \right) \left( 1 + \mu_i + \frac{\gamma_2}{2} - \frac{\gamma_3}{\mu_i} \right) \! \bigg) \, , \qquad i = 1 , 2 , 3 \, ,
\eea
and
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
X^i_{\text{SP}} - X^i_{\text{NP}} = - 2 w p^i = 0 \, , \qquad i = 1 , 2 , 3 \, .
\ee
Remarkably, they satisfy the constraint
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
g_\Lambda \left( X^\Lambda_{\text{SP}} + X^\Lambda_{\text{NP}} \right) + 2 w \tanh ( \delta ) = 2 \mathrm{i} \, .
\ee
\subsection{Attractor mechanism}
Since from the four-dimensional point of view the theory is topologically twisted, we need to use the $A$-gluing \eqref{Agluing}:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} & = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , \qquad && \omega_{(1)} = \omega \, , \\
X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} & = \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{(2)} = - \omega \, ,
\eea
where, to keep the same notations as before, we define $\mathfrak{p}^\Lambda = - 2 p^\Lambda$. This gives the $\mathcal{E}$-functional
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{KN-AdS5:cE:4D}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{5}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^0 , \chi^\Lambda , \omega) = 4 \mathrm{i} \frac{\mathfrak{p}^0 \chi^1 \chi^2 \chi^3}{(2 \chi^0 )^2 + ( \omega \mathfrak{p}^0 )^2} \, .
\ee
The entropy functional \eqref{gluing} is given by
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\label{I-functional:GR}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{5}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^0 , \chi^\Lambda , \omega ) & = \frac{\pi}{4 G_{\text{N}}^{(4)}}\left (\mathcal{E}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{5}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^0 , \chi^\Lambda , \omega)
- 2 \mathrm{i} \chi^\Lambda q_\Lambda - 2 \omega \mathcal{J}\right ) \\
& + \lambda \left( g_\Lambda \chi^\Lambda - 2 - \mathrm{i} \omega \tanh ( \delta ) \right) \, .
\eea
Evaluating the $\mathcal{I}$-functional \eqref{I-functional:GR} at its critical point we recover
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
S^{\text{KN-AdS$_{5}$}}_{\text{BH}} \left( p^0 , q_i , \mathcal{J} \right) = \mathcal{I}_{\text{KN-AdS$_{5}$}} ( \mathfrak{p}^0 , \bar \chi^\Lambda , \bar \omega )
\, ,
\ee
and the critical values $(\bar\chi^\Lambda , \bar\omega)$ read
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\bar{\chi}^\Lambda & = - \mathrm{i} \left( X^\Lambda_{\text{SP}} + X^\Lambda_{\text{NP}} \right) \, , \qquad \Lambda = 0, \ldots, 3 \, , \\
\bar{\omega} & = - \sqrt{2} \cosh (\delta ) \left( X^0_{\text{SP}} - X^0_{\text{NP}} \right) = - 2 w \, .
\eea
The values of the sections at the SP and the NP are then given by the usual attractor relations
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& X^0_{\text{SP, NP}} = \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \left( \bar \chi^0 \pm \mathrm{i} \frac{\bar \omega}{2} \mathfrak{p}^0 \right) \, , \\
& X^i_{\text{SP}} = X^i_{\text{NP}} = \frac{\mathrm{i}}{2} \bar{\chi}^i \, , \qquad i = 1 , 2, 3 \, .
\end{aligned}
\ee
Notice that we have a dependence on the parameter $\delta$, which is related to the conserved charges in five dimensions, in the gaugings and in the constraint that the chemical potentials fulfill.
This is an artifact of the dimensional reduction, in order to obtain a consistent supersymmetric four-dimensional solution.
We nevertheless see that the gluing procedure nicely works at the formal level.
\subsection{Comparison with the five-dimensional entropy functional} \label{sec:5dpicture}
The entropy functional \eqref{I-functional:GR} is equivalent to the functional for KN-AdS$_5$ black holes found by \cite{Hosseini:2017mds} in a different basis.
In \eqref{I-functional:GR} the Legendre transform is done with respect to a four-dimensional basis of charges.
The latter and the corresponding chemical potentials are related to the natural five-dimensional ones by a linear redefinition involving $\delta$.
The entropy functional found in \cite{Hosseini:2017mds} is given in \eqref{HHZ}. Reinstating the five-dimensional Newton's constant, we can write it as
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{HHZ2}
\mathcal{I}(\Delta_a,\omega_i)= \mathrm{i} \frac{\pi^2}{2G^{(5)}_{\text{N}}} \? \frac{\Delta^1\Delta^2\Delta^3}{\omega_1\omega_2} + 2 \pi \mathrm{i} \left (\sum_{a=1}^3 \Delta^a Q_a - \sum_{i=1}^2 \omega_i J_i\right) ,
\ee
where we used the holographic dictionary
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\frac{1}{G^{(5)}_{\text{N}}} = \frac{2}{\pi} N^{2} \, .
\ee
The five-dimensional charges used in \cite{Hosseini:2017mds} are related to the four-dimensional conserved charges by%
\footnote{In order to compare with \cite[(4.18)]{Hosseini:2017mds} one has to set $\delta = 0$, $\mathcal{J} = 0$ here, that corresponds to KN-AdS$_5$ black holes with equal angular momenta $(J_1 = J_2)$, and therefore a static black hole in four dimensions. Moreover, $g_{\text{here}} = \sqrt{2}$ while $g_{\text{there}}$ = 1. This leads to the following redefinition of four-dimensional charges: $q_\Lambda^{\text{there}} = \sqrt{2} \? q_\Lambda^{\text{here}}$, $\Lambda = 0, \ldots, 3$.}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\begin{aligned}
Q_i^{(5)} & = - \frac{\sqrt{2}\? \pi \cosh (\delta)}{G^{(5)}_{\text{N}}}\? q_i \, , \qquad i = 1 , 2 , 3 \, , \\
J_{1,2} & = \frac{\sqrt{2} \? \pi e^{\pm \delta } \cosh ( \delta )}{G^{(5)}_{\text{N}}} \left( q_0 \mp \sqrt{2} \cosh ( \delta ) \mathcal{J} \right) .
\end{aligned}
\ee
We see that the entropy functional \eqref{I-functional:GR} matches precisely with the one presented in \cite{Hosseini:2017mds}, upon the identification
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\Delta^i & = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \chi^i \, , \qquad i = 1 , 2 , 3 \, , \\
\omega_{1,2} & = \frac{1}{4} \left( 1 \mp \tanh ( \delta ) \right) \left( \sqrt{2} \cosh ( \delta ) \chi^0 \pm \mathrm{i} \omega \right) .
\eea
\section{Generalization to higher dimensions}
\label{sec:higher}
We expect that our construction can be extended to other dimensions. We give few examples here leaving a detailed analysis for a later publication \cite{Hosseini:2019HHZ2}.
The gravitational blocks in higher dimensions are of the form
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}\label{Bhigherdim}
& \mathcal{B}_{\text{5D}} (X^\Lambda , \omega_i) \equiv - \frac{\mathcal{F}_{\text{5D}}(X^\Lambda)}{\omega_1 \omega_2} \, , \\
& \mathcal{B}_{\text{6D}} (X^\Lambda , \omega_i) \equiv - \frac{\mathcal{F}_{\text{6D}}(X^\Lambda)}{\omega_1 \omega_2} \, , \\
& \mathcal{B}_{\text{7D}} (X^\Lambda , \omega_i) \equiv - \frac{\mathcal{F}_{\text{7D}}(X^\Lambda)}{\omega_1 \omega_2 \omega_3} \, ,
\eea
where $\omega_i$ are chemical potentials associated with rotations. We can also see them as equivariant parameters associated to the independent rotational symmetries
of the solutions, which we assume to be the maximal ones in each dimension (two, two and three, respectively).
\subsection{Five dimensions}
Let us first consider the five-dimensional picture.
For KN-AdS$_5$ black holes with near horizon region AdS$_2 \times_w S^3$, and rotating black strings in AdS$_5$ with near horizon BTZ$ \times_w S^2$ we use
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{F}_{\text{5D}} (X^\Lambda) = X^1 X^2 X^3 \, .
\ee
From the gravitational point of view we glue two copies of $D_2\times S^1$, where $D_2$ is a disk. It is easy to see that, with suitable redefinition of variables, the entropy functional \eqref{HHZ} for KN-AdS$_5$ can be obtained by gluing the two copies into an $S^3$ with the identifications
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\label{5did}
& X^{a}_{(1)} = \chi^a \, , \qquad && \omega_{1,(1)} = \omega_1 \, , \qquad &&& \omega_{2,(1)} = \omega_2 \, ,\\
& X^{a}_{(2)} = \chi^a \, , && \omega_{1,(2)} = \omega_1 \, , &&& \omega_{2,(2)} = \omega_2 \, ,
\eea
while the entropy functional \eqref{BSI} for rotating black strings an be obtained by gluing the two copies into an $S^2\times S^1$, where the $S^1$ lies inside BTZ, with the identifications
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
\label{5dA}
& X^{\Lambda}_{(1)} = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_1}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , \qquad && \omega_{1, (1)} = \omega_1 \, , \qquad &&& \omega_{2, (1)} = \omega_2 \, , \\
& X^{\Lambda}_{(2)} = \chi^\Lambda - \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_1}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{1, (2)} = - \omega_1 \, , \qquad &&& \omega_{2, (2)} = \omega_2\, .
\eea
The partition functions of the holographically dual field theories are obtained by gluing copies of the $D_2 \times T^2$ partition function, the four-dimensional holomorphic blocks. The latter have the expansion
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{Bethehol2}
B^\alpha ( \Delta^\Lambda | \omega_1 ) \underset{\omega_1 \to 0}{\sim} \exp \bigg( \! -\frac{1}{\omega_1} \mathcal{W} ( x^\alpha , \Delta^\Lambda ) \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where $\omega_1$ is the equivariant parameter on $D_2$. Moreover, in a Cardy limit associated with the torus $T^2$, the twisted superpotential of $\mathcal{N} = 4$ SYM reads \cite[(3.23)]{Hosseini:2016cyf}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\widetilde \mathcal{W} ( \Delta^\Lambda | \beta) = \mathrm{i} \pi^3 N^2 \? \frac{\Delta^1 \Delta^2 \Delta^3}{2 \beta} \, ,
\ee
with $\sum_{\Lambda=1}^3 \Delta^\Lambda = 2$. Here $\beta = - 2 \pi \mathrm{i} \tau$ where $\tau$ is the modulus of the torus.\footnote{The twisted superpotential is evaluated on the Bethe vacuum that dominates the saddle point approximations
of both the topologically twisted index \cite{Hosseini:2016cyf} and the superconformal ones \cite{Benini:2018ywd}.}
By identifying $\Delta^\Lambda$ with $X^\Lambda$ and $\beta$ with $\omega_2$,
it is not hard to recognize in the exponent of \eqref{Bethehol2} the expression of the five-dimensional gravitational block $\mathcal{B}_{5\text{D}}$.
The gluing \eqref{5dA} precisely corresponds to the field theory gluing used for the topologically twisted index in \cite{Nieri:2015yia}.
As in four dimensions, the gluing \eqref{5did} is superficially different from the $S$-gluing used in field theory \cite{Nieri:2015yia},%
\footnote{See also \cite{Yoshida:2014qwa,Peelaers:2014ima}.}
but we again expect to have the same physical effect in the saddle point approximation. It would be interesting to relate the two more directly.
\subsection{Six dimensions}
Let us now consider the six-dimensional point of view. We consider here black holes in the AdS$_6 \times_w S^4$ background of massive type IIA supergravity \cite{Brandhuber:1999np}.
For KN-AdS$_6$ \cite{Chow:2008ip}, \emph{m}AdS$_6$ \cite{Hosseini:2018usu,Suh:2018szn} and possible rotating generalizations with near horizon AdS$_2 \times_w \mathcal{M}_4$,
where the manifold $\mathcal{M}_4$ is either $S^4$ or toric K\"ahler, we should use\footnote{The variables $X_1$ and $X_2$ can be associated with the two isometries of the internal manifold $S^4$ of the solution \cite{Brandhuber:1999np}.}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{F6d}
\mathcal{F}_{\text{6D}} (X^\Lambda) = (X^1 X^2)^{3/2} \, .
\ee
The structure of five-dimensional supersymmetric partition functions and their decomposition in terms of holomorphic blocks are not fully understood.
It was argued in \cite{Hosseini:2018uzp,Crichigno:2018adf} that the effective Seiberg-Witten prepotential should play the role of the twisted superpotential for three- and four-dimensional field theories.
The expression \eqref{F6d} is precisely the critical value of the Seiberg-Witten prepotential of the dual field theory in the large $N$ limit, see \cite[(3.71)]{Hosseini:2018uzp}.
A natural conjecture inspired by \cite{Nekrasov:2003vi,Bawane:2014uka,Bershtein:2015xfa,Hosseini:2018uzp} is that we need a gluing of the form
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{conjecture:gluing}
\mathcal{E} ( \chi^\Lambda , \omega_i ) = \sum_{\sigma = 1}^{\chi_{\text{E}} (\mathcal{M}_4)} \mathcal{B}_{\text{6D}} \big(X^\Lambda_{(\sigma)} , \omega_{i, (\sigma)} \big) \, ,
\ee
where $\chi_{\text{E}} (\mathcal{M}_4)$ denotes the Euler characteristic of $\mathcal{M}_4$.
The contributions are associated to the NP and SP of $S^4$ and to the fixed points under the torus action for a toric manifold $\mathcal{M}_4$ in the spirit of \cite{Nekrasov:2003vi}.
The entropy functional for Kerr-Newman black holes in AdS$_6$ was found in \cite[(3.15)]{Choi:2018fdc} and it is given by
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{KNAdS6:EF}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{KN-AdS$_6$}} (\Delta , \omega_i) = - \mathrm{i} \frac{\pi}{(3 g)^4 G_{\text{N}}^{(6)}} \frac{\Delta^3}{\omega_1 \omega_2} + \Delta Q + \sum_{i=1}^2 \omega_i J_i + \lambda \bigg( \Delta - \sum_{i=1}^2 \omega_i - 2 \pi \mathrm{i} \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where $Q$ is the electric charge and $J_i$, $i=1,2$, are the two angular momenta of the solution.
$\Delta$ and $\omega_i$ are, respectively, the chemical potentials conjugate to these conserved charges.
Notice that only one of the two possible electric charges is turned on in the solution \cite{Chow:2008ip}.
The entropy functional \eqref{KNAdS6:EF} fits in our general formalism by simply identity gluing the two gravitational blocks $\mathcal{B}_{\text{6D}}$ as follows:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
& X^\Lambda_{(1)} = \chi^\Lambda \, , \qquad && \omega_{1, (1)} = \omega_1 \, , \qquad &&& \omega_{2, (1)} = \omega_2 \, , \\
& X^\Lambda_{(2)} = \chi^\Lambda \, , && \omega_{1, (2)} = \omega_1 \, , &&& \omega_{2, (2)} = \omega_2 \, .
\eea
This leads to
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{E}_{\text{KN-AdS$_6$}} (\chi^\Lambda , \omega_i) = -\frac{2 ( \chi^1 \chi^2 )^{3/2}}{\omega_1 \omega_2} \, ,
\ee
that, up to a normalization, can be clearly mapped to \eqref{KNAdS6:EF} upon identifying $\chi^1= \chi^2 \equiv \Delta$.
Another interesting example is the class of static \emph{m}AdS$_6$ black holes found in \cite{Hosseini:2018usu,Suh:2018szn}.
The entropy functional of this class of black holes when the near horizon geometry is AdS$_2 \times \mathcal{M}_4$, with $\mathcal{M}_4$ being a K\"ahler-Einstein manifold, reads \cite[(6.8)]{Hosseini:2018usu}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{I-functional:smAdS6}
\mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{sm}AdS$_6$}} (\mathfrak{p}^I , \Delta^I) = \frac{\mathrm{Vol} ( \mathcal{M}_4 )}{( 3 \sqrt{2} )^4 G^{(6)}_{\text{N}}} \sum_{I , J = 1}^2 \mathfrak{p}^I \mathfrak{p}^J \frac{\partial^2 (\Delta^1 \Delta^2)^{3/2}}{\partial \Delta^I \partial \Delta^J} - \lambda \bigg( \sum_{I = 1}^2 \Delta^I - 2 \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where $\mathfrak{p}^1+\mathfrak{p}^2=2\kappa$ if the metric is normalized as $R_{\mu\nu}=\kappa g_{\mu\nu}$.
We now show that we can reproduce the above entropy functional by gluing six-dimensional gravitational blocks.
Unfortunately, there are no regular black hole solutions with manifolds $\mathcal{M}_4$ of positive curvature \cite{Hosseini:2018usu}, as one can see by extremizing \eqref{I-functional:smAdS6}.
Nevertheless, it makes sense to consider all kind of horizons because we want to reproduce the {\it functional form} of $ \mathcal{I}_{\text{\emph{sm}AdS$_6$}} (\mathfrak{p}^I , \Delta^I)$, independently of whether it has acceptable critical points or not.
Let us then focus on the case where $\mathcal{M}_4$ is the complex projective space $\mathbb{P}^2$, that is a toric manifold also.
Denote the generators of the $(\mathbb{C}^*)^2$ action on the tangent space at the three fixed points $P_{(l)}$ by $\omega_{1,(l)}$, $\omega_{2,(l)}$ with $l = 1 , 2 , 3$.
Since $\chi_{\text{E}} (\mathbb{P}^2) = 3$ we should fuse three copies of $\mathcal{B}_{\text{6D}}$ into each other using the higher-dimensional $A$-gluing as follows (see \cite[Example.\,2.1]{Hosseini:2018uzp}):
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
X^\Lambda_{(l)} = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{1,{(l)}}}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{2,{(l)}}}{2} \? \mathfrak{p}^\Lambda \, , \qquad l = 1, 2 , 3 \, ,
\ee
with
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
& \omega_{1, (1)} = \omega_1 \, , \qquad \qquad \, \? \? \omega_{2, (1)} = \omega_2 \, , \\
& \omega_{1, (2)} = \omega_2 - \omega_1 \, , \qquad \? \omega_{2, (2)} = - \omega_1 \, , \\
& \omega_{1, (3)} = - \omega_2 \, , \qquad \qquad \! \! \omega_{2, (3)} = \omega_1 - \omega_2 \, .
\eea
Thus, our $\mathcal{E}$-functional \eqref{conjecture:gluing} for $\mathcal{M}_4 = \mathbb{P}^2$ reads
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{E} ( \mathfrak{p}^I , \chi^I ) = \frac{9}{8} \sum_{I , J = 1}^2 \mathfrak{p}^I \mathfrak{p}^J \frac{\partial^2 (\chi^1 \chi^2)^{3/2}}{\partial \chi^I \partial \chi^J} \, ,
\ee
which is, up to a normalization, \eqref{I-functional:smAdS6} upon identifying $\chi^I$ with $\Delta^I$.
We can also consider the case of $\mathcal{M}_4 = S^2 \times S^2$.%
\footnote{Also in this case, no static \emph{m}AdS$_6$ black hole exists with this horizon topology. There are solutions with horizon $\Sigma_{\mathfrak{g}_1}\times \Sigma_{\mathfrak{g}_2}$, where $\Sigma_\mathfrak{g}$ denotes a Riemann surface of genus $\mathfrak{g}$, whenever $\mathfrak{g}_1 >1$ or $\mathfrak{g}_2>1$.}
The entropy functional reads \cite[(5.10)]{Hosseini:2018usu}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\label{TTI:S2xS2}
\mathcal{I}_{S^2 \times S^2 \times S^1} (\mathfrak{s}^I , \mathfrak{t}^I , \Delta^I) =
\frac{(2 \pi)^2}{81 G^{(6)}_{\text{N}}} \sum_{I , J = 1}^2 \mathfrak{s}^I \mathfrak{t}^J \frac{\partial^2 (\Delta^1 \Delta^2)^{3/2}}{\partial \Delta^I \partial \Delta^J}
- \lambda \bigg( \sum_{I=1}^2 \Delta^I - 2 \bigg) \, ,
\ee
where $\mathfrak{s}^I$, $\mathfrak{t}^I$ are the magnetic charges on the two $S^2$ and they satisfy the quantization conditions $\mathfrak{s}^1 + \mathfrak{s}^2 = 2$ and $\mathfrak{t}^1 + \mathfrak{t}^2 = 2$.
This result has been also derive from field theory using the topologically twisted index of the dual five-dimensional $\mathcal{N}=1$ theory
on $S^2 \times S^2 \times S^1$ in \cite{Hosseini:2018uzp}.%
\footnote{This is the $\mathrm{USp}(2N)$ gauge theory with $N_f$ fundamental flavors and an antisymmetric matter field, which has a five-dimensional UV fixed point with enhanced $E_{N_f+1}$ global symmetry \cite{Seiberg:1996bd}. The holographic dictionary reads \cite{Jafferis:2012iv}, $G_N^{(6)} = \frac{5 \pi}{27 \sqrt{2}} \frac{\sqrt{8 - N_f}}{N^{5/2}}$.}
The above functional can be easily obtained by gluing four copies, since $\chi_{\text{E}}(S^2 \times S^2) = 4$, of six-dimensional gravitational blocks as follows:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}} \newcommand{\eea}{\end{aligned} \end{equation}
& X^\Lambda_{(1)} = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{1, (1)}}{2} \mathfrak{s}^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{2,(1)}}{2} \mathfrak{t}^\Lambda \, , \qquad
& X^\Lambda_{(2)} = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{1, (2)}}{2} \mathfrak{t}^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{2,(2)}}{2} \mathfrak{s}^\Lambda \, , \\
& X^\Lambda_{(3)} = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{1, (3)}}{2} \mathfrak{s}^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{2,(3)}}{2} \mathfrak{t}^\Lambda \, , \qquad
& X^\Lambda_{(4)} = \chi^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{1, (4)}}{2} \mathfrak{t}^\Lambda + \mathrm{i} \frac{\omega_{2,(4)}}{2} \mathfrak{s}^\Lambda \, ,
\eea
where (see \cite[Example.\,2.2]{Hosseini:2018uzp})
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \omega_{1,(1)} = \omega_1 \, , \qquad ~~\; \? \omega_{2,(1)} = \omega_2 \, , \\
& \omega_{1,(2)} = \omega_2 \, , \qquad ~~\; \? \omega_{2,(2)} = - \omega_1 \, , \\
& \omega_{1,(3)} = -\omega_1 \, , \qquad \, \? \omega_{2,(3)} = -\omega_2 \, , \\
& \omega_{1,(4)} = -\omega_2 \, , \qquad \, \? \omega_{2,(4)} = \omega_1 \, .
\end{aligned}
\ee
The four contributions correspond to the four fixed points of the torus action associated with the poles of the spheres.
Thus, our $\mathcal{E}$-functional \eqref{conjecture:gluing} for $\mathcal{M}_4 = S^2 \times S^2$ reduces to
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{E} ( \mathfrak{s}^I , \mathfrak{t}^I , \chi^I ) = \sum_{I , J = 1}^2 \mathfrak{s}^I \mathfrak{t}^J \frac{\partial^2 (\chi^1 \chi^2)^{3/2}}{\partial \chi^I \partial \chi^J} \, ,
\ee
which is, up to a normalization, \eqref{TTI:S2xS2} upon identifying $\Delta^I$ with $\chi^I$.
We expect the existence of other static and rotating six-dimensional black holes with two isometries and positive real entropy.
Our discussion leads to a prediction for the entropy of these objects.
\subsection{Seven dimensions}
Let us finally consider the seven-dimensional perspective.
For KN-AdS$_7$ \cite{Cvetic:2005zi,Chow:2007ts} with near horizon AdS$_2 \times_w S^5$, AdS$_7$ black strings \cite{Benini:2013cda} and possible rotating generalizations with near horizon BTZ$ \times_w \mathcal{M}_4$ we should use (\textit{cf.}\;\cite[(1.4)]{Hosseini:2018dob} and \cite[(3.22)]{Hosseini:2018uzp})
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}\label{7D}
\mathcal{F}_{\text{7D}} (X^\Lambda) = (X^1 X^2)^{2} \, .
\ee
It is easy to see that the entropy functionals found in \cite{Hosseini:2018dob} and \cite{Hosseini:2018uzp} for KN-AdS$_7$ and AdS$_7$ black strings, respectively, can be obtained by gluing blocks of this form.
In principle, rotating black holes in \emph{m}AdS$_6$, KN-AdS$_6$ black holes, rotating AdS$_7$ black strings,
and KN-AdS$_7$ black holes can be all studied in F(4) gauged supergravity coupled to vector multiplets \cite{DAuria:2000xty,Andrianopoli:2001rs} using a six-dimensional point of view.
For example, after Scherk-Schwarz reduction along the Hopf fiber of $S^5$ the near horizon of KN-AdS$_7$ becomes AdS$_2 \times_w \mathbb{P}^2$
and the six-dimensional black hole becomes topologically twisted. We would then expect to recover the entropy functional for KN-AdS$_7$ by gluing
three six-dimensional gravitational blocks $\mathcal{B}_{6\text{D}}$ associated to the fixed points of the toric action on $\mathbb{P}^2$ according to \eqref{conjecture:gluing}.
It would be interesting to provide a unifying description of all six- and seven-dimensional black objects using six-dimensional supergravity.
This would be in the spirit of the analysis that we have performed in this paper for four- and five-dimensional black objects.
We hope to have given a glimpse of how higher-dimensional gravitational blocks work. We will give more details elsewhere \cite{Hosseini:2019HHZ2}.
Notice that, besides recovering known results, our discussion leads to a prediction for the entropy of many rotating higher-dimensional black objects that are still to be found.
\section{Discussion and outlook}
\label{sect:Discussion}
In this paper we provided a general entropy functional that can accommodate all known supersymmetric black holes in AdS$_4\times S^7$ and AdS$_5\times S^5$ and we proposed a generalization to higher dimensions.
Our construction is based on the gluing of gravitational blocks $\mathcal{B} (X^\Lambda_{(\sigma)} , \omega_{(\sigma)} )$ that is inspired by a field theoretic analogue, the gluing of holomorphic blocks.
As already said many times it would be very interesting to make this analogy more precise, especially because a field theory explanation of some of these results is still missing.
We would also like to stress that there already exist two purely gravitational developments expected to give rise to the same construction. First, Sen's entropy function based on a partially off-shell way of evaluating the supergravity action in the near horizon region of extremal black holes \cite{Sen:2005wa} can in principle be defined for the rotating black holes we consider here. Previous formulations with rotation \cite{Astefanesei:2006dd,Hristov:2018spe} indeed show that Sen's entropy function gets two distinct contributions from the NP and SP of the sphere. However, this construction makes use of real fugacities and is not immediately suited to take into account the constrained Legendre transform of the asymptotically AdS solutions that in general requires complex parameters. Second, the evaluation of the Euclidean on-shell action at the asymptotic boundary of AdS spaces using holographic renormalization is also expected to agree with the entropy functional \cite{Cassani:2019mms}. In particular, it was recently shown \cite{BenettiGenolini:2019jdz} in minimal supergravity that the on-shell action ``localizes'' on isolated fixed points of the supersymmetric Killing vector.%
\footnote{We can also observe some similarity between the contribution from a single fixed point in \cite{BenettiGenolini:2019jdz} and our building block $\mathcal{B} (X^\Lambda_{(\sigma)} , \omega_{(\sigma)})$ for KN-AdS$_4$ in the minimal supergravity limit.}
Since the leading number of degrees of freedom of the black holes is contained within the horizon (known colloquially as the lack of {\it black hole hair}), the asymptotic and the near horizon supergravity actions should agree. We therefore expect a suitable generalization of Sen's entropy function with rotation \cite{Astefanesei:2006dd,Hristov:2018spe} to complex fugacities to agree with a suitable generalization of the ``localization of the action'' of \cite{BenettiGenolini:2019jdz} to non-minimal supergravity, the final answer being given here \eqref{gluing}.
One can also expect that all these results could follow from an equivariant localization in supergravity along the lines of \cite{Hristov:2019xku,Hristov:2018lod}.
The entropy functional \eqref{gluing} is indeed strongly suggesting an underlying fixed point formula.
Our proposal for a six-dimensional generalization \eqref{conjecture:gluing} is also directly inspired by an equivariant localization computation in field theory.
There are also many other directions for future investigations.
First of all, it would be interesting to consider examples of black objects whose holographically dual SCFT has less supersymmetry.
In particular, there exist static \emph{m}AdS$_4 \times S^6$ black holes in mIIA supergravity \cite{Guarino:2017eag,Guarino:2017pkw} whose effective prepotential reads \cite[(1.2)]{Hosseini:2017fjo}
\begin{equation}} \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}
\mathcal{F} ( X^\Lambda ) = - \mathrm{i} \frac{3^{3/2}}{4} \left( 1 - \frac{\mathrm{i}}{\sqrt{3}} \right) c^{1/3} ( X^1 X^2 X^3 )^{2/3} \, ,
\ee
where $c$ is the dyonic gauging parameter. The entropy of these black holes has been derived recently in \cite{Azzurli:2017kxo,Hosseini:2017fjo,Benini:2017oxt} via evaluating the topologically twisted of the holographically dual field theory \cite{Guarino:2015jca}.
It would be interesting to find rotating generalization of these black holes and check if our proposal for the attractor mechanism also works in this case.
Second, we notice that our discussion, while focused on AdS$_4$ black holes, has applications also to asymptotically flat black holes. In particular, the gluing procedure and the associated attractor mechanism can be applied also to
black holes in Mink$_4$. We provide an explicit example in appendix \ref{app:B}.
We should also note that black holes in gauged supergravity can exist with more exotic horizon topologies,
such as higher genus Riemann surfaces or non-compact hyperbolic space in four dimensions \cite{Caldarelli:1998hg},
and a large number of distinct possibilities when going to higher dimensions. Adding rotation is not possible in every case,
but typically the non-compact horizons do allow for non-vanishing angular momentum.
It would be interesting to extend our findings here to all theses cases as well.
Finally, we can wonder if the gravitational blocks play a bigger role in supergravity. It is tempting to think that also other supersymmetric observables in gauged supergravity can be evaluated with the help of the building block $\mathcal{B} (X^\Lambda_{(\sigma)} , \omega_{(\sigma)} )$, and maybe not just for asymptotically locally AdS backgrounds as appendix \ref{app:B} suggests. Moreover, recalling also that in some cases thermal black holes have been found to follow from a one derivative BPS-like equations \cite{Ceresole:2007wx,Klemm:2012vm,Gnecchi:2012kb}, one might hope to generalize the gravitational blocks to non-supersymmetric cases.
We hope to report more on all these topics in the future.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank Chiung Hwang, Stefanos Katmadas, and Sara Pasquetti for useful discussions.
The work of SMH was supported by World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI Initiative), MEXT, Japan.
KH is supported in part by the Bulgarian NSF grants DN08/3 and N28/5.
AZ is partially supported by the INFN, the ERC-STG grant 637844-HBQFTNCER and the MIUR-PRIN contract 2017CC72MK003.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{intro}
\subsection{Traditional investment strategies}
Traditionally, investors and analysts in the finance industry have focused on two major approaches in predicting the movement of stock prices: fundamental analysis and technical analysis \cite{beyaz}. The former focuses on indicators which attempt to quantify the intrinsic value of a company, such as macroeconomic analysis (e.g. Gross Domestic Product, Consumer Price Index), industry analysis (i.e. industry-wide trends) and company analysis (e.g. Price-to-Earnings ratio) in order to predict the growth potential of the company in question. On the other hand, technical analysis focuses on various price movement indicators such as momentum, volatility and moving averages, all of which rely upon past trends as future indicators for each respective company \cite{shah}. This latter approach presupposes that all of the necessary information regarding each stock in question are included in its stock price. The difference in these two approaches stem from the longstanding debate about whether or not stock markets are inherently predictable and thus profitable, either in the short-term or in the long-term. However, there is a commonality in both approaches in that they use historical indicators to predict each individual stock in question, which is especially the case for most machine learning approaches. Indeed, much of the work in machine learning fits into the category of technical analysis as it is a natural way to formulate stock price prediction as a sequential modeling task \cite{shah}.
\subsection{An increasingly interconnected financial world}
In reality, however, the world is increasingly more interconnected through the proliferation of the Internet, the rise of Fintech and global banking conglomerates operating across borders. In this complex financial world, stock prices, market indices, and other crucial indicators work and move in tandem, whereby a multitude of political and economic factors can affect each price. We need to look no further than the 2008 financial crisis to understand this interconnectivity intuitively and understand that individual prices don’t move solely from past trends in isolation \cite{oecd}. As a sidenote, this phenomena makes it increasingly more difficult to make sound investment decisions based solely on past trends from a few predictors, and thus more susceptible to risky investments or even fraud on a massive scale. For instance, the case of Valeant Pharmaceuticals
is a good example of a massive fraud case which appeared to have been a sound investment choice if focusing on its linearly soaring stock price trend without understanding the full context of its suspicious business model of acquiring many drug companies and racking up their drug prices for profit. It was a very popular and attractive choice among investors, before it lost north of 60\% of its original stock value in 2015, leading to huge losses for both individual and institutional investors. Although this case mostly highlights the malintent of some investors and executives, it also shows that the financial world is quickly becoming too complex for any one person to have a holistic view of the market or dive deeper into the multitude of factors that affect a particular index or stock price \cite{grove2017forensic}.
\subsection{Graph-based machine learning in the new era of finance}
From a machine learning perspective, network structures such as company knowledge graphs were difficult to incorporate due to its non-Euclidean nature. Thus, most statistical approaches, even with recent deep learning methods, did not incorporate interconnectivity into the predictive model. Furthermore, graph analytics traditionally involved hand-engineering features and summary graph statistics using graph algorithms such as PageRank, egonet, degree distribution, among others \cite{aml}\cite{replearning}. In stock market prediction, technical analysis falls under this umbrella whereby some of the aforementioned indicators such as moving averages are hand-engineered from raw price data and fed into a classifier as features. This approach, however, is both time-consuming and inflexible, especially in representing the dynamic nature of global financial markets.
One possible remedy to these issues is the recent innovation in graph neural network algorithms.
These algorithms present an opportunity to make predictive models which better represent the increasingly fast-paced and interconnected nature of the global financial system by incorporating knowledge graphs. This type of research frames the feature extraction process as a learning task rather than a preprocessing step, as is the case with graph summary statistics approaches. We posit that the financial system can best be represented in this network structure where companies are connected through various relation types such as supplier/customer, shareholder and industries. Similar to how a professional investor makes decisions, graph neural networks can utilize the network structure to incorporate the interconnectivity of the market and make better stock price predictions, rather than relying solely on the historical stock prices of each individual company or on hand-crafted features. Despite its promise, however, the use of these algorithms to the stock market prediction problem has only recently started to be explored.
The key contribution of this paper is as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item We empirically evaluate the effectiveness of graph neural networks on stocks listed in the Nikkei 225 market.
\item We conduct backtesting over a period of roughly 20 years (4,632 timesteps) to test the generalizability of graph neural networks as a method for predicting stock prices
\item We conduct backtesting using rolling window analysis, which is an effective method for evaluating time series data, especially for historical stock price data.
\end{itemize}
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{survey}, we review related work in the use of machine learning approaches to making stock market predictions. In section \ref{proposed}, we detail the algorithm and methodology used in our work. In Section \ref{evaluation} we outline the datasets used, evaluation methods and the analysis of preliminary results. We finally discuss some future extensions of this work in Section \ref{discussion} and conclude in Section \ref{conclusion}.
\section{Related work} \label{survey}
\subsection{Deep learning for technical analysis}
There have been a number of works in the use of statistical and machine learning methods for analyzing past stock trends. This problem can be framed as either a classification task e.g. UP, DOWN, STAY, or a regression task e.g. prediction of next day's closing price \cite{beyaz}. A number of approaches \cite{hu2018listening} \cite{dlframework2017bao} have shown that deep learning methods outperform traditional machine learning approaches which use hand-crafted features. \cite{dlframework2017bao} combines autoencoders and Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM) networks in order to predict the indices of six different markets across the world and has shown its predictive capabilities across various developing and developed markets. The State Frequency Memory model in \cite{hu2018listening} extends the LSTM model with inspiration from the signal processing community whereby the model attempts to decompose stock price trends into multiple latent frequency components. This approach outperforms linear Autoregressive (AR) models in the prediction of 50 stocks over a period of 9 years. Although the architectural details of the models vary, they show that deep learning approaches are effective in finding non-linear patterns in the stock market.
\subsection{Natural language processing approaches}
The use of natural language processing (NLP) approaches have been investigated as another interesting way to incorporate natural language text such as SEC filings \cite{lee-etal-2014-importance}, patents \cite{patent} or financial news \cite{ATKINS2018120}. Features such as n-grams can be extracted \cite{lee-etal-2014-importance}, or word embedding approaches such as Word2vec can be used as an unsupervised feature extractor \cite{hu2018listening}. The Hybrid Attention Network model in \cite{hu2018listening} uses Word2vec to extract embeddings for each word in news articles, and aggregates the embeddings to output a fixed size vector that represents the features for each news article. These features can then be fed into a supervised classifier similar to how numerical data would be used as inputs.
\subsection{Complex networks and network science}
A related area of research in stock prediction using graphs comes from the network science community, especially with the study of complex networks. Complex networks study a specific type of random graphs which can broadly be categorized as small-world or scale-free. Small-world networks randomly connect two distant nodes, shortening the diameter of a graph. Scale-free networks follow a power-law connectivity distribution, where a small number of hub nodes have a large number of connections \cite{supplychain2013}. In the stock prediction setting, complex networks are used to study the major influencer companies (network centrality) or clustered communities (modularity), without specifying any explicit edge relationships. For example, \cite{DBLP:journals/corr/KimS17} makes random graphs at each time interval by connecting companies through the mutual information of price movements, in order to predict the S\&P 500 index. For each random graph, they extract graph information such as the node strength distributions, network centrality and modularity. They show that incorporating these graph characteristics can improve upon ARIMA models, in predicting the one-minute interval fluctuations of the S\&P 500 market index.
\subsection{Company knowledge graphs for market prediction}
Recently, there have been interesting works \cite{feng2019temporal}\cite{kim2019hats} which incorporate open source knowledge graphs (e.g.Wikidata) into their stock prediction models for individual companies by combining graph neural networks and sequential models such as Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN). Both works follow four major steps with some differences in the algorithmic details.
First, historical stock price data are fed into an RNN layer as features to output node embeddings for each stock in question. The features can be a combination of the previous day's closing price and moving averages \cite{feng2019temporal} or price change rates \cite{kim2019hats}. These features are used to capture the short term and/or mid term trend of each stock price. Second, an adjacency matrix is created through open knowledge graph sources such as Wikidata, to connect companies through industry, subsidiary, people and product relations. Third, the node (company) embeddings created by the RNN layer and the adjacency matrix are combined and fed into a graph neural network layer to update the node embeddings. Finally, the updated embeddings are fed into a fully connected layer to make price predictions. Furthermore, \cite{kim2019hats} feeds the updated node embeddings into a separate graph pooling layer to predict the movement of market indices e.g. S\&P 500 Index, making the overall architecture a multi-task one.
We revisit the algorithm in \cite{feng2019temporal} in more detail in Section \ref{proposed}.
\section{Generalizability of GNNs for stock prediction} \label{proposed}
In this paper we examine the following research question: \\
\textit{Are knowledge graph datasets e.g. company relations data, useful in making stock predictions across different markets and longer time horizons? } \\
To answer this question, we have adopted and extended the work in \cite{feng2019temporal} and the corresponding open source codebase.
\subsection{Graph convolutional network}
The basis for the work in \cite{feng2019temporal} is the Graph Convolutional Network (GCN) algorithm proposed in \cite{kipf}. The algorithm requires as input (a) features for each node and (b) an adjacency matrix showing relations among nodes. The features for each node \begin{math}i\end{math} are updated by using the given adjacency matrix to aggregate feature representations of its neighbors: \\
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:gcn_}
\displaystyle \overline{e_i} = \sum_{j}^{N} (\frac{\phi\ (W^T\mathbb{A}_{ij} + b)}{d_j} \times e_j)
\end{equation}
where for \begin{math}N \end{math} companies and \begin{math}K \end{math} relation types,
\begin{math} \mathbb{A} \in \mathbb{R}^{\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N} \times K}\end{math} is the adjacecy matrix,
\begin{math}d_j \end{math} is the degree of node \begin{math}j \end{math} acting as a normalization factor,
\begin{math} W \in \mathbb{R}^{K}\end{math} and \begin{math}b \end{math} are learnable parameters
and \begin{math}\phi \end{math} is a non-linear activation.
Along the diagonal of the adjacency matrix, \begin{math}\mathbb{A}_{ii} \end{math} always equals 1 to ensure that a node's own embeddings are being aggregated as well. The updated embeddings can be fed into either additional GCN layers for further neighborhood sampling or into a fully connected layer for the specific learning task such as classification or regression. For the stock market prediction setting, the features for node \begin{math}e_i \end{math} can be the output of an RNN layer, where the sequential data is mapped into a vector of fixed length i.e.
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:features}
\displaystyle e_i = RNN(\chi_i)
\end{equation}
where \begin{math} \chi_i \end{math} is the features calculated from historical stock price data such as closing price or moving averages. Equation \ref{equation:features} is calculated for each relevant stock at each timestep.
In this work, we follow the algorithm in \cite{feng2019temporal} and use an LSTM layer rather than the vanilla RNN layer. As for hyperparameters, we followed the hyperparameters used in \cite{feng2019temporal} to train on NYSE stock prices, and set the number of LSTM units at 32 and the sequence length at 8 timesteps.
\subsection{Temporal graph convolution}
The implementation of GCNs, while able to incorporate graph data into the predictive model, only uses a static version of the adjacency matrix. In other words, the weighing factor which updates \begin{math}e_{i} \end{math} to \begin{math}\overline{e_i} \end{math} is static across time. In reality, however, the propagation of stock trends among connected companies evolves dynamically. For instance, the stock price between car manufacturer Company X and car parts supplier Company Y might be highly correlated as a default, but there could be instances where, for example, a new car model release could strengthen this relationship to an even greater degree.
To incorporate this time-sensitivity into the relations among nodes (companies), the dot product of the embeddings for nodes \begin{math}i \end{math} and \begin{math}j \end{math} are multiplied as a weighing factor for the relationship strength.
\begin{equation}
\label{equation:gcn}
\displaystyle \overline{e_i} = \sum_{j}^{N}( e_i^T\ e_j\ \times \frac{\phi\ (W^T\mathbb{A}_{ij} + b)}{d_j}\ \times e_j)
\end{equation}
Intuitively, the dot product represents the similarity between the embbeddings of nodes \begin{math}i \end{math} and \begin{math}j \end{math}; the more similar the recent trends in stock prices, the stronger the relation strength will be. Again, equation \ref{equation:gcn} is calculated for each relevant company at each timestep. These embeddings are then fed into a fully-connected layer for regression.
As one minor adjustment, as opposed to the implementation for the paper optimizing the RNN layers and TGC layers separately, we've instead optimized the whole network in an end-to-end manner. This is to avoid unnecessary bugs and speed up training \cite{glasmachers2017limits}, especially in a relatively simple network with one RNN layer, one TGC layer and one fully connected layer.
\subsection{Rolling window analysis}
In the financial sector, professionals are often concerned with models which reliably can predict the market over long time horizons. Therefore, we have implemented the rolling window analysis method \cite{zivot2006rolling} for splitting the full dataset into the training and test set. We use 2000 timesteps for training and 200 for testing as a fixed window, and slide that window over the full number of timesteps. For example, index 0 to 2000 and 2000 to 2200 will be used in the first iteration for training and testing, respectively. The second iteration will have indices 200 to 2200 and 2200 to 2400, and so on. This method not only ensures that the model is generalizeable across long time horizons but also represents the idea that recent stock prices have better predictive power than older ones. For instance, in order to make future predictions for a particular stock, it makes more intuitive sense to use the historical prices from the last five years rather than from the 1980s. As a further note, it is also possible to implement the growing window method, whereby the window size for the training set continues to increase while the test set window continues to slide. For instance, the first iteration contains indices 0 to 2000 as the training set, the second iteration contains 0 to 2200, and so on. This method can be useful especially in cases where the data is sparse with wider time intervals or if there are difficulties in obtaining a comprehensive number of timesteps for backtesting.
\section{Evaluation} \label{evaluation}
\subsection{Historical stock price data}
We test our model on Japanese companies listed in the Nikkei 225 market. The number of companies, however, is filtered down to 176 from 225 listed companies. This is to ensure that there are enough timesteps to conduct long-term backtesting, since some companies were either founded or listed only recently and thus contains fewer timesteps. For features to be fed into the LSTM layer, we follow \cite{feng2019temporal} and calculate 5, 10, 20, 30-day moving averages at each timestep in addition to the adjusted closing prices. We also calculate the 1-day return ratio at timestep \begin{math} t, R_t = \frac{p_t\ -\ p_{t-1}}{p_{t-1}} \end{math} as the ground truth, where \begin{math}p_t \end{math} represents the price at timestep \begin{math}t \end{math}.
\begin{table}
\caption{An example company relation data for a particular Company X}
\label{company-x}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\toprule
\cmidrule(r){1-2}
Relation Type & Company Name & Sector & Industry & Country\\
\midrule
Supplier & Company A & \makecell{Producer Manufacturing} & Auto Parts: OEM & JPN \\
Customer & Company B & Finance & Finance/Retail/Leasing & USA \\
Partner & Company C & \makecell{Consumer Durables}& Motor Vehicles & USA \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{Knowledge graph summary}
\label{graph-info}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\toprule
\# of Nodes & 12, 473 \\
\# of Edges & 38, 252 \\
Average Node Degree & 6.13 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{First- and second-order relations extracted from the created company knowledge graph}
\label{relation-types}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
\cmidrule(r){1-2}
Relation Type & \# of edges & Description \\
\midrule
supplies-from & 145 & First-order relation between companies connected by Supplier relation\\
customer-of & 145 & First-order relation between companies connected by Customer relation\\
partner-with & 555 & First-order relation between companies connected by Partner relation\\
shares-owned-by & 220 & First-order relation between companies connected by Shareholder relation\\
common-industry & 438 & Second-order relation between companies with common industry \\
common-customer & 3634 & Second-order relation between companies with common customers \\
common-supplier & 8262 & Second-order relation between companies with common supplier \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Knowledge graph dataset}
We used the Nikkei Value Search dataset
, which consists of supplier, customer, partner and shareholder relations for each of the 176 relevant companies, as shown in Table \ref{company-x}. This data is then used to create a comprehensive knowledge graph which includes companies outside of Nikkei 225 index as well as Japan. The summary statistics for this comprehensive knowledge graph is shown in Table \ref{graph-info}.
The nodes have a "node\_type" attribute with values "company", "sector", "industry" or "country", while edges have an "edge\_type" attribute with values "in-country",
"in-industry",
"in-sector",
"parent-company-of",
"partner-with",
"related-to",
"same-company", or
"shareholder".
The nodes also have a boolean attribute called "in\_nikkei" to distinguish the nodes which are listed in the Nikkei 225 market. Also, "same-company" relations were used for entity resolution purposes, where English and Japanese names for the same company were concatenated as identical nodes.
These preprocessing steps allow for the extraction of first-order and second-order relations, listed in Table \ref{relation-types}. For example, if two nodes listed in the Nikkei 225 market both had an"in-industry" edge connected to a common "industry" node, the two nodes can be connected via second-order connections.
First-order relations are direct relations among the 176 companies. This shows an apparent relationship where connected stocks could be related. However, these relationships are quite sparse and also an area where investors are already actively using for analyzing individual stocks. To alleviate the sparsity problem and make better use of the capabilities of graph neural networks, we've extracted second-order relations, which are indirect connections between any two of the 176 companies in question. The result of the preprocessing step are seven different types of adjacency matrices, \begin{math} \mathbb{A} \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N } \end{math} where \begin{math}N\end{math} is the number of companies. We've also tested a relation type called "all" where we stack the seven adjacency matrices into a three dimensional matrix, \begin{math} \mathbb{A} \in \mathbb{R}^{\mathbb{N} \times \mathbb{N} \times K} \end{math} where \begin{math}K\end{math} is the number of relation types.
\subsection{Evaluation Metrics}
As an evaluation metric, we use the return ratio and the Sharpe ratio, as they are both used frequently in the finance industry. The return ratio \begin{math}R_t\end{math} is calculated as \begin{math} \frac{p_t - p_{t-1}}{p_{t-1}} \end{math}, which is simply the percentage increase in the stock price or the return when we buy a stock at timestep \begin{math} t-1 \end{math} and sell at timestep \begin{math} t \end{math}. The Sharpe ratio is calculated as
\begin{math} \frac{R_t - R_f}{\sigma} \end{math}
where the return \begin{math}R_t\end{math} is subtracted by the risk-free rate \begin{math}R_f\end{math} which is then divided by the standard deviation of the returns \begin{math}\sigma\end{math}. The standard deviation \begin{math}\sigma\end{math} represents the risk associated with a stock, which is important in avoiding the evaluation of models based purely on returns. It is important to note that the Sharpe Ratio should not be evaluated as an absolute value, but rather viewed as a performance indicator in comparison with the benchmark.
\begin{table}
\caption{Performance comparison among various graph types against LSTM and Buy-Hold benchmarks}
\label{final-results}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
\cmidrule(r){1-2}
Edge Type & Return Ratio (Yearly Rates) & Sharpe Ratio\\
\midrule
Benchmark (Buy-Hold) & 4.30\% & 0.16 \\
LSTM & 23.63\% & 0.29 \\
supplier-of & 21.10\% & 0.30 \\
customer-of & 27.52\% & 0.35 \\
partner-with & 15.48\% & 0.12 \\
shares-owned-by & 23.54\% & 0.22 \\
common-industry & 18.09\% & 0.24 \\
common-customer & 18.61\% & 0.17 \\
common-supplier & 16.27\% & 0.14 \\
\textbf{all} & \textbf{29.95\%} & \textbf{0.37} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\caption{Return ratio for the prediction of various timesteps (customer-of)}
\label{results-timesteps}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\toprule
\cmidrule(r){1-2}
\# of time steps & Return Ratio (Yearly Rates)\\
\midrule
\textbf{1-day} & \textbf{27.52\%} \\
5-day & 21.93\% \\
10-day & 23.327\% \\
20-day & 17.36\% \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Evaluation Results}
Our preliminary results in Table \ref{final-results} shows the following results.
(a) Both the LSTM model and the various graph neural network models outperform the market benchmark.
(b) The LSTM model is outperformed by graph neural networks for "customer-of" and "all" in terms of both the Sharpe and return ratio, and is outperformed by "supplier-of" in terms of the Sharpe ratio.
(c) "all" relations have the best performance based on both the return ratio and Sharpe ratio.
(d) "customer-of" relations had a relatively high return and Sharpe ratio despite its sparsity, which suggests that customer relations are highly effective in improving predictive performance.
The results for (d) makes intuitive sense since supply chain analysis is an important industry practice among investors. However, it is important to note that while customer relations seemed to be effective in the aggregate, its effectiveness varies by time periods. For example, \cite{feng2019temporal} concluded that partner relationships e.g. product collaborations were the most effective relation type for the NASDAQ market. As the authors mention, it does make intuitive sense for companies who collaborated on a common product to have connected revenue. However, the low performance of the partner relations in this study suggest three possible theories. First, since the testing period for the paper in \cite{feng2019temporal} was limited to 200 timesteps between 2017 and 2018, the results were inconclusive. Second, partner relations could indeed have high predictive power in the NASDAQ market even with extended backtesting, but not generalizable to the Nikkei 225 market. Finally, it could also be the case that since work in \cite{feng2019temporal} used a Wikipedia-based knowledge graph, the obtained partner relationships were filtered to very important or well-known ones, while the Nikkei Value Search dataset was more comprehensive.
\subsection{Qualitative Analysis}
The nature of the graph data also allows us to investigate post-hoc whether or not related companies have similar stock trends. For example Figure \ref{fig:customer} shows a snapshot of a stock trend chart for two companies of which the model predicted strong edge relations and are connected by customer relations. In this scenario, Company B (Company A's customer) has a trough point on 6/4/2009 and Company A has a similar lagging trough point on 6/8/2009, which suggests that the stock price of a customer contributed to the prediction of stock prices for the target company. It is also important to note that the golden cross point
has a time lag in a similar fashion. The golden cross occurs at the intersection of the mid-term (30-day) moving average and the closing price, and this indicates a bullish sentiment as the closing price crosses the moving average on an upward trend. As previously mentioned, however, the effectiveness of customer relations don't always hold across all time-spans, and other factors can affect each stock price in different directions and magnitudes. Nonetheless, the intuitive nature of knowledge graph data holds interesting opportunities in terms of explainability of stock predictions.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\caption{ Comparison of stock price movements between Company A and its customer: Company B. }
\label{fig:customer}
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{softbank.png}
\captionsetup{labelformat=empty}
\caption{(b) Company B (Company A's customer)}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{nec.png}
\captionsetup{labelformat=empty}
\caption{(a) Company A}
\end{minipage}\hfill
\end{figure}
\section{Possible extensions of current work} \label{discussion}
The scope of this paper was limited to the prediction of 1-day returns for 176 companies listed in the Nikkei 225 market. However, much of the finance industry is concerned with longer prediction timesteps due to the attractiveness of lower transaction fees in passive funds.
Therefore, it can be worthwhile to explore the different relation types with different prediction timesteps to find an effective long-term predictive model. With the current model, the direct customer relation proved to be an effective indicator only for 1-day predictions, where the effectiveness wanes as the timesteps increase, as shown in Table \ref{results-timesteps}. However, it is possible that the accuracy for predictions of longer time horizons will increase as we increase the number of hops. For example, the price of a customer two hops away can be a strong indicator for predicting the 5 or 10-day future returns of the target company, if the correlations propagate. Of course, the prediction of longer time horizons becomes more and more difficult as the timesteps increase due to the multivariate and non-linear nature of the stock market leading to higher error propagation \cite{tensorrnn}. In this scenario, it can also be worthwhile to incorporate other information such as macroeconomic data or news articles rather than solely relying on supply chain relationships, which can be regarded as an important predictor variable in a family of factors which affect the market, rather than the sole indicator. Finally, it is also worthwhile to explore the method of feeding the entire knowledge graph, rather than extracting relations only among the relevant companies listed in the Nikkei 225 market. For instance, if a company X listed in the Nikkei 225 had a relation with an American Company Y, we were only able to connect other listed companies if they also had the same relation with Company Y. This will be possible once we can collect stock price data for Company Y and other non-listed companies.
\section{Conclusion} \label{conclusion}
In this paper, we have conducted preliminary experiments on the effectiveness of incorporating company relations knowledge graphs in predicting the stock market. We have shown that certain relations (customer-of) are effective predictors individually as well as combined with other weaker relations.
Our preliminary results suggest that knowledge graph data and graph neural networks holds strong promise in creating a more generalizable and practical stock market prediction mechanism. Furthermore, there are many opportunities for extending this work to the field of model interpretability and explinability as the intuitive nature of graph data makes it easier to visualize results. We encourage the finance and AI research community to further explore the use of graph neural networks for the challenging problem of making accurate market predictions and as a consequence, improved investment decisions.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
We'd like to thank JLB and the GBS Vision Fund (IBM Japan) for supporting this work. We'd also like to thank Yoshiki Minowa, Tomokazu Takeda and Tomohiro Hayashi for many useful discussions and advice.
\medskip
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Intro}
Hermann Weyl's unique style, weaving together physical ideas with mathematical rigour in an encompassing philosophical framework, lead to many important contributions that still play a major role in theoretical physics today. Several aspects discussed in this contribution are strongly influenced by his ideas on scale invariance, Weyl transformations and on the ``geometrization of physics''. Back in 1918 when the first edition of Raum-Zeit-Materie appeared only three years after Einstein has presented the final form of his theory of General Relativity, Weyl's natural intention was a geometrical unification of gravity and electromagnetism. In this contribution, I discuss a somewhat different kind of unification: the combination of elementary particle physics with cosmology in one unified model. On the one hand, fundamental physics at the electroweak (EW) scale is well described by the Standard Model of particle physics (SM). On the other hand, the cosmic history, including a quasi de Sitter stage of the early Universe, is well described by the Standard Model of Cosmology, which incorporates the mechanism of inflaton. In both models a scalar field plays a central role: the Standard model Higgs boson, which provides the masses to the elementary particles, as well as the cosmological inflaton, which drives the accelerated expansion of the early universe. In this contribution, I discuss the theoretical and observational consequences of the idea that the Higgs boson and the inflaton are one and the same particle.
In Sec. \ref{SecInflation} I review the formalism of slow-roll inflation. In Sec. \ref{StandardModel}, I provide the required details about the SM which are relevant for Higgs-inflation.
In Sec. \ref{HiggsInflation} I discuss the model of Higgs inflation. First I show, why a simple identification of the SM Higgs boson with the inflation fails. Then, I demonstrate how a non-minimal coupling of the Higgs boson to gravity can improve the situation. I emphasize the importance of quantum corrections, both from a fundamental as well as from a phenomenological perspective and discuss the aspects related to the renormalization group (RG) improvement of the model. Finally, I show how the initial conditions for the model of non-minimal Higgs-inflation can be derived from quantum cosmological considerations in a self-consistent way.
In Sec. \ref{QFP}, I discuss the classical and quantum equivalence of different field parametrizations in cosmological models and a field covariant geometric construction of the quantum effective action.
I conclude in Sec. \ref{Conclusions} with a short summary of the discussion.
\section{Inflation}
\label{SecInflation}
In this section, I briefly summarize the essential assumptions and observable consequences of inflation. I discuss the dynamics of the homogeneous and isotropic background and the observational implications following from the linear perturbations propagating on this background.
\subsection{Background dynamics}
Observation support the underlying theoretical assumption that on large scales (${\gtrsim 200}$ Mpc), the universe is spatially flat and statistically homogeneous and isotropic, leading to the Friedman-Lema\^itre-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) line-element
\begin{align}
\mathrm{d}s^2=-\mathrm{d}t^2+a^2(t)\delta_{ij}\mathrm{d}x^{i}\mathrm{d}x^{j}.\label{FLRW}
\end{align}
Here, $t$ and $x^{i}$, $i=1,2,3$ are comoving coordinates and $a(t)$ is the scale factor.
A consistent explanation of the cosmic history requires a \textit{quasi de Sitter stage} in which the early universe expanded accelerated -- inflation. In most theoretical models the inflationary stage is realized dynamically by one or more scalar fields. In contrast to a de Sitter stage corresponding to a cosmological constant $\Lambda$, the dynamics of the scalar inflaton field allows inflation to last sufficiently long to explain the high degree of isotropy of the cosmic microwave background background radiation (CMB), and, at the same time, to end the stage of accelerated expansion, necessary to explain the formation of structure we observe today, see \cite{Starobinsky1979,Starobinsky1980,Guth1981,Mukhanov1981,Mukhanov1982,Starobinsky1982,Linde1982,Albrecht1982,Guth1982,Hawking1982,Bardeen1983}.
In its simplest incarnation, inflation is described by a single minimally coupled scalar field, the \textit{inflaton} $\varphi$ with action
\begin{align}
S[g,\varphi]=\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{-g}\left[\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}R-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\varphi\partial^{\mu}\varphi-V(\varphi)\right],
\end{align}
where $M_{\mathrm{P}}=1/\sqrt{8\pi G_{\mathrm{N}}}\approx 2.4\times10^{18}$ GeV (in units $c=\hbar=1$) is the reduced Planck mass, $g=\mathrm{det}(g_{\mu\nu})$ the determinant of the metric field $g_{\mu\nu}$, $R$ the Ricci scalar and $V(\varphi)$ the scalar field potential.
For the symmetric FLRW background \eqref{FLRW} and a homogeneous scalar field $\varphi(t)$,
the field equations for $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $\varphi$ reduce to
\begin{align}
H^2=\frac{1}{3M_{\mathrm{P}}^{2}}\left(\frac{1}{2}{\dot{\varphi}}^2 + V\right),\qquad \ddot{\varphi}+3H\dot{\varphi}+ V_{,\varphi}=0.\label{KG}
\end{align}
Here $H(t):=\dot{a}(t)/a(t)$ is the Hubble parameter and the dot denotes a derivative with respect to Friedman time $t$.
A sufficiently long phase of inflation is realized for a slowly rolling inflaton $\ddot{\varphi}/H^2\ll\dot{\varphi}^2/H^2\ll1$, for which the equations \eqref{KG} reduce to
\begin{align}
H^2\approx \frac{1}{3}\frac{V}{M^{2}_{\mathrm{P}}},\qquad
3H\dot{\varphi}\approx -V_{,\varphi}.\label{SlowRollEOM}
\end{align}
In the slow-roll approximation, the inflationary dynamics is largely dictated by the properties of the inflaton potential $V(\varphi)$. This motivates the introduction of the dimensionless slow-roll parameters which measure the slope and the curvature of $V$,
\begin{align}
\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}:=\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}\,\left(\frac{V_{,\varphi}}{V}\right)^2,\qquad\eta_{\mathrm{v}}:=M_{\mathrm{P}}^2\,\left(\frac{V_{,\varphi\varphi}}{V}\right).\label{SlowRollParameters}
\end{align}
During slow-roll inflation $\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}\ll1$ and $|\eta_{\mathrm{v}}|\ll1$ quantify the deviation from de Sitter space ($\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}=\eta_{\mathrm{v}}=0$). More precisely $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{v}}<1$ is required for inflation, i.e. accelerated expansion $\ddot{a}>0$, to be realized in the first place and $|\eta_{\mathrm{v}}|\ll1$ ensures that the inflationary phase lasts sufficiently long to solve the horizon problem.
\subsection{Perturbations and inflationary observables}
Inflation amplifies the quantized inhomogeneous perturbations around the FLRW background, which provide the seeds for the density perturbations that clump under the influence of gravity and ultimately give rise to the CMB and the structure we observe today.
The main inflationary observables are the power spectra of the scalar and tensor perturbations, which due to their weak logarithmic $k$-dependence, are parametrized by the power law ansatz
\begin{align}
\mathcal{P}_{\mathrm{t}}:=A_{\mathrm{t}}\,\left(\frac{k}{k_{*}}\right)^{n_{\mathrm{t}}+\ldots},\qquad \mathcal{P}_{\mathrm{s}}:=A_{\mathrm{s}}\,\left(\frac{k}{k_{*}}\right)^{n_{\mathrm{s}}-1+\ldots}\,.\label{PowerSpectra}
\end{align}
The reference scale $k_{*}$ in the observable window ${10^{-4}\text{ Mpc}^{-1}\leq k_{*}\leq10^{-1}\text{ Mpc}^{-1}}$, first crosses the horizon at the moment $k_{*} = a_{*}\, H_{*}$ chosen to correspond to $N=60$, where $N:=\ln a$ is the number of e-folds.
The tensor and scalar amplitudes $A_{\mathrm{t}}$ and $A_{\mathrm{s}}$ characterize the strengths of the power spectra, while the tensor and scalar spectral indices $n_{\mathrm{t}}$ and $n_{\mathrm{s}}$ characterize their tilts, i.e. their weak scale dependence. The ellipsis indicate higher order terms in the expansion, which we have neglect. To first order in the slow-roll approximation, these quantities are assumed to be constant and can be expressed in terms of $V$, $\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}$ and $\eta_{\mathrm{v}}$,
\begin{align}
A_{\mathrm{t}}={}&\frac{2\,V}{3\,\pi^2\,M_{\mathrm{P}}^4},& A_{\mathrm{s}}={}&\frac{V}{24\,\pi^2\,M_{\mathrm{P}}^4\,\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}},\label{CMBAmpl}\\
n_{t}={}&-2\,\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}},& n_{\mathrm{s}}={}&1+2\,\eta_{\mathrm{v}}-6\,\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}\,.\label{Tilt}
\end{align}
All observables \eqref{CMBAmpl} and \eqref{Tilt} are to be evaluated at $\varphi_{*}$, which can be expressed in terms of the number of e-folds $N$ via the integral relation
\begin{align}
N_{*}=\int_{t_{*}}^{t_{\mathrm{end}}}\,\text{d}t\,H\simeq\int^{\varphi_{*}}_{\varphi_{\mathrm{end}}}\,\frac{\text{d}\varphi}{M_{P}^2}\,\frac{V}{V_{,\varphi}}\,.\label{NumberEfolds}
\end{align}
The value $\varphi_{\mathrm{end}}$ is defined by the breakdown of the slow-roll approximation
\begin{align}
\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}(\varphi_{\mathrm{end}}):=1\,.\label{EndOfInfl}
\end{align}
To first order in the slow-roll approximation, the scalar-to-tensor ratio is given by
\begin{align}
r:=\frac{A_{\mathrm{t}}}{A_{\mathrm{s}}}=16\,\epsilon_{\mathrm{v}}=-8\,n_{\mathrm{t}}\,\label{TTS}.
\end{align}
The last equality is a consistency equation valid in single field models.
There only exists an upper bound on $r$, since the tensor power spectrum has not been measured. Recent observational constraints from the CMB at $k_{*}= 0.05$ $\text{ Mpc}^{-1}$ are provided in \cite{Akrami2018},
\begin{align}
A_{\mathrm{s}}^{*}={}&\left(2.099\pm0.014\right)\times 10^{-9}&& 68\%\;\mathrm{CL},\label{AsCMB}\\
n_{\mathrm{s},\,*} ={}& 0.9649 \pm 0.0042&& 68\%\;\mathrm{CL},\label{Planckns}\\
r_{*} <{}& 0.11&& 95\%\;\mathrm{CL}.\label{Planckr}
\end{align}
For any consistent inflationary model, these observational constraints have to be in agreement with the predictions for \eqref{CMBAmpl} and \eqref{Tilt}.
\section{Standard Model of particle physics}
\label{StandardModel}
The Higgs boson $h$ is an integral part of the SM of particle physics and provides a mechanism by which the SM particles acquire their mass. The Higgs field is a complex $SU(2)$ doublet $\Phi$, which in the real parametrization consists of the radial massive Higgs component $h$ and the three angular Goldstone bosons $\theta_i$, $i=1,2,3$. So far, the Higgs boson is the only fundamental scalar particle which has been detected. It is an interesting question whether there are more (maybe many more) scalar fields in nature. The Higgs sector of the SM is described by the Lagrangian density
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{Higgs}}^{\mathrm{SM}}=-\frac{1}{2}\left|\partial\Phi\right|^2-\frac{\lambda}{4}\left(\left|\Phi\right|^2-v^2\right)^2,\qquad \left|\Phi\right|^2=\Phi^{\dagger}\Phi.
\end{align}
Here $\lambda$ is the quartic Higgs self-coupling and $v\approx 246$ GeV the EW scale. In unitary gauge, with $|\Phi|^2=h^2$, the Lagrangian describing the non-derivative interaction of the Higgs boson $h$ with the other SM particles schematically reads
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{int}}^{\mathrm{SM}}=-\sum_{\chi}\frac{1}{2}\lambda_{ \chi}\chi^2h^2-\sum_{A}\frac{1}{2}g_A^2A_{\mu}^2h^2-\sum_{\psi}y_{\psi}\bar{\psi}\psi h,
\end{align}
where the sum extends over scalar fields $\chi$, vector gauge fields $A_{\mu}$ and Dirac spinors $\psi$ with the corresponding scalar, gauge and Yukawa couplings $\lambda_{\chi}$, $g_{A}$ and $y_{\psi}$.
The interaction sector is dominated by the heaviest particles in the SM: the Yukawa top-quark, the Higgs boson, the $Z$ boson and the $W^{\pm}$ bosons, with masses
\begin{align}
M_{\mathrm{t}}^2=\frac{1}{2}y_{\mathrm{t}}^2h^2,\qquad M_{h}^2=2\lambda h^2,\qquad M_{Z}^2=\frac{\left(g+g'\right)^2}{4}h^2,\qquad M_{W}^2=\frac{1}{4}g^2h^2.\label{MassesSM}
\end{align}
Data from collider experiments constrain these masses \cite{Tanabashi2018},
\begin{align}
M_{\mathrm{t}}={}&173.0\pm 0.4\;\mathrm{GeV},&
M_{\mathrm{h}}={}&125.18\pm 0.16\;\mathrm{GeV},\label{Mh}\\
M_{\mathrm{Z}}={}&91.1876\pm 0.0021\;\mathrm{GeV},&
M_{\mathrm{W}}={}&80.379\pm 0.012\;\mathrm{GeV}. \label{MW}
\end{align}
The values for \eqref{MassesSM} and \eqref{Mh} constrain the quartic Higgs self-coupling $\lambda\approx0.1$ at the EW scale $h\simeq v$.
\section{Higgs inflation}
\label{HiggsInflation}
The basic idea of Higgs inflation is to identify the SM Higgs boson $h$ with the cosmic inflaton $\varphi$,
thereby establishing a direct connection between elementary particle physics and inflationary cosmology
\begin{align}
h\equiv\varphi.
\end{align}
Such a unified scenario is not only very appealing from a theoretical point of view, but also very predictive, as it requires to simultaneously match observational constraints from particle physics and cosmology. I first discuss the difference between a minimally and non-minimally coupled SM Higgs to gravity at tree-level and then extend the discussion to the inclusion of important and unavoidable quantum corrections.
\subsection{Minimal Higgs inflation}
\label{sec:1}
The most direct approach to construct the unified scenario of Higgs inflation is to embed the SM in curved spacetime and to analyse the inflationary consequences of a SM Higgs boson minimally coupled to gravity. In this case, the graviton-Higgs sector is described by the action
\begin{align}
S[g,\varphi]=\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{-g}\left[\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}R-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\varphi\partial^{\mu}\varphi-\frac{\lambda}{4}\left(\varphi^2-v^2\right)^2\right].\label{MinAct}
\end{align}
The action \eqref{MinAct} was already investigated in one of the earliest models of inflation, formulated in \cite{Linde1983}. Form the viewpoint of the inflationary slow-roll analysis \eqref{MinAct} leads to the chaotic inflation scenario with the monomial potential (for $\varphi/v\gg1$),
\begin{align}
V(\varphi)=\frac{\lambda}{4}\varphi^4.\label{lambdaphi4}
\end{align}
For the inflationary observables \eqref{CMBAmpl}, \eqref{Tilt} and \eqref{TTS} for the potential \eqref{lambdaphi4} to leading order in $N_{*}\gg1$, the model \eqref{MinAct} predicts
\begin{align}
A_{\mathrm{s}}=\frac{2\lambda N_{*}^3}{3\pi^2},\qquad n_\mathrm{s}=1-\frac{3}{N_{*}}=0.95,\qquad r=\frac{16}{N_{*}}\approx 0.2667.\label{InfPredLamb4}
\end{align}
The numerical values are obtained for $N_{*}=60$.
Combining the observational constraint on $A_{\mathrm{s}}$ given in \eqref{AsCMB} with the predicted value in \eqref{InfPredLamb4}, directly translates into a constraint for the quartic Higgs self-coupling $\lambda\approx 10^{-13}$. Such a tiny value for $\lambda$ is clearly incompatible with the value $\lambda\approx0.1$, required by the observational SM constraint on the Higgs mass \eqref{MassesSM} and therefore spoils this first approach to identify the inflaton with the SM Higgs boson.
Note however that the constraint $\lambda\approx0.1$ only has to be satisfied at the EW scale $E_{\mathrm{EW}}\approx 10^2$ GeV, while at inflationary energy scales $E_{\mathrm{inf}}\approx 10^{15}$ GeV, $\lambda$ might attain different values. As I discuss in Sec. \ref{QC}, the RG flow of the SM drives the running $\lambda(t)$ to very small values at high energy scales. But even, if values as small as $\lambda(t_{\mathrm{inf}})\approx 10^{-13}$ could be attained dynamically by the RG flow, such that the CMB normalization condition \eqref{AsCMB} would be satisfied at the energy scale of inflation, the RG corrections would also have to improve the situation with the spectral observables as the tree-level chaotic inflationary model with potential \eqref{lambdaphi4} predicts a scalar spectral index and a tensor-to-scalar ratio \eqref{InfPredLamb4} incompatible with the observational constraints \eqref{Planckns} and \eqref{Planckr}.
\subsection{Non-minimal Higgs-inflation}
The central assumption for a successful identification of the inflaton with the SM Higgs boson is to include a non-minimally coupling of $\varphi$ to gravity.
Early ideas to incorporate a non-minimal coupling of an abstract inflaton field to gravity were formulated in \cite{Salopek1989,Fakir1990} in order to improve the situation with the observational constraints on $\lambda$ and on the spectral observables \eqref{InfPredLamb4}. The identification of a non-minimally coupled inflaton with the SM Higgs boson was proposed in \cite{Bezrukov2008}.
Independent of its phenomenological impact on the observational constraints, a non-minimal coupling might be motivated by several theoretical reasons: First, a non-minimal coupling might, to some extend, be viewed as incorporating the Machian idea of a variational gravitational constant. Second, its presence is required for technical reasons. Even in the absence of a non-minimal coupling, already the first quantum corrections for a self-interacting scalar field induce a non-minimal coupling term and the consistency of the renormalization procedure requires that this term must be included in the action. Third, from an effective field theory point of view, the non-minimal coupling term in the action corresponds to a marginal operator, which is on equal footing with the Einstein-Hilbert term in a derivative expansion and should therefore be included in the defining low energy limit of the theory. Fourth, the inclusion of such a term leads to an asymptotic scale invariance for large values of the scalar field, which realizes inflation in a natural way and ends it when the scale invariance is explicitly broken by the Einstein-Hilbert operator. Fifth, in the context of effective string theory inspired models, a non-minimal coupling unavoidably arises in the form of a dilaton or moduli field. Irrespectively of these theoretical motivations, in the following sections, I discuss the phenomenological consequences of a non-minimal coupling in the context of Higgs inflation.
\begin{align}
S[g,\varphi]=\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{-g}\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(M_{\mathrm{P}}^2+\xi\varphi^2\right)R-\frac{1}{2}\partial_{\mu}\varphi\partial^{\mu}\varphi-\frac{\lambda}{4}\left(\varphi^2-v^2\right)^2\right].\label{JFAct}
\end{align}
The formalism of Sec.~\ref{SecInflation} is directly applicable by performing a field redefinition
\begin{align}
\hat{g}_{\mu\nu}=\left(1+\xi\frac{\varphi^2}{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}\right)g_{\mu\nu},\qquad
\left(\frac{\partial\hat{\varphi}}{\partial\varphi}\right)=\frac{1+\xi\left(1+6\xi\right)\frac{\varphi^2}{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}}{\left(1+\xi\frac{\varphi^2}{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}\right)^2}.\label{TrafoJFEF}
\end{align}
In this way, the action \eqref{JFAct}, originally formulated in the Jordan frame (JF) variables $(g_{\mu\nu},\varphi)$, is mapped to the action in the Einstein frame (EF) variables $(\hat{g}_{\mu\nu},\hat{\varphi})$,\footnote{Since the form of the EF action \eqref{EFACT} formally resembles that of the Einstein-Hilbert action \eqref{MinAct}, the formulation in terms of the variables $(\hat{g}_{\mu\nu},\hat{\varphi})$ is called ``Einstein frame''. The formulation in terms of the ``Jordan frame'' variables $(g_{\mu\nu},\varphi)$, for which the scalar-tensor character of the action is manifest, derives from the early work of Pascual Jordan on such models.}
\begin{align}
\hat{S}[\hat{g},\hat{\varphi}]=\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{-\hat{g}}\left[\frac{1}{2}M_{\mathrm{P}}^2\hat{R}-\frac{1}{2}\hat{g}^{\mu\nu}\partial_{\mu}\hat{\varphi}\partial_{\nu}\hat{\varphi}-\hat{V}(\hat{\varphi})\right],\label{EFACT}
\end{align}
with the EF potential defined as
\begin{align}
\hat{V}(\hat{\varphi}):=\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^4\lambda}{4\xi^2}\left(1-e^{-\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{\hat{\varphi}}{M_{\mathrm{P}}}}\right)^2.\label{EFPot}
\end{align}
The main purpose of this transformation is to remove the non-minimal coupling by a Weyl transformation of the metric field $g_{\mu\nu}\to \hat{g}_{\mu\nu}=\Omega^2(\varphi)g_{\mu\nu}$, with a field-dependent conformal factor $\Omega^2(\varphi)$ explicitly given in the first equation of \eqref{TrafoJFEF}. Since the derivatives of $\Omega(\varphi)$, which arise in this transformation, also induce a contribution to the kinetic term of the scalar field, a reparametrization $\varphi\to\hat{\varphi}$ is required to obtain a canonically normalized kinetic term. Ultimately, in this way the complexity associated with the non-minimal coupling is shifted to the scalar potential. While the EF action formally resembles that of the minimally coupled scalar field, the potentials differ and matter fields also feel the coupling to the scalar-field dependent EF metric.\footnote{Note however, that matter fields which do not directly couple to $\varphi$ and whose action is invariant under Weyl transformations are insensitive to the transformation \eqref{TrafoJFEF} -- at least at the classical level.}
Applying the inflationary formalism of Sec.~\ref{SecInflation} to the EF action \eqref{EFACT}, the inflationary observables for the potential \eqref{EFPot} to leading order in $\hat{N}_{*}\gg1$ are
\begin{align}
\hat{A}_{\mathrm{s}}^{*}=\frac{\hat{N}_{*}^2}{72 \pi^2 }\frac{\lambda }{\xi^2},\qquad \hat{n}_{\mathrm{s}}^{*}=1-\frac{2}{\hat{N}_{*}}\approx0.9667,\qquad \hat{r}^{*}=\frac{12}{\hat{N}_{*}^2}\approx 0.0033.\label{ObsNMHI}
\end{align}
The numerical values are again presented for $N_{*}=60$.
Comparing the potential \eqref{lambdaphi4} of the minimally coupled action \eqref{MinAct} with the EF potential \eqref{EFPot}, there are two main effects which improve the situation with the observational constraints:
First, for the non-minimally coupled Higgs boson, the normalization of the EF potential depends on the ratio $\lambda/\xi^2$ in contrast to the pure $\lambda$ dependence for the minimally coupled Higgs boson. Therefore, by making $\xi$ sufficiently large $\xi\approx10^{4}$, the quartic coupling can be tuned to $\lambda\approx0.1$ such that both the CMB constraint \eqref{AsCMB} as well as the Higgs mass constraint \eqref{Mh} are satisfied simultaneously.
The second effect is that, in contrast to the quartic chaotic inflation potential \eqref{lambdaphi4}, the EF potential \eqref{EFPot} becomes field independent and almost flat for large field values of $\hat{\varphi}$, thereby improving the situation with the constraints on the spectral observables in \eqref{ObsNMHI} -- both the spectral index as well as the tensor-to-scalar ratio are in perfect agreement with the observational bounds \eqref{Planckns} and \eqref{Planckr}.
\subsection{Quantum corrections and the renormalization group}
\label{QC}
When identifying the non-minimally coupled SM Higgs boson with the inflaton at tree-level, the main compatibility requirement is that the observational restrictions on the CMB normalization \eqref{AsCMB} and the Higgs mass \eqref{Mh} are satisfied simultaneously, requiring $\xi\approx10^{4}$ and $\lambda\approx10^{-1}$.
As can be seen from \eqref{ObsNMHI}, the scalar-tensor sector of the non-minimally coupled Higgs field belongs to a more general class of inflationary models, for which the predictions of the scalar spectral index and the tensor-to-scalar ratio are independent of the model parameters. Therefore, provided the constraints \eqref{AsCMB} and \eqref{Mh} are satisfied, the inflationary predictions of the tree-level non-minimal Higgs inflation model are insensitive to the detailed properties of the SM particles.
It is clear that such a tree-level consideration is incomplete and cannot be correct. The quantum loop corrections of the SM particles have to be taken into account.
In particular, the quantum corrections to the EF effective potential, which are dominated by the heaviest particles of the SM, ultimately induce a dependence of the spectral observables $n_{\mathrm{s}}$ and $r$ on the particle content of the SM. In \cite{Barvinsky2008}, the one-loop effective Coleman-Weinberg potential in the EF (expressed in terms of the JF field $\varphi$) was obtained as
\begin{align}
\hat{V}=\frac{\lambda M_{\mathrm{P}}^4}{4\xi^2}\left(1-\frac{2M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{\xi\varphi^2}+\frac{\mathbf{A}_{\mathrm{I}}}{16\pi^2}\ln\frac{\varphi}{\mu_0}\right),
\label{EffPotEF}
\end{align}
with arbitrary renormalization point $\mu_0$ and the inflationary anomalous scaling
\begin{align}
\mathbf{A}_{\mathrm{I}}=\mathbf{A}-12\lambda=\frac{3}{8\lambda}\left[2g^4+\left(g^2+g'^2\right)^2-y_{\mathrm{t}}^4\right]-6\lambda.\label{InfAnDim}
\end{align}
Here $g$ and $g'$ are the EW gauge couplings and $y_{\mathrm{t}}$ the Yukawa to-quark coupling.
As shown in \cite{Barvinsky2008}, the impact of these quantum corrections lead to essential modifications of the shape of the inflationary potential, as during inflation $\varphi\gg M_{\mathrm{P}}/\sqrt{\xi}$, the second term in \eqref{EffPotEF} is negligible and the logarithmic quantum corrections dominate over the flat tree-level part.
The quantum contribution can be parametrized by the dimensionless quantity
\begin{align}
x:=\frac{\hat{N} \mathbf{A}_{I}}{48\pi^2},
\end{align}
which enters the inflationary observables \eqref{ObsNMHI} in the form of correction factors
\begin{align}
\hat{A}_{\mathrm{s}}^{*}=\frac{\hat{N}_{*}^2}{72 \pi^2 }\frac{\lambda }{\xi^2}\left(\frac{e^{x}-1}{xe^x}\right)^2,\qquad \hat{n}_{\mathrm{s}}^{*}=1-\frac{2}{\hat{N}_{*}}\frac{x}{e^x-1},\qquad \hat{r}^{*}=\frac{12}{\hat{N}_{*}^2}\left(\frac{xe^x}{e^x-1}\right).\label{ObsNMHIQC}
\end{align}
As demonstrated in \cite{Barvinsky2008}, the impact of these quantum corrections could render the identification of the SM Higgs with the inflaton invalid.
However, taking into account the quantum corrections at the EW scale is not sufficient. The coupling constants depend on the energy scale of the underlying physical process and their change is determined by the system RG equations
\begin{align}
\frac{\mathrm{d}g_{i}}{\mathrm{d}t}=\beta_{i},\qquad\frac{\mathrm{d}Z}{\mathrm{d}t}=\gamma Z.
\end{align}
The beta functions $\beta_i$ of the couplings $g_i=\{\lambda,\,y_{\mathrm{t}},\,\xi,\,g,\,g',\,g_{\mathrm{s}}\}$, include the quartic Higgs self-coupling $\lambda$, the Yukawa top-quark coupling $y_t$, the non-minimal coupling $\xi$, the EW gauge couplings $g$, $g'$ and the strong gauge coupling $g_{\mathrm{s}}$ all depend on the logarithmic RG scale ${t=\ln\left(\varphi/M_{\mathrm{t}}\right)}$ where the arbitrary renormalization point $\mu_0$ has ben fixed to agree with the highest mass scale $M_{\mathrm{t}}$ in the SM. In addition, the wave function renormalization $Z$ of the Higgs boson determined by its anomalous dimension $\gamma$ have to be taken into account. However, since it was found in \cite{Barvinsky2009} that the running of $Z$ is very slow, we neglect the running of $Z$ and assume $Z=1$ in the following discussion.
Although, the dimensionless couplings $g_i$, only change logarithmically with the energy scale, the effects of the RG improvement becomes sizeable as the EW scale and the inflationary scale are separated by approximately thirteen orders of magnitude.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.4]
\begin{scope}
\draw[](-1,0)--(5,0);
\node at (6,-0.45){\small Energy [GeV]};
\draw (5,-0.1)--(5,0.1);
\node at (5,0.4) {UV};
\node at (5,-0.45) {$\infty$};
\draw (4,-0.1)--(4,0.1);
\node at (4,0.4){$E_{\mathrm{inf}}$};
\node at (4,-0.4){$10^{15}$};
\draw (4.5,-0.1)--(4.5,0.1);
\node at (4.5,0.4){$M_{\mathrm{P}}$};
\node at (4.5,-0.4){$10^{18}$};
\draw (-0.5,-0.1)--(-0.5,0.1);
\node at (-0.5,0.4){$E_{\mathrm{EW}}$};
\node at (-0.5,-0.4){$10^{2}$};
\draw (-1,-0.1)--(-1,0.1);
\node at (-1,0.4){IR};
\node at (-1,-0.4){$0$};
\draw [thick,decoration={brace,mirror,raise=0.5cm},decorate](-0.2,0.2)--(3.8,0.2);
\node at (2,-0.5){Big desert or new physics?};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Different energy scales and their connection to the model of non-minimal Higgs inflation.}
\end{figure}
\noindent The dominant one-loop RG improvement of the model was investigated in \cite{Bezrukov2009a,DeSimone2009,Barvinsky2009} and shown to be the essential mechanism by which the Higgs inflation compatibility constraints can be satisfied. The subleading two-loop contributions to the running, first considered in \cite{Bezrukov2009}, are significant and, compared to the one-loop running, reduce the bound of the cosmologically compatible Higgs mass about $10$ GeV down to the observed value \eqref{Mh}.\footnote{A non-perturbative treatment in the context of the asymptotic safety paradigm which includes the running of Newtons constant has been investigated in \cite{Shaposhnikov2010}. Imposing that $\lambda$ and $\beta_{\lambda}$ vanish at the Planck scale and evolving the flow towards the IR leads to a Higgs mass prediction of $M_{\mathrm{h}}\approx126$ GeV.}
In general, the functional shape of the tree-level EF potential \eqref{EFPot} is changed by the RG improvement, which in turn leads to modified predictions for the inflationary observables \eqref{ObsNMHI}. Moreover, since the RG flow of the SM is very sensitive to the initial conditions of $\lambda(t)$ and $y_{\mathrm{t}}(t)$ at the EW scale $t_{\mathrm{EW}}\approx 0$, and since these initial conditions are related to the observed masses $M_{\mathrm{h}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{t}}$, the RG improved spectral observables can induce a strong dependence on the precise values of these masses and therefore on the details of the SM.
The non-minimal coupling in the JF directly couples the Higgs boson $h$ to derivatives of the metric field and thereby mixes gravitational and Higgs degrees of freedom. In contrast, the field content of the graviton-scalar sector in the EF is diagonal and leads to a Higgs propagator
\begin{align}
\langle h(x),h(0)\rangle
\propto\frac{s(\varphi)}{\hat{g}^{1/2}\left(\hat{\Box}-M_{\mathrm{h}}^2\right)}.\label{HiggsEFprop}
\end{align}
In \cite{DeSimone2009,Barvinsky2009}, it was demonstrated that the impact of the non-minimal coupling on the SM beta functions can be effectively incorporated by taking into account the weighting of the internal Higgs propagators in the corresponding Feynman diagrams by a power of the suppression function
\begin{align}
s(\varphi)=\frac{U}{G U+3(U_1)^2}\simeq
\begin{cases}
1&\text{ for }\varphi\ll \frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}}{\sqrt{\xi}},\\
\frac{1}{6\xi}&\text{ for }\varphi\gg \frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}}{\sqrt{\xi}}.
\end{cases}\label{supps}
\end{align}
Here the functions $U(\varphi)$ and $G(\varphi)$ are defined in \eqref{ActST}, and, upon comparison with the model of non-minimal Higgs inflation \eqref{JFAct}, are given by $U=(M_{\mathrm{P}}^2+\xi\varphi^2)/2$ and $G(\varphi)=1$. Since the suppression function \eqref{supps} behaves like $s\approx 1/6\xi$ for large field values, a large non-minimal coupling ${\xi\approx 10^{4}}$ leads to a strong suppression of Higgs contributions in the beta functions. Prior to the Higgs discovery, the Higgs mass was expected to lie in the interval ${118\;\mathrm{ GeV}\lesssim M_{\mathrm{h}}\lesssim 180\;\mathrm{ GeV}}$ and the suppression phenomenon was termed ``asymptotic freedom'' in \cite{Barvinsky2009}, as the suppression of Higgs contribution in the beta function $\beta_{\lambda}$ essentially prevents $\lambda(t)$ to run into a Landau pole before the energy scale of inflation and allows a perturbative treatment up to inflationary energy scales -- even for large Higgs mass values.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=3cm]{RunningLambdaSuppressed}
\end{center}
\caption{The RG running of $\lambda(t)$ for fixed top-quark mass $M_{\mathrm{t}}=173$ GeV and different Higgs masses $M_{\mathrm{h}}=180$ GeV (grey), $M_{\mathrm{h}}=160$ GeV (purple) and $M_{\mathrm{h}}=125$ GeV (blue) including the effect of the non-minimal coupling due to the propagator weighting with the suppression function (dashed) and without the propagator weighting (solid). For large Higgs masses, the unsuppressed beta functions would drive $\lambda(t)$ into a Landau pole for scales below the energy scale of inflation $t<t_{\mathrm{inf}}$ (grey solid line). The numerically integrated two-loop beta functions with the weighting were taken from \cite{Allison2014} and those without weighting from the two-loop truncation of the beta functions in the appendix of \cite{Buttazzo2013}.}
\label{FigSupp}
\end{figure}
\noindent From Fig. \ref{FigSupp}, it is clear that the suppression is strongest for large Higgs masses. Since the discovery of a light Higgs with $M_{\mathrm{h}}\approx125$ GeV, it is clear that the suppression mechanism is no longer very relevant.\footnote{It might however become relevant for strong non-minimal couplings $\xi\gg10^{4}$ arising e.g. in induced inflation -- not because the stronger suppression with $s=1/6\xi$, but because transition regime $M_{\mathrm{P}}/\xi\lesssim \varphi\lesssim M_{\mathrm{P}}/\sqrt{\xi}$ during which the suppression mechanism becomes effective is essentially lowered for large $\xi$ and could therefore lead to a strong suppression of $\lambda$-dependent terms at a stage where the RG flow has not driven $\lambda$ to values $\lambda\ll0.1$.} Instead, the RG flow of the SM drives the running $\lambda(t)$ to very small values at high energy scales and $\lambda$-dependent contributions in the beta functions are anyway small. Therefore, the influence of the non-minimal coupling $\xi$ on the SM beta functions is very weak. Moreover, given that the running of the non-minimal coupling $\xi$ itself is rather slow, we neglect its running $\beta_{\xi}\approx0$ and consider only the system of unmodified pure SM beta functions in the following discussion.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=3cm]{SMRGRunningCompressed}\qquad\qquad
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=3cm]{SMRGRunningLambdaCompressed}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: The pure SM running of the quartic Higgs self-coupling $\lambda$ (blue), the Yukawa top quark coupling $y_t$ (pink) and the EW and strong gauge couplings $g$ (green line), $g'$ (orange line) and $g_{\mathrm{s}}$ (red line). Right: Zoomed in plot of the pure SM running of the quartic Higgs self-coupling $\lambda$ for fixed Higgs mass $M_{\mathrm{h}}=125$ GeV and three different values of the Yukawa top quark mass $M_{\mathrm{t}}=168$ GeV (upper blue dashed line), $M_{\mathrm{t}}=173$ GeV (middle blue solid line), and $M_{\mathrm{t}}=170.8$ GeV (lower blue dashed line), illustrating the the Higgs coupling might be driven to negative values, depending on the precise value of $M_{\mathrm{t}}$. In both plots the two-loop approximation of the beta functions presented in \cite{Buttazzo2013} were numerically integrated with \texttt{Mathematica}.}
\label{FigSMRunning}
\end{figure}
\noindent Even if the running of the non-minimal coupling and its impact on the running of the SM beta functions is rather mild for a light SM Higgs boson, the presence of the non-minimal coupling is nevertheless crucial, as it ensures that the EF potential \eqref{EFPot} is almost field independent (i.e. flat) with the overall normalization factor $\lambda(t)/\xi^2$. Before I address the (in)stability of the RG improved EF potential, I briefly discuss three qualitatively different scenarios under the assumption that $\lambda(t)>0$ for all $t$.
For a light Higgs boson, the RG flow of the SM drives $\lambda(t)$ to very small values at high energies. Moreover, its flow is also very slow at high energies $\beta_{\lambda}\ll1$ and $\lambda(t)$ develops a minimum $\lambda_0:=\lambda(t_0)$ at $t_0$ defined by $\partial_{t}\lambda(t)|_{t=t_0}=\beta_\lambda(t)|_{t=t_0}=0$. Hence, the running in the vicinity of $\lambda_0$ might be described by the Taylor expansion
\begin{align}
\lambda(t)=\lambda_0+\frac{\lambda_2}{(16\pi^2)^2}\, t^2+\mathcal{O}(t^3).
\end{align}
In general, the values of $\lambda_0$ and $\lambda_2$ are functions of the SM input and depend predominately on the values of $M_{\mathrm{h}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{t}}$. Numerical integration of the RG flow reveals however that $\lambda_2$ is rather insensitive to changes in $M_{\mathrm{h}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{t}}$ and is well approximated by a constant $\lambda_2/(16\pi^2)^2\approx4\times10^{-5}$. In contrast, the value of $\lambda_0$ varies between $10^{-2}$ and $10^{-6}$ and its dependence on $M_{\mathrm{h}}$ and $M_{\mathrm{t}}$ can be parametrized by a fitting formula as e.g. discussed in \cite{Hamada2014,Bezrukov2014}; see also the discussion in the recent review article \cite{Rubio2019}.
The value $t_{0}$ is related to a value $t_{\mathrm{crit}}$ at which the RG improved effective EF potential has an inflection point $\partial_t^2\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}:=0$. There are three qualitatively different scenarios, depending on the sign of the slope $\partial_t\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}$ at that point :
\begin{enumerate}
\item[I.] {\bf Universal: $\partial_t\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}\gg0$} \\
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=11.5cm,height=3cm]{InflectionPos2Clean.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: The RG improved EF potential is a monotonically increasing function. The red line connects $t_{\mathrm{crit}}$ with $\partial_t^2\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}$. Right: The running of $\lambda$, where the red line connects $t_{0}$ with $\lambda_0$.}
\label{FigUniv}
\end{figure}
\noindent The positive slope of the RG improved EF potential cannot be too large (such as exaggeratedly shown in Fig. \ref{FigUniv} for illustrative purposes) and must be cut off by a sufficiently strong non-minimal coupling $\xi$ in order not to spoil the flatness of the potential required for slow-roll inflation. Since the shape of the RG improved potential is almost unchanged compared to the shape of the tree-level EF potential, the RG improved spectral observables \eqref{ObsNMHI}, which depend on derivatives of the potential, are almost identical to the tree-level predictions \eqref{EFPot} in this scenario. Therefore the cosmological predictions are largely insensitive to the details of the SM in this scenario. \\[2mm]
\item[II.]{\bf Critical: $\partial_t\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}\geq0$} \\
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=11.5cm,height=3cm]{InflectionCrit2Clean.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: The inflection point of the RG improved EF potential coincides with its extremum. The red line connects connects $t_{\mathrm{crit}}$ with $\partial_t^2\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}$. Left: The RG running of $\lambda(t)$. The red line connects $t_0$ with the minimum $\lambda_0$. }
\end{figure}
\noindent The exact relation $\partial_t\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}=0$ would lead to a strictly constant plateau of the RG improved EF potential, preventing any inflationary dynamics. In contrast a slight violation of this strict condition by allowing $\partial_t\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}\geq0$ with $\left|\partial_t\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}\right|\ll1$ leads to an extremely flat plateau on which (ultra) slow-roll inflation can take place.
Since this configuration can only be obtained by a highly fine-tuned combination of parameters $M_{\mathrm{h}}$, $M_{\mathrm{t}}$ and $\xi$, the RG improved cosmological predictions of non-minimal Higgs inflation in the critical regime strongly depend on the details of the SM at the EW scale, in particular on the values of $M_{\mathrm{t}}$.
Compared to its value at the EW scale $\lambda_{\mathrm{EW}}\approx0.1$, the running $\lambda$ can be as small as $\lambda_{\mathrm{inf}}\approx 10^{-6}$ during inflation, such that the CMB normalization condition \eqref{ObsNMHI} for $A_{\mathrm{s}}$ allows for a significant smaller $\xi=\mathcal{O}(10)$ as found in \cite{Allison2014,Bezrukov2014,Hamada2014}.
During the (ultra) slow-roll dynamics on the (ultra) flat plateau, the background dynamics of the inflaton field might no longer be dominated by the overall classical slow-roll drift but by quantum fluctuations, a scenario which can be consistently described within the stochastic approach, see \cite{Starobinsky1994}. In contrast to the universal regime, the slow-roll parameter $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{v}}(\varphi)$ defined in \eqref{SlowRollParameters} is no longer a monotonic function of $\varphi$, but changes the sign of its slope in accordance with the change of slope of the RG improved EF potential at the inflection point. In particular, the tree-level consistency condition \eqref{TTS} implies that, in contrast to the small universal tree-level prediction $r\approx 3\times 10^{-3}$, in the critical scenario the tensor-to-scalar ratio $r$ can attain larger values up to $r=\mathcal{O}(10^{-1})$, c.f. \cite{Allison2014,Bezrukov2014,Hamada2014}. In general, the non-monotonic behaviour of the slow-roll parameter $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{v}}$ also leads to a rather strong change ($k$-dependence) of $n_{\mathrm{s}}$ where the simple power-law parametrization of the primordial power spectra \eqref{PowerSpectra} is no longer appropriate.\\[3mm]
\item[III.]{\bf Hilltop: $\partial_t\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}<0$}\\
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=11.5cm,height=3cm]{InflectionNeg2Clean.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: The RG improved EF potential forms a second minimum at high energies. The red lie connects $t_{\mathrm{crit}}$ with the inflection point $\partial_t^2\hat{V}(t)|_{t=t_{\mathrm{crit}}}$. Left: The RG running of $\lambda(t)$. The red line connects $t_0$ with the minimum $\lambda_0$.}
\end{figure}
\noindent The RG improved EF potential develops a second local minimum at high energy scales. By lowering the values of $\lambda_0$ (increasing $M_{\mathrm{t}}$ for fixed $M_{\mathrm{h}}$), the second local minimum can be continuously lowered, up to the point where $\lambda_0=0$ and its height degenerates with the EW vacuum.
The two minima are separated by a local maximum at which hilltop inflation can take place. Such a behaviour of the RG improved EF potential has been found in \cite{Barvinsky2009}, see also \cite{Enckell2018a}. In order to realize a successful phase of inflation, it must be ensured that the inflaton field can roll down all the way to the EW vacuum and does not get trapped in the second (false) vacuum when rolling down the hilltop in the opposite direction. In general, this scenario would require a rather strong fine tuning to arrange for the correct initial conditions of inflation. However, as I discuss in Sec. \ref{SecQC}, the formation of the initial conditions for non-minimal Higgs inflation might be consistently derived from more fundamental quantum cosmological considerations.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Instability of the electroweak vacuum}
The stability of the EW vacuum together with the associated restrictions on the SM masses has been investigated already in \cite{Arnold1989,Sher1989,Anderson1990,Espinosa1995, Froggatt1996,Isidori2008}. The RG flow of the SM is known to high precision and for the central values of the Higgs mass and the top-quark mass at the EW scale \eqref{Mh}, the RG flow of the SM drives $\lambda$ to negative values $\lambda(t)<0$ at high energies $t_{\mathrm{inst}}<t<t_{\mathrm{inf}}$, see \cite{Degrassi2012,Bezrukov2012a,Buttazzo2013,Bednyakov2015}.
A negative $\lambda$ leads to the formation of a negative global minimum at an energy scales below the energy scale of inflation and therefore to a non-stable RG improved EF potential. A scenario which could have disastrous consequences for the universe.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=12cm,height=3cm]{StabilityNeg.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Left: The RG improved EF potential develops a negative vacuum at high energy scale but below the energy scale of inflation. Right: The running Higgs self-coupling $\lambda$ turns negative for $t_{\mathrm{inst}}<t<t_{\mathrm{inf}}$.}
\label{FigInst}
\end{figure}
\noindent Various ways to stabilize the EW vacuum have been proposed, among which are thermal effects discussed in \cite{Bezrukov2009b}, additional heavy scalar fields suggested in \cite{Elias-Miro2012}, the inclusion of higher dimensional operators considered in \cite{Branchina2013,Gies2015,Eichhorn2015}, the extended scalaron-Higgs model analysed in \cite{Salvio2015,Kaneda2016,Calmet2016, Wang2017,Ema2017,Ema2017a,He2018,Gorbunov2018,Ghilencea2018,Gundhi2018,Enckell2018,He2019,Ema2019}, or the coupling of a quintessence field to the SM Higgs sector investigated in
\cite{Han2019}.
Besides the division of the parameter space into a ``stable'' regime ($\lambda(t)\geq0$) and a ``non-stable'' regime ($\lambda(t_{\mathrm{inst}})<0$) with $t_{\mathrm{inst}}$ corresponding to an energy scale $E_{\mathrm{inst}}\approx 10^{11}$ GeV, the ``non-stable'' parameter region can be further subdivided into a ``metastable' region and an ``unstable'' region by calculating the (``survival'') probability $\Gamma_{\mathrm{EW}}$ for a quantum tunnelling from the EW vacuum into the negative false vacuum. Comparing the lifetime of the EW vacuum
\begin{align}
\tau_{\mathrm{EW}}\sim\Gamma^{-1}_{\mathrm{EW}},
\end{align}
with the lifetime $\tau_{\mathrm{U}}$ of the universe, metastability (instability) implies $\tau_{\mathrm{EW}}>\tau_{\mathrm{U}}$ ($\tau_{\mathrm{EW}}<\tau_{\mathrm{U}}$). This scenario and its cosmological implications has been studied in many works, see e.g. \cite{Espinosa2008,Elias-Miro2012a,Lebedev2013,Masina2013,Kobakhidze2013,Hook2015,Branchina2015,Herranen2015,Espinosa2015,Burda2015,Burda2016,Kohri2016,Salvio2016a,Joti2017,Salvio2018}.
In contrast to the firm and clear distinction between a ``stable'' region and a ``non-stable'' region in parameter space, which only depends on the values for the SM couplings at the EW scale and the precision of the perturbatively calculated beta functions, the further subdivision of the non-stable region into a ``meta-stable'' and an ``unstable'' region strongly depends on the details of the non-perturbative tunnelling scenario such as e.g. the decay via bubble formation discussed in \cite{Coleman1980} or via the Hawking-Moss instanton proposed in \cite{Hawking1982a}. Summarizing, various tunnelling probabilities have been calculated which, depending on the concrete realization, lead to very different results. Therefore, the conclusion about the ultimate fate of our universe seem to remain obscure.
\subsection{Validity of the effective field theory}
When extrapolating the SM as perturbative quantum field theory up to inflationary energy scales, it is important to ensure that the effective field theory expansion is well under control and does not break down below or at the energy scale of inflation.
The validity of the effective field theory depends on whether irrelevant higher-dimensional operators are sufficiently suppressed by the associated cutoff $\Lambda$. In the absence of any new physics in between the EW scale and the Planck scale, the natural cutoff in the context of quantum gravity is $\Lambda=\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{P}}$. However, from a tree-level unitary analysis, it was found in \cite{Burgess2009,Barbon2009,Burgess2010} that the cutoff in non-minimal Higgs inflation is essentially lowered to
\begin{align}
\Lambda=\frac{4\pi M_{\mathrm{P}}}{\xi}.\label{cutoffconst}
\end{align}
In view of the strong non-minimal coupling $\xi\approx 10^4$, the cutoff \eqref{cutoffconst} corresponds to a significantly lower scale than the typical field values during inflation
\begin{align}
\varphi_{\mathrm{inf}}\approx \frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}}{\sqrt{\xi}}.
\end{align}
If true, this would suggest that the predictions based on the low energy approximation \eqref{JFAct} are not valid during inflation, unless an unnatural suppression of higher-dimensional operators is assumed.
However, in the context of small gradient terms and large background fields during inflation, the gravitational interaction strength in the JF parametrization \eqref{JFAct} is not given by $M_{\mathrm{P}}$, but by the effective Planck mass
\begin{align}
M_{\mathrm{P}}^{\mathrm{eff}}(\varphi):=\sqrt{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2+\xi\varphi^2}\geq \sqrt{\xi}\varphi.\label{MPeff}
\end{align}
In \cite{Bezrukov2011, Barvinsky2012} it was shown that the cutoff itself is running $\Lambda\to\Lambda(\varphi)$.
The power counting method of \cite{Burgess2009,Burgess2010}, which lead to \eqref{cutoffconst}, remains valid if the Planck mass $M_{\mathrm{P}}$ is replaced by $M_{\mathrm{P}}^{\mathrm{eff}}$ and leads to a \textit{running} cutoff, which, in view of \eqref{MPeff}, is bounded from below by
\begin{align}
\Lambda(\varphi)=\frac{4\pi\varphi}{\sqrt{\xi}}.\label{cuttoffrunning}
\end{align}
This cutoff, which controls the gradient and curvature expansion, can also be derived from the leading contribution to the quadratic one-loop operator $R^2$ in the large $\xi$ expansion $\sim \xi^2 R^2/(4\pi)^2$ calculated in \cite{Barvinsky2009, Steinwachs2011}.
Comparing this to the tree-level interaction term ${\sim (M_{\mathrm{P}}^2+\xi\varphi^2)R}$, the one-loop contribution is suppressed by a cutoff $\Lambda^2(\varphi)$, which is in agreement with the running cutoff \eqref{cuttoffrunning}.
As demonstrated in \cite{Barvinsky2012}, the gradient and curvature expansion with respect to the running cutoff \eqref{cuttoffrunning} is efficient. Indeed, making use of the JF on-shell relation ${R\sim V/U\sim\lambda\varphi^2/\xi}$, the curvature expansion runs in powers of
\begin{align}
\frac{R}{\Lambda^2(\varphi)}\sim\frac{\lambda}{16\pi^2}\ll 1.\label{curvexp}
\end{align}
The smallness in \eqref{curvexp} follows in the range in which the SM remains perturbative ($\lambda\ll1$). Likewise, as shown in in \cite{Barvinsky2012}, the gradient terms is suppressed even stronger
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial}{\Lambda}\sim\frac{\lambda}{48\pi}\sqrt{\hat{\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{v}}}.\label{gradexp}
\end{align}
According to \eqref{NumberEfolds}, the additional factor $\sqrt{2\hat{\varepsilon}_{v}}$ scales like $1/\hat{N}$ at the beginning of inflation to $\mathcal{O}(1)$ at the end of it. Having established the efficiency of the curvature and gradient expansion \eqref{curvexp} and \eqref{gradexp}, the only higher dimensional operators which could potentially spoil the truncation \eqref{JFAct} of the effective field theory expansion are multi-loop corrections in the form of monomial operators
\begin{align}
\frac{\varphi^{n}}{\Lambda^{n-4}(\varphi)}.
\end{align}
While these contributions might be large, they do not spoil the flatness of the inflationary potential as, in view of the running cutoff \eqref{cuttoffrunning}, the ratio $\varphi/\Lambda(\varphi)$ is field independent.
Moreover, as noted in \cite{Bezrukov2011,Barvinsky2012,Fumagalli2016}, the asymptotic tree-level scale invariance of the model \eqref{JFAct} in the JF is only weakly broken by the quantum logs and leads to an asymptotic shift invariance in the EF, protecting the EF inflaton potential from large quantum corrections. See also \cite{Meissner2007,Shaposhnikov2009,Shaposhnikov2018,Shaposhnikov2018a,Mooij2019,Shaposhnikov2019, Wetterich2019} for a recent discussion on classical and quantum scale (conformal, respectively) invariance.
\subsection{Quantum cosmology and initial conditions for Higgs inflation}
\label{SecQC}
While the model of non-minimal Higgs inflation provides an answer to the question about the fundamental nature of the inflaton field, which largely remains an open question in many other models of inflation, it does not answer the question about the the initial conditions for inflation or the origin of the universe itself.\footnote{I did not discuss the quantum cosmological implications for Higgs inflation in my talk.}
An attempt to derive the initial conditions for the the inflationary background evolution from quantum cosmology was undertaken in \cite{Barvinsky2010} by reviving the old idea that the universe tunnelled from nothing to existence, see \cite{Vilenkin1984,Linde1984,Rubakov1984,Zeldovich1984}.
The nucleation process of the universe in the tunnelling scenario is described by a gravitational instanton -- the solution to the Euclidean version of Einstein's equation.
Starting from the Euclidean path integral
\begin{align}
\exp\left(-W\right):=\int\mathcal{D}g\exp\left(-S_{\mathrm{eff}}[g]\right),
\end{align}
the effective gravitational action $S_{\mathrm{eff}}[g]$ is obtained by integrating out all matter fields, collectively denoted by $\psi$,
\begin{align}
\exp\left(-S_{\mathrm{eff}}[g]\right):=\int\mathcal{D}\psi \exp\left(-S[g;\psi]\right)
\end{align}
For the large and slowly varying background fields during inflation, the effective action $S_{\mathrm{eff}}[g]$ admits a local expansion in gradients and curvatures
\begin{align}
S_{\mathrm{eff}}[g]=\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{g}\left[2\Lambda_{\mathrm{eff}}-R(g)+\ldots\right].\label{EuclidAct}
\end{align}
The ellipsis indicate, that we have only kept the leading orders an neglected gradient terms and higher curvature invariants. In the inflationary slow-roll approximation, we identify the quantum effective scalar field potential with an effective cosmological constant
$M_{\mathrm{P}}^2\Lambda_{\mathrm{eff}}:=V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\varphi)$.
The line element reduces to the Euclidean version of the homogeneous and isotropic FLRW universe
\begin{align}
\mathrm{d}s^2=N(\tau)\mathrm{d}\tau^2+a(\tau)^2\mathrm{d}\Omega^{2}_{(3)},\label{EuclidLine}
\end{align}
with the Euclidean time $\tau$, the volume element of the unit three-sphere $\mathrm{d}\Omega^{2}_{(3)}$, the Euclidean lapse function $N(\tau)$ and the Euclidean scale factor $a(\tau)$. The ``matter'' fields $\psi(\tau,\mathbf{x})$ are associated with all inhomogeneous degrees of freedom, including metric perturbations. On the background \eqref{EuclidLine}, the Euclidean action \eqref{EuclidAct} reduces to
\begin{align}
S_{\mathrm{eff}}[a,N]=12\pi^2M_{\mathrm{P}}^2\int\mathrm{d}\tau N\left[-a+(a')^2a+H^2a^3\right].\label{ActEuclSym}
\end{align}
In \eqref{ActEuclSym} we have defined $a':=N^{-1}\mathrm{d}/\mathrm{d}\tau$. The tunnelling instanton is obtained for the gauge choice $N=-1$ as stationary configuration with respect to variations of the lapse function in the saddle point approximation
\begin{align}
\left(a'\right)^2=1-H^2a^2.\label{EuclEOM}
\end{align}
The Euclidean Friedman equation \eqref{EuclEOM} has a turning point at $a_{+}$ corresponding to the equator of the the Euclidean $S^4$ half-sphere. The positive solution of \eqref{EuclEOM} is
\begin{align}
a(\tau)=H^{-1}\sin\left(H\tau\right),\label{sol}
\end{align}
where we have fixed the constant of integration by the condition $\mathrm{d}a/\mathrm{d}\tau|_{a=0}=1$, which follows from \eqref{EuclEOM} at $a_{-}=0$. The tunnelling probability distribution function (PDF) for $H^2=\Lambda_{\mathrm{eff}}/3$ and $\Lambda_{\mathrm{eff}}>0$ is obtained from \eqref{ActEuclSym} by integrating the configurations \eqref{sol} from the pole of the Euclidean half-sphere at $a_{-}=a(\tau_{-})=0$ to the nucleation point $a_{+}=a(\tau_{+})=1/H$ at the equator \footnote{Note that \eqref{InstTun} coincides with the PDF obtained from the semiclassical expansion of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation ${e^{-W}=|\Psi|^2}$ with the tunnelling wave function of the universe $\Psi$. Corrections from canonical quantum gravity to the inflationary power spectra have been first derived for the minimally coupled theory \cite{Kiefer2012a} and later for the general scalar-tensor theory in \cite{Steinwachs2018,Steinwachs2019}.}
\begin{align}
P(\varphi)=\exp\left[-W(\varphi)\right]=\exp\left[-\frac{24\pi^2M_{\mathrm{P}}^4}{V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\varphi)}\right].\label{InstTun}
\end{align}
At the moment of nucleation $\tau_{+}=\pi/2H$, the solution \eqref{sol} can be analytically continued $\tau\to i t$ to the Lorentzian regime
\begin{align}
a_{\mathrm{L}}(t)=\frac{1}{H}\cosh\left(Ht\right).\label{scaleLor}
\end{align}
The tunnelling instanton \eqref{InstTun} can be interpreted as representing the PDF of scale factors \eqref{scaleLor} in the quantum ensemble of de Sitter models after nucleation, i.e. the realizations of scale factors $a_{L}$ (with different $H(\varphi)=\sqrt{\Lambda_{\mathrm{eff}}(\varphi)/3}$) are distributed according to \eqref{InstTun}.
The maximum $\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}$ of the potential $V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\varphi)$ corresponds to a peak in the distribution \eqref{InstTun} and can be interpreted as the most probable value for the inflationary trajectory to start, i.e. provides the initial condition for inflation
We note that the quantum cosmological scenario could in principle be falsified by observations, as it must satisfy a consistency condition -- the value $\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}$ determined by the tunnelling scenario has to be compatible with the value $\varphi_{\mathrm{inf}}$ derived from the energy scale of inflation, i.e. $\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}\geq\varphi_{\mathrm{inf}}$.
The energy scale of inflation could be inferred from the detection of primordial gravitational waves,
\begin{align}
E^{\mathrm{obs}}_{\mathrm{inf}}=M_{\mathrm{P}}\left(\frac{3}{2}\pi^2 A_{\mathrm{t},*}\right)^{1/4}.
\end{align}
The observational data \eqref{CMBAmpl}, \eqref{AsCMB} and \eqref{Planckr} imply the upper bound $E_{\mathrm{obs}}^{\mathrm{inf}}\lesssim 10^{16}$ GeV.
When this general formalism is applied to the model of non-minimal Higgs inflation, the RG improved EF potential \eqref{EFPot} enters the tunnelling PDF \eqref{InstTun},
\begin{align}
P(\varphi)\simeq\exp\left[-96\pi^2\frac{\xi^2}{\lambda}\left(1+\frac{2M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{\xi \varphi^2}\right)\right].\label{PDF}
\end{align}
Here, the couplings $\lambda(t)$ and $\xi(t)$ are function of the logarithmic RG scale ${t=\log(\varphi/M_{\mathrm{t}})}$ and we have neglected the wave function renormalization of the Higgs boson, i.e. set $Z=1$. The distribution \eqref{PDF} has a sharply peaked maximum at
\begin{align}
\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}^2=-\left.\frac{64\pi^2M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{\xi \mathbf{A}_{\mathrm{I}}}\right|_{t_\mathrm{max}}.\label{phimax}
\end{align}
Here, $\mathbf{A}_{\mathrm{I}}$ is the inflationary anomalous scaling defined in \eqref{InfAnDim}.
The value \eqref{phimax} for $\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}$ satisfies the consistency condition $\varphi_{\mathrm{\max}}\geq\varphi_{\mathrm{inf}}$ as the value $\varphi_{\mathrm{inf}}$ at horizon crossing was found to be related to $\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}$ by
\begin{align}
\frac{\varphi^2_{\mathrm{inf}}}{\varphi^2_{\mathrm{max}}}=1-\exp\left(-\hat{N}\frac{\mathbf{A}_{\mathrm{I}}(t_{\mathrm{end}})}{48\pi^2}\right).
\end{align}
Thus for wavelengths longer than the pivotal one, the moment of horizon crossing $\varphi_{\mathrm{inf}}$ comes closer to the moment of nucleation $\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}$ but always chronologically stays behind it $\varphi_{\mathrm{max}}>\varphi_{\mathrm{inf}}$ and approaches it in the limit $N\to\infty$.
The quantum cosmological analysis provides a complete picture as it suggests that non-minimal Higgs inflation might even predict its own initial conditions in a self-consistent way, followed by a successful inflationary phase and a subsequent transition to the SM at low energies.
\section{Quantum field parametrization dependence in cosmology}
\label{QFP}
In this section, I discuss another aspect of Higgs inflation, which is connected to a more general field theoretical problem. The predictions \eqref{ObsNMHI} were derived by transforming between the JF parametrization \eqref{JFAct} and the EF parametrization \eqref{EFACT}. In fact, the class of models leading to inflationary predictions equivalent to those of non-minimal Higgs inflation \eqref{ObsNMHI} is much larger and also includes geometrical modifications of general relativity.
\subsection{Starobinsky inflation}
The first model of inflation was proposed in \cite{Starobinsky1980}, which according to recent data \cite{Akrami2018} is still one of the most favoured models, see also the analysis in \cite{Martin2014}. In addition to the Einstein-Hilbert action, which is linear in the scalar curvature, the action of Starobinsky's model includes the square of the Ricci scalar
\begin{align}
S[g]=\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{-g}\left[R+\frac{R^2}{6M^2}\right],\label{fRAct}
\end{align}
Beside the Planck mass $M_{\mathrm{P}}$, the mass scale $M$ is the only new scale in the model. Due to the fourth-order derivatives implicit in the $R^2$ term, the theory effectively propagates a massive scalar particle -- the \textit{scalaron}. In contrast to other higher derivative modifications of Einstein's theory, which involve quadratic invariants build from the Ricci tensor and the Riemann tensor, $f(R)$ gravity does not suffer from the Ostrogradski instability and the associated problem of the higher derivative massive spin-two ghost, which spoil the unitarity of the corresponding quantum theory as discussed in \cite{Stelle1977} and \cite{Woodard2009}.
The additional scalar degree of freedom can be made explicit by transforming the action \eqref{fRAct} into its scalar-tensor representation. Performing the field redefinitions
\begin{align}
\hat{g}_{\mu\nu}=\exp\left(\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{\hat{\chi}}{M_{\mathrm{P}}}\right)g_{\mu\nu},\qquad\hat{\chi}(R)=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}M_{\mathrm{P}}\ln\left(1+\frac{R}{3M}\right),\label{TrafofR}
\end{align}
the scalaron $\hat{\chi}$ becomes manifest in the EF formulation
\begin{align}
S[\hat{g},\hat{\chi}]=\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{-\hat{g}}\left[\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}\hat{R}-\frac{1}{2}\hat{g}^{\mu\nu}\partial_{\mu}\hat{\chi}\partial_{\nu}\hat{\chi}-\hat{V}(\hat{\chi})\right],
\end{align}
with the Starobinsky EF potential
\begin{align}
\hat{V}(\hat{\chi})=\frac{3}{4}M_{\mathrm{P}}^2M^2\left(1-e^{-\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\frac{\hat{\chi}}{M_{\mathrm{P}}}}\right)^2.\label{StarPot}
\end{align}
Evaluating \eqref{CMBAmpl}-\eqref{TTS} for \eqref{StarPot} to leading order in $N_{*}\gg1$ results in
\begin{align}
A_{\mathrm{s}}^{*}=\frac{N_{*}^2}{24 \pi^2 }\frac{M^2 }{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2 },\qquad n_{\mathrm{s}}^{*}=1-\frac{2}{N_{*}}\approx0.9667,\qquad r^{*}=\frac{12}{N_{*}^2}\approx 0.0033,\label{ObsStar}
\end{align}
where the numerical values are again obtained for $N_{*}=60$.
The predictions for $n_{\mathrm{s}^{*}}$ and $r^{*}$ are not only in excellent agreement with the current observational bounds \eqref{Planckns} and \eqref{Planckr}, they are identical to the tree-level predictions of non-minimal Higgs inflation \eqref{ObsNMHI}.
The normalization condition \eqref{AsCMB} fixes the only free parameter ${M\approx 10^{-5}M_{\mathrm{P}}}$. Identifying $M=\sqrt{\lambda/3\xi^2}M_{\mathrm{P}}$ shows that non-minimal Higgs inflation and Starobinsky inflation are indistinguishable regarding their inflationary observables.
However, the couplings to other fields, the predictions for reheating and the inclusion of quantum corrections makes them at least in principle observationally distinguishable \cite{Bezrukov2012}. The degenerate inflationary predictions of these two models can be explained naturally, as both are part of a common universality class of inflationary models, see \cite{Mukhanov2013}.
Before discussing in more detail the general question of equivalence between different field parametrizations, another interesting point regarding the field transformations \eqref{TrafoJFEF} and \eqref{TrafofR} is the following:
In the geometric formulation of Starobinsky's model, the term quadratic $R^2$ dominates over the linear term for high energies $R/6M^2\gg1$ and leads to an asymptotic scale invariance of the action \eqref{fRAct}. Likewise, for high energies $\varphi\gg M_{\mathrm{P}}/\sqrt{\xi}$, the non-minimally coupled term dominates and leads to the aforementioned asymptotic scale invariance of the action \eqref{JFAct}. In both cases, inflation is realized for the approximate scale-invariant quasi de Sitter phase and ended when the scale invariance is broken by the Einstein-Hilbert term. Moreover, the transformations \eqref{TrafoJFEF} and \eqref{TrafofR} show that this asymptotic scale invariance
\begin{align}
g_{\mu\nu}\to g'_{\mu\nu}\alpha^{-2}g_{\mu\nu},\qquad \varphi\to\varphi'=\alpha \varphi,
\end{align}
translates into an asymptotic shift symmetry of the scalar field in the EF formulation
\begin{align}
\hat{\varphi}\to\hat{\varphi}'=\hat{\varphi}+\ln\alpha,
\end{align}
with constant scaling parameter $\alpha$. An approximate shift symmetry, in turn, naturally explains why the inflationary quasi de Sitter phase is realized by an almost flat, quasi-constant potential \eqref{EFPot} and \eqref{StarPot} in the EF formulation.
\subsection{Classical and quantum equivalence in cosmology}
\label{Eq}
The equivalence between the JF and EF formulations in non-minimal Higgs inflation as well as the equivalence between non-minimal Higgs inflation and Starobinsky inflation are just particular realizations of a more general equivalence. In fact, the gravity-Higgs sector \eqref{JFAct} is a particular case of the more general scalar-tensor theory
\begin{align}
S[g,\varphi]=\int\mathrm {d}^4x\sqrt{-g}\left[U(\varphi)R-\frac{1}{2}G(\varphi)\partial_{\mu}\varphi\partial^{\mu}\varphi-V(\varphi)\right]\label{ActST}
\end{align}
with general functions $U(\varphi)$, $G(\varphi)$ and $V(\varphi)$ which parametrize the non-minimal coupling to gravity, a non-standard kinetic term and an arbitrary potential. The action \eqref{ActST} covers almost all single-field model of inflation.
Likewise, Starobinsky's model \eqref{fRAct} is just a specific case of the more general class of $f(R)$ models
\begin{align}
S[g]=\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{-g}f(R),\label{FRACT}
\end{align}
with an arbitrary function $f$.
Note that since $f(R)$ is a function of the undifferentiated Ricci scalar $R$, apart from the scalaron, there are no additional propagating degrees of freedom despite the arbitrariness of $f$.
Provided $U\neq0$, the transition of the general scalar-tensor theory \eqref{ActST} to the EF action \eqref{EFACT} is achieved by performing the field redefinitions
with the EF potential
\begin{align}
\hat{g}_{\mu\nu}=\frac{2U}{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}g_{\mu\nu},\qquad \left(\frac{\partial\hat{\varphi}}{{\partial\varphi}}\right)^2=\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}\frac{GU+3U_{,\varphi}^2}{U^2},\qquad\hat{V}(\hat{\varphi})=\left(\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}\right)^2\frac{V(\hat{\varphi})}{U^2(\hat{\varphi})}.\label{STEF}
\end{align}
Similarly, provided $f_{,R}\neq0$ and $f_{,RR}\neq0$, the $f(R)$ theory \eqref{FRACT} is mapped to the EF action \eqref{EFACT} by performing the field redefinitions
with the EF potential
\begin{align}
\hat{g}_{\mu\nu}=\frac{2f_{,R}}{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}g_{\mu\nu},\qquad\hat{\varphi}(R) = M_{\mathrm{P}}\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\ln f_{,R},\qquad \hat{V}(R)=\left(\frac{M_{\mathrm{P}}^2}{2}\right)^2\frac{Rf_{,R}-f}{f_{,R}^2}.\label{fREF}
\end{align}
Comparing the transformations \eqref{STEF} and \eqref{fREF} implies the identifications
\begin{align}
U\leftrightarrow f_{,R},\qquad V\leftrightarrow Rf_{R}-f,\qquad GU+3U_{,\varphi}^2\leftrightarrow 3f_{,RR}.
\end{align}
At the level of the classical action, the classical equations of motion and the linear perturbations propagating on the background (which is a solution of the classical equations of motion), the formulations in different parametrizations related by non-singular but arbitrary non-linear transformations are mathematically equivalent. All parametrizations correspond to one and the same physical theory, just expressed in terms of different field variables.
In contrast to the non-linear but ultra-local transformation \eqref{STEF} relating the JF and EF parametrizations of the scalar-tensor theory, the transformations \eqref{fREF} relating the $f(R)$ theory with the EF scalar-tensor parametrization involves in addition derivatives -- reflecting the presence of the additional propagating scalar degree of freedom.
\subsection{Quantum equivalence and renormalization}
In Sec. \eqref{Eq}, the identical inflationary predictions of the model of non-minimal Higgs inflation \eqref{JFAct} and Starobinsky's model of inflation \eqref{fRAct} was traced back to the more general classical equivalence between scalar-tensor theories \eqref{ActST} and $f(R)$ gravity \eqref{FRACT}. In this section, I discuss the equivalence between different field parametrizations at the quantum level.
As emphasized in Sec. \ref{QC}, quantum corrections and the RG improvement are crucial.
In the RG improved treatment, the inflationary observables are expressed in terms of the running couplings evaluated at the energy scale of inflation. The running couplings are solutions to the RG equations. The RG system is determined by the beta functions. The beta functions are derived order-by-order in perturbation theory from the ultraviolet divergences of the theory, or, in non-perturbative approaches, such as the asymptotic safety program proposed in \cite{Weinberg1980}, from solving the Wetterich equation for the functional RG flow of the averaged effective action within a given truncation \cite{Wetterich1993}.
In the context of the field transformation, relating different representations of the same classical theory, an important question arises: does the RG improvement derived in different field parametrizations lead to the same results for the inflationary observables, or, in other words, does the classical equivalence between the different formulations extend to the quantum level?
In order to answer this question to leading order in the perturbative loop expansion, we explicitly calculate the one-loop divergences in different parametrizations and compare the results. Phrased diagrammatically, the question of quantum equivalence reduces to the question of whether the diagram shown in Fig. \ref{FrameFig} commutes or not.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=3cm]{FrameFigureEFJFAndfR}
\end{center}
\caption{Transition between formulations in terms of different field parametrizations at the classical and quantum level. If the classical equivalence extends to the one-loop quantum level, the diagram must commute.}
\label{FrameFig}
\end{figure}
The combination of the background field method with heat kernel techniques provides an efficient and manifest covariant tool to calculate the ultraviolet divergences in curved spacetime. The Euclidean quantum effective action $\Gamma[\phi_0]$ for a theory with bare action functional $S[\phi]$ and generalized field $\phi^{i}$ can be defined by the functional integro-differential equation\footnote{The compact DeWitt notation combines the collection of discrete bundle indices $A,B,\ldots$ with the continuous spacetime arguments $x,y,\dots$ into the generalized DeWitt index $i=(A,x)$, where it is understood that the Einstein summation convention for the DeWitt indices $i,j\ldots$ includes integration over the continuous spacetime arguments, i.e. $\phi^{i}\phi_i=\int\mathrm{d}^4x\phi^{A}(x)\phi_{A}(x)$.}
\begin{align}
\exp\left(-\Gamma\right)=\int\mathcal{D}\phi{\mathcal M}(\phi)\exp\left\{-S[\phi]-(\phi^{i}_{0}-\phi^{i})\Gamma_{,i}[\phi_0]\right\},\label{defeq}
\end{align}
Here, $\phi_0^{i}$ is the mean field (one-point correlation function) and ${\mathcal M}(\phi)$ is the functional measure.
Expanding the action $S[\phi]$ around the mean field $\phi_0^{i}$,
this equation serves as starting point for a perturbative expansion of $\Gamma$ in powers of $\hbar$, corresponding to the number of closed loops in terms of a Feynman diagrammatic representation
\begin{align}
\Gamma[\phi_0]=S[\phi_0]-\hbar\ln \mathcal{M}(\phi_0)+\hbar \Gamma_{1}[\phi_0]+\mathcal{O}\big(\hbar^2\big).
\end{align}
Neglecting the contribution from the (ultra) local measure $\mathcal{M}(\phi_0)\propto1+\delta(0)(\ldots)$, the one-loop effective action $\Gamma_{1}$ is given in terms of the functional trace
\begin{align}
\Gamma_{1}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Tr}\ln F_{ij},
\end{align}
with the fluctuation operator defined by the Hessian of the classical action
\begin{align}
F_{ij}(\nabla):=\partial_{i}\partial_jS=\left.\frac{\delta^2 S[\phi]}{\delta\phi^{i}\delta\phi^{j}}\right|_{\phi=\bar{\phi}}.\label{FlucOp}
\end{align}
At the level of the one-loop approximation, the background field $\bar{\phi}^{i}$ might be identified with the mean field $\phi_{0}^{i}$.\footnote{A systematic order-by-order renormalization procedure for arbitrary loop order, which ensures the gauge invariant structure of the counterterms and keeps tract of the background field and mean field separately is proposed in \cite{Barvinsky2018}.}.
The one-loop beta functions are proportional to the counterterms, which in the $\overline{\mathrm{MS}}$ scheme are determined by $-\Gamma^{\mathrm{div}}_{1}$. For minimal second-order fluctuation operators
\begin{align}
\mathbf{F}(\nabla)=\mathbf{1}\Delta+\mathbf{\Pi},\label{MinSecOp}
\end{align}
the Schwinger-DeWitt technique originally developed in \cite{DeWitt1965} allows to calculate the one-loop divergences in a closed form.
Here, bundle indices are suppressed and operator valued quantities such as e.g. $\mathbf{F}=F^{A}_{\;B}=\mathcal{G}^{AC}F_{CB}$ are written in bold face, $\Delta=-g^{\mu\nu}\nabla_{\nu}\nabla_{\nu}$ is the positive definite Laplacian and $\mathbf{\Pi}$ is the potential part acting multiplicatively.
The one-loop UV divergences in dimensional regularization $d=4-2\varepsilon$ are isolated as poles $1/\varepsilon$ in the limit $\varepsilon\to0$. For the operator \eqref{MinSecOp}, the divergent part of the one-loop effective action in curved spacetime reads
\begin{align}
\Gamma_{1}^{\mathrm{div}}=-\frac{1}{32\pi^2\varepsilon}\int\mathrm{d}^4x\sqrt{g}\,\mathrm{tr}\,\mathbf{a}_2(x,x).
\end{align}
It involves the bundle trace $\mathrm{tr}$ of the coincidence limit of the second Schwinger-DeWitt coefficient, which up to total derivative terms is given by
\begin{align}
\mathbf{a}_{2}(x,x)=\frac{1}{180}\left(R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}R^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}-R_{\mu\nu}R^{\mu\nu}\right)\mathbf{1}+\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{R}_{\mu\nu}\mathcal{R}^{\mu\nu}+\frac{1}{2}\left(\mathbf{\Pi}-\frac{R}{6}\mathbf{1}\right)^2.
\end{align}
The bundle curvature (suppressing bundle indices) is defined as ${\mathcal{R}_{\mu\nu}:=[\nabla_{\mu},\nabla_{\nu}]\mathbf{\phi}}$.
For higher-order and non-minimal operators $\mathbf{F}$, the Schwinger-DeWitt algorithm is not directly applicable and more general techniques developed in \cite{Barvinsky1985} are required. For operators with a degenerate principal part or with an effective Laplacian, even these generalized techniques cannot be applied directly and other methods discussed in \cite{Ruf2018,Ruf2018b,Ruf2018c,Heisenberg2019} must be employed.
In order to perform the explicit comparison illustrated in Fig. \ref{FrameFig}, first the individual calculations in the different field parametrizations have to be performed. The derivation of the one-loop divergences for the EF action \eqref{EFACT} with arbitrary EF potential $\hat{V}$ has been performed in the EF field parametrization in \cite{Barvinsky1993,Steinwachs2011}. The corresponding calculation for the general scalar-tensor action \eqref{ActST} in the JF field parametrization has been carried out in \cite{Shapiro1995} and has been generalized in \cite{Steinwachs2011} for a $O(N)$ symmetric multiplet of scalar fields. Finally, the one-loop divergences for the $f(R)$ action were obtained in \cite{Ruf2018}. Note that in all cases the off-shell divergences were calculated on a general background, which is crucial in order to uniquely ascribe the individual coefficients to different operator structures.\footnote{On particular symmetric backgrounds such as e.g. spaces of constant curvature, the different curvature invariants degenerate and their individual contributions are no longer resolvable.}
Using the transition formulas \eqref{STEF} and \eqref{fREF}, the one-loop results for the JF scalar-tensor theory and for $f(R)$ gravity were transformed back to the EF and compared with the one-loop divergences directly obtained in the EF to explicitly check the commutativity of the diagram Fig. \ref{FrameFig}. The comparison between the EF and JF parametrizations has been performed in \cite{Kamenshchik2015}, while the comparison between the $f(R)$ and scalar-tensor formulations has been carried out in \cite{Ruf2018b}.
In both cases, the one-loop comparison showed that the divergent part of the off-shell one-loop effective action, calculated in different parametrizations, does not coincide, implying that the classical equivalence is lost at the quantum level. However, in both cases it was also found that the quantum equivalence is restored for the on-shell reduction. The on-shell equivalence is in agreement with formal S-matrix equivalence theorems formulated in \cite{Chisholm1961, Kamefuchi1961,Coleman1969,Kallosh1973}.\footnote{Note however, that some of the propositions in the formal theorems, such as e.g. the assumption of asymptotically free states, are in general not satisfied in the context of gravity and cosmology.}
A naive application of the of the RG improvement by replacing the coupling constants in cosmological observables by the running constants leads to ambiguous results. The couplings are solutions of the system of RG equations which are in turn controlled by the off-shell beta function. Since the off-shell beta functions are derived from the off-shell divergences, they inherit the off-shell parametrization ambiguity.
\subsection{Geometry of field space and field covariant formalism}
From a quantum field theoretical point of view, the configuration space of fields (including the spacetime metric) might formally be viewed as a differentiable manifold. In this geometric setup, different field parametrizations simply correspond to different local coordinates and the quantum off-shell parametrization dependence is revealed as a failure of the non-field covariant mathematical formalism underlying the ordinary definition of the quantum effective action.
In more detail, the analysis shows that the ordinary quantum effective action is not a true scalar with respect to configurations space diffeomorphisms (although it is of course a scalar with respect to spacetime diffeomorphisms).
Within a field covariant formalism, it becomes meaningless to talk about a preferred physical field parametrization -- any frame is as good as any other.
In this sense, the off-shell quantum frame ambiguity finds a natural resolution in terms of the geometrically defined effective action, introduced in \cite{Vilkovisky1984}. Instead of trying to select a preferred parametrization on physical grounds, the quantum effective action is defined in a manifestly field parametrization invariant way.
The fact that the ordinary effective action is not invariant under field reparametrizations can eb traced back to the geometrically meaningless coordinate difference $(\phi^{i}_0-\phi^{i})$ which enters in the exponent of the defining equation \eqref{defeq}. According to Vilkovisky, it should be replaced by the geometrical meaningful two-point quantity $\sigma^{i}(\phi_{0},\phi)$,
\begin{align}
(\phi^{i}_0-\phi^{i})\to\sigma^{i}(\phi_{0},\phi):=\mathcal{G}^{ij}\nabla_{j}\sigma(\phi_{0},\phi).\label{sigma}
\end{align}
The bi-scalar $\sigma(\phi_0,\phi)$ is Synge's world function on the configuration space manifold.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.6,xshift=-3cm]
\begin{scope}[xshift=-4cm]
\begin{scope} [xshift=-1.8cm]
\draw (1,0) .. controls +(40:0.5cm) and +(120:0.75cm) .. (3,+0.25);
\draw[black](2,-0.1)--(1.9,0.4);
\node[black](a) at(2.5,-0.25){\tiny geodesic between $\phi_0$ and $\phi$};
\draw[black](1.2,0.2)--(1.05,0.7);
\node[black](a) at(1.05,0.8){\tiny $\sigma^{i}(\phi_0,\phi)$};
\node[black](a) at(1,-0.1){\tiny $\phi_0$};
\node[black](a) at(3,0.1){\tiny $\phi$};
\draw[color=black,thin,->](1,0.0)--(1.6,0.5);
\fill[color=black] (1,0) circle (0.75pt);
\fill[color=black] (3,+0.25) circle (0.75pt);
\end{scope}
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Synge's world function is a measure of the (squared) geodesic distance between the two points $\phi_0$ and $\phi$ in configuration space.}
\label{Synge}
\end{figure}
\noindent Here, $\mathcal{G}^{ij}(\phi)$ is the inverse of the configuration space metric $\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\phi)$ and $\nabla_{i}$ is the field covariant derivative, which defines the configuration connection $\Gamma^{k}_{ij}(\phi)$. The derivative \eqref{sigma} is a vector at $\phi_{0}$ and a scalar at $\phi$ as depicted in Fig. \ref{Synge}. In the one-loop approximation, the identification of the functional measure with ${\mathcal{M}=\sqrt{\mathrm{Det}(\mathcal{G}_{ij})}}$ and the replacement of the coordinate difference ${(\phi^{i}_0-\phi^{i})\to \sigma^{i}(\phi_0,\phi)}$ in in \eqref{defeq} , leads to a replacement of partial derivatives by covariant ones in the definition of the fluctuation operator \eqref{FlucOp},
\begin{align}
\partial_{i}\partial_{j}S\to \nabla_{i}\nabla_{j}S=\partial_{i}\partial_{j}S-\Gamma_{ij}^{k}\partial_{k}S.\label{covS}
\end{align}
Independently of the concrete prescription for the explicit construction of the configuration space metric $\mathcal{G}_{ij}$ and the Vilkovisky connection $\Gamma^{i}_{jk}$, it is clear that the additional term in the covariant construction \eqref{covS} is proportional to $\partial_{i}S$ and vanishes on-shell $\partial_{i}S=0$. Hence, on-shell the one-loop approximation of the covariant Vilkovisky-DeWitt effective action reduces to the one-loop approximation of the ordinary effective action.
As first discussed in \cite{Steinwachs2013, Steinwachs2014, Kamenshchik2015}, the problem of quantum frame dependence in cosmology is just a particular manifestation of this more general field theoretic problem of field parametrization dependence and the construction of a unique off-shell extension of the quantum effective action. For related work on classical and quantum frame dependence in cosmology, see also \cite{Magnano1994,Capozziello1997,Faraoni1999,Nojiri2001,Flanagan2004,Deruelle2011,Calmet2013,Prokopec2013,Chiba2013,Postma2014,Moss2014a,Domenech2015,Jarv2015,Kamenshchik2016,Herrero-Valea2016,Burns2016,Jarv2017,Karam2017,Bhattacharya2017,Bounakis2018,Karamitsos2018, Ohta2018,Falls2019,Finn2019}.
However, besides the technical difficulties in the explicit construction of the Vilkovisky-DeWitt effective action, it is questionable whether such a construction is actually required in the context of cosmological observables. A direct construction of manifestly reparametrization and gauge invariant cosmological observables ($n$-point correlation functions) would most likely be more efficient and would also lead to unique results.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{Conclusions}
In this contribution, I reviewed and discussed various classical and quantum aspects of the model of non-minimal Higgs inflation. Summarizing, this model offers a theoretically well motivated and phenomenologically successful unified description of particle physics with inflationary cosmology. The identification of the inflaton field with the SM Higgs boson provides a fundamental explanation of the scalar field which drives the accelerated expansion of the early universe. The RG flow connects the EW scale with the energy scale of inflation and supports the scenario that the SM could be a perturbative quantum field theory all the way up to the Planck scale.
The effective field theory expansion of the model can be arranged in a controlled way upon the introduction of a field dependent cutoff.
Moreover, within the quantum cosmological tunnelling scenario, the models predicts its own initial conditions for the onset of inflation in a self-consistent way.
In spite of all these appealing properties, I also highlighted several questions and open problems.
For the central values of the SM Higgs boson mass and the Yukawa top quark mass as measured by collider experiments at the EW scale, the RG flow of the SM drives the quartic Higgs self-coupling to negative values, resulting in the formation of a negative vacuum at high energy scales, which in turn triggers an instability of the EW vacuum. This instability has to be cured, either by finding ways to directly stabilize the RG improved Higgs potential or by invoking a mechanism which prevents the EW vacuum to decay within the lifetime of our universe.
Besides, I discussed the ambiguity in the definition of the perturbative off-shell beta function which results from a quantization in different field parametrizations related by a Weyl transformation of the metric field and a highly non-linear transformation of the scalar field.
I also illustrated the classical equivalence between scalar-tensor sector of non-minimal Higgs inflation and Starobinsky's model of inflation, which corresponds to a subclass of geometric $f(R)$ modifications of General Relativity. I discussed how, within the ordinary definition of the quantum effective action, off-shell quantum corrections break this equivalence and how this equivalence is restored on-shell. I gave a natural explanation of these results in terms of Vilkovisky's geometrically defined parametrization invariant off-shell extension of the quantum effective action and emphasized the importance of and the need for gauge and parametrization invariant cosmological observables. Finally, coming back to Hermann Weyl, I hope that already from the very limited discussion in this contribution, it became evident how his original ideas introduced 100 years ago, still strongly influence active research in theoretical physics today.
\begin{acknowledgement}
It is a pleasure to thank Silvia De Bianchi and Claus Kiefer for inviting me to this very stimulating interdisciplinary conference and the physics centre in Bad Honnef for the warm hospitality. I also thank the other participants for many interesting after-dinner discussions.
\end{acknowledgement}
|
\section{Introduction}
Recently,
the dynamics of complex systems,
such as
the relaxation of glass-forming materials
\cite{goldstein,stillingerWeber2,stillinger,heuer,APRV,debenedettiStillinger,
sastory,DRB,DH,AFMK,DSSSKG,yang},
the kinetics of biomolecules \cite{BeckerKerplus,folding,kinesin,gene,hummer,hummer2,wolynes,pande,wang,kern,nucleosome}, and
diffusion in nanoclusters \cite{bbskj,hhdksi,jkk,hshias,hbssh,cubic,niiyama},
were studied in a unified way for Markov state models \cite{wales0,wales,stillingerBook,BPE,lumping}.
The slowest relaxation modes of these systems
describe
the bottleneck processes, and hence
they are the most crucial,
e.g.,
for understanding
glass transitions and
rapid formations of mixed crystals
\cite{clumping,clumping2,dps,kfs,maeno,oku2007,rg,rgtime}.
The relaxation rates and modes are
the eigenvalues and eigenvectors, respectively,
of the transition rate matrix of a Markov state model.
In general,
physical quantities are expressed in terms of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
The resulting expressions,
called spectral representations,
give useful formulas that enable us to
evaluate the physical quantities
with use of
the eigenvalues and eigenvectors
\cite{reresub1,reresub2,reresub3,reresub4,reresub5,reresub6,ngvankampenResub,HartichGodecResub,aldousResub}.
We can compute the relaxation rates and modes
of realistic, complicated Markov state models
using numerical diagonalization algorithms \cite{matrixcomp}.
However,
it is hard to understand why the eigenvectors are formed in the shapes of
the numerical diagonalization results
because the eigenvectors are quite high-dimensional and complicated.
To extract the essence of the relaxation properties of
Markov state models,
there have been many studies,
such as
lumping or renormalizing Markov state models \cite{lumping,clumping,clumping2,dps,kfs,rg,rgtime},
and
applications of
network algorithms,
such as Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm \cite{maeno}.
Although there are many pioneering works concerning this problem
\cite{reresub1,reresub2,reresub3,reresub4,reresub5,reresub6,ngvankampenResub,HartichGodecResub,aldousResub},
to the best of our knowledge, this problem has not yet been completely clarified.
As a more specific indicator of diffusive transport
than the slowest relaxation rates,
the first passage time is widely studied
mainly for analyzing the kinetics in complex networks
\cite{mfpt,ddl,dsl,lhl,tbv,kinesin,gene}.
The first passage times from one state to another target state
in a kinetic network
are
the required times of stochastic realizations
for traveling from the former to the latter state for the first time.
The corresponding mean first passage time is
given by
the mean value of the first passage times of the stochastic realizations.
Intuitively,
we may interpret the slowest relaxation of a system
as the process that transports the excess probability
to the maximum probability states of the equilibrium distribution
along the unavoidable and slowest transport routes
in order to achieve the equilibrium distribution.
Therefore, it may be possible to understand the formation of the slowest relaxation mode by searching for the states, where the first passage times to the maximum probability states are the largest, and then by finding out the main routes connecting the former to the latter states.
To the best of our knowledge, however,
there have been no such studies that search for the slowest relaxations
with this idea.
Instead, all pioneering works, e.g., Refs.~\cite{reresub1,reresub2,reresub3,reresub4,reresub5,reresub6,ngvankampenResub,HartichGodecResub}, concern mainly how the mean first passage times are expressed with the relaxation modes via renewal theorems.
It should be noted that in this paper
we study the inverse problem,
i.e.,
how and why the slowest relaxation modes are reconstructed by the mean first passage times.
As a realistic problem,
we analyze a KCl nanocluster model
having one vacancy \cite{kimura,cubic,niiyama}.
The vacancy diffuses in the cluster
and introduces
the mixing of atoms in the cluster.
As for the pioneering works on vacancy diffusion,
the equilibrium vacancy concentration \cite{nt1resub}
and
the relaxation process using a stochastic process simplified by a
uniform diffusion equation \cite{nt2resub} have been studied.
Nevertheless,
there are no studies
in which the surface effects of nanoclusters on the relaxations
of the vacancy diffusion
are taken into consideration.
The most substantial reason that makes such approaches difficult is
that it is hard
to estimate the transition rates between all adjacent states
on the high-dimensional potential energy surface
from interatomic interactions.
Fortunately,
in Ref.~\cite{niiyama}
we have successfully enumerated all states and
all transition rates between adjacent states
in nanoclusters of various sizes,
and we elucidated the specific properties,
such as migration energies of vacancies,
arising from the surfaces of nanoclusters.
In this paper, we use these transition data
to construct the Markov state model of KCl nanoclusters
and investigate the relationship
between the slowest relaxation modes
and the first passage times in the Markov state model
equipped with the cluster surfaces of
characteristic transition regions.
The purpose of this paper is twofold.
One is
to understand the formations of the slowest relaxation modes
in terms of the first passage times of
the vacancy diffusion in KCl nanoclusters.
The other is
to elucidate the theoretical basis for
why such a mean first passage time analysis
applies to the slowest relaxations.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:mfpts},
we introduce
a Markov state model,
its relaxation modes,
and
its mean first passage times in a general setting.
For the mean first passage times,
we develop a stationary population method
that enables us to compute the first passage times
from the stationary populations of
the Markov state models that connect sinks with sources.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:model},
we introduce the interatomic interaction of the KCl nanoclusters
and then construct the Markov state models of the vacancy diffusion model.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:1stRelaxation},
we compute
the slowest relaxation mode and the mean first passage times
of a KCl nanocluster.
We find there that
the shape of the energy landscape \cite{wales,stillingerBook} tells us
why its relaxation makes effective use of
the shortest routes of the vacancy from the center to the surface.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:2ndRelaxation},
we study the second slowest relaxation mode
and
the corresponding mean first passage times
of the KCl nanocluster.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:symmetric},
we first confirm
that, under exchanging sinks and sources,
the mean first passage time approximation for the relaxation times
in Sec.~\ref{sec:1stRelaxation}
is asymmetric,
while
that in Sec.~\ref{sec:2ndRelaxation} is suitably symmetric.
We then develop a symmetric stationary population method
for the mean first passage times,
where they
are interpreted
as the mean first encounter times of particle-hole pairs.
The iterative use of the symmetric method turns out
to be equivalent to an inverse power method for diagonalization of matrices.
We show that
the mean first passage time approximations of the relaxation times
are
good approximations
that
converge to
the exact
relaxation times
with the iterative use of the symmetric method.
\section{Markov state model, Relaxation rates, and Mean first passage times\label{sec:mfpts}}
In this section,
we introduce a Markov state model,
and
we describe
a popular method of calculating first passage times for this model
according to Refs.~\cite{ngvankampenResub, aldousResub}.
We also show that
the mean first passage times obey stationary population equations,
which will be used to develop
a symmetrized version of the population method
later in Sec.~\ref{sec:symmetric}.
\subsection{Continuous-time Markov state model}
We start with a
continuous-time Markov state model
described by a transition rate matrix $K$
with
finite dimension, $n$, of the state space.
The kinetic equation
is given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\vb*{P}}{dt}=K\vb*{P},
\label{eq:cmc}
\end{equation}
where
$\vb*{P}$
is the probability distribution $\vb*{P}=(p_1,\dots,p_n)^T$,
with $p_i$ denoting the probability of the $i$th state
and the superscript $T$ denoting the transpose.
We assume
that $K$ is time-independent
and satisfies $K_{ij}\geqslant 0$ ($i\neq j$) and
the probability conservation condition of
$\sum_{i=1}^n (K)_{ij}=0$
($j=1,2,\dots,n$).
Further,
we assume
that
the equilibrium, $\lim_{t\to\infty}\vb*{P}(t)$, is a unique vector
$\vb*{P}_\text{eq}$ satisfying the detailed balance conditions
$(K)_{i,j} (\vb*{P}_\text{eq})_j=(K)_{j,i} (\vb*{P}_\text{eq})_i$
\cite{haken, ngvankampenResub}.
Then,
the eigenvalues of $K$ satisfy
\begin{align}
0= \lambda_0 > \lambda_1 \geqslant \dots \geqslant \lambda_{n-1}.
\end{align}
The equilibrium $\vb*{P}_\text{eq}$ coincides with
the zeroth eigenvector of $K$,
and the first, second, $\dots$ eigenvectors $\vb*{P}_i$ of $K$
represent the slowest relaxation modes
with the relaxation times of $|\lambda_1|^{-1} \geqslant |\lambda_2|^{-1}\geqslant\dots$,
respectively.
\subsection{Mean first passage times}
The mean first passage times, $t_{i,j}$, from a state $j$ to $i$
are evaluated by connecting perfect absorbers to all the final destinations
of
$i$.
The resulting equation
is given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\vb*{P}}{dt}=K\vb*{P}-\vb*{S}_-,
\label{eq:cmcS}
\end{equation}
where $\vb*{S}_-$ represents the perfect absorbers that always keep
$(\vb*{P})_i=0$ for the sink states of $i$.
Without the loss of generality,
the sink states are assumed to be the states of $i=1,\dots,m$,
and
the other states, which are free from the absorbers, are
the remainders of $i=m+1,\dots,n$.
The perfect absorber conditions are represented as follows:
\begin{align}
&\vb*{S}_-=(s_1,\dots,s_m,0,\dots,0)^T\equiv
\begin{pmatrix}
\vb*{s}_-\\ \vb*{0}
\end{pmatrix},\label{eq:Ss}\\
&\vb*{P}=(0,\dots,0,p_{m+1},\dots,p_n)^T\equiv
\begin{pmatrix}
\vb*{0}\\ \vb*{p}
\end{pmatrix}.
\label{eq:Pp}
\end{align}
By substituting Eqs.~\eqref{eq:Ss}
and \eqref{eq:Pp} for Eq.~\eqref{eq:cmcS},
we have the following solution
with the initial condition of $\vb*{P}_0=
\begin{pmatrix}
\vb*{0}\\
\vb*{p}_0
\end{pmatrix}
$:
\begin{align}
&\vb*{p}(t)=e^{t K_{FF}}\vb*{p}_0,
\label{eq:kai_p}\\
&\vb*{s}_-(t)=K_{SF}e^{t K_{FF}}\vb*{p}_0,
\label{eq:kai_s}
\end{align}
where
$\vb*{p}_0$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\|\vb*{p}_0\|\equiv \sum_{i=1}^{n-m} |(\vb*{p}_0)_i|
=\sum_{i=1}^{n-m} (\vb*{p}_0)_i
=1.\label{eq:p0norm}
\end{align}
$K_{FF}$
is the submatrix with dimension $(n-m)\times (n-m)$
formed by selecting the rows of $K$ from $m+1$ to $n$ and the columns from $m+1$ to $n$,
and
$K_{SF}$
is
the
submatrix with dimension $m\times (n-m)$
formed by
selecting the rows from 1 to $m$ and the columns from $m+1$ to $n$.
The probability conservation property of the rate matrix of $K$
can be represented by
\begin{align}
\sum_{i=1}^{m} (K_{SF})_{ij}+\sum_{i=1}^{n-m} (K_{FF})_{ij}=0
\label{eq:pcons}
\end{align}
for $j=1,2,\dots,n-m$.
Multiplying both sides of Eq.~\eqref{eq:pcons}
by $(K_{FF}^{-1})_{jk}$ and adding the resultant equations from $j=1$ to $n-m$,
we have the following equations
\begin{align}
\sum_{i=1}^m (-K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-1})_{ik}=1\quad
(k=1,2,\dots,n-m).
\label{eq:useful}
\end{align}
The $i$th element of $\vb*{s}_{-}(t)$
describes
the first passage time distribution
of being absorbed in the $i$th sink
at time $t$.
Therefore,
by integrating Eq.~\eqref{eq:kai_s} from $t=0$ to $\infty$,
the probability of
being absorbed in the $i$th sink for $0\leqslant t<\infty$
is given by the $i$th element of
\begin{equation}
\bar{\vb*{s}}_{-}
=\int_0^\infty \vb*{s}_{-}(t) dt
=-K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-1} \vb*{p}_0,
\label{eq:sbar-}
\end{equation}
where we use Eq.~\eqref{eq:kai_s} and
$\lim_{t\to\infty}e^{t K_{FF}}=0$,
which holds because all eigenvalues of $K_{FF}$ are negative values.
From Eq.~\eqref{eq:sbar-}
and
$({\vb*{s}}_{-}(t))_i \geqslant 0$,
we see that $(\bar{\vb*{s}}_{-})_i \geqslant 0$.
Moreover,
with the use of Eqs.~\eqref{eq:p0norm} and \eqref{eq:useful},
we have
\begin{align*}
\|\bar{\vb*{s}}_- \|&\equiv
\sum_{i=1}^m |(\bar{\vb*{s}}_-)_i |
=\sum_i \left( \bar{\vb*{s}}_{-}\right)_i\\
&=\sum_i \left(-K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-1}\vb*{p}_0\right)_i\\
&=\sum_{i,k} \left(-K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-1}\right)_{ik}\left(\vb*{p}_0\right)_k \\
&=\sum_{k} \left(\vb*{p}_0\right)_k
=\|\vb*{p}_0\|=1,
\end{align*}
whence
\begin{align}
\|\bar{\vb*{s}}_-\|
=\|\vb*{p}_0\|=1.
\end{align}
The conditional probability distribution $\rho_i(t)$
of being absorbed at time $t$ when the system is known to be
absorbed in the state of $i$ is given by
\begin{align}
\rho_i(t)=\frac{ \left[ \vb*{s}_{-}(t)\right]_i }
{ \left( \bar{\vb*{s}}_{-}\right)_i }
=
\frac{(K_{SF} e^{t K_{FF}}\vb*{p}_0)_i}{(-K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-1} \vb*{p}_0)_i}.
\end{align}
Therefore,
the mean first passage time, $t_{i,j}$,
from the state $j$ to the sink state $i$
is
given by
\begin{align}
t_{i,j}
&=\int_0^\infty t \rho_i(t)dt\nonumber\\
&=
\frac{(K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-2} \vb*{p}_0)_i}
{(-K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-1} \vb*{p}_0)_i}
\label{eq:tij}
\end{align}
with $(\vb*{p}_0)_k=\delta_{k,j-m}$ ($k=1,2,\dots,n-m$).
Moreover,
the mean first passage time, $t_j$,
from the state $j$ to any absorbing states
is
given by
\begin{align*}
t_j &=\sum_i (\bar{\vb*{s}}_-)_i t_{i,j}
=\sum_i \left(K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-2}\vb*{p}_0\right)_i\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{i,k} \left(-K_{SF}K_{FF}^{-1}\right)_{ik}\left(-K_{FF}^{-1}\vb*{p}_0\right)_k\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{k} \left(-K_{FF}^{-1}\vb*{p}_0\right)_k,
\end{align*}
that is
\begin{align}
t_{j}
&= \| -K_{FF}^{-1} \vb*{p}_0\|,
\label{eq:allsinks}
\end{align}
where
Eqs.~\eqref{eq:useful},
\eqref{eq:sbar-},
and
\eqref{eq:tij}
are used.
Equations (\ref{eq:tij})
and
(\ref{eq:allsinks})
are the basic formulas
for
calculating
the mean first passage times.
Next,
we show that
the mean first passage times
can be evaluated
from a stationary population distribution.
Let us consider
the following mean residence time distribution,
\begin{equation}
\bar{\vb*{p}}
=\int_0^\infty \vb*{p}(t)dt=-K_{FF}^{-1}\vb*{p}_0,
\label{eq:pbar}
\end{equation}
where
$( \bar{\vb*{p}})_i$
is the mean residence time in the $(i+m)$th state
for $i=1,\dots,n-m$.
Hence,
the mean residence time in the whole system
is given by the sum, $\|\bar{\vb*{p}}\|$, of $( \bar{\vb*{p}})_i$ from $i=1$ to $n-m$,
which is, of course, equivalent to
the mean first passage time $t_j$ of Eq.~(\ref{eq:allsinks}).
Equation \eqref{eq:pbar} enables us to confirm that
$\bar{\vb*{p}}$
satisfies the following non-equilibrium stationary state equation:
\begin{align}
\frac{d\bar{\vb*{p}}}{dt}
=K_{FF}\bar{\vb*{p}}+\bar{\vb*{s}}_+
=\vb*{0}
\label{eq:stationaryEq}
\end{align}
with $\bar{\vb*{s}}_+=\vb*{p}_0$.
Hence,
we can interpret
$\bar{\vb*{s}}_+$
as
the source term
that adds one particle with distribution $\vb*{p}_0$ per unit time,
$\bar{\vb*{p}} $ as the stationary population of Eq.~\eqref{eq:stationaryEq},
$\|\bar{\vb*{p}}\|$ as
the total population contained in $\bar{\vb*{p}} $,
and
$\|\bar{\vb*{p}}\|^{-1}$ as
the probabilistic flow carried by one particle.
Namely,
we can also compute the mean first passage times
as
the total numbers, $\|\bar{\vb*{P}}\|$, of particles
in the stationary
population $\bar{\vb*{P}} $
obeying
the following stationary equation:
\begin{align}
\frac{d}{dt} \bar{\vb*{P}}
=K \bar{\vb*{P}}+\vb*{S}_+ - \vb*{S}_-
=\vb*{0},
\label{eq:population}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\bar{\vb*{P}}=
\begin{pmatrix}
\vb*{0}\\
\bar{\vb*{p}}
\end{pmatrix},\quad
\vb*{S}_+=
\begin{pmatrix}
\vb*{0}\\
\vb*{p}_0
\end{pmatrix},\quad
\vb*{S}_-=
\begin{pmatrix}
\bar{\vb*{s}}_-\\
\vb*{0}
\end{pmatrix}.
\label{eq:population2}
\end{align}
Note that
the stationary population equation \eqref{eq:population}
will be used in Sec.~\ref{sec:symmetric}.
\section{KCl nanocluster vacancy diffusion model\label{sec:model}}
In this section,
according to Ref.~\cite{niiyama},
we first present
the vacancy diffusion model of KCl nanoclusters
as an example of a practical problem,
and
then
we introduce
the corresponding Markov state model of the vacancy diffusion.
\subsection{Local minima and saddle points on the potential energy surface of a KCl nanocluster}
Let us assume that
one chlorine ion is extracted from a cube of ionic crystal
with equal $N_L$-atom edges
and
further that
$N_L$ is an odd number $2 n_L+1$,
and
the resultant
cluster with $N\equiv{N_L}^3-1$ atoms
is electrically neutral.
We employ the two-body Coulomb plus Born-Mayer type potential model,
\begin{align}
v(r_{ij})=
\frac{Q_i Q_j}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r_{ij}}
+A_{ij} \exp\left( \frac{R_i+R_j-r_{ij}}{\rho}\right),
\end{align}
where
$Q_i$, $Q_j$ are the charges of the $i$th and $j$th atoms,
$\epsilon_0$ is the vacuum permittivity, and
$r_{ij}$ is the distance between the $i$th and $j$th atoms.
We use
the values of the three parameters $A_{ij}$, $R_i$, and $\rho$
that were introduced by Tosi and Fumi in Ref.~\cite{tosi}:
$A_{ij}=0.2210$, $0.2637$, and $0.1582\,$ eV, respectively,
for
K--Cl,
K--K,
and Cl--Cl
pairs;
$R_i=1.463$ and $1.585\, \mathrm{\AA}$
for
K and Cl, respectively;
and
$\rho=0.337\, \mathrm{\AA}$.
Then,
the total potential energy of the cluster is given by
\begin{align}
V(\vb*{r}_1,\dots,\vb*{r}_N)=\sum_{i=1}^{N-1} \sum_{j=i+1}^N v(r_{ij}).
\label{eq:totalPot}
\end{align}
In the course of the time evolution,
the vacancy moves around the cluster,
which
introduces atomic mixing to the cluster.
Note that
the cubic form of the cluster is kept with the time evolution
when the temperature is sufficiently low \cite{cubic}.
At such low temperatures,
the position of the vacancy is specified
by the cubic lattice point $\vb*{n}=(n_x,n_y,n_z)$ with
$-n_L \leqslant n_x,n_y,n_z \leqslant n_L$.
Moreover,
we are able to find the atomic structure corresponding to the
vacancy lattice point $\vb*{n}$
as follows:
First,
atoms are arranged at
$d(m_x,m_y,m_z)$ with lattice constant $d=3.147\ {\rm\AA}$ for KCl,
where $(m_x,m_y,m_z)\neq \vb*{n}$ and $-n_L \leqslant m_x,m_y,m_z \leqslant n_L$.
Then, the configuration of the atoms
is relaxed to the local minimum (LM)
configuration, $\vb*{r}=(\vb*{r}_1,\dots,\vb*{r}_N)$,
of the potential energy surface, e.g.,
by
the conjugate gradient method \cite{matrixcomp}.
In this way,
$\vb*{n}$ is assigned to
the LM atomic structure as $\vb*{r}_{\vb*{n}}=\vb*{r}$.
We compute the LM configurations $\vb*{r}_{\vb*{n}}$
and the energies $V(\vb*{r}_{\vb*{n}})$
for all $\vb*{n}$.
The LM datasets of $V(\vb*{r}_{\vb*{n}})$ and $\vb*{r}_{\vb*{n}}$
are stored in a file in nondecreasing order of energy $V(\vb*{r}_{\vb*{n}})$.
For the sake of notational simplicity,
the $i$th lowest energy is denoted as $E_i$,
and
the corresponding
LM, atomic configuration, and
vacancy lattice point
are denoted as
$i$,
$\vb*{r}_i$, and
$\vb*{n}_i$,
respectively.
Then,
we proceed to find out all of the saddle points (SPs) connecting the adjacent
LMs,
e.g.,
by
the nudged elastic band method \cite{wales}.
The corresponding saddle point connecting the $i$th and $j$th LMs,
atomic configuration, and potential energy
are denoted as
${ij}$,
$\vb*{r}_{ij}$, and
$E_{ij}$,
respectively.
For the computational details of enumerating all of the LMs and SPs,
we refer the reader to Ref.~\cite{niiyama}.
\subsection{Markov state model of KCl vacancy diffusion}
Let $f(\vb*{r})$ denote the probability density function at
a configuration $\vb*{r}$.
We suppose
that
the intra-LM relaxations are
so fast
that
$f(\vb*{r})$ is represented as
\begin{align}
f(\vb*{r})= p_1 f_1(\vb*{r})+p_2 f_2(\vb*{r})+\dots+p_n f_n(\vb*{r}),
\end{align}
where
$n$ is the number of the LMs,
$f_i(\vb*{r})$ is
the local equilibrium in the $i$th-LM basin,
and
$p_i$ is the probability that
$\vb*{r}$ is in the $i$th-LM basin.
We identify
$p_i$
with the probability in the $i$th state of the Markov state model.
Then,
the probability vector $\vb*{P}$ of the Markov state model
is given by
$\vb*{P}=(p_1,p_2,\dots,p_n)^T$.
Next,
we evaluate
the transition rate $k_{i,j}$
from the $j$th to the adjacent $i$th state,
when
the potential barrier energies are sufficiently larger than
the average kinetic energy of $k_\text{B} T/2$ for one degree of freedom
at temperature $T$,
where $k_{\mathrm{B}}$ denotes the Boltzmann constant.
In this case,
the transition rate $k_{i,j}$
from the $j$th to the $i$th state
is given by
\begin{align}
k_{i,j}=
\nu_{i,j}
\exp \left({-\frac{E_{ij}-E_j}{k_\mathrm{B} T}}
\right).
\label{eq:kij}
\end{align}
Here,
the prefactor $\nu_{i,j}$,
called a frequency factor,
is given by
\begin{align}
\nu_{i,j}=\frac{\prod_k^\prime (\vb*{\nu}_i)_k}{\prod_k^\prime (\vb*{\nu}_{ij})_k},
\label{eq:nuij}
\end{align}
where $\vb*{\nu}_i$ and $\vb*{\nu}_{ij}$
are
vibrational frequency vectors
that are calculated from
the Hessians
at
$\vb*{r}_i$ and $\vb*{r}_{ij}$, respectively.
The product
$\prod^\prime_k (\vb*{\nu}_\ast)_k$ denotes
the partial product of the positive frequency modes
$(\vb*{\nu}_\ast)_k >0$,
where
the imaginary frequency modes and
the zero frequency modes
are left out from the products.
Finally,
the transition rate matrix $K$ is
given by
\begin{align}
(K)_{i,j}=k_{i,j}\ (i\neq j)
\quad \text{and}\quad
(K)_{j,j}=-\sum_{i\neq j} k_{i,j},\label{eq:Kmat}
\end{align}
where
the probability conservation equations
$\sum_{i}(K)_{i,j}=0$ for $j=1,2,\dots,n$
and
the detailed balance conditions
$(K)_{i,j} (\vb*{P}_\text{eq})_j=(K)_{j,i} (\vb*{P}_\text{eq})_i$
for $i$, $j=1,2,\dots,n$
are satisfied
since $(\vb*{P}_\text{eq})_i\propto \exp(-E_i/k_\text{B}T)$.
In the following,
we examine the slowest relaxation modes
of the KCl vacancy diffusion model of $N_L=13$.
To this end,
we searched for the LMs and the SPs of the cluster,
thereby finding $1099$ ($=1+(N_L^3-1)/2$) LMs and 5472 SPs.
Then,
with the use of Eqs.~\eqref{eq:kij}, \eqref{eq:nuij}, and \eqref{eq:Kmat},
we formed its rate matrix of $K$ at $k_\text{B} T=0.03$ eV,
whose matrix dimension $n$ is $1099$
and
the number of nonzero offdiagonal elements
is
$10948$ ($=5472\times 2$).
By diagonalizing $K$,
we obtained the eigenvalues $\lambda_i$ and
the corresponding relaxation modes $\vb*{P}_i$
for $i=0,1,2,\dots, n-1$,
where
$\vb*{P}_0=\vb*{P}_\text{eq}$.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:1stRelaxation} and Sec.~\ref{sec:2ndRelaxation},
we study the properties of
the slowest relaxation $\vb*{P}_1$
and the second slowest relaxations $\vb*{P}_2$,
$\vb*{P}_3$, and $\vb*{P}_4$ ($\lambda_2=\lambda_3=\lambda_4$),
respectively.
\section{the slowest relaxation mode\label{sec:1stRelaxation}}
In this section,
we show that
the slowest relaxation mode of the KCl nanocluster
makes effective use of the fast surface diffusion of the cluster,
in terms of
the mean first passage times,
the free energy landscapes,
and
the atomic interactions.
\subsection{Dominant pathways\label{sec:dominantPathways}}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{fig1.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
The slowest relaxation mode, $\vb*{P}_1$, at $k_\text{B}T=0.03$ eV:
(a)
Red (light gray) and blue (dark gray) balls are depicted
at vacancy lattice points of $\vb*{n}_i$
with radii $\propto |(\vb*{P}_1)_i|^{1/3}$
for $(\vb*{P}_1)_i > 0$ and $(\vb*{P}_1)_i < 0$,
respectively.
Note that
$\vb*{P}_1$ has cubic symmetry around the $x$-, $y$-, and $z$-axes.
(b)
$(\vb*{P}_1)_i$ along pathways $\ell_1$ of Eq.~\eqref{eq:ell1}
and $\ell_2$ of Eq.~\eqref{eq:ell2}
are plotted as a function of
the number of steps from the origin $(0,0,0)$
with blue circles connected by the lower line
and orange squares connected by the upper line, respectively.
}
\label{fig:density}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=6.5cm]{fig2.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
Probabilistic flows $f_{i,j}$ of $\vb*{P}_1$
at $k_\text{B}T=0.03$ eV
are represented
by
arrows from $\vb*{n}_j$
to $\vb*{n}_i$
with cylinder radii $\propto\sqrt{|f_{i,j}|}$
for $f_{i,j}>0$.
The flows have the same cubic symmetry as
in Fig.~\ref{fig:density}.
Hence,
only the flows in a reduced zone $n_y\geqslant n_x \geqslant n_z \geqslant 0$
are represented.
We see that two pathways $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$ in blue (dark gray)
carry the dominant flows:
$\ell_1$ is composed of
the
straight move from the origin $(0,0,0)$ to the edge center $(6,6,0)$
and
the succeeding zigzag move to the vertex $(6,6,6)$;
$\ell_2$ is composed of
the zigzag move from the origin to the face center $(0,6,0)$
and the succeeding straight move to the vertex.
[See Eqs.~\eqref{eq:ell1} and \eqref{eq:ell2}.]
}
\label{fig:flow}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:density}(a)
shows the slowest relaxation mode of $\vb*{P}_1$,
from which
we see
that
$\vb*{P}_1$ has
the probability excesses at around the origin $(0,0,0)$
and the probability shortages at around
the eight vertices of $(\pm n_L,\pm n_L,\pm n_L)$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:density}(b),
we also
plot
the values of
$(\vb*{P}_1)_i$ along two pathways
from the origin to the vertex $(n_L,n_L,n_L)$,
which clearly shows
that
they have the maximum values at the origin
and
positive values up to three steps from the origin
and negative values at the vertices.
$\vb*{P}_1$ decays with the rate of
$\lambda_1=-1.92 \times 10^{5}\ \mathrm{s}^{-1}$
over the course of time.
Hence,
the probabilistic flow
from the center to the vertices
is expected in the relaxation process of $\vb*{P}_1$.
To confirm this,
we compute all of
the probabilistic flows $f_{i,j}$ from $j$ to $i$,
generated by $\vb*{P}_1$,
where
$f_{i,j}$ is
given by
$f_{i,j}=k_{i,j}p_j-k_{j,i}p_i$
with $p_i=(\vb*{P}_1)_i$
for $1\leqslant i, j \leqslant n$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:flow},
$f_{i,j}$ are represented
by the arrows from $\vb*{n}_j$ to $\vb*{n}_i$ when $f_{i,j} > 0$.
We see that
the probabilistic flows from the center to the vertices
are generated.
More precisely,
the probabilistic flows are not uniform
but mostly along the two dominant pathways of
$\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$ as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:flow}.
The dominant pathways of $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$
are defined
by the following algorithm that searches for the maximum flow
pathways flowing into the terminals.
First,
we start with
the terminal of
the vertex $(n_L,n_L,n_L)=(6,6,6)$.
The probabilistic flow from $(5,6,5)$
flows into the terminal $(6,6,6)$.
The probabilistic flows from
$(6,6,5)$ and $(4,6,4)$
flow into $(5,6,5)$, respectively.
The dominant pathways via
$(6,6,5)$ and $(4,6,4)$
are denoted as $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$,
respectively.
We then search for the source flow of $\ell_1$ as follows.
The probabilistic flow from $(5,6,4)$
is the maximum flow flowing into $(6,6,5)$.
That from $(6,6,3)$
is the maximum flow flowing into $(5,6,4)$,
and so on.
This procedure continues until the source $(0,0,0)$ appears
and
gives the dominant pathway as
\begin{align}
\ell_1
=&
(0, 0, 0)
\to (1, 1, 0)
\to \dots \to (6, 6, 0)\nonumber\\
&\to (5, 6, 1)
\to (6, 6, 2)
\to (5, 6, 3)\label{eq:ell1}\\
&\to (6, 6, 4)
\to (5, 6, 5)
\to (6, 6, 6). \nonumber
\end{align}
The dominant paths of this kind are composed of six straight steps
from the origin to the 12 centers of the edges
$(\pm 6,\pm 6,0)$,
$(\pm 6,0,\pm 6)$,
$(0,\pm 6,\pm 6)$,
followed by six zigzag steps from there to the vertices along the edges.
Similarly,
we search for the source flows flowing into $(4,6,4)$
and obtain $\ell_2$ as
\begin{align}
\ell_2=
& (0,0,0)
\to (1,1,0)
\to (0, 2,0)
\to (1, 3,0)\nonumber\\
&\to (0, 4,0)
\to (1, 5,0)
\to (0, 6,0)\to\label{eq:ell2}\\
&
(1, 6,1)\to
\dots
\to (5, 6,5)
\to (6, 6, 6). \nonumber
\end{align}
The dominant paths of the second kind are composed of six zigzag steps
from the center to the six centers of the faces,
$(\pm 6,0,0)$,
$(0,\pm 6,0)$,
$(0,0,\pm 6)$,
followed by six straight steps from there to the vertices.
In other words,
the dominant paths arriving at each vertex
are the three
$\ell_1$-type paths,
which climb along the three edges connected to the vertex,
and the three
$\ell_2$-type paths,
which move across the three faces containing the vertex.
Note that
these observations
are consistent with our previous results from Ref.~\cite{rg}.
There,
all states are
divided into groups, called metabasins,
that are located around
the vertices,
the edges,
the faces,
and the center part,
and then
the relaxation processes
are
described accurately
by
the renormalized transitions
between
these metabasins.
That is to say,
we have reconfirmed here that
the essential pathways
connecting
the vertices,
the edges,
the faces,
and the center part
are indispensable for
describing the slowest transport of probabilities.
\subsection{Mean first passage times\label{sec:mfpt2vertex}}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{fig3.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
Mean first passage times of $t_j$ at $k_\text{B}T=0.03$ eV,
with perfect sinks connected to the vertices $(\pm 6,\pm 6,\pm 6)$:
(a) $t_j$ are represented
by balls of radii $\propto |t_j|^{1/3}$ located at $\vb*{n}_j$.
The mean first passage times
have cubic symmetry around the $x$-, $y$-, and $z$-axes.
(b) $t_j$ along $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$
are plotted as a function of the number of steps from the origin
with blue circles connected by the lower line
and orange squares connected by the upper line, respectively.
Both of $t_j$ have the maximum value of $8.28\times 10^{-6}$ s
at the origin of $(0,0,0)$.
The values of $t_j$ in the center part,
where the number of steps is from 0 to 4,
have the same order of magnitude,
while
those in the two layers from the surface,
where the number of steps is from 5 to 12,
are quite small values.
}
\label{fig:mfpts}
\end{figure}
Here,
we consider why
the dominant paths carrying large probabilistic flows
are not
almost straight, nine-step shortest paths from the origin to the vertices,
such as
$
(0, 0, 0)
\to (0, 1, 1)
\to (1, 1, 2)
\to (2, 2, 2)
\to (2, 3, 3)
\to (2, 4, 4)
\to (3, 4, 5)
\to (4, 5, 5)
\to (5, 5, 6)
\to (6, 6, 6)
$,
but longer 12-step paths of $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:flow}.
To this end,
we examine the mean first passage times of $t_j$ from
various initial states of $j$
to the sink states of the vertices $(\pm n_L,\pm n_L,\pm n_L)$.
Using Eq.~\eqref{eq:allsinks},
we compute $t_j$ for various initial states of $j$.
The resulting $t_j$
are
plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:mfpts}(a).
We see that
the states in the central part have large $t_j$ values,
while
the states on the surface have quite small values.
That is,
the KCl nanocluster is a hybrid system
that combines entirely different microscopic diffusive regions:
The central part is the region that is hard to move stochastically,
whereas
the surface part is the region that is quite easy to move.
To see this more closely,
we plot $t_j$ along the paths of $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$
in Fig.~\ref{fig:mfpts}(b),
where
both of $t_j$ have the maximum value at the origin
and
they are negligibly small compared to the maximum value
in two layers from the surface.
Now,
we see the reason why the detoured pathways are selected
to be the dominant pathways,
as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:flow}.
Namely,
it is because
all the dominant pathways prefer to pass
the slow diffusion region of the central part as soon as possible,
with the fewest steps of $n_L=6$,
in order to make the most effective use of the fast diffusion in the surface region.
Next,
we show that
$\lambda_1$
can be evaluated approximately from $t_j$.
The longest mean first passage time to the vertices
is
$t_{(0,0,0)}=8.28\times10^{-6}$ s.
The probability of being at the vertices in equilibrium
is $\vb*{P}_\text{eq}(\text{vertices})=
\sum_{i \in \text{vertices}} (\vb*{P}_\text{eq})_i
=0.885$.
We regard
the equilibration time
as
the required time of
constructing $\vb*{P}_\text{eq}(\text{vertices})$.
Then,
the equilibration time
is approximately given by
\begin{align}
\vb*{P}_\text{eq}(\text{vertices})\times t_{(0,0,0)}
=7.33\times 10^{-6} \ \text{s}.
\label{eq:P1relaxtime}
\end{align}
The corresponding equilibration rate
is given by the inverse of the equilibration time,
$1.36\times10^{5}\ \mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
The estimate
agrees
qualitatively
with the values of $|\lambda_1|=1.92\times 10^5$ s$^{-1}$,
although
it is a smaller value than $|\lambda_1|$.
This discrepancy arises because,
although the actual excess probabilities in $\vb*{P}_1$
are distributed in the central part
as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:density},
the excess probability is approximated to
the distribution concentrated on
the origin, for the mean first passage time approximation of $\lambda_1$.
We will revisit this point
in Sec.~\ref{sec:symmetric}.
\subsection{Free energy sequences\label{sec:freeEnergySeq}}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{fig4.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
Free energy sequences in units of eV
are plotted
at $k_\text{B}T=0.03$ eV,
as functions of steps counted from the origin $(0,0,0)$ to a vertex
along the geometric shortest path
({$\blacktriangle$}, green),
along the dominant path, $\ell_1$, of Eq.~\eqref{eq:ell1}
via an edge center
(\raisebox{-0.25ex}{\Large $\bullet$}, blue)
and the dominant path, $\ell_2$, of Eq.~\eqref{eq:ell2} via a face center ($\blacksquare$, orange).
The integer steps
indicate the free energies of the local minima,
and
the half-integer steps
indicate the free energies of the saddle points
that connect the basins of adjacent local minima.
}
\label{fig:FijFj}
\end{figure}
Here,
we consider the physical reason why
the bottleneck of diffusion in the Markov state model of the KCl nanocluster
is located at the central part.
To this end,
we examine the following free energies
for the LMs of $j$ and the SPs of $ij$,
respectively:
\begin{align}
F_{j}&=E_j-k_\text{B}T \ln {\prod_k}^\prime (\vb*{\nu}_j)_k,\label{eq:Fj}\\
F_{ij}&=E_{ij}-k_\text{B}T \ln {\prod_k}^\prime (\vb*{\nu}_{ij})_k,
\label{eq:Fij}
\end{align}
where $k_{i,j}=\exp[ -\beta(F_{ij}-F_j) ]$ holds.
Then,
the free energy sequence of local minima and saddle points
along a pathway $i_0\to i_1\to \cdots \to i_s$
is given by
$F_{i_0},F_{i_0i_1},F_{i_1},F_{i_1i_2},F_{i_2},\dots F_{i_s}$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:FijFj},
we plot the free energy sequences of
the dominant pathways of $\ell_1$ [Eq.~\eqref{eq:ell1}]
and $\ell_2$ [Eq.~\eqref{eq:ell2}].
Along these dominant pathways,
the activation energies for the inner transitions $i_k\to i_{k+1}$
are about
$\Delta F_{i_{k+1},i_k}=F_{i_ki_{k+1}}-F_{i_k}\approx 0.5$ eV,
and hence
the transition rates become quite low rates of
$k_{i_{k+1},i_k}\approx 6\times 10^{5}\ \mathrm{s}^{-1}$
at $k_\text{B}T=0.03$ eV.
In contrast,
those for the surface transitions
are
$\Delta F_{i_{k+1},i_k}\approx 0.2$ eV,
and
the transition rates are about
$k_{i_{k+1},i_k}\approx 1\times 10^{10}\ \mathrm{s}^{-1}$,
which are about $10^4$ times higher than the inner rates,
at the same temperature.
For comparison,
we also plot
the free energy sequence
along
the nine-step geometric shortest path
in Fig.~\ref{fig:FijFj}.
We see that
the first seven steps are
in the slow diffusion region
and
the last two steps are
in the faster surface diffusion region.
Therefore,
the geometric shortest path
cannot be dominant,
because
the extra steps in the slower diffusion region reduce
its diffusive flow drastically.
Note that
the activation free energies of $\Delta F_{i_k,i_{k+1}} \gtrsim 0.2$ eV
are sufficiently larger than $k_\text{B} T=0.03$ eV
and hence
the harmonic approximation \eqref{eq:kij}
used in this study is accurate.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5cm]{fig5.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
Individual energies $V_k$ of $k$th atoms
contained in the $z=0$ planes are shown for
(a)
the LM of the vacancy lattice point of $\vb*{n}_1=(0,0,0)$,
(b) the SP connecting LMs of $\vb*{n}_1$ and $\vb*{n}_2=(1,1,0)$,
and
(c) the LM of the vacancy lattice point of $\vb*{n}_2$.
The Cl and K atoms of individual energies $V_k$ are
represented by blue (dark gray) and yellow (light gray) balls with radii
$\propto \sqrt[3]{V_k-\min_{k}\{V_k\} }$.
The defect neighbors are defined by the regions
inside the green (gray) frames of $|x-y|<1.2d$, $-1.2d<x+y<3.2d$,
and $|z|<2.2$. (See the text.)
}
\label{fig:LM1SPLM2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Activation energies on potential energy landscapes\label{sec:activation}}
Next,
we show that
it
can be understood
in terms of the interatomic interaction energies
why
the surface activation free energies
are so small compared to the inner ones.
First,
from Eqs.~\eqref{eq:nuij}, \eqref{eq:Fj}, and \eqref{eq:Fij},
$\Delta F_{i,j}= E_{ij}-E_j+k_{\mathrm{B}}T \ln \nu_{i,j}$ holds.
At the low temperature of $k_\text{B}T=0.03$ eV,
$k_{\mathrm{B}}T \ln \nu_{i,j} \approx 0.03 $ eV
is negligible compared to $\Delta F_{i,j} \approx 0.5$ eV,
and
$\Delta F_{i,j} \approx E_{ij}-E_j$ holds.
Hence,
in the following
we
consider the activation energies,
$\Delta E_{i,j}=E_{ij}-E_j$,
of various transitions.
We examine the activation energy of $\Delta E_{i,j}$
when the vacancy lattice points $\vb*{n}_i$ and $\vb*{n}_j$
are present in the inner part of the cluster.
In this case,
$E_i$ and $E_j$ are almost the same,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:FijFj},
and hence
$\Delta E_{i,j}$ is determined by
the energy increase from $E_i\simeq E_j$,
due to
the deformation of the crystal structure near the lattice defect.
To quantify the deformation energies,
we introduce the individual potential energy of the $k$th atom as
\begin{align}
V_k=\frac12\sum_{l\neq k} v(r_{kl}).
\end{align}
Then, the total potential energy of Eq.~\eqref{eq:totalPot}
is represented as
\begin{align}
V(\vb*{r})=\sum_{k}V_k.
\end{align}
Note that
$V_k$ is half of the required energy to remove the $k$th atom from the cluster,
since
$V(\vb*{r}_1,\dots,\vb*{r}_k,\dots\vb*{r}_N)-V(\vb*{r}_1,\dots,\vb*{r}_{k-1},\vb*{r}_{k+1}\dots,\vb*{r}_N)=2 V_k$ holds.
Figures \ref{fig:LM1SPLM2}(a) and \ref{fig:LM1SPLM2}(c), respectively,
show the values of $V_k$ for
the LMs of the vacancy lattice points of
$\vb*{n}_1={(0,0,0)}$ and $\vb*{n}_2={(1,1,0)}$.
We see that
the changes of $V_k$ are concentrated
in the vicinities of the vacancies
at around $\vb*{r}_1= d \vb*{n}_1$ and $\vb*{r}_2= d \vb*{n}_2$
with lattice constant $d$,
and that
$V_k$ of Cl and K atoms
decrease and increase, respectively,
when approaching the vacancy positions.
Figure \ref{fig:LM1SPLM2}(b)
shows the values of $V_k$
for the SP connecting the LMs of $\vb*{n}_1$ and $\vb*{n}_2$.
The SP has
the high energy Cl atom as the lattice defect
at around the midpoint, $\vb*{r}_{1,2}=d(1/2,1/2,0)$, of the vacancy positions.
In this case, too,
$V_k$ of Cl and K atoms
decrease and increase, respectively,
when approaching the defect of the high-energy Cl atom.
Next,
we show that
$\Delta E_{i,j}$ can be estimated
with use of the local $V_k$ values around the defects.
To this end,
we obtain the local energies
$E_1^{\text{loc.}}=-134.34$ eV,
$E_{1,2}^{\text{loc.}}=-133.804$ eV, and
$E_2^{\text{loc.}}=-134.334$ eV,
which
are
the sums of $V_k$ inside the local regions
surrounded by the green (gray) rectangle frames
in Figs.~\ref{fig:LM1SPLM2}(a), \ref{fig:LM1SPLM2}(b), and \ref{fig:LM1SPLM2}(c),
respectively.
Hence,
the activation energies
evaluated from these local energies
are given by
$\Delta E_{2,1}^{\text{loc.}}=E_{1,2}^{\text{loc.}}-E_{1}^{\text{loc.}}=
0.530$ eV
and
$\Delta E_{1,2}^{\text{loc.}}=E_{1,2}^{\text{loc.}}-E_{2}^{\text{loc.}}
=0.536$ eV,
which agree qualitatively with
the exact activation energies
of
$\Delta E_{2,1}=0.58$ eV and
$\Delta E_{1,2}=0.58$ eV.
Similarly,
we also evaluate the local activation energies of
other types of activation processes
as listed in Table~\ref{table:deltaE}.
We see that
the other types of activation energies
are also described suitably
by the local activation energies.
Therefore,
we have confirmed that
all of the activation energies can be interpreted as
the energy rises due to the local lattice deformations
generated around the lattice defects.
Also,
the local deformation assumption leads to
the approximate relations of
$\Delta E_{\text{face}\leftarrow\text{face}}\approx
\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}}/2$
and
$\Delta E_{\text{edge}\leftarrow\text{face}}\approx
\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}}/4$,
which are implied in Table \ref{table:deltaE}.
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{%
Activation energies $\Delta E_{i,j}$
and local activation energies $\Delta E^{\mathrm{loc.}}_{i,j}$
of vacancy transitions in the KCl cluster of $n_L=6$
are enumerated in units of eV.
$\Delta E_{1,2}=E_{1,2}-E_2$
and
$\Delta E^\text{loc.}_{1,2}=E^\text{loc.}_{1,2}-E^\text{loc.}_2$,
where
$E^\text{loc.}_{1,2}$ and $E^\text{loc.}_2$ are
sums of individual atomic energies around the defect points.
(See the text.)
}
\label{table:deltaE}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{p{3.5cm}p{3.5cm}p{3.5cm}p{3.5cm}}
\hline
\hfil Activation type \hfil & \hfil $\vb*{n}_1\leftarrow \vb*{n}_2$\hfil & \hfil $\Delta E_{1,2}$\hfil &\hfil $\Delta E_{1,2}^{\mathrm{loc.}}$\hfil\\
\hline \hline
\hfil$\text{Inner}\leftarrow\text{Inner}$\hfil &\hfil $(1,1,0)\leftarrow (0,0,0)$\hfil &\hfil $0.58$\hfil &\hfil$0.53$ \hfil\\
\hfil$\text{Face}\leftarrow\text{Face}$\hfil & \hfil$(6,1,1)\leftarrow(6,0,0)$\hfil &\hfil $0.32$\hfil &\hfil $0.33$\hfil \\
\hfil $\text{Edge}\leftarrow\text{Face}$
\hfil & \hfil$(6,6,0)\leftarrow (6,5,1)$\hfil & \hfil $0.15$\hfil &\hfil $0.18$ \hfil\\
\hfil $\text{Vertex}\leftarrow\text{Face}$
\hfil & \hfil$(6,6,6)\leftarrow (6,5,5)$\hfil & \hfil $0.027$\hfil &\hfil $0.036$ \hfil\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
To understand these relations,
we assume for simplicity that the deformation energy is uniformly distributed
inside the ball of radius $a \approx d$ located at the defect point.
Assuming further
that
the deformation energy per unit volume is given by $\epsilon$,
then the activation energies for inner vacancies are
estimated as
$\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner} }=4\pi a^3 \epsilon/3\, (=0.58\ \text{eV)}$.
Next,
we consider the activation energies for vacancies in a face.
In this case,
the energies of adjacent local minima
are also supposed to be the same for simplicity.
Since the deformed regions are half of the inner case,
the deformation energies of the vacancies in the faces
are estimated to be
$\Delta E_{\text{face}\leftarrow\text{face} }
=4\pi a^3 \epsilon/3/2=\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}}/2
\, (=0.29\, \text{eV})$.
Moreover,
when a vacancy inside a face moves to an adjacent edge,
the deformation energy reduces to half of
$\Delta E_{\text{face}\leftarrow\text{face} }$,
since the deformed region is halved from that of
the transition in a face.
Hence,
we have
$\Delta E_{\text{edge}\leftarrow\text{face} }\approx
\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}}/4\ (=0.15\ \text{eV})$.
We see that
the estimated values agree quantitatively with the exact values.
Lastly,
when the vacancy in a face moves to an adjacent vertex,
the deformation energy is evaluated to be halved
to $\Delta E_{\text{edge}\leftarrow\text{face} }$.
Thus,
we have the following approximation:
$\Delta E_{\text{vertex}\leftarrow\text{face} }\approx
\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}}/8(=0.07\ \text{eV})$,
which agrees qualitatively with
the exact value of $0.027$ eV.
Here,
we have revealed that
the activation energies for the system of $n_L=6$
are determined by the local deformation energies of $\Delta E^{\mathrm{loc.}}_{i,j}$ around the defects.
Accordingly,
the activation energies
are supposed to be almost independent of the system size of $n_L$.
In fact,
we have
$\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}} =\Delta E_{(0,1,1)\leftarrow(0,0,0)}=0.58$ eV,
$\Delta E_{\text{face}\leftarrow\text{face}}=\Delta E_{(4,1,1)\leftarrow(4,0,0)}=0.33$ eV,
$\Delta E_{\text{edge}\leftarrow\text{face}}=\Delta E_{(4,4,0)\leftarrow(4,3,1)}=0.16$ eV,
and
$\Delta E_{\text{vertex}\leftarrow\text{face}}=\Delta E_{(4,4,4)\leftarrow(4,3,3)}=0.03$ eV
for $n_L=4$.
These results show that
all types of activation energies
are indeed almost independent of the system size
when $n_L \geqslant 4$.
On the other hand,
for $n_L=2$,
we have
$\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}}=\Delta E_{(0,1,1)\leftarrow(0,0,0)}=0.47$ eV,
$\Delta E_{\text{face}\leftarrow\text{face}}=\Delta E_{(2,1,1)\leftarrow(2,0,0)}=0.39$ eV,
$\Delta E_{\text{edge}\leftarrow\text{face}}=\Delta E_{(2,2,0)\leftarrow(2,1,1)}=0.3$ eV,
and
$\Delta E_{\text{vertex}\leftarrow\text{face}}=\Delta E_{(2,2,2)\leftarrow(2,1,1)}=0.05$ eV,
which shows that
the uniform local deformation assumption for the activation energies
employed above
does not hold for $n_L=2$.
In other words,
the cluster of $n_L=2$
is too small to separate the deformations of the surface
from those of the central portion,
and thus
some non-negligible couplings are generated
between
the inner and surface deformations.
As a result of the couplings,
the relatively high
activation energies between inner transitions
are decreased,
while
the other relatively low activation energies
between surface transitions
are increased for $n_L=2$.
In addition,
the saddle connectivity graphs of
$n_L=4$, $6$, and $8$ depicted in Ref.~\cite{niiyama}
also show visually
that
the activation energies of
$\Delta E_{\text{inner}\leftarrow\text{inner}}
$,
$\Delta E_{\text{face}\leftarrow\text{face}}
$,
$\Delta E_{\text{edge}\leftarrow\text{face}}
$, and
$\Delta E_{\text{vertex}\leftarrow\text{face}}
$
are almost independent of the sizes $n_L$ of the clusters.
\section{The second slowest relaxations\label{sec:2ndRelaxation}}
\begin{figure}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=6.5cm]{fig6.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
We plot the second slowest relaxation mode of $\vb*{P}_2$
in the same manner as in Fig.~\ref{fig:density}.
$\vb*{P}_2$ has the four-fold rotational symmetry around the $x$-axis.
The relaxation mode is polarized in the $x$-direction,
where
the excess and shortage of probability
are distributed, respectively,
in $x>0$ and $x<0$,
symmetrically with respect to the plane
of $x=0$.
Similarly to $\vb*{P}_2$,
$\vb*{P}_3$ and $\vb*{P}_4$
are the relaxation modes,
which are
polarized in
the $y$- and $z$-directions, respectively.
}
\label{fig:densityPx}
\end{figure}
In this section,
we examine the second slowest relaxations of
$\lambda_2,\lambda_3,\lambda_4=-3.89\times 10^{5}\ \mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:densityPx},
we plot $\vb*{P}_2$ in the same way as in
Fig.~\ref{fig:density}.
The probability deviations of
$\vb*{P}_2$
are polarized in the $x$-direction.
Here,
the probability excess is in the region of $x>0$,
the probability shortage is in $x<0$,
and
the probabilities are zero in $x=0$.
From this observation,
the relaxation process is expected as follows:
the probability excess moves in the opposite $x$-direction,
the probability shortage moves in the $x$-direction,
and
these pairs meet with each other in the region of $x=0$,
to be annihilated.
To confirm this expectation,
we evaluated the mean first passage times
with sinks connected to $(0,n_y,n_z)$ for $-n_L\leqslant n_y,n_z \leqslant n_L$.
The longest passage time is
$t_{(2,0,0)}=4.05\times 10^{-6}\ \mathrm{s}$.
The resulting rate of this process
is
$2.47\times 10^{5}\ \mathrm{s}^{-1}$.
Also here,
the estimated values of the rate
agree qualitatively with $|\lambda_2|$,
but they are somewhat smaller than
the exact rate of $|\lambda_2|=3.89\times 10^{5}\ \mathrm{s}^{-1}$,
because this approximate rate is evaluated
only from the longest mean first passage time,
as discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:mfpt2vertex}.
Finally, we show that the approximate relation of
$\lambda_2\approx 2 \lambda_1$ holds.
Here,
the value of $\lambda_2$ evaluated from
the mean first passage time from $(2,0,0)$ to $x=0$
is approximated by that from $(2,0,0)$ to $(0,0,0)$.
From Fig.~\ref{fig:density}(b),
we see that
$\lambda_1$ is approximately evaluated from the mean first passage time
from $(0,0,0)$ to $(4,0,0)$,
which
is approximately twice as long as
that from $(0,0,0)$ to $(2,0,0)$
since
each of the transitions requires almost the same transition time
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:FijFj}.
Hence,
the proportional relation
$1/|\lambda_1|:1/|\lambda_2|=4:2$ holds,
and thus
$\lambda_2=2\lambda_1$ holds.
Similarly,
we can derive
the approximate relations of
$\lambda_3=2\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_4=2\lambda_1$.
In this section,
we have confirmed that
the second slowest relaxations of
$\vb*{P}_2$,
$\vb*{P}_3$,
and
$\vb*{P}_4$, respectively,
smooth out
the nonequilibrium distribution deviations
in the
$x$-,
$y$-,
and
$z$-directions in the course of time,
and
the bottleneck processes for the second slowest relaxations
are also
the slow diffusions inside the cluster.
This fact allows us to
derive the approximate relation of
$\lambda_2,\ \allowbreak\lambda_3,\ \lambda_4\approx 2 \lambda_1$.
\section{Symmetric evaluation of relaxation rates\label{sec:symmetric}}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=5cm]{fig7.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
Schematic illustration of the population methods.
(a) The stationary particle population of $(\bar{\vb*{P}})_i$
satisfying Eqs.~\eqref{eq:population}
and \eqref{eq:population2} is shown as a function of states $i$.
The red (light gray) arrow indicates how
the particles injected at the source move diffusively to the sink.
We also show $\|\bar{\vb*{P}}\| \vb*{P}_{\mathrm{eq}}
$ with a dashed line,
to illustrate the latter term in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:Qsiki0}.
(b)
The symmetric stationary population $\vb*{Q}$
with
a source and a sink connected to
the left and right end states, respectively,
is given by
Eq.~\eqref{eq:Qsiki0}.
The negative population $-\vb*{Q}_-$ is interpreted
as
the stationary population $\vb*{Q}_-$ of holes.
The blue (gray) arrow indicates how
the holes injected at the hole source move diffusively.
Particles from the source and
the holes
meet at the center
and
are annihilated by pair annihilation.
(c)
The stationary population under the exchange of the sink and source
is shown.
In this case,
particles of population $\vb*{Q}_-$
move to the left
and
holes of population $\vb*{Q}_+$
move to the right.
The particles and
the holes
meet at the center
to be annihilated.
Both of the mean annihilation times in (b) and (c)
agree with
the mean first passage time,
$\| \vb*{Q}_+ \|=\| \vb*{Q}_- \|$,
of particles and holes.
(See the text.)
}
\label{fig:particle-hole}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Symmetric population method \label{sec:symmetricpopulation}}
In the previous sections,
we have successfully evaluated
the values of
the slowest and second slowest relaxation rates
with the use of the mean first passage times.
Recall that
the usages of the mean first passage times
for the slowest and second slowest relaxations
were different.
That is,
for the slowest relaxation,
the mean first passage times concerning particles
were used,
whereas,
for the second slowest relaxations,
the mean annihilation times of particle-hole pairs
were evaluated with the uses of the mean first passage times.
The difference manifests
itself in the symmetry of relaxation times under exchanging the sinks and sources.
Namely,
the approaches to evaluating
the slowest and second slowest relaxation rates,
respectively,
give
the relaxation times
that
are asymmetric and symmetric for exchanging
sinks and sources.
In fact, as shown in Eq.~\eqref{eq:P1relaxtime},
the slowest relaxation time is $7.33\times 10^{-6}$ s
with the source and the sinks being connected to the origin
and the vertices, respectively,
whereas,
with the sources and the sink being connected to the vertices and the origin,
the mean first passage time is given by
$\tau'=3.82\times 10^{-3}$ s
and thus
the relaxation time is $(\vb*{P}_\text{eq})_{(0,0,0)} \times \tau'=8.24\times 10^{-3}$ s.
The symmetry
corresponds to
the property
that
$\vb*{P}_i$ and $-\vb*{P}_i$
have the same value of $\lambda_i$,
and
hence it is required for a consistent treatment.
Here,
we develop
an alternative population method for estimating mean first passage times
that is symmetric under the exchange of the sinks and sources.
To this end,
we consider
the following stationary population equation:
\begin{align}
K {\vb*{Q}}+\vb*{S}&= \vb*{0}, \label{eq:particle-hole}\\
\text{with}\ \| \vb*{Q}_+ \|= \|\vb*{Q}_-\|,&\quad
\| \vb*{S}_+ \|= \|\vb*{S}_-\|=1. \label{eq:particle-hole2}
\end{align}
Here,
$
\vb*{Q}=
\vb*{Q}_+ - \vb*{Q}_-$
and
$
\vb*{S}=
\vb*{S}_+ - \vb*{S}_-,
$
where the positive population $\vb*{Q}_+$
and
the negative population $-\vb*{Q}_-$
are given by
\begin{align}
\vb*{Q}_+=\frac{\vb*{Q}+|\vb*{Q}|}2,\quad
\vb*{Q}_-=-\frac{\vb*{Q}-|\vb*{Q}|}2,
\end{align}
with
$|\vb*{Q}|\equiv (|q_1|,|q_2|,\dots,|q_n| )$.
The source part $\vb*{S}_+$
and
the sink part $-\vb*{S}_-$
are, respectively,
given by
\begin{align}
\vb*{S}_+=\frac{\vb*{S}+|\vb*{S}|}2,\quad
\vb*{S}_-=-\frac{\vb*{S}-|\vb*{S}|}2,
\end{align}
with
$|\vb*{S}|\equiv (|s_1|,|s_2|,\dots,|s_n| )$.
With use of
the stationary solution $\bar{\vb*{P}}$,
satisfying Eqs.~\eqref{eq:population} and \eqref{eq:population2},
the stationary solution ${\vb*{Q}}$ of
Eqs.~\eqref{eq:particle-hole} and \eqref{eq:particle-hole2}
is
given by
\begin{align}
\vb*{Q}
=\bar{\vb*{P}}
- \| \bar{\vb*{P}} \|
\vb*{P}_{\mathrm{eq}},
\label{eq:Qsiki0}
\end{align}
In fact,
$\vb*{Q}$ given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:Qsiki0}
satisfies
the constraint
$\|\vb*{Q}_+\|=\|\vb*{Q}_-\|
$,
because
$
\|\vb*{Q}_+\|-\|\vb*{Q}_-\|=
\|\vb*{Q}\|
=\|
(\bar{\vb*{P}}- \| \bar{\vb*{P}} \|
\vb*{P}_{\mathrm{eq}})
\|=\| \bar{\vb*{P}} \|-\| \bar{\vb*{P}} \|=0
$ holds.
As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:particle-hole}(b),
the negative population $-\vb*{Q}_-$
can be interpreted as
the hole population of $\vb*{Q}_-$.
Hence,
the mean annihilation times of particles and holes
are, respectively,
given by
the first passage times of
$\|\vb*{Q}_+\|$
and
$\|\vb*{Q}_-\|$
as discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:2ndRelaxation}.
Similarly,
$\vb*{S}_-$ is interpreted as
a hole source part that adds one hole per unit time.
Hence,
the constraint of $\|\vb*{S}_+\|=\|\vb*{S}_-\|=1$
means
that
$\vb*{S}_+$
adds one particle per unit time,
and $\vb*{S}_-$
adds one hole per unit time.
Note that,
since
$\vb*{P}_\text{eq}$ satisfies the detailed balance condition,
the particle flows of $\vb*{\bar{P}}$ and $\vb*{Q}$ are the same,
and so are their dominant pathways,
as illustrated in Figs.~\ref{fig:particle-hole}(a)
and \ref{fig:particle-hole}(b).
The constraint $\|\vb*{Q}_+ \|=\|\vb*{Q}_-\| $ means that
the mean first passage times are
symmetric under exchanging the sinks and sources.
In fact,
by exchanging the sinks and sources,
$\vb*{S}$ and
$\vb*{Q}$
are, respectively,
converted to $-\vb*{S}$
and
$-\vb*{Q}$,
and hence
$\vb*{Q}_+ $ and $\vb*{Q}_-$
are,
respectively,
converted to
$\vb*{Q}_- $ and $\vb*{Q}_+$,
as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:particle-hole}(c).
Hence,
the mean first passage times
of Eqs.~\eqref{eq:particle-hole} and \eqref{eq:particle-hole2}
satisfy
$\|\vb*{Q}_- \|=\|\vb*{Q}_+\| $ with sinks and sources exchanged,
which
is the same value as the value before the exchange.
Here,
with this symmetric population method,
we evaluate the slowest relaxation rate of $\lambda_1$
for the vacancy diffusion model of the KCl nanocluster.
Setting
\begin{align}
(\vb*{S}_+)_{(0,0,0)}=1,\
(\vb*{S}_-)_{(\pm n_L,\pm n_L,\pm n_L)}=1/8,
\label{eq:SinP1}
\end{align}
and otherwise $(\vb*{S}_{\pm})_{i,j,k}=0$,
we evaluated
the symmetric stationary solution of Eq.~\eqref{eq:Qsiki},
thereby
obtaining
the slowest relaxation time
of
$\|\vb*{Q}_+\|=\|\vb*{Q}_-\|=
7.92 \times 10^{-6}$~s.
Namely,
with this symmetric method,
we obtained an approximation of the exact slowest relaxation time
of $-1/\lambda_1=5.2\times 10^{-6}$ s,
which is
symmetric under exchanging the sinks and sources
and
as accurate
as the asymmetric result of $7.33\times 10^{-6}$ s
given in Sec.~\ref{sec:1stRelaxation}.
For the second slowest relaxation,
we set
\begin{align}
(\vb*{S}_+)_{(2,0,0)}=1,\
(\vb*{S}_-)_{(-2,0,0)}=-1,
\label{eq:SinP2}
\end{align}
and otherwise $(\vb*{S}_{\pm})_{i,j,k}=0$,
thereby
obtaining the symmetric result of
$\|\vb*{Q}_+\|=\|\vb*{Q}_-\|=
4.05 \times 10^{-6}$ s,
which of course agrees with the result given in Sec.~\ref{sec:2ndRelaxation}.
In this subsection,
we have developed
the symmetric population method for
mean first passage times,
which enables us to
approximately
evaluate
the slowest relaxation times
symmetrically by exchanging the sinks and sources.
\subsection{Symmetric population method as an inverse power method
\label{sec:iteration}}
Here,
we show that
the iterative use of the symmetric population method
enables us to
compute the slowest relaxation times accurately.
First,
the $n\times n$ matrix
$P=(\vb*{P}_\text{eq},\vb*{P}_1,\vb*{P}_2,\dots,\vb*{P}_{n-1})$
is invertible,
where
$\vb*{P}_i$ is the eigenvector corresponding
to the $i$th relaxation mode.
We expand $\vb*{S}$ and $\vb*{Q}$ as
\begin{align}
\vb*{S}&=s'_0 \vb*{P}_\text{eq}+s'_1 \vb*{P}_1+s'_2 \vb*{P}_2+\dots,\\
\vb*{Q}&=q'_0 \vb*{P}_\text{eq}+q'_1 \vb*{P}_1+q'_2 \vb*{P}_2+\dots,\label{eq:Qsiki}
\end{align}
where the coefficients $s'_i$ and $q'_i$ are defined as follows:
\begin{align}
s'_i=(P^{-1}\vb*{S})_i,\quad q'_i=(P^{-1}\vb*{P})_i.
\label{eq:s'q'}
\end{align}
With the use of $s'_i$ and $q'_i$,
Eq.~\eqref{eq:particle-hole}
is represented as
\begin{align}
q'_0&= s'_0=0,\label{eq:q0s0}\\
q'_i &=\frac{s'_i}{-\lambda_i} \quad (i=1,2,\dots).\label{eq:qisi}
\end{align}
Substituting
Eqs.~\eqref{eq:q0s0} and \eqref{eq:qisi}
into Eq.~\eqref{eq:Qsiki},
we have
\begin{align}
\vb*{Q}=\frac{s'_1}{-\lambda_1} \vb*{P}_1+
\frac{s'_2}{-\lambda_2} \vb*{P}_2+\dots.
\label{eq:Qsiki2}
\end{align}
Equations \eqref{eq:s'q'} and \eqref{eq:Qsiki2}
define
the procedure to obtain $\vb*{Q}$ from $\vb*{S}$,
which
is denoted as $\vb*{Q}=Q(\vb*{S})$.
Then,
the mean first passage time approximation $\tau$ of the relaxation time
is written as follows:
\begin{align}
\tau=\frac{\|\vb*{Q}_+\|}{\|\vb*{S}_+\|}
=\frac{\|\vb*{Q}_-\|}{\|\vb*{S}_-\|}
= \frac{\|\vb*{Q}\|}{\|\vb*{S}\|}
= \frac{\|Q(\vb*{S})\|}{\|\vb*{S}\|},
\end{align}
as discussed in the previous subsection.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6cm]{fig8.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{%
The mean first passage times of the symmetric population method
converge to the slowest relaxation times.
(a)
The mean first passage times,
$\tau =\|{Q}^{(m)}(\vb*{S})\|/\|{Q}^{(m-1)}(\vb*{S}) \|$,
are plotted
as a function of iteration number $m$ ($m=1,2,\dots,10$)
with circles
for the slowest relaxation
and
with squares
for the second slowest relaxation.
The dashed and dotted lines show
the values of the exact relaxation times of
$1/|\lambda_1|$ and $1/|\lambda_2|$,
respectively.
$Q(\vb*{S})$
are plotted in the same manner as in Fig.~\ref{fig:density}(a),
for the slowest relaxation [panel (b)]
and
for the second slowest relaxation [panel(c)].
}
\label{fig:iteration}
\end{figure}
Now,
we consider the effect of
the iterative use of this procedure.
We apply the $m$-times function composition of $Q$ to $\vb*{S}$,
and
the resultant vector ${Q}^{(m)}(\vb*{S})$ is given by
\begin{align}
{Q}^{(m)}(\vb*{S})=\frac{s'_1}{(-\lambda_1)^m} \vb*{P}_1+
\frac{s'_2}{(-\lambda_2)^m} \vb*{P}_2+\dots,
\label{eq:Qsiki3}
\end{align}
which shows that, as $m\to \infty$,
if $s'_1\neq 0$, then $\vb*{Q}\propto \vb*{P}_1$,
else if
$s'_1=\dots=s'_{i-1}= 0$ and $s'_i\neq 0$,
then $\vb*{Q}\propto \vb*{P}_i$.
From this, we understand that
the symmetric population method
can be interpreted as an inverse power method for the eigenvalue problem \cite{matrixcomp}.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:iteration}(a), we plot the mean first passage times
\begin{align*}
\tau=
\frac{\|Q^{(m)}(\vb*{S})\|}{\|Q^{(m-1)}(\vb*{S})\|}
=
\frac{\|Q (Q^{(m-1)}(\vb*{S}))\|}{\|Q^{(m-1)}(\vb*{S})\|}
\end{align*}
for the slowest and second slowest relaxation modes
with the settings of Eqs.~\eqref{eq:SinP1} and \eqref{eq:SinP2},
respectively.
At $m=1$,
both are larger than the corresponding exact relaxation times,
because
$\vb*{S}$
of Eqs.~\eqref{eq:SinP1} and \eqref{eq:SinP2}
are selected so as to maximize
the mean first passage times of $\|Q(\vb*{S})\|/\|\vb*{S}\|$.
At $m=2$ and $3$,
the mean first passage time approximations almost converge to
the corresponding relaxation times.
These findings
show that
the mean first passage time approximations of
the slowest and the second slowest relaxation times
satisfy
$s'_1\neq 0$ and
$s'_1= 0, s'_2\neq 0$, respectively.
Moreover,
both of $\vb*S$
are sufficiently accurate,
so as to converge to the slowest and second slowest relaxation modes,
respectively,
with a few iterations.
Namely,
$\vb*S$
of Eqs.~\eqref{eq:SinP1} and \eqref{eq:SinP2}
closely approximate the exact eigenvectors of $\vb*{P}_i$ ($i=1,2$),
although $\vb*{S}$ are
the drastic simplifications of $\vb*{P}_i$
with very few sinks and sources.
To see the convergence of $Q^{(m)}(\vb*{S})$
to the eigenvectors
with the symmetric population method,
we plot ${Q}(\vb*{S})$ for
the slowest and second slowest relaxation modes
in Figs.~\ref{fig:iteration}(b) and \ref{fig:iteration}(c), respectively.
Comparing these graphs with
Figs.~\ref{fig:density}(a) and \ref{fig:densityPx},
respectively,
we see that
${Q}(\vb*{S})$ with Eqs.~\eqref{eq:SinP1} and \eqref{eq:SinP2}
are
almost the same
with
$\vb*{P}_1$
and
$\vb*{P}_2$.
That is,
we can obtain accurate approximate eigenvectors
by applying this procedure just once to
the quite simplified sinks and sources of $\vb*{S}$.
We
remark finally that
when
it is difficult to set $\vb*{S}$ to be in the convergence region of $\vb*{P}_2$,
we can obtain the first and second slowest relaxation modes
simultaneously
by iteratively applying $Q$ to two vectors that span a
two-dimensional subspace and orthogonalizing the vectors,
as in the general diagonalization algorithms
\cite{matrixcomp}.
\section{summary\label{sec:summary}}
We studied
the slowest and second slowest relaxations
of
vacancy diffusion in a KCl nanocluster.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:1stRelaxation},
we found
that
the slowest relaxation mode of $\vb*{P}_1$
has cubic symmetry around
the origin
$(0,0,0)$,
where
the excess probability at around the origin
flows into the vertices of $(\pm n_L,\pm n_L,\pm n_L)$
over the course of time evolution.
We also found
that
the dominant pathways that carry large diffusive flows
are classified into two types of pathways from the origin to the vertices.
One is
through the face centers,
and
the other
is through the edge centers.
To understand why these pathways are selected as dominant pathways,
we estimated the mean first passage times from various states
to the vertex sinks.
As a result,
the surface diffusion turned out to be about $10^4$ times faster than
the surface diffusion
at room temperature of $k_\mathrm{B}T=0.03$ eV.
Hence,
the dominant pathways turned out to be
the shortest pathways to the surfaces.
There,
we also gave an approximation of the slowest relaxation rate $\lambda_1$
with the use of the mean first passage times.
Next,
the reasons for the slow inner and
fast surface diffusions
were studied in terms of the free energy landscape.
The sequences of free energies at minima and saddle points
along the two types of pathways
were examined.
We found
that
the activation free energies
in the inner region
are
about twice as large as
those in the surface region,
which
explains
the drastic slow inner diffusion.
We also gave
an intuitive explanation for the ratio of the activation energies
that are leading terms of the activation free energies,
with the use of the individual atomic energies of $V_k$.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:2ndRelaxation},
we considered the second slowest relaxation modes.
With use of
the three-dimensional plot of Fig.~\ref{fig:densityPx},
the second relaxation modes of
$\vb*{P}_2$,
$\vb*{P}_3$,
and
$\vb*{P}_4$
turned out to correspond
to relaxation of
the excesses and the deficiencies of probability
in the $x$-
$y$-, and
$z$-directions, respectively.
The second slowest relaxation rate of $\lambda_2$
is also successfully estimated by use of
the mean first passage times with sinks connected to the region of $x=0$.
There,
the intuitive explanation for
the approximate relation
$\lambda_2,\lambda_3,\lambda_4 \approx 2\lambda_1$
was given
in terms of the free energy landscapes along the dominant pathways.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:symmetric},
we have developed a symmetric population method,
which computes the approximate relaxation rate
as the mean first passage times of particles and holes.
The symmetric population method
has a
reasonable
property in that
both $\vb*{P}_i$ and $-\vb*{P}_i$ are the eigenvectors of
the same eigenvalue.
We have also shown that
iterative use of the symmetric population method
enables us to obtain the accurate slowest relaxation times,
similarly to the inverse power method of matrix diagonalization.
In summary,
we have shown that
the properties of the slowest relaxation modes are reconstructed
by mean first passage times
in Markov state models suitably connected with sinks and sources.
The mean first passage times are useful
to extract the bottleneck processes buried in Markov state models.
We have also shown that
the formation of the bottlenecks can be understood
from the physical basis of potential energy landscapes
that support the networks of the Markov state models.
\begin{acknowledgements}
The authors are very grateful to Shoji Tsuji and Kankikai
for the use of their facilities at Kawaraya during the early stage of
this study.
Y.S and
T.O.
are supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Exploratory Research
(Grant No. JP 15K13539) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{\large{S\MakeLowercase{upplemental} I\MakeLowercase{nformation}
}}
\renewcommand{\figurename}{FIG.~S}
\renewcommand{\tablename}{Table.~S}
\renewcommand{\thetable}{\arabic{table}}
\twocolumngrid
\section*{Methods}
\section*{Nanowire growth} The wires studied in this work were grown using molecular beam epitaxy on InAs(111)B substrate at $420~^\circ$C, via standard Au-catalized vapor-liquid-solid method. First, InAs wires were grown along the $[0001]$ direction with wurtzite crystal structure. Subsequently to the semiconductor growth, a full Al shell was grown at $-30~^\circ$C on all six facets by rotating the growth substrate with respect to the metal source, resulting in an epitaxial interface between the Al and InAs \cite{Krogstrup2015}. The core diameter was tuned by changing the Au seed particle size. The shell thickness was controlled by the Al growth time.
\section*{Device fabrication} For the device fabrication individual wires were transferred onto a degenerately n-doped Si substrate capped with a $200$~nm thermal oxide using a micro-manipulator station. Standard electron beam lithography techniques were used to pattern etching windows and contacts. A thin layer of AR 300-80 (new) adhesion promoter and double layer of EL6 copolymer resists was used to define the etching windows. The Al was then selectively wet-etch for $\sim 60$~s in MF-321 photoresist developer. To contact the Al shell, a stack of A4 and A6 PMMA resist was used. The Al oxide from under the contacts was removed by Ar-ion milling (RF ion source, $25$~W, $18$~mTorr, $9$~min) followed by normal Ti/Al ($5/210$~nm for wires A and B, and $5/350$~nm for wire C) ohmic contact metallization. To contact the InAs core a single layer of A6 PMMA resist was used. A gentler Ar-ion milling (RF ion source, $15$~W, $18$~mTorr, $6.5$~min) was used to remove the native oxide layer off the InAs core, followed by deposition of the normal Ti/Al ($5/180$~nm for wires A and B, and $5/350$~nm for wire C) ohmic contacts.
\begin{table}[b!]
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}cccccc}
Wire & $d_{\rm F}$ (nm) & $d_{\rm M}$ (nm) & $d_{\rm C}$ (nm) & $t_{\rm S}$ (nm) & $L$ (nm)\\
\hline
A & 157$\pm$5 & 146$\pm$4 & 137$\pm$5 & 7$\pm$3 & 945$\pm$5\\
B & 195$\pm$5 & 163$\pm$4 & 135$\pm$5 & 24$\pm$3 & 945$\pm$5\\
C & 340$\pm$5 & 288$\pm$4 & 240$\pm$5 & 41$\pm$3 & 920$\pm$5\\
\end{tabular*}
\caption{\label{tb:wire_dim} Wire dimensions measured from micrographs. Full-wire diameter $d_{\rm F}$, mean diameter $d_{\rm M}$, core diameter $d_{\rm C}$, shell thickness $t_{\rm S}$, and distance between the voltage probes $L$.}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[b!]
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}cccccc}
Wire & $R_{\rm N}$ ($\Omega$) & $T_{\rm C0}$ (K) & $\Delta_0~(\mu{\rm eV})$ & $I_{\rm S0}~(\mu A)$ & $I_{\rm R0}~(\mu A)$\\
\hline
A & 34.3$\pm$0.1 & 1.45$\pm$0.1 & 220$\pm$7 & 24$\pm$1 & 14$\pm$1\\
B & 1.6$\pm$0.1 & 1.22$\pm$0.1 & 183$\pm$3 & 62$\pm$2 & 46$\pm$2\\
C & 0.35$\pm$0.01 & 1.17$\pm$0.1 & 177$\pm$3 & 61$\pm$2 & 60$\pm$2\\
\end{tabular*}
\caption{\label{tb:wire_char} Wire characteristics extracted from transport measurements. Normal-state resistance $R_{\rm N}$, zero-field critical temperature $T_{\rm C0}$, superconducting gap $\Delta_0$, zero-field switching current $I_{\rm S0}$ and re-trapping current $I_{\rm R0}$.}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[b!]
\begin{tabular*}{\linewidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}cccccc}
Wire & $\Delta B$ (mT) & $\rho$ ($\Omega$ nm) & $l_{\rm e}$ (nm) & $\xi_{\rm S} $ (nm) & $\lambda$ (nm)\\
\hline
A & 150$\pm$7 & 110$\pm$40 & 4$\pm$1 & 71$\pm$8 & 200$\pm$60\\
B & 120$\pm$5 & 20$\pm$3 & 20 $\pm$3 & 180$\pm$10 & 100$\pm$20\\
C & 38.4$\pm$0.9 & 14$\pm$1 & 29$\pm$2 & 224$\pm$8 & 89$\pm$7\\
\end{tabular*}
\caption{\label{tb:wire_quant} Calculated wire quantities. Flux period in magnetic field $\Delta B = \Phi_0/A_{\rm M}$, resistivity $\rho$, mean free path $l_{\rm e}$, zero-field superconducting coherence length $\xi_{\rm S}$ and Ginzburg-Landau penetration depth $\lambda$.}
\end{table}
\section*{Wire parameters} The main wire parameters, including the ones use to compute the theory curves in the main text, are summarized in Tables~S\ref{tb:wire_dim}, S\ref{tb:wire_char} and S\ref{tb:wire_quant}. The full-wire diameter, $d_{\rm F}$, and the core diameter, $d_{\rm C}$, [Fig.~1(a) in the main-text] as well as the distance between the voltage probes, $L$, for each wire were measured from individual micrographs. For all the wires the Al oxide was assumed to be $t_{\rm Ox} = 2$~nm. Using simple trigonometrical considerations one can deduce the full cross-sectional area $A_{\rm F} = 3 \sqrt{3} (d_{\rm F} - 2 t_{\rm Ox})^2/8$, the shell thickness $t_{\rm S}=\sqrt{3}\left(d_{\rm F}-d_{\rm C}\right)/4 - t_{\rm Ox}$ and the mean wire diameter $d_{\rm M} = (d_{\rm F} - 2t_{\rm Ox} + d_{\rm C})/2$. The normal state resistance $R_{\rm N}$ and the zero-field transition temperature $T_{\rm C0}$ were measured while cooling down the sample. Zero-field switching $I_{\rm S0}$ and re-trapping $I_{\rm R0}$ currents were measured at the base temperature. The period of the Little-Park oscillations in magnetic field can be calculated using $\Delta B = \Phi_0/A_{\rm M} = 8\, \Phi_0/ 3\sqrt{3}\, d_{\rm M}^2$. The shell resistivity is given by $\rho= R_{\rm N} (A_{\rm F} - A_{\rm C})/L$, where $A_{\rm C} = 3 \sqrt{3} d_{\rm C}^2/2$ is the core cross-sectional area. The Drude mean free path for electrons in the shell is determined using $l_{\rm e} = m_{\rm e}{ }v_{\rm F}/ e^2 n \rho$, with electron mass $m_{\rm e}$, electron Fermi velocity in Al $v_{\rm F} = 2.03 \times 10^6$~m/s \cite{Kittel2005}, electron charge $e$ and charge carrier density $n = k_{\rm F}^3/ 3 \pi^2$, where $k_{\rm F}$ is the Fermi wave vector. The dirty-limit superconducting coherence length is given by \cite{Tinkham1996} $\xi_{\rm S} ~=~\sqrt{\pi \hbar v_{\rm F} l_{\rm e}/24 k_{\rm B} T_{\rm C0}}$, where $\hbar$ is the reduced Planck constant and $k_{\rm B}$ is the Boltzmann constant. For a dirty superconductor, the Ginzburg-Landau penetration depth is \cite{Tinkham1996} $\lambda(T) = \lambda_{\rm L}(T) \sqrt{\xi_0/1.33{ }l_{\rm e}}$, with the London penetration depth $\lambda_{\rm L} (T) = \lambda_{\rm L} (0) / \sqrt{2(1-T/T_{\rm C0})}$, and the coherence length is $\xi_{\rm S} (T) = 0.855 \sqrt{\xi_0 l_{\rm e}/(1-T/T_{\rm C0})}$. This gives $\lambda = \lambda_{\rm L} \xi_{\rm S}/1.39{ }l_{\rm e}$, with the zero-temperature London penetration depth $\lambda_{\rm L} = 16$~nm \cite{Kittel2005}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{sup1.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:S1} Differential conductance, $dI/dV$, as a function of source-drain voltage bias, $V$, measured for (a) wire A, (b) wire B, and (c) wire C.}
\end{figure}
\section*{Density of states} Each of the measured wire is equipped with a tunneling probe at its end, see the main-text Fig.~1(b). Applying voltage to the back-gate, $V_{\rm BG}$, creates a tunnel barrier in the bare-semiconducting (InAs) segment, seperating the normal-metal (Ti/Au) contact and the wire (Al/InAs). In the tunneling regime, the change in the current through the junction with the applied voltage bias corresponds to the local density of states. Differential tunnelling conductance, $dI/dV$, measured for all three wires as a function of source-drain voltage, $V$, is shown in Fig.~S1. For wire A, with the thinnest shell, the measured superconducting gap is $\Delta_0 = 220~\mu$eV, whereas both wires B and C show a gap of around $\Delta_0 = 180~\mu$eV. All three gaps agree (within the experimental error) with the BCS theory predicted value $\Delta_0 = 1.764{ }k_{\rm B}{ }T_{\rm C0}$. Wires A and B display additional peaks in density of states at the energies below the main superconducting gap. We identify these with the proximity induced gaps inside the semiconducting cores.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{sup2.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:S2} (a) Differential shell resistance, $R_{\rm S}$, as a function of parallel magnetic field, $B_\parallel$, and temperature, $T$, measured for wire C at perpendicular magnetic field $B_\perp = 12$~mT. The theory curve is the main-text Eq.~3 computed with $\alpha = \alpha_\parallel + \alpha_\perp$. (b) $R_{\rm S}$-$T$ traces measured at $B_\perp = 12$~mT. At $B_\parallel = 21$~mT, close to $\Phi_0/2$ applied flux, $R_{\rm S}$ saturates at low temperatures. At $B_\perp = 51$~mT, before the wire enter the destructive regime around $3\Phi_0/2$, $R_{\rm S}$ shows temperature dependence even at the base temperature.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{sup3.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:S3} Differential shell resistance, $R_{\rm S}$ as a function of $T$ measured at fixed $B_\perp = 12$~mT for wire C at different $B_\parallel$ values. Around $B_\parallel = 0$, as $T$ is lowered, the sample displays a conventional normal-superconducting phase transition. As the field is tuned to $B_\parallel = -14$~mT the shell resistance starts to saturate at low $T$ to a finite, $B_\parallel$-dependent value.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{sup4.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:S4} (a) Micrograph of wire C with the highlighted three-terminal setups for the outer segments shell resistance measurements. (b) Differential shell resistance in the left-most wire C segment, $R_{12} = dV_{12}/dI_{\rm S}$ (with the subtracted contact resistance $R_{12}^0$) measured as a function of temperature $T$ at $B_\parallel = -19$~mT and different $B_\perp$ values. (c) Similar to (b), but measured for the right-most segment. The contact resistances $R_{12}^0$ and $R_{34}^0$ were measured around the base temperature at $B_\perp = 0$ and $B_\parallel = -19$~mT.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{sup5.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:S5} Same data as in the main-text Fig.~5(a), (b) and (c), but in logarithmic color scale highlighting the low-resistance features. At low $T$, the anomalous phase is present predominantly above the $T_{\rm C}$ predicted by the mean-field theory. The finite resistance at higher temperatures, below the arcs of the theory curves, arise presumably due to thermal fluctuations.}
\end{figure}
\section*{Non-saturating resistance} The observed low-temperature saturation of the half-flux quantum $R_{\rm S}$ might rise a question whether it is not an artifact of a deficient cooling. In other words, if the electron temperature upon cooling would saturate at some elivated temperature, so would the shell resistance. To rule out such an explanation we record two $R_{\rm S}$-$T$ traces for wire C at $B_\perp = 12$~mT, see Fig.~S2: One at $B_\parallel = 21$~mT, close to $\Phi_0/2$ applied flux quantum, displaying the anomalous $R_{\rm S}$ saturation; Another at $B_{\parallel} = 52$~mT, before the destructive regime around $3\Phi_0/2$, with a $T$-dependent $R_{\rm S}$ down to the base temperature. Furthermore, the data in the main-text Fig.~5(d) shows that the $R_{\rm S}$ starts to saturate at different temperatures for different $B_\perp$. Finally, it is unlikely for a poor electron cooling to cause the observed broadening of the anomalous phase in flux, see the main-text Fig.~5(b) and (c), as well as Fig. S2(a).
\section*{Flux-dependent resistance saturation} The data shown in the main-text Fig.~5 demonstrate that at a fixed $B_\parallel = -19$~mT (around $-\Phi_0/2$ of the applied flux) $R_{\rm S}$ at low $T$ saturates to a $B_\perp$-dependent value. We observe a qualitatively similar $B_\parallel$-dependent anomalous saturation of $R_{\rm S}$ at a fixed $B_\perp = 12$~mT, see Fig.~S3.
\section*{Outer segments} To demonstrate that the anomalous resistance saturation shown in the main-text Fig.~5(d) is not due to a local disorder in the middle-wire segment, we investigate the outer two wire segments using three-terminal setup, see Fig.~S4(a). Differential shell resistances $R_{12} = dV_{12}/dI_{\rm S}$ and $R_{34} = dV_{34}/dI_{\rm S}$ with the subtracted corresponding contact resistances measured as a function of $T$ at $B_\parallel = -19$~mT and different $B_\perp$ values are shown in Fig.~S4(b) and (c). The contacts resistances $R_{12}^0$ and $R_{34}^0$ were measured around the base temperature at $B_\perp = 0$ and $B_\parallel = -19$~mT. The observed $B_\perp$-dependent, low-temperature anomalous shell resistances are qualitatively similar to the $R_{\rm S}$ of the middle segment. The small quantitative discrepancies between the segments might arise due to the uncertainty in the applied $B_\perp$ or a small wire tapering.
\section*{Anomalous phase vs. mean-field theory} Figure S5 shows the same data as in the main-text Fig.~5(a)-(c), but plotted in a logarithmic color scale to highlight the low-resistance features. It appears that the anomalous resistance phase at low $T$ develops predominantly above the mean-field theory predicted $T_{\rm C}$, close to the $\pm \Phi_0/2$ of the applied flux. At elevated $T$, the wire shows finite, but reduced $R_{\rm S}$ around $0$ and $\pm \Phi_0$ of the applied flux, presumably arising due to thermal fluctuations.
|
\section{Introduction}
In electromagnetic dynamics,
the perfect electric conductor is an important idealized material,
that allows surface charges and currents.
Since the surface charge and current density are often unknown,
PEC walls are modeled through the imposition of boundary conditions
that require the continuity of the normal component of the magnetic field and the tangential component
of the electric field on the boundary of a domain.
In free-space simulations involving PECs,
the interface between a PEC and its surrounding medium is treated
as an embedded boundary.
Embedded boundary conditions can be difficult to treat,
particularly in a finite-difference context.
Indeed,
challenges include the development of numerical methods
that can handle various complex geometries of the PEC
without increasing the complexity of a numerical method while retaining high-order accuracy.
It is also worth mentioning that high-order schemes are important
to diminish the phase error for long time simulations \cite{Hesthaven2003}.
Many numerical strategies are proposed to achieve high-order accuracy for problems involving
embedded PEC walls,
such as discontinuous Galerkin (DG) approaches \cite{Hesthaven2002},
pseudospectral time-domain methods (PSTD) \cite{Yang1997,Fan2002,Galagusz2016} or
finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) schemes \cite{Yee1992,Jurgens1992,Ditkowski2001,Zhao2010,Wang2013}.
A discontinuous Galerkin approach can treat complex geometries of embedded PEC walls
by an appropriate mesh.
However,
a large number of unknowns for high-order accuracy is needed for these approaches.
This is due to the use of piecewise polynomial spaces that do not require continuity between
two elements of a mesh.
Various strategies have been proposed to reduce the computational cost
of DG based methods,
such as parallel computing strategies or particular choices of basis functions \cite{Cockburn2004,Cohen2006}.
It is also worth mentioning that finite-element approaches with non-body-fitted grids
have been developed for electromagnetic problems,
but low-order basis functions have been used \cite{Chen2007,Chen2009,Wang2019}.
On the other hand,
finite-difference time-domain approaches use a simple Cartesian grid and have
low computational costs.
However,
the imposition of embedded boundary conditions is far from trivial.
A naive approach is to use the Yee scheme \cite{Yee1966} with a staircased approximation of the
embedded boundary.
Unfortunately,
this approach leads to a first-order scheme at best
and sometimes to non-convergent approximations \cite{Ditkowski2001}.
To overcome this issue,
many FDTD approaches have been proposed,
such as overlapping grids \cite{Yee1992},
contour path methods \cite{Jurgens1992,Wang2013} and
locally modifications of FD schemes \cite{Ditkowski2001,Zhao2010}.
A staircase-free FDTD scheme has been proposed in \cite{Ditkowski2001} to recover
a second-order scheme without significantly compromising the simplicity of the used FD scheme.
They explicitly impose PEC boundary conditions by locally modifying a finite-difference scheme in
the vicinity of the boundary.
Following the same idea,
a fourth-order finite-difference scheme based on
the Matched Interface and Boundary (MIB) method \cite{Zhao2004}
has been proposed to handle embedded PEC walls
using the vector Helmholtz equation \cite{Zhao2010}.
This FD scheme is obtained
by deriving and explicitly imposing jump conditions for PEC walls on
the embedded boundary.
However,
the complexity of a MIB based scheme increases with its order or the complexity of
the geometry of the embedded boundary because of the imposition
of high-order jump conditions \cite{Yu2007,Zhang2016}.
Finally,
pseudospectral methods have the advantage to require less
grid points per wavelength than FDTD approaches.
The Fourier and Chebyshev collocation methods with a multidomain strategy
have been used to achieve high-order accuracy \cite{Yang1997,Fan2002}.
These approaches need a multidomain decomposition with an appropriate mesh grid
for embedded boundary conditions,
and therefore
an additional treatment of interfaces between subdomains is needed.
An alternative approach is to use a Fourier penalty method \cite{Galagusz2016}.
Although this approach does not need a multidomain strategy,
there is some stability issues that limit the order of the
method in two and three dimensions.
Another avenue to handle embedded boundary conditions is
FD schemes based on the Correction Function Method (CFM).
The CFM,
which was inspired by the Ghost Fluid Method (GFM),
has been originally developed to treat Poisson's equations with interface jump conditions with
arbitrarily complex interfaces.
FD schemes based on the CFM achieve high-order by means of a minimization problem.
This numerical strategy has been successfully applied to Poisson problems with
constant and piecewise constant coefficients,
and interface jumps \cite{Marques2011,Marques2017}.
It is also worth mentioning that a CFM based strategy have also been used to treat 3-D Poisson equation with interface
jump conditions \cite{Marques2019}.
Afterward,
extensions of this method have been used to handle the wave equation and Maxwell's equations with
constant coefficients and interface jump conditions \cite{Abraham2018,LawMarquesNave2020}.
Briefly,
the underline assumption of the CFM
is that jumps on the interface can be smoothly extended in the vicinity of the interface.
Therefore,
a system of partial differential equations (PDEs) coming from the original system of PDEs is derived
to model jumps around the interface.
The solution of this system of PDEs is called the correction function.
A square measure of the error associated with the correction function's system of PDEs
is then minimized to compute approximations of the correction function.
Afterward,
these approximations are used to correct a given FD
scheme that involves nodes in different subdomains.
It is worth mentioning that the additional computational cost associated with
minimization problems of the CFM is not negligible.
Hence,
this makes unavoidable the use of parallel computing
strategies \cite{Abraham2017}.
As mentioned before,
a FDTD strategy based on the CFM has been developed to handle Maxwell's equations with constant
coefficients and interface jump conditions \cite{LawMarquesNave2020}.
Even though this numerical scheme could also be used to enforce embedded boundary conditions,
one needs to impose all information on the boundary,
that is both normal and tangential components of each electromagnetic field.
This is a major drawback when embedded PEC wall boundary conditions are considered.
As shown in this work,
a direct application of the numerical scheme proposed in \cite{LawMarquesNave2020}
for PEC wall boundary conditions leads to an ill-posed minimization problem because
of the lack of information on the embedded boundary.
Hence,
the main goal of this work is to overcome this issue and proposes high-order
FDTD schemes based on the CFM,
which are referred as CFM-FDTD schemes,
to handle embedded PEC wall boundary conditions.
The algorithm presented in this paper also provides an important
stepping stone towards a CFM-FDTD approach to handle Maxwell's interface problems.
We first extend CFM-FDTD schemes for PEC problems
for which the surface current and charge density are unknown.
Afterward,
we describe a construction of appropriate local patches
that are needed for minimization problems.
This construction reduces the computation cost of the CFM while
guarantees the uniqueness of the correction function for a given node to
be corrected.
We then introduce CFM-FDTD schemes based on the well-known Yee scheme and
a fourth-order staggered FDTD scheme.
Finally,
numerical examples based on the transverse magnetic (TM$_z$) mode are performed to verify
the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes.
The paper is organized as follows.
In Section~\ref{sec:defPblm},
we introduce Maxwell's equations with embedded PEC wall conditions.
The CFM applied to Maxwell's equations is presented in Section~\ref{sec:CFM}.
In this section,
we propose an extension of the CFM for problems involving a PEC for which the surface current
and charge density are unknown.
Minimization problems coming from the CFM are analyzed.
The impact of the CFM on a FDTD scheme is also investigated and
the construction of local patches is described.
We then introduce CFM-FDTD schemes based on the Yee scheme in Section~\ref{sec:Yee} and
on a fourth-order staggered FDTD scheme in Section~\ref{sec:fourthOrderScheme}.
Finally,
we perform numerical examples to verify the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes in Section~\ref{sec:numEx}.
\section{Definition of the Problem} \label{sec:defPblm}
Assume a domain $\Omega$ subdivided into two subdomains $\Omega^+$ and $\Omega^-$.
The interface $\Gamma$ between subdomains is independent of time
and allows solutions,
that is the magnetic field $\mathbold{H}$ and the electric field $\mathbold{E}$ in this work,
to be discontinuous along it.
We define $\mathbold{H}^+$ and $\mathbold{E}^+$ as the solutions in $\Omega^+$,
and $\mathbold{H}^-$ and $\mathbold{E}^-$ as the solutions in $\Omega^-$.
The jumps are denoted as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\llbracket \mathbold{H} \rrbracket =&\,\, \mathbold{H}^+ - \mathbold{H}^-, \\
\llbracket \mathbold{E} \rrbracket =&\,\, \mathbold{E}^+ - \mathbold{E}^-.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
We consider the boundary $\partial \Omega$ of $\Omega$ and a given time interval $I = [0,T]$.
Assuming linear media and a periodic domain,
Maxwell's equations with interface conditions are given by
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:pblmDefinition}
\begin{align}
\partial_t (\mu\,\mathbold{H}) + \nabla\times \mathbold{E} =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I, \label{eq:Faraday} \\
\partial_t (\epsilon\,\mathbold{E}) - \nabla\times\mathbold{H} =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I , \label{eq:AmpereMaxwell}\\
\nabla\cdot(\epsilon\,\mathbold{E}) =&\,\, \rho \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I , \label{eq:divE}\\
\nabla\cdot(\mu\,\mathbold{H}) =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I , \label{eq:divH}\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\llbracket \mathbold{E} \rrbracket =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I ,\label{eq:tangentEInterf}\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\llbracket \mathbold{H} \rrbracket =&\,\, \mathbold{J}_s(\mathbold{x},t) \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I ,\label{eq:tangentHInterf}\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\llbracket \epsilon\,\mathbold{E} \rrbracket =&\,\, \rho_s(\mathbold{x},t) \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I ,\label{eq:normalEInterf}\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\llbracket \mu\,\mathbold{H} \rrbracket =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I ,\label{eq:normalHInterf}\\
\mathbold{H}(\mathbold{x},0) =&\,\, \mathbold{H}_0(\mathbold{x}) \quad \text{in } \Omega, \label{eq:InitialCdnH}\\
\mathbold{E}(\mathbold{x},0) =&\,\, \mathbold{E}_0(\mathbold{x}) \quad \text{in } \Omega, \label{eq:InitialCdnE}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $\mu$ is the magnetic permeability,
$\epsilon$ is the electric permittivity,
$\rho$ is the electric charge density,
$\mathbold{J}_s$ is the surface current density,
$\rho_s$ is the surface charge density and
$\hat{\mathbold{n}}$ is the unit normal to the interface $\Gamma$ pointing toward $\Omega^+$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:typicalDomain} illustrates a typical geometry of a domain $\Omega$.
Without loss of generality,
we assume constant coefficients that are such that $\epsilon, \mu >0$ and $\rho = 0$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.35\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{typicalDomain.tikz}
\caption{Geometry of a domain $\Omega$ with an interface $\Gamma$.}
\label{fig:typicalDomain}
\end{figure}
For problems involving a PEC,
we often do not know the surface current density $\mathbold{J}_s$ and the surface charge density $\rho_s$.
Interface conditions \eqref{eq:tangentEInterf}-\eqref{eq:normalHInterf} are then reduced to
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\llbracket \mathbold{E} \rrbracket =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I ,\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\llbracket \mu\,\mathbold{H} \rrbracket =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Let us assume that subdomain $\Omega^-$ is a PEC,
we then have $\mathbold{E}^-(\mathbold{x},t) = 0, \forall (\mathbold{x},t)\in\Omega^-\times I$.
Considering that the initial condition of the magnetic field is given by $\mathbold{H}^-(\mathbold{x},0) = 0$,
we also have $\mathbold{H}^-(\mathbold{x},t) = 0, \forall (\mathbold{x},t)\in\Omega^-\times I$.
Thus,
interface conditions on $\Gamma$ can be considered as embedded boundary conditions,
given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{E}^+=&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I ,\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot (\mu\,\mathbold{H}^+) =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
for $\Omega^+$.
In this work,
we focus on problems involving PECs and therefore assume $\Gamma$ to be an embedded boundary of $\Omega^+$.
\section{Correction Function Method} \label{sec:CFM}
The smoothness of solutions is important when one wants to use FD schemes.
Realizing that problem \eqref{eq:pblmDefinition} can have discontinuous solutions,
standard FD schemes cannot {\it a priori} be used around the embedded boundary $\Gamma$.
The correction function method allows one to circumvent this issue.
The purpose of the CFM is to find a correction for a finite difference approximation that
involves nodes that belong to different subdomains.
To find such a correction,
the CFM assumes that solutions in $\Omega^+\times I$ and $\Omega^- \times I$ can be
smoothly extended in a small region $\Omega_\Gamma \times I$,
where $\Omega_\Gamma \subset \Omega$ encloses the embedded boundary $\Gamma$,
in such a way that the original PDE is still satisfied.
A functional that is a square measure of the error of a PDE that describes the behaviour of jumps
or correction functions
in the vicinity of the embedded boundary is derived.
This functional is then minimized in a discrete functional space
to obtain approximations of the correction function in $\Omega_\Gamma \times I$.
In practice,
we define a local patch $\Omega_\Gamma^h \subset \Omega_\Gamma$ for which
the correction function needs to be computed at a node $\mathbold{x}_c\in\Omega_\Gamma^h$
and a time interval $I_\Gamma^h = [t_n - \Delta t_{\Gamma}, t_n]$.
The additional computational cost associated with the CFM is not negligible
when compared with the original FDTD scheme.
In fact,
the CFM consumes most of the computational time.
However,
a parallel implementation of the computation of correction functions
can be performed since minimization problems associated with local patches
are independent.
We refer to \cite{Abraham2017} for more details about the benefits of a parallel implementation of the CFM.
In the following,
we summarize the procedure for the CFM
applied on Maxwell's equations when electromagnetic fields are known on the embedded boundary \cite{LawMarquesNave2020}.
Afterward,
we present an analysis of the minimization problem that is needed for the CFM.
The functional to be minimized
is then modified and analyzed
for embedded PEC walls for which the surface current and charge density are
unknown.
We also investigate the impact of such a modification on a FDTD scheme.
We then describe a construction of local patches that reduces the computation cost of the CFM and
ensures an appropriate representation of the embedded boundary within the local patch.
Let us first introduce some notations.
The inner product in $L^2\big(\Omega_{\Gamma}^{h}\times I_\Gamma^h\big)$
is defined by
$$\langle\mathbold{v},\mathbold{w}\rangle = \int\limits_{I_\Gamma^h}\!\int\limits_{\Omega_{\Gamma}^{h}}\!\!\mathbold{v}\cdot\mathbold{w}\,\mathrm{d}V\,\mathrm{d}t$$
and we also use the notation
$$\langle \mathbold{v},\mathbold{w} \rangle_{\Gamma} = \int\limits_{I_\Gamma^h}\!\int\limits_{\Omega_{\Gamma}^{h}\cap\Gamma}\!\!\mathbold{v}\cdot\mathbold{w} \, \mathrm{d}S\,\mathrm{d}t$$
for legibility.
The correction functions are defined as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbold{D}_H =&\,\, \mathbold{H}^+ - \mathbold{H}^-, \\
\mathbold{D}_E =&\,\, \mathbold{E}^+ - \mathbold{E}^-.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Let us first assume that the surface current density and charge density are known.
Following the same procedure as in \cite{LawMarquesNave2020},
one can obtain the following quadratic functional to minimize
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
J(\mathbold{D}_H,&\mathbold{D}_E) = \frac{\ell_h}{2} \, \big\langle\mu\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_H + \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_E,\mu\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_H + \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_E\big\rangle \\
+&\,\,
\frac{\ell_h}{2} \, \langle \epsilon\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_E - \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_H,\epsilon\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_E - \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_H \big\rangle\\
+&\,\, \frac{c_p}{2} \,\big\langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{D}_H - \mathbold{J}_s,\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{D}_H - \mathbold{J}_s\big\rangle_{\Gamma} + \frac{c_p}{2}\,\big\langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot \mathbold{D}_H, \hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot \mathbold{D}_H \big\rangle_{\Gamma}\\
+&\,\, \frac{c_p}{2} \, \big\langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{D}_E,\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{D}_E \big\rangle_{\Gamma}+\frac{c_p}{2} \, \big\langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot \mathbold{D}_E - \tfrac{\rho_s}{\epsilon},\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot \mathbold{D}_E - \tfrac{\rho_s}{\epsilon} \big\rangle_{\Gamma} ,
\end{aligned}
\normalsize
\end{equation*}
where $c_p>0$ is a penalization coefficient and
$\ell_h$ is the length in space of the patch.
We scale the integral over the domain by $\ell_h$ to ensure that all terms
in the functional $J$ behave in a similar way when the
computational grid is refined \cite{LawMarquesNave2020}.
To guarantee the divergence-free constraint \eqref{eq:divE} and \eqref{eq:divH},
we minimize the functional $J$ in a divergence-free space-time polynomial spaces,
namely
\begin{equation*}
V = \big\{ \mathbold{v} \in \big[P^k\big(\Omega_{\Gamma}^{h}\times I_\Gamma^h\big)\big]^3 : \nabla\cdot\mathbold{v} = 0 \big\},
\end{equation*}
where $P^k$ denotes the space of polynomials of degree $k$.
It is worth mentioning that basis functions of $V$ are based on high-degree divergence-free basis functions proposed in \cite{Cockburn2004} for discontinuous Galerkin approaches.
The problem statement is then
\begin{equation} \label{eq:minPblm}
\text{Find } (\mathbold{D}_H,\mathbold{D}_E) \in V \times W \text{ such that } (\mathbold{D}_H,\mathbold{D}_E) \in \underset{\mathbold{v}\in V, \mathbold{w} \in W}{\arg\min}J(\mathbold{v},\mathbold{w}),
\end{equation}
where $W=V$.
The following proposition shows that the quadratic functional $J$ has a global minimizer
when finite-dimensional functional spaces are used and for an appropriate choice
of the penalization coefficient $c_p$.
\begin{proposition} \label{lem:minAnalysis}
Let us consider problem \eqref{eq:minPblm},
and assume $\mathbold{v}$ and $\mathbold{w}$ to be basis functions of $V$ and $W$.
There exists a positive constant $\tilde{c} = \frac{c_p}{\ell_h}$ for which the functional $J$ has a unique global minimizer.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let us first notice that problem \eqref{eq:minPblm} is an unconstrained minimization problem.
In this case,
if the hessian matrix coming from a quadratic functional is positive definite,
then the critical point is a global minimum.
Let us consider $\mathbold{v}$ and $\mathbold{w}$ to be basis functions of $V$ and $W$.
The hessian matrix coming from problem \eqref{eq:minPblm} is given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{bmatrix}
\ell_h\,a + c_p\,b & \ell_h\,e\\
\ell_h\,e & \ell_h\,c + c_p\,d
\end{bmatrix} ,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
a =&\,\, \langle \mu\,\partial_t\mathbold{v},\mu\,\partial_t\mathbold{v}\rangle+\langle\nabla\times\mathbold{v},\nabla\times\mathbold{v}\rangle,\\
b =&\,\, \langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{v},\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{v}\rangle_{\Gamma} + \langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\mathbold{v},\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\mathbold{v}\rangle_{\Gamma},\\
c =&\,\, \langle\nabla\times\mathbold{w},\nabla\times\mathbold{w}\rangle + \langle\epsilon\,\partial_t \mathbold{w},\epsilon\,\partial_t \mathbold{w}\rangle,\\
d =&\,\, \langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{w},\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{w}\rangle_{\Gamma} + \langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\mathbold{w},\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\mathbold{w}\rangle_{\Gamma},\\
e = &\,\, \langle \mu\,\partial_t \mathbold{v},\nabla\times\mathbold{w}\rangle - \langle \epsilon\,\partial_t \mathbold{w},\nabla\times\mathbold{v}\rangle.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Requiring the hessian matrix to be positive definite,
one finds the following conditions:
\begin{align}
\ell_h\,a + c_p\,b >&\,\, 0, \label{eq:minCdn1}\\
(\ell_h\,a + c_p\,b)\,(\ell_h\,c + c_p\,d) - (\ell_h\,e)^2 >&\,\, 0. \label{eq:minCdn2}
\end{align}
Since $\mathbold{v}$ and $\mathbold{w}$ are basis functions of $V$ and $W$,
we have $\mathbold{v}\neq 0$ and $\mathbold{w}\neq0$.
Noticing that $\mathbold{v}$ and $\mathbold{w}$ cannot be both orthogonal and collinear
to $\hat{\mathbold{n}}$ except for the zero element,
we also have $b\neq0$ and $d\neq0$.
Hence,
condition \eqref{eq:minCdn1} is always satisfied.
However,
condition \eqref{eq:minCdn2} leads to the following criterion
\begin{equation} \label{eq:cdnHessian}
\tilde{c} > \frac{e^2-a\,c}{\tilde{c}\,b\,d} - \frac{a\,d+b\,c}{b\,d},
\end{equation}
where
$\tilde{c} = \frac{c_p}{\ell_h}$.
For a sufficiently large $\tilde{c}$,
criterion \eqref{eq:cdnHessian} is satisfied.
\end{proof}
Let us now investigate the impact of the CFM based on minimization problem \eqref{eq:minPblm}
on a given FD scheme.
Assume a spatial finite difference operator noted $L$,
such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:withoutCFM}
\partial_t \mathbold{U}(t) + L\,\mathbold{U}(t) = 0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbold{U}$
is a vector containing $m$ unknowns that estimate electromagnetic fields on the grid points in space.
We consider that a correction is needed at $r$ nodes in the vicinity of the embedded boundary,
system \eqref{eq:withoutCFM} then becomes
\begin{equation} \label{eq:withCFM}
\partial_t \mathbold{U}(t) + L\,\mathbold{U}(t) + L\,A\,\mathbold{D}(t) = 0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbold{D}$
is a vector containing $r$ values of the correction function coming from problem \eqref{eq:minPblm} and $A$ is a rectangular matrix of dimension $m\times r$ with either $0$ or $\pm 1$ as components depending where
the correction is needed.
Hence,
the correction function can therefore be considered as a time-dependent force term.
From Proposition~\ref{lem:minAnalysis},
we have the existence and unicity of the coefficients of polynomial approximations of the correction function
for an appropriate $c_p$.
Since $\mathbold{D}_H(\mathbold{x}, t)$ and $\mathbold{D}_E(\mathbold{x},t)$ are polynomial functions,
and $\Omega_{\Gamma}^h\times I_{\Gamma}^h$ is a compact domain,
these approximations and their derivatives are bounded in the infinity norm.
It is therefore sufficient to investigate the stability of the original FDTD scheme \eqref{eq:withoutCFM} to
identify any time-step criteria of the corresponding CFM-FDTD scheme (c.f. Theorem 5.1.1 in \cite{Gustafsson1995}).
As for the consistency,
it can be shown that the order in space of a CFM-FDTD scheme is $\min\{k,n\}$,
where $k$ is the degree of polynomial approximations of the correction function and $n$ is the order of
the FD scheme in space (c.f. Proposition~\ref{lem:errorAnalysis}).
\subsection{PEC wall boundary conditions} \label{sec:PECwall}
Let us now focus on PEC wall boundary conditions.
By Proposition~\ref{lem:minAnalysis},
one cannot just neglect interface conditions \eqref{eq:tangentHInterf}
and \eqref{eq:normalEInterf} for PEC problems for which $\mathbold{J}_s$
and $\rho_s$ are unknown because
this leads to an ill-posed minimization problem.
To circumvent this issue,
we propose to use fictitious interface conditions,
given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fictInterfCdn}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{1,i}\times(\mathbold{E}^+-\mathbold{E}^*) =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \Gamma_{1,i} \times I \quad \text{for} \quad i=1,\ldots,N_1,\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{2,i}\times(\mathbold{H}^+-\mathbold{H}^*) =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \Gamma_{2,i} \times I \quad \text{for} \quad i=1,\ldots,N_2,\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{3,i}\cdot(\mathbold{E}^+-\mathbold{E}^*) =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \Gamma_{3,i} \times I \quad \text{for} \quad i=1,\ldots,N_3,\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{4,i}\cdot(\mathbold{H}^+-\mathbold{H}^*) =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \Gamma_{4,i} \times I \quad \text{for} \quad i=1,\ldots,N_4,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $N_k$ is the number of fictitious interfaces $\Gamma_{k,i} \subset \Omega^+\cap\Omega_{\Gamma}^h$
for $k=1,\dots,4$,
$\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{k,i}$ is the unit normal associated with fictitious interface $\Gamma_{k,i}$,
and $\mathbold{H}^*$ and $\mathbold{E}^*$ are respectively finite difference approximations
of $\mathbold{H}^+$ and $\mathbold{E}^+$ in $\Omega^+$.
In subsection~\ref{sec:fictInterfImplementation},
we provide more details on the implementation of these fictitious interface conditions.
The functional to minimize is then given by
\small
\begin{equation} \label{eq:functionalPEC}
\begin{aligned}
\tilde{J}(\mathbold{D}_H,&\mathbold{D}_E) = \frac{\ell_h}{2} \, \big\langle\mu\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_H + \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_E,\mu\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_H + \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_E\big\rangle \\
+&\,\,
\frac{\ell_h}{2} \, \langle \epsilon\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_E - \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_H,\epsilon\,\partial_t \mathbold{D}_E - \nabla\times\mathbold{D}_H \big\rangle\\
+&\,\, \frac{c_p}{2} \, \big\langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{D}_E ,\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{D}_E\big\rangle_{\Gamma} + \frac{c_p}{2}\,\big\langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot \mathbold{D}_H, \hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot \mathbold{D}_H\big\rangle_{\Gamma}\\
+&\,\, \frac{c_{f}}{2\,N_{E}} \, \sum_{i=1}^{N_1} \big\langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}_{1,i}\times (\mathbold{D}_E - \mathbold{E}^*),\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{1,i}\times(\mathbold{D}_E- \mathbold{E}^*)\big\rangle_{\Gamma_{1,i}} \\
+&\,\, \frac{c_{f}}{2\,N_{H}} \, \sum_{i=1}^{N_2} \big\langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}_{2,i}\times(\mathbold{D}_H - \mathbold{H}^*),\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{2,i}\times(\mathbold{D}_H- \mathbold{H}^*)\big\rangle_{\Gamma_{2,i}} \\
+&\,\, \frac{c_{f}}{2\,N_{E}} \, \sum_{i=1}^{N_3} \big\langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{3,i}\cdot (\mathbold{D}_E - \mathbold{E}^*),\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{3,i}\cdot (\mathbold{D}_E - \mathbold{E}^*) \big\rangle_{\Gamma_{3,i}} \\
+&\,\, \frac{c_{f}}{2\,N_{H}} \, \sum_{i=1}^{N_4} \big\langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{4,i}\cdot (\mathbold{D}_H - \mathbold{H}^*),\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{4,i}\cdot (\mathbold{D}_H - \mathbold{H}^*) \big\rangle_{\Gamma_{4,i}},
\end{aligned}
\normalsize
\end{equation}
\normalsize
where $c_f>0$ and $c_p>0$ are penalization coefficient,
and $N_{H}=N_2+N_4$ and $N_{E}=N_1+N_3$ are the total number of fictitious interfaces for
each electromagnetic field.
The problem statement is then
\begin{equation} \label{eq:minPblmPEC}
\text{Find } (\mathbold{D}_H,\mathbold{D}_E) \in V \times W \text{ such that } (\mathbold{D}_H,\mathbold{D}_E) \in \underset{\mathbold{v}\in V, \mathbold{w} \in W}{\arg\min}\tilde{J}(\mathbold{v},\mathbold{w}),
\end{equation}
where $W=V$.
The following proposition guarantees that there is a global minimizer for an appropriate choice of the penalization
coefficient $c_f$ and fictitious interfaces.
\begin{proposition} \label{lem:minAnalysisFictInterf}
Let us consider problem \eqref{eq:minPblmPEC},
and assume $\mathbold{v}$ and $\mathbold{w}$ to be basis functions of $V$ and $W$.
Moreover,
assume that there is collinear and orthogonal fictitious interfaces to each plane defined by the axis
of the Cartesian coordinate system and for each type of fictitious interface conditions \eqref{eq:fictInterfCdn}.
There exists a positive constant $\tilde{c} = \frac{c_f}{\ell_h}$ for which the functional $\tilde{J}$ has a unique global minimizer.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The demonstration is similar to the proof presented in Proposition~\ref{lem:minAnalysis}.
The Hessian matrix coming from problem \eqref{eq:minPblmPEC} is given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{bmatrix}
\ell_h\,a + c_p\,b + c_f\,\tilde{b} & \ell_h\,e\\
\ell_h\,e & \ell_h\,c + c_p\,d + c_f\,\tilde{d}
\end{bmatrix} ,
\end{equation*}
where $a$,
$c$ and $e$ are the same as in Proposition~\ref{lem:minAnalysis},
but
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
b =&\,\, \langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\mathbold{v},\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot\mathbold{v}\rangle_{\Gamma},\\
d =&\,\, \langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{w},\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{w}\rangle_{\Gamma},\\
\tilde{b} =&\,\, \frac{1}{N_{H}} \, \sum_{i=1}^{N_2}\langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}_{2,i}\times\mathbold{v},\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{2,i}\times\mathbold{v}\rangle_{\Gamma_{2,i}} + \frac{1}{N_{H}} \, \sum_{i=1}^{N_4} \langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{4,i}\cdot\mathbold{v},\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{4,i}\cdot\mathbold{v}\rangle_{\Gamma_{4,i}},\\
\tilde{d} =&\,\, \frac{1}{N_{E}} \,\sum_{i=1}^{N_1} \langle \hat{\mathbold{n}}_{1,i}\times\mathbold{w},\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{1,i}\times\mathbold{w}\rangle_{\Gamma_{1,i}} + \frac{1}{N_{E}} \, \sum_{i=1}^{N_3} \langle\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{3,i}\cdot\mathbold{w},\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{3,i}\cdot\mathbold{w}\rangle_{\Gamma_{3,i}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
One can notice that $b\geq0$ and $d\geq0$.
However,
since there is fictitious interfaces that are collinear and orthogonal to each plane defined
by the axis of the coordinate system and for each fictitious interface condition,
we have $\tilde{b}\neq0$ and $\tilde{d}\neq0$.
Requiring the Hessian matrix to be positive definite,
one finds the following conditions:
\begin{align}
\ell_h\,a + c_p\,b + c_f\,\tilde{b} >&\,\, 0, \label{eq:minCdn1FictInterf}\\
(\ell_h\,a + c_p\,b + c_f\,\tilde{b} )\,(\ell_h\,c + c_p\,d + c_f\,\tilde{d}) - (\ell_h\,e)^2 >&\,\, 0. \label{eq:minCdn2FictInterf}
\end{align}
Condition \eqref{eq:minCdn1FictInterf} is always satisfied and
condition \eqref{eq:minCdn2FictInterf} leads to the following criterion
\begin{equation} \label{eq:cdnHessianFictInterf}
\tilde{c} > \frac{e^2-a\,c}{\tilde{c}\,\tilde{b}\,\tilde{d}} - \frac{c_p\,(a\,d+b\,c)}{c_f\,\tilde{b}\,\tilde{d}} - \frac{a\,\tilde{d}+\tilde{b}\,c}{\tilde{b}\,\tilde{d}}
- \frac{c_p\,(b\,\tilde{d}+\tilde{b}\,d)}{\ell_h\,\tilde{b}\,\tilde{d}}-\frac{c_p^2\,b\,d}{\ell_h\,c_f\,\tilde{b}\,\tilde{d}},
\end{equation}
where
$\tilde{c} = \frac{c_f}{\ell_h}$.
For a sufficiently large $\tilde{c}$,
criterion \eqref{eq:cdnHessianFictInterf} is satisfied.
\end{proof}
Let us now investigate the impact of the CFM based on minimization problem \eqref{eq:minPblmPEC}
on the stability of the original FD scheme.
As shown previously,
we have a system of the form \eqref{eq:withCFM} with $\mathbold{D}$ coming from
problem~\eqref{eq:minPblmPEC}.
However,
this is not completely accurate since fictitious interface conditions \eqref{eq:fictInterfCdn}
depend on FD solutions in $\Omega^+$.
Computing Gateaux derivatives and using a necessary condition to obtain a minimum,
we obtain
$$M\,\mathbold{c} = c_f\,\mathbold{b}_f + c_p\,\mathbold{b}_{\Gamma},$$
where
$\mathbold{c}$ contains coefficients of polynomial approximations of the correction function,
and $\mathbold{b}_f$ and $\mathbold{b}_{\Gamma}$ are associated with terms using
respectively fictitious interfaces and embedded boundaries.
Moreover,
we can define a linear operator $B$ that is such that
$\mathbold{b}_f = B\,\mathbold{U}$.
From Proposition~\ref{lem:minAnalysisFictInterf},
problem~\eqref{eq:minPblmPEC} is well-posed for appropriate fictitious interfaces,
$c_p$ and $c_f$,
which leads to
$\mathbold{c} = c_f\,M^{-1}\, B\,\mathbold{U} + c_p\,M^{-1}\,\mathbold{b}_{\Gamma}$.
Hence,
we have
\begin{equation*}
\partial_t \mathbold{U}(t) + L\,(I + c_f\,A\,M^{-1}\, B)\,\mathbold{U}(t) + c_p\,L\,A\,M^{-1}\,\mathbold{b}_{\Gamma} = 0,
\end{equation*}
where $L$ is a finite difference operator,
$I$ is the identity operator and
$A$ is a linear operator that computes polynomial approximations of the correction function at nodes
where it is needed.
Since problem~\eqref{eq:minPblmPEC} is well-posed,
we assume that the term $L\,A\,M^{-1}\,\mathbold{b}_{\Gamma}$ can be bounded.
It is then sufficient to investigate the stability of
\begin{equation*} \label{eq:withCFMPEC}
\partial_t \mathbold{U}(t) + L\,(I + c_f\,A\,M^{-1}\, B)\,\mathbold{U}(t) = 0,
\end{equation*}
to identify any time-step criteria of the corresponding CFM-FDTD scheme \cite{Gustafsson1995}.
We remark that we recover the original FDTD scheme in the limit when $c_f \to 0$
and therefore its properties.
We therefore assume that we should be close to the stability condition of the original FDTD scheme
for a sufficient small $c_f$.
This assumption is supported by numerical examples performed in Section~\ref{sec:numEx}.
In order to choose an appropriate penalization coefficient $c_f$,
one should consider the following constraints.
First,
the priority should be given to embedded boundary conditions
in problem \eqref{eq:minPblmPEC},
that is $c_p>c_f$.
Second,
the weight associated with fictitious interface conditions in the minimization
problem should diminish as the length of local patches $\ell_h$ goes to zero,
that is when the mesh grid size diminishes.
This again enforces embedded boundary conditions and avoids any stability issues of
CFM-FDTD schemes as the time-step size is refined.
However,
a too small value of $c_f$ could lead to poorly conditioned matrices
coming from the minimization problem~\eqref{eq:minPblmPEC}.
\subsection{Implementation of Fictitious Interface Conditions} \label{sec:fictInterfImplementation}
This short subsection focus on technical details concerning the implementation of fictitious interface conditions
\eqref{eq:fictInterfCdn}.
Since $\Omega^-$ is a PEC domain,
it is common to consider $\mathbold{H}^-=0$ and $\mathbold{E}^-=0$ as explained in Section~\ref{sec:defPblm}.
The natural extension of these electromagnetic fields in the non-PEC domain,
that is $\Omega^+$,
is then zero.
Hence,
$\mathbold{D}_H = \mathbold{H}^+$ and $\mathbold{D}_E = \mathbold{E}^+$.
This allows us to enforce fictitious interface conditions in $\Omega^+$
using finite difference approximations within it,
namely $\mathbold{H}^* \approx \mathbold{H}^+$ and
$\mathbold{E}^*\approx \mathbold{E}^+$.
To ease the implementation of fictitious interface conditions \eqref{eq:fictInterfCdn},
we choose fictitious interfaces that are aligned with the mesh grid.
In other words,
fictitious interfaces $\Gamma_{k,i}$ are chosen in such a way that their normal $\hat{\mathbold{n}}_{i,k}$
is an element of the standard basis in $\mathbb{R}^3$.
This facilitates the construction of space-time interpolating polynomials that use FD approximations.
Let us consider the transverse magnetic (TM$_z$) mode (see Section~\ref{sec:TMz}),
which is a 2-D simplification of Maxwell's equations,
as an example.
In this case,
the normal of a fictitious interface is either $\mathbold{n}_1 = (1,0)$ or $\mathbold{n}_2 = (0,1)$.
Hence,
$\mathbold{n}_1\cdot \mathbold{H}^* = H_x^*$,
$\mathbold{n}_2\cdot\mathbold{H}^* = H_y^*$,
$\mathbold{n}_1\times\mathbold{H}^* = H_y^*$,
$\mathbold{n}_2\times\mathbold{H}^* = -H_x^*$,
$\mathbold{n}_1\times\mathbold{E}^* = (0,-E_z^*)$ and
$\mathbold{n}_2\times\mathbold{E}^* = (E_z^*,0)$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:fictInterfExample} illustrates fictitious interfaces that can be generated for a given local patch and
a staggered grid that is described in Section~\ref{sec:2D}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[Fictitious interfaces for $H_x$]{\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.35\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{fictInterfForHx.tikz}}
\subfigure[Fictitious interfaces for $H_y$]{\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.35\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{fictInterfForHy.tikz}}
\subfigure[Fictitious interfaces for $E_z$]{\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.35\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{fictInterfForE.tikz}}
\caption{An example of a local patch $\Omega_{\Gamma}^h$ with fictitious interfaces.
The $x$-component and the $y$-component of the magnetic field
are respectively represented by
{\color{gray}$\circ$} and {\color{gray}\tiny$\square$} while the $z$-component of the electric field is
represented by {\color{gray}$\bullet$}.
Fictitious interfaces associated with $\mathbold{n}_1 = (1,0)$ and $\mathbold{n}_2=(0,1)$ are respectively
represented by \textcolor{cyan}{\rule[0.35ex]{0.25cm}{1pt}} and \textcolor{red}{\rule[0.35ex]{0.25cm}{1pt}}.}
\label{fig:fictInterfExample}
\end{figure}
The functional \eqref{eq:functionalPEC} involves time integrals of
finite difference approximations $\mathbold{H}^*$ and $\mathbold{E}^*$ in
the vicinity of the boundary $\Gamma$.
Since the time interval associated with local patches is given by $I_{\Gamma}^h = [t_n-\Delta t_{\Gamma}, t_n]$,
we can use previous computed finite difference solutions to construct
the space-time interpolant needed for fictitious interface conditions.
However,
this makes difficult the initialization of a CFM-FDTD scheme that uses fictitious interface
conditions.
In Section~\ref{sec:Yee} and Section~\ref{sec:fourthOrderScheme},
we propose an initialization strategy for the Yee scheme and a fourth-order FDTD scheme.
\subsection{Computation of local patches} \label{sec:compLocalPatch}
The computation of an appropriate local patch $\Omega_{\Gamma}^h$ is essential for the CFM.
The well-posedness of problem \eqref{eq:minPblm} and \eqref{eq:minPblmPEC} highly depends
on the representation of the embedded boundary
within the local patch $\Omega_{\Gamma}^{h}$.
Hence,
an appropriate local patch is of foremost importance to obtain an accurate approximation
of a correction function.
In previous CFM-FDTD schemes,
a \enquote{Node Centered} approach is used to compute local patches
\cite{Marques2011,LawMarquesNave2020}.
This approach consists to define a local patch and solve a minimization problem
for each node to be corrected.
Even though it is more expensive than other constructions
of local patches,
\enquote{Node Centered} approaches have the benefit to guarantee
the uniqueness of the correction function at a given node.
Hence,
a common discrete measure of the divergence for staggered FDTD schemes is conserved
for some nodes close to the embedded boundary \cite{LawMarquesNave2020}.
In this work,
as it is done for other immersed boundary methods \cite{Kallemov2016,Stein2016},
we directly discretize the embedded boundary.
Let us now summarize this approach.
For simplicity,
let us consider $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^2$.
Assume a given embedded boundary $\Gamma$ that can be parametrized with respect to the
parameter $s\in[s_a,s_b]$.
The number of local patches is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:nbLocPatch}
N_s \approx \frac{L_\Gamma}{\alpha\,h} + 1,
\end{equation}
where $L_\Gamma$ is the estimated arc length of $\Gamma$,
$h$ is mesh grid size and $\alpha$ is positive constant.
In this work,
we use $\alpha = 2$.
Hence,
centre points of local patches are given by $\mathbold{x}_{c,i} = (x(s_i),y(s_i))$,
where $s_i = s_a + i\,\Delta s$
for $i = 0,\dots,N_s-1$ and $\Delta s = \tfrac{s_b-s_a}{N_s-1}$.
For a given node to be corrected at $\mathbold{x}_D$,
we find the closest $\mathbold{x}_{c,i}$ and associate the corresponding local patch to
$\mathbold{x}_D$.
We therefore guarantee the uniqueness of the correction function to each node to be corrected
while reducing the computational cost,
particularly for large stencils,
when compared with \enquote{Node Centered} approaches.
The local patches are square and aligned with the computational grid.
The length in space of local patches is $\ell_h = \beta\,h$,
where $h$ is the mesh grid size and $\beta$ is a positive constant.
It is worth mentioning that the parameter $\beta$ is chosen in such a way
that enough fictitious interfaces
can be generated within $\Omega_{\Gamma}^h$ and that all nodes to be corrected are
associated with a local patch.
As for the time interval $I_{\Gamma}^h = [t_n-\Delta t_{\Gamma}, t_n]$,
we choose $\Delta t_{\Gamma}$ in such a way that $I_{\Gamma}^h$
include the number of time steps needed to construct space-time interpolants
associated with fictitious interface conditions.
\section{Application of the CFM to the Yee Scheme} \label{sec:Yee}
In this section,
we apply the CFM to the well-known Yee scheme \cite{Yee1966},
which is a popular FDTD scheme in computational electromagnetics,
with a particular attention on its initialization.
Let us recall that the Yee scheme uses a staggered grid in both space and time.
We then need to adapt the functional \eqref{eq:functionalPEC},
and more precisely
the interval of integration in time of fictitious interface conditions,
in order to consider a staggered grid in time.
Finally,
we conclude with pros and cons of such an approach.
In the following,
we assume that the parameter $\beta$ has been chosen in such a way that enough fictitious interfaces have
been generated within $\Omega_{\Gamma}^h$ (see subsection~\ref{sec:compLocalPatch}) and
we therefore focus on the time component.
Let us first define a staggered grid in time.
We consider a time interval $I = [0,T]$ subdivided into $N_t$ subintervals of length $\Delta t$.
We then have $t_n := n\,\Delta t$ for $n = 0,\dots,N_t$ and $t_{n+1/2} := (n+1/2)\,\Delta t$ for $n = -1, \dots, N_t-1$.
The magnetic and electric field are respectively defined at $t_{n+1/2}$ and $t_n$.
According to the Yee scheme,
we first compute $\mathbold{H}^{1/2}$ using
initial conditions $\mathbold{H}^{-1/2}$ and $\mathbold{E}^0$,
as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:InitYeeScheme}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\tdplotsetmaincoords{75}{105}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75]
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (1,-5.8)--(8,-5.8);
\draw[thick,black] (1,-5.7)--(1,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (3,-5.7)--(3,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (5,-5.7)--(5,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (7,-5.7)--(7,-5.9);
\draw (1.45,-6.4) node {$t_{-1/2}$};
\draw (5.35,-6.4) node {$t_{1/2}$};
\draw (3.1,-6.39) node {$t_0$};
\draw (7.1,-6.39) node {$t_1$};
\draw[thick,black] (1,0)--(3,0);
\draw[dashed,thick,black] (3,0)--(5,0);
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (1,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (3,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (5,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw (1,1) node {\small$\mathbold{H}$, $\partial_t\mathbold{E}$};
\draw (3,1) node {\small$\mathbold{E}$, $\partial_t\mathbold{H}$};
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (1,0.8)--(1,0.2);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (3,0.8)--(3,0.2);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (3,-1.45)--(3,-0.85);
\draw (3,-1.65) node {\small$\mathbold{D}_E$};
\pattern[pattern=north east lines] (1,-0.5)--(3,-0.5)--(3,-0.75)--(1,-0.75)--cycle;
\draw [black, thick] (1,-0.5)--(3,-0.5)--(3,-0.75)--(1,-0.75)--cycle;
\draw[thick,black] (1,-3.5)--(5,-3.5);
\draw[dashed,thick,black] (5,-3.5)--(7,-3.5);
\draw[dashed,thick,black] (3,-3.5)--(5,-3.5);
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (1,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (3,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (5,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (7,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw (1,-2.5) node {\small$\mathbold{H}$, $\partial_t\mathbold{E}$};
\draw (3,-2.45) node {\small$\mathbold{E}$};
\draw (5,-2.45) node {\small$\mathbold{H}$};
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (1,-2.7)--(1,-3.3);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (3,-2.7)--(3,-3.3);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (5,-2.7)--(5,-3.3);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (5,-4.95)--(5,-4.35);
\draw (5,-5.15) node {\small$\mathbold{D}_H$};
\pattern[pattern=north east lines] (1,-4)--(5,-4)--(5,-4.25)--(1,-4.25)--cycle;
\draw [black, thick] (1,-4)--(5,-4)--(5,-4.25)--(1,-4.25)--cycle;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Initialization strategy for the proposed CFM-Yee scheme. The black and white circle marker represent respectively the magnetic and electric field. The dashed box illustrates the time interval $I_{\Gamma}^h$ of local patches.}
\label{fig:InitYeeScheme}
\end{figure}
In this case,
the CFM-Yee scheme needs to provide corrections for the electric field at $t_0$,
that is $\mathbold{D}_E^0$.
The time interval of local patches is then $I^h_{\Gamma} = [t_{-1/2},t_0]$.
At first sight,
we do not have enough information in time within local patches to build accurate enough space-time interpolants
for fictitious interface conditions.
However,
by Faraday's law~\eqref{eq:Faraday} and Amp\`ere-Maxwell's law~\eqref{eq:AmpereMaxwell},
we have $\partial_t \mathbold{H}^+ = -\mu^{-1}\,\nabla\times\mathbold{E}^+$ and
$\partial_t \mathbold{E}^+ = \epsilon^{-1}\,\nabla \times \mathbold{H}^+$ in $\Omega^+$.
We can then compute the first-order time derivative of $\mathbold{H}$ at $t_0$ and $\mathbold{E}$ at $t_{-1/2}$
using the curl of $\mathbold{E}^0$ and $\mathbold{H}^{-1/2}$.
It is worth mentioning that one could estimate the curl operator using appropriate finite difference approximations.
First-degree polynomials in time can be constructed using $\mathbold{H}^{-1/2}$ and $\partial_t \mathbold{H}^0$,
and $\mathbold{E}^0$ and $\partial_t \mathbold{E}^{-1/2}$.
Hence,
the interval of integration in time associated with all fictitious interface conditions in functional \eqref{eq:functionalPEC}
is also $I_{\Gamma}^h$.
For the computation of $\mathbold{E}^1$,
one needs correction functions for the magnetic field at $t_{1/2}$,
that is $\mathbold{D}_H^{1/2}$,
as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:InitYeeScheme}.
The time interval of local patches is then $I^h_{\Gamma} = [t_{-1/2},t_{1/2}]$.
In this situation,
we construct a first-degree polynomial in time for the electric field using again $\mathbold{E}^0$
and $\partial_t \mathbold{E}^{-1/2}$.
As for the magnetic field,
we use $\mathbold{H}^{-1/2}$ and $\mathbold{H}^{1/2}$ to compute a first-degree polynomial in time.
The interval of integration in time associated with fictitious interface conditions involving the magnetic field
is then $[t_{-1/2}, t_{1/2}]$ while
the one associated with the electric field is $[t_{-1/2},t_0]$.
Once the initialization of the proposed CFM-Yee scheme is done,
we only have two cases to consider,
as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:strategyYeeScheme}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\tdplotsetmaincoords{75}{105}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75]
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (-3,-5.8)--(8,-5.8);
\draw[thick,black] (-3,-5.7)--(-3,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (-1,-5.7)--(-1,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (1,-5.7)--(1,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (3,-5.7)--(3,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (5,-5.7)--(5,-5.9);
\draw[thick,black] (7,-5.7)--(7,-5.9);
\draw (-2.45,-6.4) node {$t_{n-3/2}$};
\draw (-0.6,-6.39) node {$t_{n-1}$};
\draw (1.55,-6.4) node {$t_{n-1/2}$};
\draw (5.55,-6.4) node {$t_{n+1/2}$};
\draw (3.1,-6.39) node {$t_n$};
\draw (7.4,-6.39) node {$t_{n+1}$};
\draw[thick,black] (-3,0)--(3,0);
\draw[dashed,thick,black] (3,0)--(5,0);
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (-3,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (-1,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (1,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (3,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (5,0) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw (-3,1.05) node {\small$\mathbold{H}$};
\draw (-1,1.05) node {\small$\mathbold{E}$};
\draw (1,1.05) node {\small$\mathbold{H}$};
\draw (3,1.05) node {\small$\mathbold{E}$};
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (-3,0.8)--(-3,0.2);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (-1,0.8)--(-1,0.2);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (1,0.8)--(1,0.2);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (3,0.8)--(3,0.2);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (3,-1.45)--(3,-0.85);
\draw (3,-1.65) node {\small$\mathbold{D}_E$};
\pattern[pattern=north east lines] (-3,-0.5)--(3,-0.5)--(3,-0.75)--(-3,-0.75)--cycle;
\draw [black, thick] (-3,-0.5)--(3,-0.5)--(3,-0.75)--(-3,-0.75)--cycle;
\draw[thick,black] (-1,-3.5)--(5,-3.5);
\draw[dashed,thick,black] (5,-3.5)--(7,-3.5);
\draw[dashed,thick,black] (3,-3.5)--(5,-3.5);
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (-1,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (1,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (3,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=black] (5,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw[-latex,thick,black,fill=white] (7,-3.5) circle [radius=0.1];
\draw (-1,-2.45) node {\small$\mathbold{E}$};
\draw (1,-2.45) node {\small$\mathbold{H}$};
\draw (3,-2.45) node {\small$\mathbold{E}$};
\draw (5,-2.45) node {\small$\mathbold{H}$};
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (-1,-2.7)--(-1,-3.3);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (1,-2.7)--(1,-3.3);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (3,-2.7)--(3,-3.3);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (5,-2.7)--(5,-3.3);
\draw[-latex,thick,black] (5,-4.95)--(5,-4.35);
\draw (5,-5.15) node {\small$\mathbold{D}_H$};
\pattern[pattern=north east lines] (-1,-4)--(5,-4)--(5,-4.25)--(-1,-4.25)--cycle;
\draw [black, thick] (-1,-4)--(5,-4)--(5,-4.25)--(-1,-4.25)--cycle;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Strategy for a CFM-Yee scheme. The black and white circle marker represent respectively the magnetic and electric field. The dashed box illustrates the time interval $I_{\Gamma}^h$ of local patches.}
\label{fig:strategyYeeScheme}
\end{figure}
The first case involves the computation of $\mathbold{H}^{n+1/2}$ and therefore $\mathbold{D}_E^{n}$.
The time interval of local patches is $I_{\Gamma}^h = [t_{n-3/2}, t_n]$.
Approximations of the magnetic field at $t_{n-3/2}$ and $t_{n-1/2}$
are used to construct a first-degree polynomial interpolant in time.
This leads to an interval of integration in time associated with fictitious interface conditions involving the magnetic field of
$[t_{n-3/2}, t_{n-1/2}]$.
As for fictitious interface conditions of the electric field,
the interval of integration in time
is $[t_{n-1}, t_{n}]$,
and $\mathbold{E}^{n-1}$ and $\mathbold{E}^n$ are used to construct a first-degree polynomial in time.
The second case implies the computation of $\mathbold{E}^{n+1}$.
We then need to compute $\mathbold{D}_H^{n+1/2}$ and therefore $I_{\Gamma}^h = [t_{n-1}, t_{n+1/2}]$.
First-degree polynomial in time is constructed using $\mathbold{H}^{n-1/2}$ and $\mathbold{H}^{n+1/2}$,
and $\mathbold{E}^{n-1}$ and $\mathbold{E}^n$.
This leads to intervals of integration in time of fictitious interfaces given by $[t_{n-1/2}, t_{n+1/2}]$ for the magnetic
field and $[t_{n-1}, t_n]$ for the electric field.
Another avenue to initialize the proposed CFM-Yee scheme,
although it is very specific to some applications,
is to consider that $\mathbold{H}^+$ and $\mathbold{E}^+$ in the vicinity
of the embedded boundary remain unchanged for $t\leq t_0$.
Hence,
the numerical strategy described previously for Fig.~\ref{fig:strategyYeeScheme} can be directly used.
As an example,
this approach could be useful for scattering problems.
Finally,
the main disadvantage of this approach is the computation cost associated with
minimization problems of the CFM at each update of electromagnetic fields.
In fact,
the CFM consumes most of the computational time when compared with the finite-difference part.
However,
a parallel implementation of the computation of approximations of the correction function can be performed since
minimization problems associated with local patches are independent at a given time step.
We refer to \cite{Abraham2017} for more details about the benefits of a parallel implementation of the CFM.
It is also worth mentioning that we do not have to keep whole previous solutions but only approximations
associated with fictitious interfaces.
Despite this drawback,
the proposed CFM-Yee scheme could achieve second-order convergence
for appropriate approximations of the correction function (see Proposition~\ref{lem:errorAnalysis})
while treating various complex geometries of the embedded boundary without significantly
increasing the complexity of the numerical approach.
Moreover,
it can also be implemented as a black-box for existing softwares that use the Yee scheme.
\section{Application of the CFM on a Fourth-Order Staggered FDTD Scheme} \label{sec:fourthOrderScheme}
In this section,
we introduce a CFM-FDTD scheme based on a fourth-order staggered FDTD scheme.
The staggered space and time grid are defined as in the Yee scheme.
Spatial derivatives are estimated using the fourth-order centered approximation.
As for time derivatives,
many avenues can be chosen,
such as staggered Adams-Bashforth or staggered backward differentiation methods \cite{Ghrist2000}.
In this work,
we choose a fourth-order staggered free-parameter multistep method introduced in \cite{Ghrist2000},
which has a maximum imaginary stability boundary close to the leapfrog method used in the Yee scheme.
In the following,
we first describe a fourth-order staggered free-parameter multistep method that is used to discretize time derivatives.
We assume that previous solutions needed for the initialization of the multistep method are given.
Afterward,
we introduce the associated CFM-FDTD scheme with a particular attention on the time component.
As in Section~\ref{sec:Yee},
we assume that the parameter $\beta$ has been chosen in such a way that
enough fictitious interfaces have been generated within $\Omega_{\Gamma}^h$.
Let us consider $\partial_t \mathbold{H} = \mathbold{f}_H(\mathbold{E})$ and
$\partial_t \mathbold{E} = \mathbold{f}_E(\mathbold{H})$.
The considered fourth-order free-parameter method is given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:freeParamScheme}
\begin{aligned}
\mathbold{H}^{n+1/2} =&\,\, -\alpha_3\,\mathbold{H}^{n-1/2} - \alpha_2\,\mathbold{H}^{n-3/2} - \alpha_1\,\mathbold{H}^{n-5/2} -
\alpha_0\,\mathbold{H}^{n-7/2} + \\
&\,\, \Delta t \, \big(\beta_3\,\mathbold{f}_H(\mathbold{E}^n) + \beta_2\,\mathbold{f}_H(\mathbold{E}^{n-1})
+ \beta_1\,\mathbold{f}_H(\mathbold{E}^{n-2})\big)\\
\mathbold{E}^{n+1} =&\,\, -\alpha_3\,\mathbold{E}^{n} - \alpha_2\,\mathbold{E}^{n-1} - \alpha_1\,\mathbold{E}^{n-2} -
\alpha_0\,\mathbold{E}^{n-3} + \\
&\,\, \Delta t \, \big(\beta_3\,\mathbold{f}_E(\mathbold{H}^{n+1/2}) + \beta_2\,\mathbold{f}_E(\mathbold{H}^{n-1/2})
+ \beta_1\,\mathbold{f}_E(\mathbold{H}^{n-3/2})\big)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\beta_1=t$,
$\beta_2 = s$,
$\beta_3 = \frac{1}{22}\,s + \frac{12}{11}$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\alpha_0 =&\,\, -\frac{1}{22} - \frac{1}{528}\,s+\frac{1}{24}\,t, \\
\alpha_1 =&\,\, \frac{5}{22} + \frac{9}{176}\,s-\frac{9}{8}\,t, \\
\alpha_2 =&\,\, -\frac{9}{22} - \frac{201}{176}\,s+\frac{9}{8}\,t, \\
\alpha_3 =&\,\, -\frac{17}{22} + \frac{577}{528}\,s-\frac{1}{24}\,t,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
with $s=-1$ and $t=1.045$.
Let us now introduce the corresponding CFM-FDTD scheme.
The time scheme \eqref{eq:freeParamScheme} needs to compute
$\mathbold{f}_H(\mathbold{E})$ at $t_n$, $t_{n-1}$ and $t_{n-2}$,
and $\mathbold{f}_E(\mathbold{H})$ at $t_{n+1/2}$, $t_{n-1/2}$ and $t_{n-3/2}$.
Hence,
we need to keep previous corresponding correction functions.
For the computation of $\mathbold{H}^{n+1/2}$,
we set $I_{\Gamma}^h = [t_{n-7/2}, t_{n}]$ and compute $\mathbold{D}_E^{n}$.
It is worth mentioning that,
at the first update of the magnetic field to estimate $\mathbold{H}^{1/2}$,
we compute the correction function $\mathbold{D}_E$ at $t_0$,
$t_{-1}$ and $t_{-2}$,
and $\mathbold{D}_H$ at $t_{-1/2}$ and $t_{-3/2}$.
For the update of the electric field,
that is $\mathbold{E}^{n+1}$,
we set $I_{\Gamma}^h = [t_{n-3}, t_{n+1/2}]$ and compute $\mathbold{D}_H^{n+1/2}$.
As for the Yee scheme,
we need to adapt the interval of integration in time of fictitious interface conditions using
a similar procedure as in Section~\ref{sec:Yee} for both cases.
\section{Numerical Examples} \label{sec:numEx}
In the following,
we name the CFM-FDTD scheme based on the Yee scheme as CFM-Yee scheme
while the one based on a fourth-order staggered FDTD scheme
is named CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme.
The error of $\mathbold{U}=[H_x,H_y,E_z]^T$ at $t_n$ is computed using approximations and
analytic solutions of the magnetic field and the electric field at respectively $t_n-\tfrac{\Delta t}{2}$ and
$t_n$ because of the staggered grid in time.
\subsection{Transverse Magnetic Mode} \label{sec:TMz}
Let us consider the transverse magnetic (TM$_{\text{z}}$) mode.
The unknowns are $H_x(x,y,t)$,
$H_y(x,y,t)$ and $E_z(x,y,t)$.
For a domain $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^2$ and constant physical parameters,
Maxwell's equations are then simplified to
\begin{equation} \label{eq:TMzSyst}
\begin{aligned}
\mu\,\partial_t H_x + \partial_y E_z =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I,\\
\mu\,\partial_t H_y - \partial_x E_z =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I,\\
\epsilon\,\partial_t E_z - \partial_x H_y + \partial_y H_x =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I,\\
\partial_x H_x + \partial_y H_y =&\,\, 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \times I,\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with the associated boundary, embedded
boundary and initial conditions.
\subsection{A $2$-D Staggered Space Discretization}
\label{sec:2D}
In this subsection,
we present a staggered grid in space.
Let us consider a rectangular domain $\Omega = [x_{\ell},x_r]\times[y_b, y_t] \subset \mathbb{R}^2$.
The domain is divided in $N=N_x\,N_y$ square cells,
noted by $\Omega_{ij} = [x_{i-1/2},x_{i+1/2}]\times[y_{j-1/2},y_{j+1/2}]$ and centered at
$$(x_i,y_j) = (x_{\ell} + (i - \tfrac{1}{2})\,\Delta x , y_b + (j-\tfrac{1}{2})\,\Delta y)$$ for $i=1,\dots,N_x$ and $j=1,\dots,N_y$
with $\Delta x := (x_r-x_{\ell})/N_x$ and $\Delta y := (y_t-y_b)/N_y$.
The $z$-component of the electric field is approximated at the center of the cell.
The $x$-component and $y$-component of the magnetic field are respectively approximated at
$$(x_i,y_{j+1/2}) = (x_{\ell}+(i-\tfrac{1}{2})\,\Delta x, y_b +j\,\Delta y)$$
for $i = 1, \dots, N_x$ and for $j=0,\dots,N_y$, and
$$(x_{i+1/2},y_j) = (x_{\ell}+i\,\Delta x, y_b + (j-\tfrac{1}{2})\,\Delta y)$$
for $i= 0, \dots, N_x$ and for $j=1,\dots,N_y$.
We use either the second or fourth order centered finite difference scheme in space.
As an example,
the $x$-derivative of $H_y$ is of the form
\begin{equation*}
\partial_x H_y(x_i,y_j,t_{n+1/2}) \approx \frac{H_{y,i+1/2,j}^{n+1/2}-H_{y,i-1/2,j}^{n+1/2}}{\Delta x}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
\partial_x H_y(x_i,y_j,t_{n+1/2}) \approx \frac{H_{y,i-3/2,j}^{n+1/2}-27\,H_{y,i-1/2,j}^{n+1/2}+27\,H_{y,i+1/2,j}^{n+1/2}-H_{y,i-3/2,j}^{n+1/2}}{24\,\Delta x}
\end{equation*}
for respectively the second and fourth order centered finite-difference.
Finally,
as it is commonly used,
we impose $E_z=0$ and $H_x=H_y=0$ in PEC subdomains.
\subsection{Problems with an Analytic Solution} \label{sec:pblmsAnalyticSol}
In this subsection,
we perform numerical examples with analytic solutions
to assess the impact of the penalization coefficient $c_f$ and
to verify the proposed numerical approach.
The domain $\Omega$ is divided in two subdomains $\Omega^+$ and $\Omega^-$.
Periodic boundary conditions are used on all $\partial \Omega$.
We set $c_p = 1$.
The mesh grid size is such that $h=\Delta x = \Delta y$.
We use second and third degree polynomial approximations of the correction function for respectively
the CFM-Yee scheme and the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme.
Hence,
this should lead to a second and third order convergence in $L^2$-norm
(see Proposition~\ref{lem:errorAnalysis}).
We set $\ell_h = 7\,h$,
and we construct $\mathbold{E}^*$ and $\mathbold{H}^*$ in $\Omega^+$
using at least a
second degree interpolating polynomial in space for both schemes.
\subsubsection{Circular Cavity Problem} \label{sec:circularCavity}
Let us consider a holed PEC material.
The domain is $\Omega = [-1.25,1.25]\times[-1.25,1.25]$.
Since $\Omega^-$ is a PEC subdomain,
the embedded boundary $\Gamma$ then encloses subdomain $\Omega^+$.
The embedded boundary is a circle centered at $(0,0)$ with unit radius.
The physical parameters are $\epsilon = 1$ and $\mu = 1$.
The time-step size is $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{2}$ for both CFM-FDTD schemes.
In subdomain $\Omega^+$,
the solution in cylindrical coordinates is given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
H_\rho^+(\rho,\phi,t) =&\,\, \frac{i}{\alpha_{i,j}\,\rho}\,J_i(\alpha_{i,j}\,\rho)\,\sin(i\,\phi)\,\sin(\alpha_{i,j}\,t), \\
H_\phi^+(\rho,\phi,t) =&\,\,\frac{1}{2}\,\big(J_{i-1}(\alpha_{i,j}\,\rho)-J_{i+1}(\alpha_{i,j}\,\rho)\big)\,\cos(i\,\phi)\,\sin(\alpha_{i,j}\,t), \\
E_z^+(\rho,\phi,t) =&\,\, J_i(\alpha_{i,j}\,\rho)\,\cos(i\,\phi)\,\cos(\alpha_{i,j}\,t),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where $\alpha_{i,j}$ is the $j$-th positive real root of the $i$-order Bessel function of first kind $J_i$.
In this numerical example,
we choose $i=6$ and $j=2$.
Let us assess the impact of the penalization coefficient $c_f$ on the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes.
Fig.~\ref{fig:convPlotCircCavityInterface} illustrates convergence plots of $\mathbold{U}=[H_x,H_y,E_z]^T$
in $L^2$-norm for both CFM-FDTD schemes
using different values of $c_f$,
that is $\Delta t$,
$\tfrac{\Delta t}{2}$ and $\tfrac{\Delta t}{4}$.
The time interval is $I = [0,0.5]$.
We observe a clear second-order convergence for the CFM-Yee scheme.
For the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme,
a fourth-order convergence is observed,
which is better than expected.
The obtained convergence orders are in agreement with the theory for all values of $c_f$.
However,
one can notice that the error slightly increases as the value of $c_f$ diminishes.
Let us now perform long time simulations.
Fig.~\ref{fig:longSimulationCavity} illustrates the evolution of the error of electromagnetic fields
in $L^2$-norm
as a function of the number of periods for different values of $c_f$.
The time interval is $I=[0,10]$ and the mesh grid size is $h=\tfrac{1}{160}$.
Numerical results suggest that the CFM-Yee scheme is stable for the considered values of
the penalization coefficient $c_f$.
However,
the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme seems more sensitive than the CFM-Yee scheme to the value of $c_f$.
Stability issues appear after a dozen of periods for the largest considered value of the penalization coefficient,
that is $c_f = \Delta t$.
The penalization coefficient $c_f$ must be therefore chosen small enough to avoid stability issues
as the mesh grid size diminishes.
Based on these numerical results,
we choose $c_f = \Delta t$ and $c_f = \tfrac{\Delta t}{4}$ for respectively the CFM-Yee scheme and
the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme to avoid any stability issues in all other numerical examples.
\begin{figure
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=2.5\textwidth,center}
\centering
\subfigure[CFM-Yee]{
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{pblm9_Yee.tikz}
}
\subfigure[CFM-$4^{th}$]{
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{pblm9_fourth.tikz}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{Convergence plots in $L^2$-norm for a circular cavity problem using the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes for different values of $c_f$, that is $\Delta t$, $\tfrac{\Delta t}{2}$ and $\tfrac{\Delta t}{4}$.}
\label{fig:convPlotCircCavityInterface}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=2.5\textwidth,center}
\setlength\figureheight{0.35\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.85\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{longL2.tikz}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{Evolution in time of the error of $\mathbold{U}$ in $L^2$-norm for a circular cavity problem
using CFM-FDTD schemes with $h=\tfrac{1}{160}$ and different values of $c_f$, that is $\Delta t$, $\tfrac{\Delta t}{2}$ and $\tfrac{\Delta t}{4}$.}
\label{fig:longSimulationCavity}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Square Cavity Problem} \label{sec:squareCavity}
Let us consider a PEC material with square holes.
The domain is $\Omega = [-0.75,0.75]\times[-0.75,0.75]$ and the time interval is $I=[0,0.5]$.
Since $\Omega^-$ is a PEC subdomain,
the boundary $\Gamma$ then encloses subdomain $\Omega^+$.
The boundary $\Gamma$ is a square of unit length centered at $(0,0)$ .
The physical parameters are $\epsilon = 1$ and $\mu = 1$.
The time-step size is $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{2}$ for both CFM-FDTD schemes.
In $\Omega^+$,
the solution is given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
H_x^+(x,y,t) =&\,\, -\frac{\pi\,n}{\omega}\,\sin(m\,\pi\,x)\,\cos(n\,\pi\,y)\,\sin(\omega\,t), \\
H_y^+(x,y,t) =&\,\, \frac{\pi\,m}{\omega}\,\cos(m\,\pi\,x)\,\sin(n\,\pi\,y)\,\sin(\omega\,t), \\
E_z^+(x,y,t) =&\,\, \sin(m\,\pi\,x)\,\cos(n\,\pi\,y)\,\cos(\omega\,t),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where $\omega = \pi\,\sqrt{m^2+n^2}$ with $m,n>0$ \cite{Hesthaven2008}.
In this numerical example,
we choose $m=n=4$.
Convergence plots are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:convPlotSquareCavityInterface} for both
proposed CFM-FDTD schemes.
A second and fourth order convergence are observed for respectively the CFM-Yee scheme and
the fourth-order CFM-FDTD scheme in $L^2$-norm.
The obtained convergence orders are in agreement with the theory.
\begin{figure
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=2.5\textwidth,center}
\centering
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{pblm20.tikz}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{Convergence plots in $L^2$-norm for a square cavity problem using the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes.}
\label{fig:convPlotSquareCavityInterface}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Two Concentric PEC Cylinders Problem} \label{sec:concentricPEC}
This problem considers a holed PEC containing a PEC cylinder
as illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:concPEC}.
It is recalled that $\Omega^-$ is a PEC subdomain.
We therefore have subdomain $\Omega^+$ enclosed by two PEC walls on $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$.
There is two circular embedded boundaries centered at $(0,0)$ with radius $r_1=\tfrac{1}{3}$ and $r_2=1$ for respectively
$\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\tdplotsetmaincoords{75}{105}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.75]
\draw[-latex,thick] (0,0)--(0,5)--(5,5)--(5,0)--cycle;
\draw[-latex,thick,blue] (2.5,2.5) circle [radius=2];
\draw[-latex,thick,blue] (2.5,2.5) circle [radius=0.75];
\draw (3.25,3.3) node {$\color{blue}\Gamma_1$};
\draw (4.1,4.2) node {$\color{blue}\Gamma_2$};
\draw (0.75,4.5) node {$\Omega^-$};
\draw (1.6,3.5) node {$\Omega^+$};
\draw (2.5,2.5) node {$\Omega^-$};
\draw (0.5,0.3) node {$\partial \Omega$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Geometry of a two concentric PEC cylinders problem.}
\label{fig:concPEC}
\end{figure}
The domain is $\Omega = [-1.25,1.25]\times[-1.25,1.25]$ and the time interval is $I=[0,0.75]$.
The physical parameters are $\epsilon = \tfrac{1}{2}$ and $\mu = \tfrac{1}{2}$.
The time-step size is $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{4}$ for both CFM-FDTD schemes.
In subdomain $\Omega^+$,
the solution in cylindrical coordinates is given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
H_x^+(\rho,\phi,t) =&\,\, -\frac{1}{2}\,\sin(\omega\,t+\phi)\,\sin(\phi)\,\big(J_0(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})-J_2(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})+\alpha\,Y_0(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})-\alpha\,Y_2(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})\big)\\
&\,\,-\frac{2\,\cos(\phi)}{\omega\,\rho}\,\cos(\omega\,t+\phi)\,\big(J_1(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})+\alpha\,Y_1(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})\big), \\
H_y^+(\rho,\phi,t) =&\,\, \frac{1}{2}\,\sin(\omega\,t+\phi)\,\cos(\phi)\,\big(J_0(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})-J_2(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})+\alpha\,Y_0(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})-\alpha\,Y_2(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})\big)\\
&\,\,-\frac{2\,\sin(\phi)}{\omega\,\rho}\,\cos(\omega\,t+\phi)\,\big(J_1(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})+\alpha\,Y_1(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})\big), \\ E_z^+(\rho,\phi,t) =&\,\, \cos(\omega\,t+\phi)\,\big(J_1(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})+\alpha\,Y_1(\tfrac{\omega\,\rho}{2})\big),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where $\alpha \approx 1.76368380110927$,
$\omega \approx 9.813695999428405$,
and $J_i$ and $Y_i$ are the $i$-order Bessel function of respectively first and second kind \cite{Ditkowski2001}.
Convergence plots are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:convPlotTwoConCylInterface} for both
proposed CFM-FDTD schemes.
As expected,
we observe a second and third order convergence for respectively the CFM-Yee scheme and
the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme in $L^2$-norm.
\begin{figure
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=2.5\textwidth,center}
\centering
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{pblm26.tikz}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{Convergence plots in $L^2$-norm for a two concentric PEC cylinders problem using the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes.}
\label{fig:convPlotTwoConCylInterface}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Problems with a Manufactured Solution} \label{sec:scatteringPblms}
Let us now consider more complex embedded boundaries.
To our knowledge,
there is no analytical solution for Maxwell's equations with arbitrary embedded boundaries.
We therefore consider that embedded boundary conditions are given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\times\mathbold{E}^+=&\,\, \mathbold{a}(\mathbold{x},t) \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I ,\\
\hat{\mathbold{n}}\cdot (\mu\,\mathbold{H}^+) =&\,\, b(\mathbold{x},t) \quad \text{on } \Gamma \times I,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbold{a}(\mathbold{x},t)$ and $b(\mathbold{x},t)$ are known functions.
The physical parameters are $\epsilon = 1$ and $\mu = 2$.
The time-step size is $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{2}$ for both CFM-FDTD schemes.
We also consider the 5-star and 3-star embedded boundary illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:interfaceGeo}.
The solutions are
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
H_x^+ =&\,\, 0.5\,\sin(2\,\pi\,x)\,\sin(2\,\pi\,y)\,\sin(2\,\pi\,t), \\
H_y^+ =&\,\, 0.5\,\cos(2\,\pi\,x)\,\cos(2\,\pi\,y)\,\sin(2\,\pi\,t), \\
E_z^+ =&\,\, \sin(2\,\pi\,x)\,\cos(2\,\pi\,y)\,\cos(2\,\pi\,t)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
in $\Omega^+$
while $H_x^-=H_y^-=0$ and $E_z^-=0$ in $\Omega^-$.
It is worth noting that manufactured solutions are at divergence-free in each subdomain,
but not in the whole domain because of embedded boundary conditions that we impose.
Nevertheless,
this allows us to assess the performance of the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes in a more
general framework.
The time interval is $I=[0,1]$.
We set $\ell_h = 7\,h$ for both embedded boundaries.
The other parameters are the same as problems with analytical solutions in subsection~\ref{sec:pblmsAnalyticSol}.
Convergence plots for each geometry of the embedded boundary are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:convPlotManuSol} using
both proposed CFM-FDTD schemes.
For the 5-star boundary,
a second-order convergence is observed for the CFM-Yee scheme.
We also observe a fourth order convergence for the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme.
As for the 3-star boundary,
we observe a second-order convergence for the CFM-Yee scheme
while a third-order convergence is obtained for the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=2.5\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[circular]{ \label{fig:circleInterfaceGeo}
\setlength\figureheight{0.25\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.25\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{circleInterfGeo.tikz}
}
\subfigure[5-star]{\label{fig:starInterfaceGeo}
\setlength\figureheight{0.25\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.25\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{starInterfGeo.tikz}
}
\subfigure[3-star]{\label{fig:triStarInterfaceGeo}
\setlength\figureheight{0.25\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.25\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{triStarInterfGeo.tikz}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{Different geometries of an embedded PEC.}
\label{fig:interfaceGeo}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=2.5\textwidth,center}
\centering
\subfigure[5-star]{
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{pblm7.tikz}
}
\subfigure[3-star]{
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{pblm8.tikz}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{Convergence plots in $L^2$-norm for problems with a manufactured solution using the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes and different geometries of the embedded boundary.}
\label{fig:convPlotManuSol}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Scattering Problems} \label{sec:scatteringPblms}
Let us now consider scattering problems involving various geometries of a PEC.
To our knowledge,
there is no analytic solution for these problems with arbitrary geometries of the embedded boundary.
Hence,
we estimate errors using approximate solutions coming from a very fine grid.
The domain is $\Omega = [-1,1.5]\times[-0.75,1.75]$ and the time interval is $I=[0,1.5]$.
Periodic conditions are used on all $\partial \Omega$.
We consider embedded boundaries illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:interfaceGeo}.
The physical parameters are $\epsilon = 1$ and $\mu = 1$.
The mesh grid size is $h=\Delta x = \Delta y$.
The time-step size is $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{2}$.
The parameters for local patches are
$\ell_h = 6\,h$ for the circular PEC,
and $\ell_h = 7\,h$ for the 5-star PEC and 3-star PEC.
The other parameters are the same as problems with analytical solutions in subsection~\ref{sec:pblmsAnalyticSol}.
Let us consider a pulsed wave propagating in the positive $x$-direction,
given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:pulsedWave}
\begin{aligned}
H_{x_{p}}(\mathbold{x},t) =&\,\, 0, \\
H_{y_p}(\mathbold{x},t) =&\,\,-\frac{2}{\sigma^2}\,(x-\gamma-t)\,e^{-\big(\frac{x-\gamma-t}{\sigma}\big)^2}, \\
E_{z_p}(\mathbold{x},t) =&\,\, \frac{2}{\sigma^2}\,(x-\gamma-t)\,e^{-\big(\frac{x-\gamma-t}{\sigma}\big)^2},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma = 0.1$ and $\gamma = -0.3$.
It is worth mentioning that we use electromagnetic fields given in \eqref{eq:pulsedWave} to compute all
previous solutions needed to initialize the time-stepping method presented in Section~\ref{sec:fourthOrderScheme}.
It is recalled that we set $H_x^- = H_y^- =0$ and $E_z^-=0$ in the PEC subdomain,
that is $\Omega^-$.
The reference solution $\mathbold{U}^\star$
is computed using $h=\tfrac{1}{1620}$ and the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme.
All nodes used for $H_x$,
$H_y$ and $E_z$ in coarser grids with
$h\in\{\tfrac{1}{20},\tfrac{1}{60},\tfrac{1}{180},\tfrac{1}{540}\}$ are also part of the finer grid.
Fig.~\ref{fig:convPlotScatteringPblms} illustrates convergence plots for each geometry of the embedded PEC using both CFM-FDTD schemes.
We observe a second and fourth order convergence for respectively the CFM-Yee scheme and
the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme.
\begin{figure
\centering
\subfigure[circular]{
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{convScatteringCircle.tikz}
}
\subfigure[5-star]{
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{convScattering5star.tikz}
}
\subfigure[3-star]{
\setlength\figureheight{0.3\linewidth}
\setlength\figurewidth{0.325\linewidth}
\tikzset{external/export next=false}
\input{convScattering3star.tikz}
}
\caption{Convergence plots in $L^2$-norm for scattering problems using the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes and different geometries of the embedded PEC.}
\label{fig:convPlotScatteringPblms}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:circularScattering},
Fig.~\ref{fig:fiveStarScattering} and Fig.~\ref{fig:triStarScattering} illustrate the evolution of the magnitude of
each component of electromagnetic fields.
The numerical approach can handle various geometries of the embedded boundary without significantly increasing
the complexity of the method.
\begin{figure
\centering
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$H_x$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Hx_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Hx_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Hx_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$H_y$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Hy_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Hy_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Hy_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$E_z$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Ez_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Ez_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{circle_Ez_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{The evolution of the magnitude of components $H_x$, $H_y$ and $E_z$ with $h = \tfrac{1}{100}$ and $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{2}$ using the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme and the circular embedded PEC. From left to right, we show the computed electric field and
magnetic field at respectively $t \in \{ 0.4, 0.9, 1.4\}$ and $t-\tfrac{\Delta t}{2}$. The embedded boundary is represented by the white line.}
\label{fig:circularScattering}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$H_x$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Hx_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Hx_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Hx_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$H_y$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Hy_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Hy_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Hy_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$E_z$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Ez_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Ez_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{star_Ez_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{The evolution of the magnitude of components $H_x$, $H_y$ and $E_z$ with $h = \tfrac{1}{100}$ and $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{2}$ using the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme and the 5-star embedded PEC. From left to right, we show the computed electric field and
magnetic field at respectively $t\in \{ 0.4, 0.9, 1.4\}$ and $t-\tfrac{\Delta t}{2}$. The embedded boundary is represented by the white line.}
\label{fig:fiveStarScattering}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$H_x$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Hx_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Hx_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Hx_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$H_y$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Hy_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Hy_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Hy_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\begin{adjustbox}{max width=1.25\textwidth,center}
\subfigure[$E_z$]{
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Ez_80.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Ez_180.png}}
{\includegraphics[width=2.25in]{triStar_Ez_280.png}}
}
\end{adjustbox}
\caption{The evolution of the magnitude of components $H_x$, $H_y$ and $E_z$ with $h = \tfrac{1}{100}$ and $\Delta t = \tfrac{h}{2}$ using the CFM-$4^{th}$ scheme and the 3-star embedded PEC. From left to right, we show the computed electric field and
magnetic field at respectively $t\in \{ 0.4, 0.9, 1.4\}$ and $t-\tfrac{\Delta t}{2}$. The embedded boundary is represented by the white line.}
\label{fig:triStarScattering}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
This work proposes FDTD schemes based on the Correction Function Method for
Maxwell's equations with embedded PEC boundary conditions.
The associated minimization problems are well-posed for an appropriate representation
of the embedded boundary within
the local patch,
and an appropriate choice of penalization coefficients and
fictitious interfaces.
Fictitious interfaces can induce some issues for long time simulations.
The penalization coefficient associated with fictitious interface conditions
must be therefore chosen small enough to avoid any stability issues as the time-step size diminishes.
We have applied the CFM to the well-known Yee scheme and a fourth-order staggered FDTD scheme.
It is worth mentioning that the proposed numerical strategy can be implemented as a black-box to existing
softwares.
Based on numerical examples,
it has been shown that the proposed CFM-FDTD schemes can handle embedded PEC
problems with
various geometries of the boundary
while retaining high-order convergence and
without significantly increasing the complexity of the proposed numerical approach.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors are grateful to Dr. Marc Laforest and Dr. Serge Prudhomme of Polytechnique Montr{\'e}al for their support.
The authors also thank Damien Tageddine for helpful conversations.
The research of JCN was partially supported by the NSERC Discovery Program.
This is a pre-print of an article published in Journal of Scientific Computing. The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10915-021-01591-z.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Hall--Littlewood functions and Hall polynomials}
{\em Hall--Littlewood symmetric functions}\/ form a classical basis of the ring of symmetric
functions \cite{Littlewood-poly}; they interpolate between Schur functions at $t=0$ and
monomial symmetric functions at $t=1$. We refer the reader to the book \cite{Macdonald} for details.
In this paper, we are interested in the {\em structure constants}\/
of the algebra of symmetric functions $\Lambda$ (with coefficients which are rational functions
of the formal parameter $t$)
in the basis of Hall--Littlewood functions:
if $P^\lambda\in \Lambda$ is the Hall--Littlewood symmetric function associated to the partition $\lambda$,
then write
\[
P^\lambda P^\mu = \sum_\nu c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu P^\nu
\]
where the sum is over all partitions. The $c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$ turn out to be polynomials in $t$ with integer
coefficients. They are called {\em Hall polynomials}\/ \cite{Hall-poly} and are interesting
in their own right: they
count short exact sequences of finite abelian $p$-groups (with $t=1/p$).
Hall noticed that they were structure constants of an algebra.
Even though we only study Hall polynomials and not Hall--Littlewood symmetric functions in the present paper,
we note that Hall--Littlewood symmetric functions do occur naturally in the context of solvable lattice models,
which is the implicit framework of the current work, cf the related papers \cite{artic65,artic67}.
In this paper, we shall restrict to a finite-dimensional quotient $\Lambda_{k,n}$ of $\Lambda$ defined
in two steps. First we consider the usual map $\Lambda\to\Lambda_k$ from symmetric functions to
{\em symmetric polynomials}\/ in $k$ variables. Under it, $P^\lambda$ is mapped to zero unless $\lambda$
has no more than $k$ parts, in which case we obtain the {\em Hall--Littlewood polynomial}
\[
P^\lambda(x_1,\ldots,x_k)=
\sum_{w\in \mathcal{S}_k/\mathcal{S}_\lambda} w\left(x_1^{\lambda_1}\ldots x_k^{\lambda_k}
\prod_{i,j: \lambda_i>\lambda_j} \frac{x_i-t x_j}{x_i-x_j}\right)
\]
where $\mathcal{S}_\lambda$ is the subgroup of $\mathcal{S}_k$ that stabilizes $\lambda$.
In a second stage, denoting by $\lambda'$ the conjugate partition of $\lambda$,
let $\P_{k,n}$ be the set of partitions $\lambda$ such that $\lambda_1\le n-1$, $\lambda'_1\le k$,
and consider the further quotient by the ideal generated by all $P^\lambda$ for which $\lambda\not\in \P_{k,n}$.
It is easy to see, as a consequence of the Pieri rule that will be discussed below,
that $\Lambda_{k,n}$ has as a basis the $P^\lambda$ for $\lambda\in \P_{k,n}$,
and that its structure constants $c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$ are the same as those of $\Lambda$,
with $\lambda,\mu,\nu$ restricted to $\P_{k,n}$.
In what follows we implicitly pad partitions $\lambda\in \P_{k,n}$ with zeroes in such a way that they have exactly $k$ parts.
Denote then by $m_r(\lambda)$, $r=0,\ldots,n-1$, the number of parts $r$ of $\lambda$. In particular,
$m_0(\lambda)=k-\lambda'_1$, and $\sum_{r=0}^{n-1} m_r(\lambda)=k$. The map $\lambda\mapsto m_r(\lambda)$ is a bijection between $\P_{k,n}$ and the set of
$n$-tuplets of nonnegative integers summing to $k$.
\subsection{Honeycombs}
\rem[gray]{careful that compared to [KTW \url{https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0306274.pdf}], my Young diagrams are conjugate.
both seem to correspond to what I call dual honeycombs in my viewer
(plus conjugate Young diagram for [KTW] of course).
honeycombs would be like [KTW] except probably need to flip left right
or something. in any case HL does not have conjugation symmetry (presumably
we get a rule for q-whitaker if we conjugate).
strangely I seem to agree with [KT \url{https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/9807160.pdf}]
the ``dual numbering'' of the viewer is a bit confusing in the sense that it does give
the conjugate partition.
}
We view vertices of the triangular lattice as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defL2}
L_2=\{(a,b,c)\in\ZZ^3: a+b+c=0\}
\end{equation}
(which is naturally identified with the root lattice of $\mathfrak{sl}_3$).
Given $k\ge 1$, a $GL(k)$ {\em honeycomb}\/ \cite{KT-I} is
a subset of line segments with multiplicities sitting inside the triangular lattice, in such a way
that there are $k$ semi-infinite segments going off in each of the three directions
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.7]
{
\draw [->] (0,0) -- ++(180:1) node[left] {$\ss(0,1,-1)$};
\draw [->] (0,0) -- node[right] {$\ss(-1,0,1)$} ++(300:1);
\draw [->] (0,0) -- node[right] {$\ss(1,-1,0)$} ++(60:1);
},
while all other segments are finite; and such that the endpoints of segments form vertices
where a balance condition is satisfied, namely that at each vertex,
if we denote by $j,i,j',i',j'',i''$ the multiplicities of line segments around that vertex, then
the following two equalities are satisfied:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:balance}
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.5]{
\draw (0:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss j$} -- (180:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i'$};
\draw (120:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss j'$} -- (300:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i''$};
\draw (240:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss j''$} -- (60:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i$};
}
\qquad
i'-j=i''-j'=i-j''
\end{equation}
(if there is no line the corresponding multiplicity is zero).
Fixing $n\ge1$, we say that a $GL(k)$ honeycomb has boundaries $\lambda,\mu,\nu\in \P_{k,n}$ if all vertices
are contained inside an equilateral triangle of size $n-1$, in such a way
that if one numbers lattice vertices of the boundary of that triangle from $0$ to $n-1$
left to right for each side, then there are exactly $m_r(\lambda)$ (resp.\ $m_r(\mu)$,
$m_r(\nu)$) semi-infinite lines oriented
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.7]
{
\draw [->] (0,0) -- ++(180:1)
}
(resp.\
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.7]
{
\draw [->] (0,0) -- ++(60:1)
},
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.7]
{
\draw [->] (0,0) -- ++(300:1)
})
going through vertex $r$, $r=0,\ldots,n-1$ of the North-West (resp.\ North-East, South) side of the triangle.
\begin{ex*}
A honeycomb with $\lambda=(6,3,1,0)$, $\mu=(3,2,1,0)$, $\nu=(6,5,4,1)$, $k=4$, $n=7$:
\begin{center}
\def5{7}\honeycomb[{
\node at (-2/3,1+1/3) {6};
\node at (-2/3,4+1/3) {3};
\node at (-2/3,6+1/3) {1};
\node at (-2/3,7+1/3) {0};
\node at (1/3,-2/3) {0};
\node at (1+1/3,-2/3) {1};
\node at (2+1/3,-2/3) {2};
\node at (3+1/3,-2/3) {3};
\node at (2+1/3,5+1/3) {1};
\node at (5+1/3,2+1/3) {4};
\node at (6+1/3,1+1/3) {5};
\node at (7+1/3,1/3) {6};
}]{1/0/1/0/1/0,1/0/0/1/1/1,1/0/0/1/1/1,1/0/0/1/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/0/0/0/1,1/0/1/0/1/0,1/0/0/1/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/1/1/0/0/1,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/1/1/0/0/0,1/0/0/0/0/1,0/1/1/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/1/1/0/0/1,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/1/1/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/1/1/0/0/0}
\end{center}
In general, lines can have multiplicities which will be drawn as lines stacked next to each other and
redundantly labelled in purple.
\end{ex*}
To each vertex of a honeycomb we associate a {\em fugacity}\/ given by the formula
\begin{align}\label{eq:fug}
\fug\Big(\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.5]{
\draw (0:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss j$} -- (180:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i'$};
\draw (120:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss j'$} -- (300:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i''$};
\draw (240:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss j''$} -- (60:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i$};
}\Big)
&=
\sum_{r=0}^{\min(i,i')} (-1)^r t^{j'r+r(r+1)/2} \frac{\a_{i+j-r}}{\a_{i-r}\a_r \a_{i'-r}}
\\\notag
&=
\frac{\a_{i+j}}{\a_i\a_{i'}}\,
\,{}_2\phi_1\left({t^{-i},t^{-i'}\atop t^{-(i+j)}};t,t^{i''+1}\right)
\end{align}
where $\a_i=\prod_{r=1}^{i} (1-t^r)$,
and
$\,{}_2\phi_1\left({t^{-i},t^{-i'}\atop t^{-(i+j)}};t,t^{i''+1}\right)=
\sum_{n=0}^{\min(i,i')} \frac{(t^{-i};t)_n(t^{-i'})_n}{(t;t)_n(t^{-(i+j)};t)_n}t^{n(i''+1)}$
is a terminating basic hypergeometric series \cite{GR-basic}. Fugacities are actually polynomials in $t$,
see Appendix~\ref{app:fug} for its first few values.
The fugacity of a honeycomb is the product of fugacities of its vertices.
The main theorem of this paper is a new formulation of the product rule for Hall--Littlewood polynomials
in terms of honeycombs:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:main}
The structure constants $c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$ of $\Lambda_{k,n}$ are given by
\[
c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu = \sum \big\{ \fug(H)\, :\, H\ \text{honeycomb with boundaries $\lambda$, $\mu$, $\nu$}) \big\}
\]
\end{thm}
Equivalently, one has, in $\Lambda_{k,n}$,
\[
P^\lambda P^\mu = \sum_{H:\ \substack{\text{NW boundary of }H=\lambda\\\text{NE boundary of }H=\mu}} \fug(H)\ P^{\text{S boundary of $H$}}
\]
where the sum is over all honeycombs $H$ whose vertices are contained inside an equilateral triangle of
size $n-1$.
\begin{ex*}
Here are the three honeycombs with boundaries $\lambda=(3,2,1,1,0)$, $\mu=(3,1,0,0,0)$, $\nu=(4,3,2,1,1)$,
$k=5$, $n=5$:
\begin{center}
\def5{5}
\honeycomb[{
\node[myred] at (1/3,2.5+1/3) {2};
}]{3/0/0/0/0/3,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,1/0/0/1/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,3/1/1/0/0/3,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,3/0/1/0/1/2,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/1/1/1/1/0,2/0/2/0/2/0,0/1/1/2/2/0,0/1/1/0/0/0}
\honeycomb[{
\node[myred] at (1/3,1.5+1/3) {2};
\node[myred] at (1/3,2.5+1/3) {2};
\node[myred] at (1.5+1/3,1+1/3) {2};
\path (1+1/3,1+1/3) node[right,green!50!black] {\ss 1+t};
\path (2+1/3,1+1/3) node [left,green!50!black] {\ss 1-t};
}]{3/0/0/0/0/3,1/0/0/0/0/1,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,3/0/1/0/1/2,1/0/1/1/2/0,0/1/0/2/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,2/1/1/0/0/2,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,2/0/2/0/2/0,0/1/1/2/2/0,0/1/1/0/0/0}
\honeycomb[{
\node[myred] at (1/3,1.5+1/3) {2};
\path (1+1/3,2+1/3) node[above=-1mm,green!50!black] {\ss 1+t-t^2};
\path (1+1/3,3+1/3) node [right,green!50!black] {\ss 1+t};
}]{3/0/0/0/0/3,1/0/0/0/0/1,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,3/0/1/0/1/2,1/0/0/1/1/1,0/1/1/1/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,2/0/1/0/1/1,1/1/1/1/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,1/1/2/0/1/0,1/0/1/1/2/0,0/1/1/0/0/0}
\end{center}
Nontrivial fugacities are marked in green next to the vertices. In total, we find
\[
c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu=
1+(1+t)(1-t)+(1+t-t^2)(1+t)=3+2t-t^2-t^3
\]
\end{ex*}
Product rules for Hall--Littlewood functions, or equivalently expressions for Hall polynomials,
already exist in the literature; most notably, in \cite[II.4]{Macdonald}, a formula for $c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$
is given as a sum over Littlewood--Richardson tableaux, where the coefficients are very similar to ours.
Since honeycombs and Littlewood--Richardson tableaux are in bijection, one can presumably relate our two rules.
However, we believe the honeycomb formulation displays better some of the underlying symmetries, as should be made
clear in what follows.
\begin{rmk*}One can check that the expression \eqref{eq:fug} evaluated at $t=0$ is equal to $1$, so that
the fugacity of every honeycomb at $t=0$ is $1$ as well; in other words,
\[
c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu (t=0)= \text{number of honeycombs with boundaries $\lambda$, $\mu$, $\nu$}
\]
In this way we recover one of the many formulations of the {\em Littlewood--Richardson rule}\/ for Schur
polynomials \cite{KT-I}.
\end{rmk*}
\subsection{Plan of proof}
The rest of the paper is devoted to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:main}. The logic that we follow
is analogous to
the paper \cite{KTW-octa}, which is concerned with the Littlewood--Richardson rule for Schur polynomials,
the special case $t=0$ of our result (as remarked right above).\footnote{There are minor differences between our setup
and that of \cite{KTW-octa}: (a) We work in $\Lambda_{k,n}$ whereas they work in $\Lambda_k$; (b) relatedly,
we use honeycombs whereas they use hives (the bijection between the two is explained in \cite[Sect.~6]{KTW-octa};
(c) our partitions are {\em conjugate}\/ of theirs, which is irrelevant at $t=0$, but not so for general $t$.}
We identify partitions with Young diagrams.
It is known that Hall--Littlewood polynomials (or symmetric functions) satisfy the {\em Pieri rule}\/
\cite[(5.7--5.8) p228]{Macdonald}: given $r\in\ZZ_{>0}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pieri}
P^\lambda P^{(r)} = \sum_{\substack{\nu:\ \nu/\lambda\text{ is a}\\\text{horizontal strip}\\\text{with $r$ boxes}}}
P^\nu\,
\frac{1}{1-t}
\prod_{i\in I_{\nu/\lambda}} (1-t^{m_i(\nu)})
\end{equation}
where $I_{\nu/\lambda}$ is the set of $i$ such that $\nu/\lambda$ has a box in column $i$ but not in column $i+1$.
As an aside, we note that
since the $P^{(r)}$, $r\in\ZZ_{>0}$, generate $\Lambda_k$ as an algebra \cite[p 209]{Macdonald},
and since in \eqref{eq:pieri},
$\nu_1\ge \lambda_1$ and $\nu'_1\ge \lambda'_1$,
the {\em ideal}\/ of $\Lambda_k$ generated by the $P^\lambda$, $\lambda\not\in \P_{k,n}$, is equal
to the linear span of these $P^\lambda$.
This implies, as noted in the introduction, that the $P^\lambda$, $\lambda\in \P_{k,n}$, form a basis of $\Lambda_{k,n}$, and that the structure constants of $\Lambda_{k,n}$ are the same as those of $\Lambda$.
Now {\em define}\/ a bilinear operation
$\times$ on the linear span $\Lambda_{k,n}$ of the $P^\lambda$, $\lambda\in \P_{k,n}$, by
\[
P^\lambda\times P^\mu = \sum_{H:\ \substack{\text{NW boundary of }H=\lambda\\\text{NE boundary of }H=\mu}} \fug(H)\ P^{\text{S boundary of $H$}}
\]
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} says that $\times$ agrees with the usual product of $\Lambda_{k,n}$.
We shall first show that the Pieri rule \eqref{eq:pieri}
is satisfied by $\times$, i.e.,
\begin{prop}\label{prop:pieri}
One has, for any $r\in\ZZ_{>0}$,
\[
P^\lambda\times P^{(r)}=P^\lambda P^{(r)}
\]
as a relation in $\Lambda_{k,n}$.
\end{prop}
Secondly we show
\begin{prop}\label{prop:assoc}
$\times$ is associative.
\end{prop}
In other words, the coefficients
$\sum \big\{ \fug(H)\, :\, H\ \text{honeycomb with boundaries $\lambda$, $\mu$, $\nu$}) \big\}$
are the structure constants of an associative algebra.
Theorem~\ref{thm:main} then follows from Propositions~\ref{prop:pieri} and \ref{prop:assoc}, as we recall briefly.
The $P^{(r)}$, $r\in\ZZ_{>0}$, generate $\Lambda_{k,n}$ as an algebra,
and the $P^\lambda$, $\lambda\in \P_{k,n}$ are a linear basis of it,
so we can content ourselves with showing
\[
P^\lambda\times (P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_\ell)})=
P^\lambda P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_\ell)}
\]
We prove this by induction on $\ell$:
\begin{align*}
P^\lambda\times (P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_\ell)})&=
P^\lambda\times (P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_{\ell-1})} P^{(r_\ell)})
\\
&=
P^\lambda\times (P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_{\ell-1})}\times P^{(r_\ell)})&\text{by Prop.~\ref{prop:pieri}}&
\\
&=
(P^\lambda\times P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_{\ell-1})})\times P^{(r_\ell)}&\text{by Prop.\ \ref{prop:assoc}}&
\\
&=
(P^\lambda P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_{\ell-1})})\times P^{(r_\ell)}&\text{by induction}&
\\
&=
P^\lambda P^{(r_1)}\ldots P^{(r_{\ell-1})}P^{(r_\ell)}&\text{by Prop.~\ref{prop:pieri}}&
\end{align*}
Section~\ref{sec:pieri} is devoted to the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:pieri}.
Section~\ref{sec:bosonic}, though not strictly necessary for the proof,
introduces the formalism of ``tensor calculus'' which is used in related work on puzzles
(see in particular \cite{artic46,artic71}); the same type of graphical calculus is then used in
Section~\ref{sec:assoc}, which contains the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:assoc}.
In fact, it is perhaps in the latter proof that the interest of the paper lies,
rather than in the result of Theorem~\ref{thm:main} itself.
Indeed we prove associativity by reducing it to elementary ``excavation'' moves of a tetrahedron, in the same spirit
of three-dimensional geometry as \cite{KTW-octa};
however, a major difference is that while the method of \cite{KTW-octa} is {\em combinatorial},
resulting in a bijective proof of associativity, our method is {\em linear algebraic}\/ (in fact, secretly
representation-theoretic), expressing the whole of $c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$ as a certain entry of a tensor
and then manipulating it using linear algebra identities, rather than manipulating individual honeycombs. (In fact,
we show in Appendix~\ref{app:assoc}
an example for which no fugacity-preserving bijection between pairs of honeycombs exists, barring a
combinatorial proof of associativity away from $t=0$.)
\rem{refer to Hannah?}
\section{Pieri rule}\label{sec:pieri}
\rem[gray]{technically we don't need to prove that we get the right diagrams --
it's true because of the $t=0$ case.}
Given a partition $\lambda\in \P_{k,n}$ viewed as a Young diagram, and $\nu\in \P_{k,n}$ obtained from $\lambda$ by addition
of a horizontal strip with $r$ boxes ($1\le r\le k$), subdivide the strip $\nu/\lambda$
into subsets of boxes in consecutive columns; indexing them $1,\ldots,\ell$
from top to bottom,
denote by $c_i$ the column of the rightmost box of the $i^{\rm th}$ subset,
and by $b_i$ its number of boxes.
\begin{ex*}
\[
\lambda=(5,3,1,1,0),\ r=3,\ \nu=(5,5,2,1,0),\qquad
\tikz[baseline=0]{\node[tableau]{&&&&\\&&&\colorcell{blue!50!white}&\colorcell{blue!50!white}\\&\colorcell{green!50!white}\\\\\vcell\\};
\path (tab-2-5) node[right=2mm] {$b_1=2$};
\draw[dotted] (tab-2-5) ++ (0,-0.4) -- ++(0,-1.5) node[below] {$c_1=5$};
\path (tab-3-2) node[right=2mm] {$b_2=1$};
\draw[dotted] (tab-3-2) ++ (0,-0.4) -- ++(0,-1) node[below] {$c_2=2$};
}
\]
\[
\lambda=(3,2,1,1,0),\ r=3,\ \nu=(4,3,1,1,1),\qquad
\tikz[baseline=0]{\node[tableau]{&&&\colorcell{blue!50!white}\\&&\colorcell{blue!50!white}\\\\\\\colorcell{green!50!white}\\};
\path (tab-1-4) node[right=2mm] {$b_1=2$};
\draw[dotted] (tab-1-4) ++ (0,-0.4) -- ++(0,-2.5) node[below] {$c_1=4$};
\path (tab-5-1) node[right=2mm] {$b_2=1$};
\draw[dotted] (tab-5-1) ++ (0,-0.4) -- ++(0,-0.5) node[below] {$c_2=1$};
}
\]
\end{ex*}
Construct a honeycomb with boundaries $\lambda$, $\mu=(r)$, $\nu$ as follows.
Consider the path starting on the right side of the honeycomb
at location $r$, and successively make it go
South-West until it reaches the NW/SE column
numbered $c_1$, then make it go $b_1$ steps straight West, then again
South-West till it reaches NW/SE column $c_2$, etc, and finally
$b_\ell$ steps to the left, at which point it reaches the $0^{\rm th}$
(leftmost) NE/SW column.
Note that the rest of the honeycomb is then uniquely determined by the balance condition;\footnote{
We leave the proof of uniqueness as an exercise to the reader; note that it can in principle
be extracted from the corresponding proof of \cite[Prop.~4]{KTW-octa} by applying the honeycomb--hive bijection.}
in particular, in the first NE/SW column, vertices are of the form
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.5]{
\draw (0,0) -- (180:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i'$};
\draw (0,0) -- (300:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i'$};
\draw (240:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i-i'$} -- (60:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i$};
},
except at the spot where the special path described above arrives from the right, where we have
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.5]{
\draw (0:1) -- (180:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i'$};
\draw (0,0) -- (300:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i'-1$};
\draw (240:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i-i'+1$} -- (60:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i$};
}.
\begin{ex*}With the same partitions as above, and $n=6$, we obtain
\begin{center}
\def5{6}\honeycomb[{
\node[myred] at (1/3,1+1/3) {3};
\node[myred] at (1/3,3+1/3) {2};
\path (1+1/3,2+1/3) node[left,green!50!black] {\ss 1-t};
\path (3+1/3,0+1/3) node[below left,green!50!black] {\ss 1+t};
\node at (6+1/3,1/3) {c_1};
\node at (3+1/3,3+1/3) {c_2};
\draw[latex-latex] (3+1/3-0.2,1/3) -- node[above=-1mm] {b_1} (1+1/3-0.1,2+1/3-0.1);
\draw[latex-latex] (1+1/3-0.1,3+1/3-0.1) -- node[above=-1mm] {b_2} (1/3,4+1/3-0.2);
}]{4/0/1/0/1/3,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,1/0/1/1/2/0,0/0/0/2/2/0,0/0/0/2/2/0,3/0/0/0/0/3,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/1/1/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,3/0/1/0/1/2,0/1/0/1/0/1,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,2/0/0/0/0/2,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,2/1/2/0/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,1/0/1/0/1/0
\qquad
\honeycomb[{
\node[myred] at (1/3,2.5+1/3) {3};
\node[myred] at (1/3,3.5+1/3) {2};
\node[myred] at (0.5+1/3,4+1/3) {2};
\path (1+1/3,3+1/3) node[left,green!50!black] {\ss 1-t};
\path (1+1/3,4+1/3) node[right,yshift=1mm,green!50!black] {\ss 1+t+t^2};
\draw[latex-latex] (3+1/3-0.1,1+1/3-0.1) -- node[above=-1mm] {\ b_1} (1+1/3-0.1,3+1/3-0.1);
\draw[latex-latex] (1+1/3-0.2,4+1/3) -- node[above=-1mm] {b_2} (1/3-0.1,5+1/3-0.1);
\node at (5.33,1.33) {c_1};
\node at (2.33,4.33) {c_2};
}]{4/0/0/0/0/4,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/0/0/0/1,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,4/0/0/0/0/4,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,4/0/1/0/1/3,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/1/1/1/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,3/0/1/0/1/2,0/1/0/1/0/1,0/0/0/0/0/0,2/0/2/0/2/0,1/0/1/2/3/0,0/1/1/0/0/0}
\end{center}
\end{ex*}
The fugacity of the honeycomb is entirely concentrated along the special path;
each right turn of the path at NW/SE column
$c_i$, of the form
\def5{1}\tikzset{puznode/.style={font=\scriptsize}}%
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.5]{
\draw (0,0) -- (180:1);
\draw (120:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss m-1$} -- (300:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss m$};
\draw (0,0) -- (60:1);
}
with $m=m_{c_i}(\nu)$,
incurs according to \eqref{eq:fug} a fugacity of
\[
\sum_{r=0}^1
(-1)^r
t^{(m-1)r+r(r+1)/2}\frac{1}{\a_r \a_{1-r}}
=
\frac{1-t^m}{1-t}
\]
whereas each left turn, of the form
\tikz[baseline=-3pt,scale=0.5]{
\draw (120:1) -- (0,0) (240:1) -- (0,0) (0:1) -- (0,0);
},
incurs according to the same formula a fugacity of $\a_1=1-t$. The total fugacity is therefore
\[
(1-t)^{\ell-1}\prod_{i=1}^\ell \frac{1-t^{m_{c_i}(\nu)}}{1-t}
=\frac{1}{1-t}\prod_{i=1}^\ell (1-t^{m_{c_i}(\nu)})
\]
This coincides with \cite[(5.7--5.8) p228]{Macdonald}, taking into account
the notation $q_r=(1-t)P^{(r)}$ used by that reference. Proposition~\ref{prop:pieri} follows.
\tikzset{bgline/.style={gray,dotted}
\tikzset{lattice/.style={fill=none,circle,inner sep=0.5pt}
\tikzset{puznode/.style={font=\scriptsize}}
\section{Honeycombs as bosonic puzzles}\label{sec:bosonic}
We now pause to provide several alternative graphical representations of honeycombs.
\subsection{Bosonic puzzles}\label{sec:puzzle}
The first transformation is a ``puzzle-like'' representation of honeycombs: we draw a new triangular lattice
which is obtained from the original one by shifting every vertex in such a way that vertices of the old lattice
lie at the centers of up-pointing triangles of the new one;
and each time a line segment of a honeycomb crosses
an edge of this new triangular lattice, we record its multiplicity (and label empty edges with zeroes).
To each edge is therefore associated two numbers, which for improved readability we write in two colors,
purple and cyan, so that around each vertex of a honeycomb the colors alternate as follows:
\tikz[baseline=0,scale=0.5]{
\draw (0:1) node[right=-1mm,mygreen] {$\ss j$} -- (180:1) node[left=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i'$};
\draw (120:1) node[left=-1mm,mygreen] {$\ss j'$} -- (300:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i''$};
\draw (240:1) node[left=-1mm,mygreen] {$\ss j''$} -- (60:1) node[right=-1mm,myred] {$\ss i$};
}.
We then erase the original honeycomb, keeping only the cyan and purple labels.
\begin{ex*}\
\begin{center}
\def5{5}
\def1{1}
\honeycomb%
{3/0/0/0/0/3,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,1/0/0/1/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,3/1/1/0/0/3,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,3/0/1/0/1/2,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/1/1/1/1/0,2/0/2/0/2/0,0/1/1/2/2/0,0/1/1/0/0/0}
\qquad
\puzzlex%
{3/0/0/0/0/3,1/0/1/0/1/0,0/0/0/1/1/0,1/0/0/1/1/1,0/0/0/1/1/0,3/1/1/0/0/3,0/0/0/0/0/0,0/0/0/0/0/0,1/0/1/0/1/0,3/0/1/0/1/2,0/0/0/1/1/0,0/1/1/1/1/0,2/0/2/0/2/0,0/1/1/2/2/0,0/1/1/0/0/0}
\end{center}
\end{ex*}
The resulting picture is reminiscent of puzzles as defined in \cite{KTW-II}, except that the actual labels associated
to edges are quite different. In fact,
in order to dispel possible confusion, let us point out that this new representation
is not directly related to the well-known fact that
honeycombs are in bijection with ordinary puzzles: here the puzzles that
we obtain are ``bosonic'', in the sense that they are associated with certain parabolic Verma modules
of $\mathcal U_{t^{1/2}}(\mathfrak{sl}_3)$ (see Section~\ref{sec:RT}).
The ordinary puzzles are ``fermionic'' in nature, and in this context,
the bijection between honeycombs and puzzles can be interpreted as a form of boson-fermion correspondence.
\subsection{The tensor calculus}\label{sec:tensor}
We now implement the same procedure that was formulated in \cite{artic46} and subsequently used in
\cite{artic68,artic71} to turn puzzles into entries of a certain tensor.
In order to do so, we switch to the more traditional
graphical calculus of mathematical physics:
this time, starting from our (new) triangular lattice,
we draw its dual honeycomb lattice, and transport the labels
of each edge of the former to the edge of the latter which it intersects. There is also a conventional
choice of orientation of each edge: we declare that all edges are oriented upwards.
This means that up- and down-pointing triangles now look like
\begin{equation}\label{eq:vertices}
\tikz[baseline=0,scale=1.2]{
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss j''$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss j$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss j'$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'$};
}
\qquad
\tikz[baseline=0,scale=1.2]{
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss j''$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''$};
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss j$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i$};
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss j'$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'$};
}
\end{equation}
which we call $U$ and $D$ vertices respectively.
To SouthWest, SouthEast, South oriented edges we shall associate
three (infinite-dimensional) vector spaces $V,V',\bar V''$, each of which equipped with
a basis indexed by pairs of nonnegative integers.
(The bar will be justified in Section~\ref{sec:Z3}.
In what follows the bar denotes linear algebra duality.
Changing the orientation of a line corresponds to switching to the dual vector space.
We shall indeed discuss another, perhaps more natural, choice of orientation in Section~\ref{sec:Z3};
it is however less convenient for the generalization we have in mind in Section~\ref{sec:assoc}.)
These vector spaces possess a $L_2\cong\ZZ^2$-grading,
the {\em weight} ($L_2$ was defined in \eqref{eq:defL2});
the basis vectors $v_{i,j}\in V$, $(i,j)\in \ZZ^2_{\ge0}$, are homogeneous of weight
$\wt(v_{i,j})=(i,-i-j,j)$, and similarly,
$\wt(v'_{i',j'})=(j',i',-i'-j')$,
$\wt(\bar v''_{i'',j''})=-(-i''-j'',j'',i'')$.
The fugacities are now encoded as entries of a tensor associated to each vertex; namely,
to a $U$ (resp.\ $D$) vertex is associated an element
of $\bar V''\to V'\otimes V$, resp.\ $V\otimes V'\to \bar V''$.
Specifically, the entries are given by
\begin{align}\label{eq:defU}
U^{i',j',i,j}_{i'',j''}&=
\begin{cases}
\a_{i''}\a_{j''}u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}&\wt(v_{i,j})+\wt(v'_{i',j'})=\wt(\bar v''_{i'',j''})
\\
0&\text{else}
\end{cases}
\\\label{eq:defD}
D_{i,j,i',j'}^{i'',j''}&=
\begin{cases}
\rlap{$\a_j$}\phantom{\a_{i''}\a_{j''}y(j,i,j',i',j'',i'')}
&i=j'',\ i'=j,\ i''=j'
\\
0&\text{else}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
where we recall
$\a_i=\prod_{r=1}^{i} (1-t^r)$, and
$u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}$ is closely related to the fugacity that was introduced in \eqref{eq:fug},
and given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defy}
u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}
=
\frac{\a_{i+j}}{\a_i\a_{i'}\a_{i''}\a_j\a_{j''}}\,
\,{}_2\phi_1\left({t^{-i},t^{-i'}\atop t^{-(i+j)}};t,t^{i''+1}\right)
\end{equation}
The condition of equality of weights in the definition \eqref{eq:defU} is known as {\em weight conservation}.
Note that the condition $i=j''$, $i'=j$, $i''=j'$ in the definition \eqref{eq:defD} implies
(but is stronger than) the weight conservation $\wt(v_{i,j})+\wt(v'_{i',j'})=\wt(\bar v''_{i'',j''})$.
One last (standard) graphical convention is that indices that are not marked are summed over. For example, in size $2$,
we can consider
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pic2}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8,baseline=0]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (90:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:2);
\begin{scope}[shift={(90:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_0$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_1$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(210:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_0$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_0$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-30:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_1$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_1$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{equation}
Because of the implicit summation, this picture represents a certain entry of a product of $3$ $U$ tensors
and $1$ $D$ tensor.
The main result of this section is the simple reformulation:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:c}
$c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$ is the tensor entry corresponding to the following diagram ($n\times n$ triangle inside the
honeycomb lattice):
\begin{equation}\label{eq:c}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5,baseline=0]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (90:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:2);
\begin{scope}[shift={(90:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1);
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_1$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(210:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_0$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_0$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-30:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_1$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1);
\end{scope}
\node[rotate=60] at (60:5) {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(60:10)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (90:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:2);
\begin{scope}[shift={(90:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_0$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_{n-1}$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(210:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1);
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_{n-2}$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-30:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1);
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_1$};
\end{scope}
\end{scope}
\path (60:5) ++(0:5) node[rotate=-60] {$\cdots$};
\node at (0:5) {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(0:10)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (90:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:2);
\begin{scope}[shift={(90:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_{n-2}$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(210:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_{n-2}$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-30:2)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_{n-1}$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_{n-1}$};
\end{scope}
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{equation}
with $i'_k=m_k(\lambda)$, $i_k=m_k(\mu)$, $i''_k=m_k(\nu)$, $k=0,\ldots,n-1$.
\end{lem}
(The picture is the generalization of \eqref{eq:pic2} to arbitrary $n$.)
\begin{proof}
At every edge of the diagram, we insert the decomposition of the identity in terms of bases
$v_{i,j},v'_{i',j'},v''_{i'',j''}$.
The definition \eqref{eq:defD} of the entries of $D$ simply means that honeycomb lines go across down-pointing triangles, as well as contributes a factor of $\a_j$ which we combine with the $U$ vertex below to the left of it.
As to the definition \eqref{eq:defU} of the entries of $U$,
it is easy to check that
$\wt(v_{i,j})+\wt(v'_{i',j'})=\wt(\bar v''_{i'',j''})$ is exactly the balance condition for vertices of a
honeycomb; the contribution to the fugacity is the factor $\a_j$ coming from the $D$ vertex above and right
of it (noting that if the $U$ vertex is on the NorthEast boundary, $j=0$ so no such factor occurs) times
$\a_{i''}\a_{j''}u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}$;
in the absence of a honeycomb vertex, i.e., if $j=i=j'=i'=j''=i''=0$, the result is $1$,
whereas in the presence of a honeycomb vertex we recover exactly the fugacity \eqref{eq:fug}.
Overall, the product over all entries involved in computing the tensor entry of the lemma
reproduces exactly the fugacity of the honeycomb; summing over possible values of $i,j$ or $i',j'$,
$i'',j''$ at every internal edge results in summing over all honeycombs.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The \texorpdfstring{$\ZZ_3$}{Z3}-invariant setting}\label{sec:Z3}
There is a more natural, $\ZZ_3$-invariant, choice of orientation,
which is to orient all edges from say up-pointing triangles to down-pointing triangles;
it leads to new vertices:
\[
\tikz[baseline=0,scale=1.2]{
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss j''$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss j$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss j'$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'$};
}
\qquad
\tikz[baseline=0,scale=1.2]{
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss j''$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''$};
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss j$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i$};
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss j'$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'$};
}
\]
which we call $\tilde U$ and $\tilde D$ (these will not be used outside of this section).
\rem[gray]{careful that this is called $U_{sym'}$ from the notes, not $U_{sym}=\overset{4}{U}$}
The corresponding tensors are now $\tilde U\in V''\otimes V' \otimes V$ and $\tilde D:
V\otimes V'\otimes V''\to\CC$, where by definition $V''$ is the vector space dual to $\bar V''$ introduced
above; it comes equipped with the dual basis $v''_{i'',j''}$, $(i'',j'')\in \ZZ_{\ge0}^2$,
$\wt(v''_{i'',j''})=(-i''-j'',j'',i'')$.
The $\ZZ_3$-symmetry can also be promoted to their entries: write
\begin{align}\label{eq:defUt}
\tilde U^{i'',j'',i',j',i,j}
&=
\begin{cases}
u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}&\wt(v_{i,j})+\wt(v'_{i',j'})+\wt(v''_{i'',j''})=0
\\
0&\text{else}
\end{cases}
\\\label{eq:defDt}
\tilde D_{i,j,i',j',i'',j''}&=
\begin{cases}
\a_i\a_{i'}\a_{i''}
&i=j'',\ i'=j,\ i''=j'
\\
0&\text{else}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
where $u^{\ldots}$ was defined in \eqref{eq:defy}.
In fact, we have an even larger symmetry:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:D6}
Given $j,i,j',i',j'',i''\ge 0$ satisfying the weight conservation $i'-j=i''-j'=i-j''$, $u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}$ is invariant under the natural action of the dihedral
group $D_6$ on its variables.
\end{lem}
Note that the weight conservation itself has dihedral symmetry, restricting
the natural 6-dimensional representation of $D_6$ to a 4-dimensional subrepresentation.
\begin{proof}
Two order 2 transformations are easy to show. Noting $i+j=i'+j''$, we immediately
have from the definition \eqref{eq:defy} of $u^{\ldots}$ the invariance under the reflection
$(j,i,j',i',j'',i'')\mapsto (j'',i',j',i,j,i'')$.
Secondly, one of Heine's transformation formulae \cite[(III.3)]{GR-basic} for ${}_2\phi_1$
implies the invariance under $(j,i,j',i',j'',i'')\mapsto (i',j'',i'',j,i,j')$.
Together these generate a $\ZZ_2\times \ZZ_2$ subgroup of $D_6$. The other
symmetries do not seem to follow from standard transformation formulae of ${}_2\phi_1$,
to the limited knowledge of the author. Instead one can prove them from the following representation
\cite[(III.8)]{GR-basic}:
\[
u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}
=\begin{cases}
\displaystyle\frac{{}_3\phi_1\left({t^{-i},t^{-i'},t^{-i''}\atop t^{c+1}};t,t^{i+i'+i''+c}\right)}{\a_i\a_{i'}\a_{i''}\a_c}
&c\ge 0
\\[3mm]
\displaystyle\frac{{}_3\phi_1\left({t^{-j},t^{-j'},t^{-j''}\atop t^{-c+1}};t,t^{j+j'+j''-c}\right)}{\a_j\a_{j'}\a_{j''}\a_{-c}}
&c\le 0
\end{cases}
\]
where to make the $\ZZ_3$ symmetry
$(j,i,j',i',j'',i'')\mapsto (j',i',j'',i'',j,i)$
more apparent, we have written $c=j-i'=j'-i''=j''-i$.
Together, these transformations generate the whole of $D_6$.
\end{proof}
Finally, define $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ to be the tensor entry represented by the following diagram
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ct}
c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}=
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5,baseline=0]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (90:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:2);
\begin{scope}[shift={(90:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1);
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_1$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(210:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_{n-1}$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_0$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-30:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_{n-2}$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1);
\end{scope}
\node[rotate=60] at (60:5) {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(60:10)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (90:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:2);
\begin{scope}[shift={(90:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_0$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_{n-1}$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(210:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1);
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1) node[above,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[below,myred] {$\ss i'_{n-2}$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-30:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1);
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_1$};
\end{scope}
\end{scope}
\path (60:5) ++(0:5) node[rotate=-60] {$\cdots$};
\node at (0:5) {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(0:10)}]
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (90:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (210:2);
\draw[invarrow] (0,0) -- (-30:2);
\begin{scope}[shift={(90:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_{n-2}$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(210:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_1$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (150:1);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[shift={(-30:2)}]
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (-90:1) node[left,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[right,myred] {$\ss i''_0$};
\draw[arrow] (0,0) -- (30:1) node[below,mygreen] {$\ss 0$} node[above,myred] {$\ss i_{n-1}$};
\end{scope}
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{equation}
with $i'_k=m_k(\lambda)$, $i_k=m_k(\mu)$, $i''_k=m_k(\nu)$, $k=0,\ldots,n-1$. Note that
$\nu$ is now read in reverse at the bottom; in fact, let us denote $\nu^*$ to be
the partition such that $m_{n-1-k}(\nu^*)=m_k(\nu)$ for $k=0,\ldots,n-1$. In terms of Young
diagrams, this corresponds to taking the complement inside the $k\times (n-1)$ rectangle
and then rotating 180 degrees.
Though this choice of orientation may be more natural,
the $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ thus defined are not exactly computing the structure constants we are after. Rather,
we have the following.
Define, for any $\lambda\in \P_{k,m}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defh}
h_\lambda=
\prod_{r=0}^{n-1}\a_{m_r(\lambda)}
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{prop}\label{prop:Z3}
(a) $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ is related
to $c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$ by
\[
c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}=
h_\nu^{-1}
c^{\lambda,\mu}_{\nu^*}
\]
(b) $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ is invariant under cyclic permutation of the $\lambda,\mu,\nu$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let us compare the diagrams \eqref{eq:c} and \eqref{eq:ct} corresponding to $c^{\lambda,\mu}_{\nu^*}$ and $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ respectively.
The labels on the boundaries match; the vertices have fugacities given by
\eqref{eq:defU}, \eqref{eq:defD}
and
\eqref{eq:defUt} \eqref{eq:defDt} respectively. The conditions for being
nonzero also match, so the only difference is in the nonzero entries.
One has the following relation between them:
\begin{align*}
\tilde U&=\a_{i''}^{-1}\a_{j''}^{-1} U
\\
\tilde D&=\a_{i''}\a_{j''} D
\end{align*}
The factors in the tilded fugacities only occur on vertical edges.
Because each (vertical) edge that is summed over in the diagram connects a $U$ and a $D$ vertex, the factors above exactly cancel, so that the only difference occurs at the boundary (vertical) edges. The latter only occur at the bottom boundary of the diagram, and there one has all $j''=0$ and the $i''$ labels form the sequence $m_k(\nu)$, $k=0,\ldots,n-1$. This leads to
the desired relation in view of the definition \eqref{eq:defh}.
Due to Lemma~\ref{lem:D6}, the fugacities $\tilde U$ and $\tilde D$
are invariant by cyclic shift $(j,i,j',i',j'',i'')\mapsto(j',i',j'',i'',j,i)$.
This implies $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}=c^{\mu,\nu,\lambda}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk*}
The $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ have the following interpretation.
Consider {\em dual}\/ Hall--Littlewood polynomials
\[
P_\lambda:=h_\lambda P^{\lambda^*}
\]
(these are a natural ``finitized'' version of the usual dual Hall--Littlewood
polynomials). Then our main Theorem \ref{thm:main} is trivially equivalent
to the fact that $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ is the coefficient of $P_\nu$ in
the expansion of $P^\lambda P^\mu$. Of course such an interpretation implies
that $c^{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ is invariant under {\em every}\/ permutation of $\lambda,\mu,\nu$.
Similarly, had we used the fugacities
\begin{align}\label{eq:defu}
u_{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}&=\a_j \a_i \a_{j'} \a_{i'}\a_{j''}\a_{i''}
u^{j,i,j',i',j'',i''}
\\\notag
&=
\a_{i+j}\a_{j'}
\,{}_2\phi_1\left({t^{-i},t^{-i'}\atop t^{-(i+j)}};t,t^{i''+1}\right)
\end{align}
for $U$ vertices
instead of $u^{\ldots}$, correspondingly redefined the fugacity of $D$ vertices to be
$(\a_j\a_{j'}\a_{j''})^{-1}$,
and labelled our puzzles counterclockwise, we would find a quantity $c_{\lambda,\mu,\nu}$ which
is nothing but the coefficient of $P^\nu$ in the expansion of $P_\lambda P_\mu$.
\end{rmk*}
\subsection{The representation theory}\label{sec:RT}
Although outside the scope of the present paper, we briefly sketch the representation-theoretic
interpretation of $U$ and $D$. $V$, $V'$ and $V''$ can be endowed with
an action of the quantized algebra $\mathcal U_{t^{1/2}}(\mathfrak{sl}_3)$,
in such a way that they are parabolic Verma modules for distinct parabolic subalgebras,
their parabolic subalgebras and highest weights being related
to each other by 120 degree rotation of the weight lattice (the weights defined above are always
relative to the highest weight). Then one can show that there exist
intertwiners $V\otimes V'\to \bar V''$ and $\bar V''\to V'\otimes V$ which are unique up to normalization. There is only one parameter in the definition of
such highest weights; call it $s$.
Finally, take the limit $t^s\to 0$;
the intertwiners then take the form \eqref{eq:defU}--\eqref{eq:defD}
(up to switching them, depending on the conventional sign of $s$).
\begin{rmk*}
Had we kept $s$ finite, we would have obtained instead the product rule for
rank 1 Bethe wave functions of arbitrary spin
(also known as ``spin Hall--Littlewood functions'' in the recent literature),
see e.g.~\cite{Bor-symfun} for their definition. This would encompass both the product rule of the present paper and those
of \cite{artic46} and \cite{artic68} (see also \cite{artic71} for the justification of the occurrence of the root system of
$\mathfrak{sl}_3$).
\end{rmk*}
\section{Associativity}\label{sec:assoc}
\subsection{The 3D geometry intepretation}\label{sec:3d}
We first briefly recall the interpretation of associativity in terms of three-dimensional geometry,
as advocated in \cite{KTW-octa}. Expanding $(P^\lambda P^\mu)P^\nu=P^\lambda(P^\mu P^\nu)$, we find
the quadratic equations
\[
\sum_{\sigma\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\mu}_\sigma c^{\sigma,\nu}_{\rho}
=
\sum_{\tau\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\tau}_{\rho} c^{\mu,\nu}_\tau
\qquad
\forall\ \lambda,\mu,\nu,\rho\in\P_{k,n}
\]
It is natural to depict this equation in the usual two dual ways as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:assoc}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt]
\shade[top color=white!50!black,bottom color=white] (-1,0) -- (0,1) -- (1,0) -- cycle;
\shade[bottom color=white!50!black,top color=white] (-1,0) -- (0,-1) -- (1,0) -- cycle;
\draw (-1,0) -- node {$\lambda\,$} (0,1) -- node {$\mu$} (1,0) -- node {$\nu$} (0,-1) -- node {$\rho$} cycle;
\draw (1,0) -- node {$\sigma$} (-1,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt]
\shade[left color=white!50!black,right color=white] (0,-1) -- (1,0) -- (0,1) -- cycle;
\shade[right color=white!50!black,left color=white] (0,-1) -- (-1,0) -- (0,1) -- cycle;
\draw (-1,0) -- node {$\lambda\,$} (0,1) -- node {$\mu$} (1,0) -- node {$\nu$} (0,-1) -- node {$\rho$} cycle;
\draw (0,-1) -- node {$\tau$} (0,1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\text{or}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90]
\draw[ultra thick,arrow] (-1,-1) -- node[below] {$\nu$} (-0.25,0);
\draw[ultra thick,arrow] (0.25,0) -- node[right] {$\sigma$} (-0.25,0);
\draw[ultra thick,arrow] (0.25,0) -- node[above] {$\lambda$} (1,1);
\draw[ultra thick,invarrow] (-1,1) -- node[below] {$\rho$} (-0.25,0);
\draw[ultra thick,arrow] (1,-1) -- node[above] {$\mu$} (0.25,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt]
\draw[ultra thick,invarrow] (-1,-1) -- node[left] {$\rho$} (-0.25,0);
\draw[ultra thick,invarrow] (-0.25,0) -- node[above] {$\tau$} (0.25,0);
\draw[ultra thick,invarrow] (0.25,0) -- node[right] {$\mu$} (1,1);
\draw[ultra thick,arrow] (-1,1) -- node[left] {$\lambda$} (-0.25,0);
\draw[ultra thick,arrow] (1,-1) -- node[right] {$\nu$} (0.25,0);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{equation}
Here the shaded triangles should be filled with an actual expression for $c^{\lambda,\mu}_\nu$ such as the
puzzles of Section~\ref{sec:puzzle};
or equivalently, the thick lines of the dual picture are really multiple lines, and the vertex a multi-vertex
similar to \eqref{eq:c}.
Let us focus on the left picture (the right picture will be used extensively in the next sections).
It is convenient to imagine it as a tetrahedron viewed from the top, where the l.h.s.\
corresponds to the full (opaque) tetrahedron with its top two faces shown, whereas the r.h.s.\ is
a view of its bottom two faces as if the tetrahedron had been excavated.
If we subdivide each triangle into smaller triangles, in the spirit of puzzles:
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.5]
\shade[top color=white!50!black,bottom color=white] (-1,0) -- (0,1) -- (1,0) -- cycle;
\shade[bottom color=white!50!black,top color=white] (-1,0) -- (0,-1) -- (1,0) -- cycle;
\draw (-1,0) -- (0,1) -- (1,0) -- (0,-1) -- cycle;
\draw (1,0) -- (-1,0);
\draw (-0.75,-0.25) -- (0.25,0.75);
\draw (-0.5,-0.5) -- (0.5,0.5);
\draw (-0.25,-0.75) -- (0.75,0.25);
\draw (0.75,-0.25) -- (-0.25,0.75);
\draw (0.5,-0.5) -- (-0.5,0.5);
\draw (0.25,-0.75) -- (-0.75,0.25);
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.5]
\shade[left color=white!50!black,right color=white] (0,-1) -- (1,0) -- (0,1) -- cycle;
\shade[right color=white!50!black,left color=white] (0,-1) -- (-1,0) -- (0,1) -- cycle;
\draw (-1,0) -- (0,1) -- (1,0) -- (0,-1) -- cycle;
\draw (0,-1) -- (0,1);
\draw (-0.75,-0.25) -- (0.25,0.75);
\draw (-0.5,-0.5) -- (0.5,0.5);
\draw (-0.25,-0.75) -- (0.75,0.25);
\draw (0.75,-0.25) -- (-0.25,0.75);
\draw (0.5,-0.5) -- (-0.5,0.5);
\draw (0.25,-0.75) -- (-0.75,0.25);
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
then one should correspondingly think of the tetrahedron as subdivided into smaller polyhedra. One finds
that the correct subdivision is into three types of polyhedra:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Tetrahedra}\/ which are obtained by homothecy from the full tetrahedron.
\item Other tetrahedra, called in what followed {\em dual tetrahedra}, obtained by top-bottom mirror
symmetry from the previous kind.
\item {\em Octahedra}.
\end{itemize}
All these polyhedra have equal edge length, which is $1/n$ times the edge length of the original tetrahedron.
The idea is then to prove associativity, i.e., \eqref{eq:assoc}, step by step by excavating the large
tetrahedron one small polyhedron at a time. Each kind of polyhedron
(tetrahedron, dual tetrahedron and octahedron) corresponds to a {\em local}\/ transformation
of the puzzle-like objects.
This idea is realized in the context of hives in \cite{KTW-octa} (with uniform fugacities, corresponding
to our $t=0$ case). (See also Appendix~\ref{app:assoc} for a $n=3$ example in our context.)
In order to implement these local transformations for honeycombs,
we need to extend the formalism of Section~\ref{sec:bosonic}
to the geometry of the root lattice of $\mathfrak{sl}_4$ (as opposed to $\mathfrak{sl}_3$). The rationale
for such a shift of perspective will be given elsewhere \cite{SchubIV}. We only remark in passing that since the picture itself
has been lifted from two dimensions to three, it is natural to also upgrade the root lattice from two to three dimensions.
\subsection{The tensor calculus revisited}
Recall from Section~\ref{sec:tensor}
that the first step is an assignment of a vector space/a set of labels to each edge of our diagrams.
Compared to Section~\ref{sec:bosonic}, we will need more types of edges. The type of an (oriented)
edge is given by a subset $A$ of $\{0,1,2,3\}\cong \ZZ_4$, and the corresponding vector space denoted $V_A$;
in practice we shall only consider $|A|=1$, i.e., $V_\alpha$, $\alpha=0,\ldots,3$,
and $|A|=2$ with the specific choice $V_{\alpha\,\alpha+1}$,
$\alpha=0,\ldots,3$.
A basis of $V_A$ is labelled as follows: it is a collection of nonnegative integers $a_{\beta,\alpha}$ with
$\beta\not\in A$
and $\alpha\in A$. For $|A|=1$ this means three labels, and for $|A|=2$, four labels.
As in Section~\ref{sec:bosonic}, when we draw the oriented lines corresponding to various vector spaces $V_A$,
we always give them the same direction to ease the interpretation of diagrams.
Our convention is that $V_0$ goes SouthWest,
$V_1$ SouthEast, $V_2$ NorthEast, $V_3$ NorthWest, and $V_{01}$ South, $V_{12}$ East, $V_{23}$ North, $V_{30}$ West.
Redundantly, we also write $A$ next to the line carrying the space $V_A$.
One more convention is that we draw the lines of $V_A$, $|A|=2$, as double lines.
Finally, the allowed vertices come in the following types:
\begin{itemize}
\item Trivalent vertices that correspond to linear maps $V_{\alpha\,\beta}\to V_\beta\otimes V_\alpha$; they are the analogues of up-pointing triangles. We only use the following:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=-1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[below left] {$1$} (-0.05,0) -- node[right] {$01$} ++(0,-1);
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[below right] {$0$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=270,scale=1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[above left] {$2$} (-0.05,0) -- node[above] {$12$} ++(0,-1);
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[below left] {$1$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[below left] {$3$} (-0.05,0) -- node[left] {$23$} ++(0,-1);
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[below right] {$2$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90,scale=1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[below right] {$0$} (-0.05,0) -- node[below] {$30$} ++(0,-1);
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[above right] {$3$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\item Trivalent vertices that correspond to linear maps $V_\alpha\otimes V_\beta\to V_{\alpha\beta}$;
they are the analogue of down-pointing triangles. Similarly, we use the following:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw[arrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[below left] {$1$} (-0.05,0) -- node[left] {$01$} ++(0,-1);
\draw[arrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[below right] {$0$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90,scale=1.2]
\draw[arrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[below right] {$2$} (-0.05,0) -- node[below] {12} ++(0,-1);
\draw[arrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[above right] {$1$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=-1,baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw[arrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[below left] {$3$} (-0.05,0) -- node[right] {23} ++(0,-1);
\draw[arrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[below right] {$2$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=270,scale=1.2]
\draw[arrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[above left] {$0$} (-0.05,0) -- node[above] {30} ++(0,-1);
\draw[arrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[below left] {$3$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\item Elements in $V_A\otimes V_{\bar A}$, where $\bar A$ is the complement of $A$ in $\{0,1,2,3\}$, which we only
use for $|A|=|\bar A|=2$:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90,scale=1.2]
\draw (-0.5,-0.05) -- (0.5,-0.05) (-0.5,0.05) -- node[left,pos=0.25] {$01$} node[left,pos=0.75] {$23$} (0.5,0.05);
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.35 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (-0.5,0) -- (0.5,0) };
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.8 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (-0.5,0) -- (0.5,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw (0,-0.05) -- (1,-0.05) (0,0.05) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {$12$} node[above,pos=0.75] {$30$} (1,0.05);
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.35 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- (1,0) };
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.8 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- (1,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\item Their inverses $V_A\otimes V_{\bar A}\to\mathbb \CC$:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90,scale=1.2]
\draw (-0.5,-0.05) -- (0.5,-0.05) (-0.5,0.05) -- node[left,pos=0.25] {$23$} node[left,pos=0.75] {$01$} (0.5,0.05);
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.35 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (-0.5,0) -- (0.5,0) };
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.8 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (-0.5,0) -- (0.5,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\qquad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw (0,-0.05) -- (1,-0.05) (0,0.05) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {$30$} node[above,pos=0.75] {$12$} (1,0.05);
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.35 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- (1,0) };
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.8 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- (1,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\end{itemize}
\begin{ex*}
The labelling around a vertex $V_{01}\to V_1\otimes V_0$ is given by
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=-1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (150:1) -- node[below left] {$1$} (-0.05,0) -- node[right] {$01$} ++(0,-1);
\draw[invarrow=0.25] (30:1) -- node[below right] {$0$} (0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\quad
\mapsto
\quad
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=-1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.45] (150:1) --
node[above,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{0,1}$}
node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{2,1}$}
node[below,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{3,1}$}
(-0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw[invarrow=0.45] (30:1) --
node[above,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,0}$}
node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{2,0}$}
node[below,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{3,0}$}
(0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\path (0,0) -- node[above] {$\ss a'_{2,0}\ a'_{2,1}$}
node {$\ss a'_{3,0}\ a'_{3,1}$} ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
Note that the four labels of the double line also appear on the other edges. This does not mean that they
are equal!
When there is a risk of confusion, we shall use primes or superscripts to distinguish identically named labels of different edges.
\end{ex*}
The {\em weight}\/ of a label (or of its corresponding basis vector) is equal to $\sum a_{\alpha,\beta}(e_\alpha-e_\beta)$, where
$e_0,\ldots,e_3$ form a basis of $\RR^4$ (note that the $e_\alpha-e_\beta$ are nothing but the roots of $\mathfrak{sl}(4)$).
A major difference with the $\mathfrak{sl}_3$ setup is that
the weight of a label is not enough to reconstruct the label in the case $|A|=2$ (in other words, some
weight spaces have dimension greater than $1$).
We must now assign fugacities to these vertices. All our fugacities will be $\ZZ_4$-invariant, in the sense
that shifting all indices $\alpha\in \{0,1,2,3\}$ by $1\pmod4$ will leave them invariant. We also have weight
conservation: the fugacity will be zero unless the sum of weights of incoming edges is equal to the
sum of weights of outgoing edges.
The duality pairings are easy to define.
Note that labels of $V_A$ and of $V_{\bar A}$ correspond bijectively via $a_{\beta,\alpha}\leftrightarrow a_{\alpha,\beta}$,
and that their weights are negatives of each other. The rule is that these labels must match, and then the fugacity
is given by $\prod_{\alpha\in A,\beta\not\in A} \a_{a_{\alpha,\beta}}^\pm$ where the sign is $+$ (resp.\ $-$) for incoming (resp.\ outgoing) arrows:
\begin{align}\label{eq:defdual}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw (0,-0.05) -- (1,-0.05) (0,0.05) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {12} node[above,pos=0.75] {30} (1,0.05);
\node at (-0.4,0.3) {$\ss a_{1,0}$};
\node at (-0.4,0.1) {$\ss a_{2,0}$};
\node at (-0.4,-0.1) {$\ss a_{1,3}$};
\node at (-0.4,-0.3) {$\ss a_{2,3}$};
\node at (1.4,0.3) {$\ss a_{0,1}$};
\node at (1.4,0.1) {$\ss a_{0,2}$};
\node at (1.4,-0.1) {$\ss a_{3,1}$};
\node at (1.4,-0.3) {$\ss a_{3,2}$};
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.35 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}},mark = at position 0.8 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- (1,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
&=\prod_{\alpha=3,0,\beta=1,2} \delta_{a_{\alpha,\beta},a_{\beta,\alpha}}\a_{a_{\alpha,\beta}}
\\\label{eq:defdualb}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw (0,-0.05) -- (1,-0.05) (0,0.05) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {$30$} node[above,pos=0.75] {$12$} (1,0.05);
\draw decorate[thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.35 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}},mark = at position 0.8 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- (1,0) };
\node at (1.4,0.3) {$\ss a_{1,0}$};
\node at (1.4,0.1) {$\ss a_{2,0}$};
\node at (1.4,-0.1) {$\ss a_{1,3}$};
\node at (1.4,-0.3) {$\ss a_{2,3}$};
\node at (-0.4,0.3) {$\ss a_{0,1}$};
\node at (-0.4,0.1) {$\ss a_{0,2}$};
\node at (-0.4,-0.1) {$\ss a_{3,1}$};
\node at (-0.4,-0.3) {$\ss a_{3,2}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
&=\prod_{\alpha=3,0,\beta=1,2} \delta_{a_{\alpha,\beta},a_{\beta,\alpha}}\a_{a_{\alpha,\beta}}^{-1}
\end{align}
and similarly for $01/23$.
In other words,
via the identification $V_{\bar A}\cong \bar V_A$, our bases are dual of each other up to normalization.
The ``down-pointing'' maps $V_{\alpha}\otimes V_{\alpha+1}\to V_{\alpha\,\alpha+1}$ are equally simple.
Once again labels naturally come in pairs whose contribution to the weight cancels, and the rule is that
these labels must match.
Let us for example take $\alpha=2$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defDD}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=-1.2]
\draw[arrow=0.45] (150:1) --
node[below,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{2,3}$}
node[above,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{0,3}$}
node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,3}$}
(-0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw[arrow=0.45] (30:1) --
node[below,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{3,2}$}
node[above,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{0,2}$}
node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,2}$}
(0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\path (0,0) -- node[above] {$\ss a'_{0,2}\ a'_{0,3}$}
node {$\ss a'_{1,2}\ a'_{1,3}$} ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\delta_{a_{0,2},a'_{0,2}}
\delta_{a_{1,2},a'_{1,2}}
\delta_{a_{0,3},a'_{0,3}}
\delta_{a_{1,3},a'_{1,3}}
\delta_{a_{2,3},a_{3,2}}
t^{a_{1,3}a_{0,2}/2}\a_{a_{2,3}}
\end{equation}
One pairs each primed label with its corresponding unprimed label, and $a_{2,3}$ with $a_{3,2}$.
The only nontrivial feature is a power of $t^{1/2}$, a formal variable squaring to $t$.
The definition is extended to other cases by $\ZZ_4$-symmetry.
Finally, the ``up-pointing'' maps $V_{\alpha\,\alpha+1}\to V_{\alpha+1}\otimes V_{\alpha}$ are defined as follows, again choosing
$\alpha=2$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:defUU}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.45] (150:1) --
node[above,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{0,3}$}
node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,3}$}
node[below,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{2,3}$}
(-0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\draw[invarrow=0.45] (30:1) --
node[above,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{0,2}$}
node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,2}$}
node[below,pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{3,2}$}
(0.05,0) -- ++(0,-1);
\path (0,0) -- node {$\ss a'_{0,3}\ a'_{0,2}$}
node[below] {$\ss a'_{1,3}\ a'_{1,2}$} ++(0,-1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0) -- ++(0,-1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\begin{cases}
t^{a'_{1,3}a'_{0,2}/2}
\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a'_{1,3}}\a_{b}
&\text{if weight is conserved}
\\
\qquad u^{a'_{0,2},a'_{0,3},a_{3,2},a_{0,2},a_{0,3},b}u^{a'_{1,3},a'_{1,2},a_{2,3},a_{1,3},a_{1,2},b}\hspace{-1cm}
\\
0&\text{else}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $u^{\ldots}$ is the terminating basic hypergeometric series defined in \eqref{eq:defy},
and $b=a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}=a_{2,3}+a_{1,3}-a'_{1,3}$ (the latter equality coming from weight conservation).
Weight conservation also implies that the arguments of $u^{\ldots}$ satisfy the balance condition.
Once again, one can interpret all these maps as intertwiners for certain $\mathcal U_{t^{1/2}}(\mathfrak{sl}_4)$ parabolic Verma modules (namely, $V_A$ has highest weight $s\sum_{\alpha\in A}e_\alpha$) in the limit $t^s\to 0$.
\subsection{Double puzzles}
We are ready to introduce the main actor of the proof of associativity, which we call
{\em double puzzles}. They are obtained by gluing to the bottom side of a puzzle, another puzzle
upside down. We define, as in Section~\ref{sec:3d}, two versions corresponding to either
side of the associativity equation \eqref{eq:assoc}:
\begin{align}\label{eq:defLHS}
\mathcal L
&=
\begin{tikzpicture}[yscale=0.75,xscale=1.05,baseline=0]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (a) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{2,3}}=m_{0}(\lambda)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{1,3}}={\color{myblue}a_{0,3}}=0$} -- node[above] {$3$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[left=-1mm,pos=0.25] {$23$}
node[left=-1mm,pos=0.75] {$01$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[below] {$0$} ++(225:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{3,0}}=m_{0}(\rho)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{2,0}}={\color{mygreen}a_{1,0}}=0$};
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (b) -- node[above] {$2$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[below] {$1$} ++(-45:1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\begin{scope}[shift={(0:5)}]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (a) -- node[above] {$3$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[left=-1mm,pos=0.25] {$23$}
node[left=-1mm,pos=0.75] {$01$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[below] {$0$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (b) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{1,2}}=m_{n-1}(\mu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{0,2}}={\color{mygreen}a_{3,2}}=0$} -- node[above] {$2$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[below] {$1$} ++(-45:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{0,1}}=m_{0}(\nu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{3,1}}={\color{myblue}a_{2,1}}=0$};
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\end{scope}
\node[rotate=45] at (60:2.25) {$\cdots$};
\path (60:2.25) ++(0:2.75) node[rotate=-45] {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(60:5)}]
\draw[arrow=0.75] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[right=-1mm] {$23$} ++(0,1) -- node[above] {$2$} ++(45:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{1,2}}=m_{0}(\mu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{0,2}}={\color{mygreen}a_{3,2}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[below] {$3$} ++(-45:1) -- node[left=-1mm] {$23$} ++(270:1) ++(0.05,0) coordinate(a) ++(0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[above] {$2$} ++(45:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{1,2}}=m_{1}(\mu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{0,2}}={\color{mygreen}a_{3,2}}=0$};
\draw[arrow=0.75] (-0.05,-0.5) -- ++(0,1) -- node[above] {$3$} ++(135:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{2,3}}=m_{n-1}(\lambda)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{1,3}}={\color{myblue}a_{0,3}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[below] {$2$} ++(225:1) -- node[right=-1mm] {$23$} ++(270:1) ++(-0.05,0) coordinate(b) ++(-0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[above] {$3$} ++(135:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{2,3}}=m_{n-2}(\lambda)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{1,3}}={\color{myblue}a_{0,3}}=0$};
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0.5) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (a) -- ++(0,1) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (b) -- ++(0,1) };
\end{scope}
\node at (0:2.5) {$\cdots$};
\node[rotate=-45] at (-60:2.25) {$\cdots$};
\path (-60:2.25) ++(0:2.75) node[rotate=45] {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(-60:5)},scale=-1]
\draw[arrow=0.75] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[left=-1mm] {$01$} ++(0,1) -- node[below] {$0$} ++(45:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{3,0}}=m_{n-1}(\rho)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{2,0}}={\color{mygreen}a_{1,0}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above] {$1$} ++(-45:1) -- node[right=-1mm] {$01$} ++(270:1) ++(0.05,0) coordinate (a) ++(0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[below] {$0$} ++(45:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{3,0}}=m_{n-2}(\rho)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{2,0}}={\color{mygreen}a_{1,0}}=0$};
\draw[arrow=0.75] (-0.05,-0.5) -- ++(0,1) -- node[below] {$1$} ++(135:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{0,1}}=m_{n-1}(\nu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{3,1}}={\color{myblue}a_{2,1}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[above] {$0$} ++(225:1) -- node[left=-1mm] {$01$} ++(270:1) ++(-0.05,0) coordinate (b) ++(-0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[below] {$1$} ++(135:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{0,1}}=m_{n-2}(\nu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{3,1}}={\color{myblue}a_{2,1}}=0$};
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0.5) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (a) -- ++(0,1) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (b) -- ++(0,1) };
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\\\label{eq:defRHS}
\mathcal R
&=
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=2.5cm,rotate=90,yscale=0.75,xscale=1.05]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (a) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{3,0}}=m_{n-1}(\rho)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{2,0}}={\color{myblue}a_{1,0}}=0$} -- node[left] {$0$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {$30$}
node[below=-1mm,pos=0.75] {$12$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[right] {$1$} ++(225:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{0,1}}=m_{n-1}(\nu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{3,1}}={\color{mygreen}a_{2,1}}=0$};
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (b) -- node[left] {$3$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[right] {$2$} ++(-45:1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\begin{scope}[shift={(0:5)}]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (a) -- node[left] {$0$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {$30$}
node[below=-1mm,pos=0.75] {$12$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[right] {$1$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (b) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{2,3}}=m_{n-1}(\lambda)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{1,3}}={\color{mygreen}a_{0,3}}=0$} -- node[left] {$3$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[right] {$2$} ++(-45:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{1,2}}=m_{0}(\mu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{0,2}}={\color{myblue}a_{3,2}}=0$};
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\end{scope}
\node[rotate=-45] at (60:2.25) {$\cdots$};
\path (60:2.25) ++(0:2.75) node[rotate=45] {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(60:5)}]
\draw[arrow=0.75] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above=-1mm] {$30$} ++(0,1) -- node[left] {$3$} ++(45:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{2,3}}=m_{0}(\lambda)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{1,3}}={\color{mygreen}a_{0,3}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[right] {$0$} ++(-45:1) -- node[above] {$30$} ++(270:1) ++(0.05,0) coordinate(a) ++(0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[left] {$3$} ++(45:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{2,3}}=m_{1}(\lambda)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{1,3}}={\color{mygreen}a_{0,3}}=0$};
\draw[arrow=0.75] (-0.05,-0.5) -- ++(0,1) -- node[left] {$0$} ++(135:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{3,0}}=m_{0}(\rho)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{2,0}}={\color{myblue}a_{1,0}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[right] {$3$} ++(225:1) -- node[above=-1mm] {$30$} ++(270:1) ++(-0.05,0) coordinate(b) ++(-0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[right] {$0$} ++(135:1) node[left=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{3,0}}=m_{1}(\rho)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{2,0}}={\color{myblue}a_{1,0}}=0$};
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0.5) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (a) -- ++(0,1) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (b) -- ++(0,1) };
\end{scope}
\node at (0:2.5) {$\vdots$};
\node[rotate=45] at (-60:2.25) {$\cdots$};
\path (-60:2.25) ++(0:2.75) node[rotate=-45] {$\cdots$};
\begin{scope}[shift={(-60:5)},scale=-1]
\draw[arrow=0.75] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above] {$12$} ++(0,1) -- node[right] {$1$} ++(45:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{0,1}}=m_{0}(\nu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{3,1}}={\color{mygreen}a_{2,1}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (0.05,-0.5) -- node[left] {$2$} ++(-45:1) -- node[above=-1mm] {$12$} ++(270:1) ++(0.05,0) coordinate (a) ++(0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[right] {$1$} ++(45:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{0,1}}=m_{1}(\nu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{myblue}a_{3,1}}={\color{mygreen}a_{2,1}}=0$};
\draw[arrow=0.75] (-0.05,-0.5) -- ++(0,1) -- node[right] {$2$} ++(135:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{1,2}}=m_{n-1}(\mu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{0,2}}={\color{myblue}a_{3,2}}=0$};
\draw[invarrow=0.15,arrow=0.9] (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[left] {$1$} ++(225:1) -- node[above] {$12$} ++(270:1) ++(-0.05,0) coordinate (b) ++(-0.05,0) -- ++(90:1) -- node[right] {$2$} ++(135:1) node[right=-1mm,align=center] {$\ss {\color{myred}a_{1,2}}=m_{n-2}(\mu)$\\[-3mm]$\ss {\color{mygreen}a_{0,2}}={\color{myblue}a_{3,2}}=0$};
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0.5) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (a) -- ++(0,1) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (b) -- ++(0,1) };
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{align}
We have also colored the labels to ease identification with the results of Section~\ref{sec:bosonic}.
\begin{prop}\label{prop:doublepuzzle}
One has:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal L&=h_\rho\sum_{\sigma\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\mu}_\sigma c^{\sigma,\nu}_{\rho}
\\
\mathcal R&=h_\rho\sum_{\tau\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\tau}_{\rho}c^{\mu,\nu}_\tau
\end{align*}
\end{prop}
For more explicit diagrams in size $n=3$, see Appendix~\ref{app:assoc}.
\begin{proof}
We first analyze each half of the double puzzle $\mathcal L$. They have exactly the same structure
as the puzzle \eqref{eq:c} in Lemma~\ref{lem:c}, except that the labeling of the vertices is in principle more complicated,
and the fugacities are not obviously the same. We proceed in steps.
We consider the top half of $\mathcal L$. Note that every label $a_{\alpha,\beta}$ on its NorthWest and
NorthEast boundaries for which $\alpha=0$ are zero ($\beta=0$ never arises). Therefore, applying weight conservation
at every vertex on these boundaries, we conclude that the labels on the other side of these vertices satisfy
the same property. By induction this is true throughout the top half of $\mathcal L$.
Denote $i=a_{1,2}$, $j=a_{3,2}$ for edges of type $2$,
$i'=a_{2,3}$, $j'=a_{1,3}$ for edges of type $3$, and $i''=a_{1,3}$, $j''=a_{1,2}$ for edges of type $23$.
This way the labelling becomes identical to the one of \eqref{eq:vertices}, and one easily checks that
the $\mathfrak{sl}_4$ weight conservation reduces to the $\mathfrak{sl}_3$ weight conservation, itself
equivalent to the balance condition of honeycombs.
Next we compare fugacities: this amounts to setting all labels involving the index $0$ to zero in the
definitions \eqref{eq:defUU} and \eqref{eq:defDD}, as well as the correspondence of notations
of the previous paragraph. One easily checks that they indeed reduce to the definitions \eqref{eq:defU} and
\eqref{eq:defD}, using $u^{0,0,a_{3,2},0,0,a_{3,2}}=\a_{a_{3,2}}^{-1}$ and Lemma~\ref{lem:D6}.
Now let us analyze what happens at the bottom of that top half. There is a series of $n$ edges of type $23$,
whose nonzero labels are $a_{1,2}$, $a_{1,3}$, which we denote
$j''_r$ and $i''_r$ respectively, $r=0,\ldots,n-1$.
By summing weight conservation at every vertex of the top half, we obtain the ``global'' conservation equation
\[
\sum_{r=0}^{n-1}m_r(\lambda)(e_2-e_3)+\sum_{r=0}^{n-1}m_r(\mu)(e_1-e_2)=
\sum_{r=0}^{n-1}(j''_r(e_1-e_2)+i''_r(e_1-e_3))
\]
Recalling that all our partitions satisfy $\sum_{r=0}^{n-1}m_r(\lambda)=k$, we
have
\[
k(e_1-e_3)=\sum_{r=0}^{n-1}(j''_r(e_1-e_2)+i''_r(e_1-e_3))
\]
from which we immediately derive $j''_r=0$ for all $r$, as well as $\sum_{r=0}^{n-1} i''_r=k$. Therefore, we can
write $i''_r=m_r(\sigma)$ for some partition $\sigma$ in $\P_{k,n}$.
Comparing with \eqref{eq:c}, we conclude that at fixed labels $i''_r$ at the bottom, the top half
of $\mathcal L$ reproduces exactly the tensor entry of Lemma~\ref{lem:c} and is therefore equal to
$c^{\lambda,\mu}_\sigma$.
The exact same reasoning can be repeated for the bottom half, noting that it is obtained from the top half
by the following procedure: rotate 180 degrees, increase all indices by $2$ mod $4$, replace $\lambda$
with $\nu$, $\mu$ with $\rho^*$ and $\sigma$ with some as yet unknown other partition
$\bar\sigma$, defined by $\bar i''_r=m_r(\bar\sigma)$, $r=0,\ldots,n-1$,
where the $\bar i''_r$ are the $a_{3,1}$ labels at the top of the bottom half,
numbered from right to left.
Therefore, the bottom half of $\mathcal L$ contributes $c^{\nu,\rho^*}_{\bar\sigma}$.
Finally, we need to perform the summation over the $i''_r$, i.e., over $\sigma\in \P_{k,n}$.
According to \eqref{eq:defdualb}, the contribution is nonzero only if $i''_r=\bar i''_{n-1-r}$, so that $\bar\sigma=\sigma^*$,
and equal to $\prod_{r=0}^{n-1} \a_{m_r(\sigma)}^{-1}=h_\sigma^{-1}$, cf \eqref{eq:defh}.
We conclude that
\begin{align*}
\mathcal L&=\sum_{\sigma\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\mu}_\sigma h_\sigma^{-1} c^{\nu,\rho^*}_{\sigma^*}
\\
&=\sum_{\sigma\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\mu}_\sigma c^{\nu,\rho^*,\sigma}
&&\text{by Prop.~\ref{prop:Z3} (a)}
\\
&=\sum_{\sigma\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\mu}_\sigma c^{\sigma,\nu,\rho^*}
&&\text{by Prop.~\ref{prop:Z3} (b)}
\\
&=h_\rho\sum_{\sigma\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\mu}_\sigma c^{\sigma,\nu}_{\rho}
&&\text{by Prop.~\ref{prop:Z3} (a)}
\end{align*}
We proceed identically with $\mathcal R$. In fact, $\mathcal R$ is obtained from $\mathcal L$
by increasing the numbering
of all spaces by $1$ mod $4$ and by shifting cyclically all labels by 90 degrees (and conventionally
rotating the diagram back 90 degrees), so we obtain in exactly the same way
\begin{align*}
\mathcal R&=\sum_{\tau\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\rho^*,\lambda}_{\tau^*} h_\tau^{-1} c^{\mu,\nu}_\tau
\\
&=h_\rho\sum_{\tau\in \P_{k,n}} c^{\lambda,\tau}_{\rho} c^{\mu,\nu}_\tau &&\text{by $3\times$ Prop.~\ref{prop:Z3}}
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
In conclusion, in order to prove Prop.~\ref{prop:assoc} (associativity), all we need is to go from
\eqref{eq:defLHS} to \eqref{eq:defRHS} by means of three identities
corresponding in the dual picture to the tetrahedron, octahedron and dual tetrahedron moves of Section~\ref{sec:3d}.
We prove such identities now, in increasing order of complexity.
All our proofs have in common with that of Prop.~\ref{prop:doublepuzzle} that l.h.s.\ and r.h.s.\ are related
by the $\ZZ_4$ action generated by
90 degree rotation and shifting the numbering of all spaces and labels by $1$.
This implies that we only
need to analyze say the l.h.s.\ and prove its $\ZZ_4$-invariance.
\subsection{The dual tetrahedron identity}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:dualtetra}
The following identity holds in $\bar V_0\otimes \bar V_1\otimes \bar V_2\otimes \bar V_3$:
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90,scale=1.2]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[arrow=0.167,invarrow=0.833] (a) -- node[below right] {$2$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[below,pos=0.25] {$12$}
node[below,pos=0.75] {$30$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[below left] {$3$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[arrow=0.167,invarrow=0.833] (b) -- node[above right] {$1$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above left] {$0$} ++(-45:1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[arrow=0.167,invarrow=0.833] (a) -- node[below left] {$1$} (-0.05,0.5) -- (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[above left] {$2$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[arrow=0.167,invarrow=0.833] (b) -- node[below right] {$0$} (0.05,0.5) -- node[right,pos=0.25] {$01$}
node[right,pos=0.75] {$23$} (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above right] {$3$} ++(-45:1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We write out an entry of the l.h.s.\ explicitly:
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90,scale=1.2]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[arrow=0.3,invarrow=0.7] (a) -- node[pos=0.45,above] {$\ss a_{0,2}$} node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,2}$} node[pos=0.45,below] {$\ss a_{3,2}$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[pos=0.25,below=-0.5mm] {$\ss a'_{02}$} node[pos=0.25,below=2.5mm] {$\ss a'_{32}$}
node[below=-0.5mm,pos=0.75] {$\ss a'_{13}$} node[below=2.5mm,pos=0.75] {$\ss a'_{23}$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[pos=0.65,above] {$\ss a_{0,3}$} node[pos=0.65] {$\ss a_{1,3}$} node[pos=0.65,below] {$\ss a_{2,3}$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[arrow=0.3,invarrow=0.7] (b) -- node[pos=0.45,above] {$\ss a_{0,1}$} node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{2,1}$} node[pos=0.45,below] {$\ss a_{3,1}$} (0.05,0.5) -- node[pos=0.25,above=2.5mm] {$\ss a'_{01}$} node[pos=0.25,above=-0.5mm] {$\ss a'_{31}$} node[pos=0.75,above=2.5mm] {$\ss a'_{10}$} node[pos=0.75,above=-0.5mm] {$\ss a'_{20}$} (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above,pos=0.65] {$\ss a_{1,0}$} node[pos=0.65] {$\ss a_{2,0}$} node[pos=0.65,below] {$\ss a_{3,0}$} ++(-45:1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
According to \eqref{eq:defdual} and \eqref{eq:defDD}, this entry is nonzero only if
\begin{align*}
a_{0,1}&=a'_{0,1}=a'_{1,0}=a_{1,0}
\\
a_{3,1}&=a'_{3,1}=a'_{1,3}=a_{1,3}
\\
a_{0,2}&=a'_{0,2}=a'_{2,0}=a_{2,0}
\\
a_{3,2}&=a'_{3,2}=a'_{2,3}=a_{2,3}
\\
a_{2,1}&=a_{1,2}
\\
a_{3,0}&=a_{0,3}
\end{align*}
in which case it is equal to
\[
\a_{a_{0,1}}\a_{a_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,2}}\a_{a_{0,3}}\a_{a_{1,3}}\a_{a_{2,3}}
\]
The interpretation is obvious: the 12 external labels come in pairs of opposite weight, and they should be made equal,
in which case the fugacity is the product over each pair $a_{\alpha,\beta}=a_{\beta,\alpha}$ of $\a_{a_{\alpha,\beta}}$. In particular this expression
is manifestly $\ZZ_4$-invariant.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The octahedron identity}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:octa}
The following identity holds in $V_{30}\otimes V_{23}\otimes V_{12}\otimes V_{01}$:
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw[arrow=0.5] (-2,-0.05) -- (-1,-0.05) -- node[below left] {$1$} (-0.05,-1) -- node[left] {$01$} (-0.05,-2);
\draw[arrow=0.5] (2,0.05) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {$12$} node[above,pos=0.75] {$30$} (1,0.05) -- node[above right] {$3$} (0.05,1) -- node[right] {$23$} (0.05,2);
\draw[arrow=0.5] (-2,0.05) -- node[above,pos=0.25] {$30$} node[above,pos=0.75] {$12$} (-1,0.05) -- node[above left] {$2$} (-0.05,1) -- (-0.05,2);
\draw[arrow=0.5] (2,-0.05) -- (1,-0.05) -- node[below right] {$0$} (0.05,-1) -- (0.05,-2);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}},mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (-2,0) -- (-1,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}},mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (2,0) -- (1,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-2) -- (0,-1) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,2) -- (0,1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw[invarrow=0.5] (-2,-0.05) --(-1,-0.05) -- node[below left] {$3$} (-0.05,-1) -- node[left,pos=0.25] {$23$} node[left,pos=0.75] {$01$} (-0.05,-2);
\draw[invarrow=0.5] (2,0.05) -- node[above] {$12$} (1,0.05) -- node[above right] {$1$} (0.05,1) -- node[right,pos=0.25] {$01$} node[right,pos=0.75] {$23$} (0.05,2);
\draw[invarrow=0.5] (-2,0.05) -- node[above] {$30$} (-1,0.05) -- node[above left] {$0$} (-0.05,1) -- (-0.05,2);
\draw[invarrow=0.5] (2,-0.05) -- (1,-0.05) -- node[below right] {$2$} (0.05,-1) -- (0.05,-2);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (-2,0) -- (-1,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.5 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (2,0) -- (1,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}},mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,-2) -- (0,-1) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}},mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (0,2) -- (0,1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Again, we look at the l.h.s.:
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\draw[arrow=0.35] (-2,-0.05) -- node[pos=0.25,below=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^W_{1,0}$} node[pos=0.25,below=3mm] {$\ss a^W_{1,3}$} node[pos=0.75,below=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^W_{0,1}$} node[pos=0.75,below=3mm] {$\ss a^W_{3,1}$} (-1,-0.05) -- node[above] {$\ss a_{0,1}$} node {$\ss a_{2,1}$} node[below] {$\ss a_{3,1}$} (-0.05,-1) -- (-0.05,-2);
\draw[arrow=0.35] (2,0.05) -- node[pos=0.25,above=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^E_{3,2}$} node[pos=0.25,above=3mm] {$\ss a^E_{3,1}$} node[pos=0.75,above=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^E_{2,3}$} node[pos=0.75,above=3mm] {$\ss a^E_{1,3}$} (1,0.05) -- node[above] {$\ss a_{0,3}$} node {$\ss a_{1,3}$} node[below] {$\ss a_{2,3}$} (0.05,1) -- (0.05,2);
\draw[arrow=0.35] (-2,0.05) -- node[pos=0.25,above=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^W_{2,3}$} node[pos=0.25,above=3mm] {$\ss a^W_{2,0}$} node[pos=0.75,above=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^W_{3,2}$} node[pos=0.75,above=3mm] {$\ss a^W_{0,2}$} (-1,0.05) -- node[above] {$\ss a_{0,2}$} node {$\ss a_{1,2}$} node[below] {$\ss a_{3,2}$} (-0.05,1) -- (-0.05,2);
\draw[arrow=0.35] (2,-0.05) -- node[pos=0.25,below=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^E_{0,1}$} node[pos=0.25,below=3mm] {$\ss a^E_{0,2}$} node[pos=0.75,below=-0.5mm] {$\ss a^E_{2,0}$} node[pos=0.75,below=3mm] {$\ss a^E_{1,0}$} (1,-0.05) -- node[above] {$\ss a_{1,0}$} node {$\ss a_{2,0}$} node[below] {$\ss a_{3,0}$} (0.05,-1) -- (0.05,-2);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}},mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (-2,0) -- (-1,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.25 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}},mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{>}}}] { (2,0) -- (1,0) };
\path decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-2) -- node {$\ss a^S_{2,1}\ a^S_{2,0}$} node[below=0.5mm] {$\ss a^S_{3,1}\ a^S_{3,0}$} (0,-1) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.75 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,2) -- node {$\ss a^N_{1,2}\ a^N_{1,3}$} node[above=0.5mm] {$\ss a^N_{0,2}\ a^N_{0,3}$} (0,1) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
In view of \eqref{eq:defdual} and \eqref{eq:defDD} (the latter being relevant to
South and North vertices), we have the following equalities
\begin{align*}
a_{2,0}^W&=a_{0,2}^W
&
a_{2,3}^W&=a_{3,2}^W
&
a_{1,0}^W&=a_{0,1}^W
&
a_{1,3}^W&=a_{3,1}^W
\\
a_{2,0}^E&=a_{0,2}^E
&
a_{2,3}^E&=a_{3,2}^E
&
a_{1,0}^E&=a_{0,1}^E
&
a_{1,3}^E&=a_{3,1}^E
\\
a_{0,2}^N&=a_{0,2}
&
a_{1,2}^N&=a_{1,2}
&
a_{0,3}^N&=a_{0,3}
&
a_{1,3}^N&=a_{1,3}
\\
a_{3,1}^S&=a_{3,1}
&
a_{2,0}^S&=a_{2,0}
&
a_{2,1}^S&=a_{2,1}
&
a_{3,0}^S&=a_{3,0}
\\
&&
a_{3,2}&=a_{2,3}
&
a_{0,1}&=a_{1,0}
\end{align*}
Weight conservation at the West and East vertices gives six more equalities:
\begin{align*}
a_{0,2}^W + a_{0,1}^W &= a_{0,2} + a_{01}\\
-a_{0,1}^W - a_{3,1}^W &=- a_{0,1} - a_{2,1} - a_{3,1} + a_{1,2}\\
-a_{0,2}^W - a_{3,2}^W &= -a_{0,2} - a_{1,2} - a_{3,2} + a_{2,1}\\
-a_{1,0}^E - a_{2,0}^E &= -a_{1,0} - a_{2,0} - a_{3,0} + a_{0,3}\\
a_{1,3}^E + a_{1,0}^E &= a_{1,3} + a_{1,0}\\
a_{2,3}^E + a_{2,0}^E &= a_{2,0} + a_{2,3}
\end{align*}
Solving them gives four constraints for the external labels:
\begin{align*}
a_{0,2}^E+a_{0,3}^N+a_{1,3}^N&=a_{3,1}^E+a_{2,0}^S+a_{3,0}^S
\\
a_{1,3}^N+a_{1,0}^W+a_{2,0}^W&=a_{0,2}^N+a_{3,1}^E+a_{0,1}^E
\\
a_{2,0}^W+a_{2,1}^S+a_{3,1}^S&=a_{1,3}^W+a_{0,2}^N+a_{1,2}^N
\\
a_{3,1}^S+a_{3,2}^E+a_{0,2}^E&=a_{2,0}^S+a_{1,3}^W+a_{2,3}^W
\end{align*}
which are manifestly $\ZZ_4$-invariant,
as well as fixes all the internal ones; the nontrivial ones are
\begin{align*}
a_{0,1}&=a_{1,0}=a_{1,0}^W+a_{2,0}^W-a_{0,2}^N
\\
a_{2,3}&=a_{3,2}=a_{3,2}^E+a_{0,2}^E-a_{2,0}^S
\end{align*}
Finally, the associated nonzero entry is
\begin{gather*}
(\a_{a_{2,0}^W}\a_{a_{2,3}^W}\a_{a_{1,0}^W}\a_{a_{1,3}^W}\a_{a_{3,1}^E}\a_{a_{3,2}^E}\a_{a_{0,1}^E}\a_{a_{0,2}^E}
)^{-1}
\\
t^{(a_{0,2}^N a_{1,3}^N+a_{2,0}^W a_{1,3}^W+a_{2,0}^S a_{3,1}^S+a_{3,1}^E a_{0,2}^E)/2}
\a_{a_{0,1}}\a_{a_{2,3}}
\\
\a_{a_{2,0}^W}\a_{a_{2,3}^W}\a_{a_{1,0}^W}\a_{a_{1,3}^W}
\a_{a_{2,1}^S+a_{3,1}^S-a_{1,3}^W}
\\
\a_{a_{3,1}^E}\a_{a_{3,2}^E}\a_{a_{0,1}^E}\a_{a_{0,2}^E}
\a_{a_{0,3}^N+a_{1,3}^N-a_{3,1}^E}
\\
u^{a_{3,1}^W,a_{3,2}^W,a_{2,1}^S,a_{3,1}^S,a_{3,2},a_{2,1}^S+a_{3,1}^S-a_{3,1}^W}
u^{a_{0,2}^W,a_{0,1}^W,a_{1,2}^N,a_{0,2}^N,a_{0,1},a_{2,1}^S+a_{3,1}^S-a_{3,1}^W}
\\
u^{a_{1,3}^E,a_{1,0}^E,a_{0,3}^N,a_{1,3}^N,a_{1,0},a_{0,3}^N+a_{1,3}^N-a_{1,3}^E}
u^{a_{2,0}^E,a_{2,3}^E,a_{3,0}^S,a_{2,0}^S,a_{2,3},a_{0,3}^N+a_{1,3}^N-a_{1,3}^E}
\end{gather*}
After simplifying, substituting $a_{0,1}=a_{1,0}$ and $a_{2,3}=a_{3,2}$ with their values, and applying
Lemma~\ref{lem:D6}, we obtain the $\ZZ_4$-invariant expression
\begin{gather*}
t^{(a_{0,2}^N a_{1,3}^N+a_{1,3}^W a_{2,0}^W+a_{2,0}^S a_{3,1}^S+a_{3,1}^E a_{0,2}^E)/2}
\\
\a_{a_{0,3}^N+a_{1,3}^N-a_{3,1}^E}
\a_{a_{1,0}^W+a_{2,0}^W-a_{0,2}^N}
\a_{a_{2,1}^S+a_{3,1}^S-a_{1,3}^W}
\a_{a_{3,2}^E+a_{0,2}^E-a_{2,0}^S}
\\
u^{a_{1,3}^W,a_{2,3}^W,a_{2,1}^S,a_{3,1}^S,a_{3,2}^E+a_{0,2}^E-a_{2,0}^S,a_{2,1}^S+a_{3,1}^S-a_{1,3}^W}
\\
u^{a_{2,0}^S,a_{3,0}^S,a_{3,2}^E,a_{0,2}^E,a_{0,3}^N+a_{1,3}^N-a_{3,1}^E,a_{3,2}^E+a_{0,2}^E-a_{2,0}^S}
\\
u^{a_{3,1}^E,a_{0,1}^E,a_{0,3}^N,a_{1,3}^N,a_{1,0}^W+a_{2,0}^W-a_{0,2}^N,a_{0,3}^N+a_{1,3}^N-a_{3,1}^E}
\\
u^{a_{0,2}^N,a_{1,2}^N,a_{1,0}^W,a_{2,0}^W,a_{2,1}^S+a_{3,1}^S-a_{1,3}^W,a_{1,0}^W+a_{2,0}^W-a_{0,2}^N}
\end{gather*}
which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The tetrahedron identity}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:tetra}
The following identity holds in $V_3\otimes V_2\otimes V_1\otimes V_0$:
\[
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (a) -- node[below left] {$3$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[left,pos=0.25] {$23$}
node[left,pos=0.75] {$01$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[above left] {$0$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (b) -- node[below right] {$2$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above right] {$1$} ++(-45:1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
=
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,rotate=90,scale=1.2]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (a) -- node[below right] {$0$} (-0.05,0.5) -- node[below,pos=0.25] {$30$}
node[below,pos=0.75] {$12$} (-0.05,-0.5) -- node[below left] {$1$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[invarrow=0.167,arrow=0.833] (b) -- node[above right] {$3$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[above left] {$2$} ++(-45:1);
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- (0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0.5) -- (0,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
\end{prop}
This is the only nontrivial identity, in the following sense: contrary to the diagrams of
Prop.~\ref{prop:dualtetra}
and \ref{prop:octa}, here the internal labels are not uniquely fixed by the external labels, so that a summation
has to be performed. It also means that this part of the proof of associativity is {\em not}\/
bijective: the number of configurations of the l.h.s.\ may differ from that of the r.h.s.\ (e.g.,
several configurations in the l.h.s.\ may correspond to a single configuration in the r.h.s.;
such a phenomenon will be exhibited in Appendix~\ref{app:assoc}).
\begin{proof}
Let us denote by $\mathcal T$ an entry of the l.h.s., multiplied by some prefactors for convenience:
\[
\mathcal T=\prod_{\alpha\ne \beta}\a_{a_{\alpha,\beta}}
\begin{tikzpicture}[baseline=-3pt,scale=1.2]
\path (0,0.5) ++(135:1) coordinate (a);
\draw[invarrow=0.29,arrow=0.73] (a) -- node[pos=0.45,above] {$\ss a_{0,3}$} node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,3}$} node[pos=0.45,below] {$\ss a_{2,3}$} (-0.05,0.5) --
(-0.05,-0.5) -- node[pos=0.55,above] {$\ss a_{1,0}$} node[pos=0.55] {$\ss a_{2,0}$} node[pos=0.55,below] {$\ss a_{3,0}$} ++(225:1);
\path (0,0.5) ++(45:1) coordinate (b);
\draw[invarrow=0.29,arrow=0.73] (b) -- node[pos=0.45,above] {$\ss a_{0,2}$} node[pos=0.45] {$\ss a_{1,2}$} node[pos=0.45,below] {$\ss a_{3,2}$} (0.05,0.5) -- (0.05,-0.5) -- node[pos=0.55,above] {$\ss a_{0,1}$} node[pos=0.55] {$\ss a_{2,1}$} node[pos=0.55,below] {$\ss a_{3,1}$} ++(-45:1);
\path decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,-0.5) -- node[pos=0.7] {$\ss a'_{3,0}\quad a'_{2,0}$} node[below,pos=0.7] {$\ss a'_{3,1}\quad a'_{2,1}$}(0,0) };
\draw decorate [thin,decoration={markings,mark = at position 0.6 with {\arrow[scale=2]{<}}}] { (0,0.5) -- node[above,pos=0.7] {$\ss a'_{0,3}\quad a'_{0,2}$} node[pos=0.7] {$\ss a'_{1,3}\quad a'_{1,2}$} (0,0) };
\end{tikzpicture}
\]
It is a function of the 12 external labels $a_{\alpha,\beta}$, $\alpha,\beta=0,\ldots,3$, $\alpha\ne \beta$. Weight conservation at each vertex
and \eqref{eq:defdualb} imply the following equalities:
\begin{itemize}
\item The trivial equalities
$a'_{0,3}=a'_{3,0}$, $a'_{1,3}=a'_{3,1}$, $a'_{0,2}=a'_{2,0}$, $a'_{1,2}=a'_{2,1}$ coming from the pairing, cf \eqref{eq:defdualb}.
\item
The vanishing of the sum of weights of all external labels; this is the same for l.h.s.\ and r.h.s., and therefore
$\ZZ_4$-invariant.
\item Three relations involving the internal labels, namely:
\begin{align}\label{eq:subst}\notag
a'_{0,3}&=a_{0,2}+a_{0,3}-a'_{0,2}
\\
a'_{1,3}&=a_{1,3}-(a_{0,2}+a_{3,2}-a_{2,3})+a'_{0,2}
\\\notag
a'_{1,2}&=a_{2,0}+a_{2,1}-a'_{0,2}
\end{align}
so that there remains one free parameter among the internal labels, here chosen to be $a'_{0,2}$.
\end{itemize}
The resulting entry is therefore a sum:
\begin{align*}
\mathcal T=&\prod_{\alpha\ne \beta} \a_{a_{\alpha,\beta}} \sum_{a'_{0,2}\ge 0} t^{a'_{0,2}a'_{1,3}}
\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a'_{1,3}}\a_{a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}}
\\
&u^{a'_{0,2},a'_{0,3},a_{3,2},a_{0,2},a_{0,3},a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}u^{a'_{1,3},a'_{1,2},a_{2,3},a_{1,3},a_{1,2},a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}
\\
&u^{a'_{0,2},a'_{1,2},a_{1,0},a_{2,0},a_{2,1},a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}}u^{a'_{1,3},a'_{0,3},a_{0,1},a_{3,1},a_{3,0},a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}}
\end{align*}
where for compactness we have not performed the substitution \eqref{eq:subst} yet.
Our strategy will be as follows: we shall show that $\mathcal T$ satisfies a set of $\ZZ_4$-invariant
relations which allows to reduce the identity to a special case for which we can show directly
that l.h.s.\ and r.h.s.\ agree.
We use the redefinition \eqref{eq:defu}:
\begin{align}\label{eq:T}
\mathcal T=&\sum_{a'_{0,2}\ge 0} t^{a'_{0,2}a'_{1,3}}
(\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a'_{1,3}}\a_{a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}})^{-1}
\\\notag
&u_{a'_{0,2},a'_{0,3},a_{3,2},a_{0,2},a_{0,3},a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}u_{a'_{1,3},a'_{1,2},a_{2,3},a_{1,3},a_{1,2},a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}
\\\notag
&u_{a'_{0,2},a'_{1,2},a_{1,0},a_{2,0},a_{2,1},a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}}u_{a'_{1,3},a'_{0,3},a_{0,1},a_{3,1},a_{3,0},a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}}
\end{align}
\newcommand\T[1]{{\mathcal T}_{#1}}
Let us introduce the shorthand notation where we put in subscript substituted variables; e.g.,
$\T{a_{2,3}+1}$ stands for $\mathcal T$ in which $a_{2,3}$ has been
substituted with $a_{2,3}+1$, or $u_{i+1,i''+1}=u_{j,i+1,j',i',j'',i''+1}$.
Also denote $u^{(1)},\ldots,u^{(4)}$ for the four $u$ factors in \eqref{eq:T}.
We shall start from the following recurrence relation satisfied by $u_{\ldots}$, following directly from its definition:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:recu}
u_{i''+1}
=t^{i}(1-t^{j'})u_{j'-1}
+(1-t^{i})u_{j+1,i-1}
\end{equation}
(for all nonnegative integer values of the arguments)
as well as all other relations obtained from it by dihedral symmetry, cf Lemma~\ref{lem:D6}.
Apply the reflected version $u_{j''+1}=t^{j'}(1-t^i)u_{i-1}+(1-t^{j'})u_{i'+1,j'-1}$ of \eqref{eq:recu} to $u^{(1)}$:
\begin{align*}
\T{a_{0,3}+1}
=&
\sum_{a'_{0,2}\ge 0} t^{a'_{0,2}a'_{1,3}}
(\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}+1}\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a'_{1,3}}\a_{a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}})^{-1}
\\
&\left(
t^{a_{3,2}}(1-t^{a'_{0,3}})u^{(1)}
+
(1-t^{a_{3,2}})u^{(1)}_{a_{3,2}-1,a_{0,2}+1}
\right)
u^{(2)}u^{(3)}u^{(4)}_{a'_{0,3}+1}
\end{align*}
where the shift of $a'_{0,3}$ is due to \eqref{eq:subst}.
The second term in the parentheses contributes precisely $(1-t^{a_{3,2}})\T{a_{3,2}-1,a_{0,2}+1}$,
but the first term is unwanted.
Now apply $u_{i+1}=t^{i'}(1-t^{j''})u_{j''-1}+(1-t^{i'})u_{j'+1,i'-1}$ to $u^{(4)}$:
\begin{align*}
&t^{a_{3,1}}(1-t^{a_{3,0}})\T{a_{3,0}-1}
\\
&=
\sum_{a'_{0,2}\ge 0} t^{a'_{0,2}a'_{1,3}}
(\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a'_{1,3}}\a_{a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}})^{-1}
\\
&u^{(1)}u^{(2)}u^{(3)}
\left(
u^{(4)}_{a'_{0,3}+1}-(1-t^{a_{3,1}})u^{(4)}_{a_{0,1}+1,a_{3,1}-1}
\right)
\end{align*}
Again, the second term in the parentheses contributes $-(1-t^{a_{3,1}})\T{a_{0,1}+1,a_{3,1}-1}$,
but the first term is unwanted.
Subtracting $t^{a_{3,2}}$ times the second expression from the first, we note that the unwanted terms cancel exactly,
so that we obtain our first relation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:recur}
\T{a_{0,3}+1}-t^{a_{3,2}+a_{3,1}}(1-t^{a_{3,0}})\T{a_{3,0}-1}
=(1-t^{a_{3,2}})\T{a_{3,2}-1,a_{0,2}+1}
+t^{a_{3,2}}(1-t^{a_{3,1}})\T{a_{0,1}+1,a_{3,1}-1}
\end{equation}
A second identity can be derived in a similar but slightly more involved way.
Apply \eqref{eq:recu} in the form $u_{j'+1}=t^{j}(1-t^{i''})u_{i''-1}+(1-t^{j})u_{j-1,i+1}$ to $u^{(1)}$ in \eqref{eq:T} and
$u_{i''+1}=t^{i}(1-t^{j'})u_{j'-1}+(1-t^{i})u_{j+1,i-1}$ to $u^{(2)}$,
multiply the second identity by $t^{a'_{0,2}}$ and subtract; one obtains:
\begin{align*}
&\T{a_{3,2}+1}-t^{a_{2,0}+a_{2,1}}(1-t^{a_{0,1}})\T{a_{2,3}-1}
\\
&=
\sum_{a'_{0,2}\ge 0} t^{a'_{0,2}a'_{1,3}}
(\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a'_{1,3}}\a_{a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}})^{-1}
\\
&\left(
t^{a'_{1,3}/2}(1-t^{a'_{0,2}})u^{(1)}_{a'_{0,2}-1,a'_{0,3}+1}u^{(2)}+t^{a'_{0,2}/2}(1-t^{a'_{1,2}})u^{(1)}
u^{(2)}_{a'_{1,2}-1,a'_{1,3}+1}
\right)
u^{(3)}u^{(4)}
\end{align*}
Applying four times appropriate versions of \eqref{eq:recu}, one can derive similarly:
\begin{align*}
&t^{a_{2,1}}(1-t^{a_{2,0}})\T{a_{2,0}-1,a_{3,0}+1}
+(1-t^{a_{2,1}})\T{a_{2,1}-1,a_{3,1}+1}
\\
&=
\sum_{a'_{0,2}\ge 0} t^{a'_{0,2}a'_{1,3}}
(\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a'_{1,3}}\a_{a_{3,2}+a_{0,2}-a'_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,0}+a_{2,0}-a'_{0,2}})^{-1}
\\
&u^{(1)}u^{(2)}
\left(
u^{(3)}_{}u^{(4)}_{}
+u^{(3)}_{}u^{(4)}_{}
\right)
\end{align*}
By reindexing $a'_{0,2}\to a'_{0,2}+ 1$, the two expressions are equal.
In conclusion,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:recur2}
\T{a_{3,2}+1}-t^{a_{2,0}+a_{2,1}}(1-t^{a_{0,1}})\T{a_{2,3}-1}
=
t^{a_{2,1}}(1-t^{a_{2,0}})\T{a_{2,0}-1,a_{3,1}+1}
+(1-t^{a_{2,1}})\T{a_{2,1}-1,a_{3,1}+1}
\end{equation}
Now note that \eqref{eq:recur2} is obtained from \eqref{eq:recur} by shift $\alpha\mapsto \alpha-1$ of indices in $\ZZ_4$.
Furthermore, the original expression \eqref{eq:T} has the symmetry of indices $\alpha\mapsto \alpha+2$ and
$\alpha\mapsto 3-\alpha$. Together this means that we have derived
all equations obtained from \eqref{eq:recur} by $D_4$ action on the indices of the labels,
that is the usual $\ZZ_4$ shift of indices
$\alpha \mapsto \alpha+1$, and the flip $\alpha\mapsto -\alpha\pmod 4$.
Now it is clear that by applying repeatedly \eqref{eq:recur}, we can express all values of
$\mathcal T$ in terms of its special case $a_{0,3}=0$ (induction on the sum of all arguments). Using the $D_4$ action,
we can reduce further to the
special case where the 8 parameters $a_{0,3},a_{2,3},a_{1,2},a_{3,2},a_{1,0},a_{3,0},a_{0,1},a_{2,1}$ are zero. In the latter case, the relations \eqref{eq:subst} simplify, and in particular, $a'_{0,2}$
is restricted to the range $\{\max(0,a_{0,2}-a_{1,3}),\ldots,a_{0,2}\}$; furthermore,
using $u_{\ldots,a,0,b,\ldots}=\a_a\a_b$, $\mathcal T$ simplifies to
\begin{align*}
\mathcal T&=\sum_{a'_{0,2}=\max(0,a_{0,2}-a_{1,3})}^{a_{0,2}} t^{a'_{0,2}a'_{1,3}}
(\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a'_{0,3}}^2\a_{a'_{1,2}}^2\a_{a'_{1,3}})^{-1}
\\
&\quad\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a_{0,2}}
\a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a_{1,3}}
\\
&\quad \a_{a'_{1,2}}\a_{a_{2,0}}
\a_{a'_{0,3}}\a_{a_{3,1}}
\\
&=\a_{a_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,3}}\a_{a_{2,0}}\a_{a_{3,1}}
\sum_{a'_{0,2}=\max(0,a_{0,2}-a_{1,3})}^{a_{0,2}} \frac{t^{a'_{0,2}(a_{1,3}-a_{0,2}+a'_{0,2})}}
{\a_{a'_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,3}-a_{0,2}+a'_{0,2}}}
\\
&=
\a_{a_{0,2}}\a_{a_{1,3}}\a_{a_{2,0}}\a_{a_{3,1}}
\sum_{i=0}^{\min(a_{0,2},a_{1,3})} \frac{t^{(a_{0,2}-i)(a_{1,3}-i)}}
{\a_{a_{0,2}-i}\a_{a_{1,3}-i}}
\end{align*}
The weight conservation is equivalent to $a_{0,2}=a_{2,0}$ and $a_{1,3}=a_{3,1}$, implying the $\ZZ_4$-invariance
of the final expression. It means that l.h.s.\ and r.h.s.\ are equal in this particular case of
external labels; but then, backtracking, we can use the $\ZZ_4$-invariant recurrence relations (the
$D_4$ orbit of \eqref{eq:recur}) to conclude that they are equal for all external labels.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Nowadays, any physicist performing analysis with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) data needs to be well-versed in programming, at the level of both a system programmer and a software developer. Processing vast amounts of collision and simulation events is a tedious task where simplest programming mistakes can create big confusions on the analysis results. Moreover, a multitude of different analysis frameworks for similar tasks make it difficult to communicate analysis algorithms within the same experiment and to preserve them for discussions outside the experiment. The steep learning curve for analysis frameworks also leads to very long lead-times for analyses, erecting a barrier between data and the physicist who may simply wish to try an analysis idea. All these difficulties could be overcome by creating analysis description languages (ADLs), which are human readable, declerative domain specific languages capable of describing the analysis flow in a standard and unambiguous way, independent of any computing framework.
An ADL would decouple the mathematical and logical algorithm of a physics analysis from computing operations, and being declerative, would eliminate programming difficulties and errors, consequently allowing the analysis to be more efficient and flawless. Working with a unique domain specific language rather than a general purpose language like c++ or python has the advantage of introducing standardization and unambiguity in expressing analysis components. This would make comparing and combining different analyses within an experiment, or between experiments significantly easier. An ADL would also assist phenomenologists in understanding and reinterpreting analyses, as well as easily suggesting new analysis ideas for testing physics models. Moreover, an ADL can be used for educating high school students or other enthusiasts about the structure of a collider analysis. It would also serve the long term preservation of analyses, by providing standardized and accessible description of the analyses for the whole high energy physics (HEP) community.
In summary, an ADL would facilitate the abstraction, design, visualization, validation, combination, reproduction, interpretation and overall communication of HEP analyses. If widely accepted for use in the HEP community, an ADL would clearly maximize the scientific output of the LHC or any upcoming long term international experiment like the Future Circular Collider. Today, the abundance of inexpensive and easily accessible computing power is leading to a fundamental paradigm shift in data analysis. The development of a full-fledged domain specific ADL combined with the increasing accessibility of computing power could eventually evolve into an AI-based analysis tool with which scientists can easily communicate in their own languages.
In this note, we present CutLang, a complete ADL, and a runtime interpreter for easily writing and performing collider analyses~\cite{Sekmen:2018ehb}. A simple top quark pair reconstruction analysis is also shown as an example to demonstrate the implementation of the CutLang ADL and to illustrate the advantages of the ADL approach.
\section {CutLang, the language}
CutLang's development precedes community wide discussions and synthesis efforts such as~\cite{Brooijmans:2016vro}. The ADL in CutLang was designed to have a number of properties aiming to serve the needs of experimental, phenomenology and education communities in HEP, such as human readability, correctness, easiness in learning, and programming language and framework independence. CutLang ADL describes the physics algorithm of event processing in an analysis in a plain text file using syntax rules that include standard mathematical and logical operations and 4-vector algebra. CutLang syntax was designed to be brief, easily readable and understandable. The syntax follows a keyword-value structure. The physics scope consists of analysis object definitions, observable definitions and event selections, which are organized in dedicated blocks. The following summarize the core physics content that can be defined within the CutLang ADL.
\begin{description}
\item [Predefined analysis objects:] Types for basic input particles are predefined in CutLang ADL.
\item [Simple analysis objects:] An arbitrary number of simple objects like jets, electrons, muons can be defined based on cuts on object attributes such as transverse momentum, pseudorapidity, heavy flavor tagging discriminators, etc.
\item [Derived analysis objects:] Objects can be defined from already existing objects (e.g. defining b-tagged jets from high transverse momentum jets).
\item [Composite analysis objects:] Composite objects can be reconstructed from multiple simple objects (e.g. reconstruct a Z boson from two electrons).
\item [Event selection regions:] Arbitrary number of event selection regions can be defined based on event selection criteria. Multiple selection regions can be defined from already defined regions (e.g. defining signal regions and control regions from a preselection region).
\item [Concurrency in event selection:] Concurrent definition of multiple algorithms on the same set of events is possible.
\item [Simple constants or event variables:] Keywords can be assigned to constants (e.g. Z boson mass) or variables (e.g. angular variables between objects, mass of the Z boson reconstructed from two leptons, etc.).
\item [Complex variables via external functions:] An analysis can contain complex variables that cannot be expressed using simple algebraic operations, or that could be numerical. In CutLang, such variables are defined in self-contained external C++ functions, which can be referenced from the ADL text file.
\item [Histogramming:] Since CutLang is also a runtime interpreter, it also allows to define histograms for event variables in the ADL file at any stage of event selection. 1- and 2-dimensional histograms can be specified and filled at run time using ROOT libraries. Histograms are defined with the keyword \texttt{histo}.
\end{description}
The following mathematical and logical operations are available for defining objects and event selection regions:
\begin{description}
\item [Comparison operators and thresholds:] All standard comparison operators, i.e. $==, <, >, =<, >=$ as well as two additional interval operators for inclusion ($[\,]$) and exclusion ($]\,[$), both defined by International standard ISO 31-11~\cite{iso},
are available for comparing particle or event properties to limiting values.
\item [Logical operators:] Both symbolic and alphanumerical forms of the AND(\&\&) and OR ($||$) operators.
\item [Ternary operator:] Application of conditional selection criteria is available, including nested statements. The C++ syntax is assumed: {\it condition $?$ true-case $:$ false-case }.
\item [$\chi^2$ minimization] In an event, particles best fulfilling a specified criterion can be selected using an optimization algorithm. The indices of the particles that would be determined at run time are to be specified as negative integers.
\item [Simple mathematical operators:] The following operations can be used in variable definitions, or in selection statements: $+$, $-$, $\ast$, $/$, \^{}, sin(), cos(), tan(), abs(), sqrt().
\end{description}
Usage of the language elements and the syntax will be illustrated by a top quark pair reconstruction analysis example in Section~\ref{sec:ttrecoexample}.
\section{CutLang, the runtime interpreter}
From the start, CutLang was designed to contain a runtime interpreter to bypass the inherent inefficiency of the modify-compile-run cycle. In an interpreted analysis system, adding new selection criteria, changing the execution order or cancelling analysis steps are more practical. CutLang runtime interpreter is written in C++ based on ROOT classes for handling Lorentz vector operations, input file and histogram manipulations, and operates in any modern Unix-like environment. The interpreter is compiled with ROOT libraries only once in the beginning or when optional external functions for complex variables are added. The actual parsing of the ADL text relies on automatically generated dictionary and grammar based on traditional tools Lex and Yacc~\cite{lexandyacc}. The ADL file is split into tokens by Lex and the hierarchical structure of the algorithm is found by Yacc.
\section{CutLang framework and tools}
The CutLang framework includes the CutLang interpreter and additional tools and facilities for performing a typical LHC analysis. The framework can read event data from multiple input formats such as ATLAS and CMS Open Data, DELPHES, FCC, etc. given as ROOT files. New input data types can be integrated using the tools and prescriptions provided inside the framework. All event types are converted into predefined input particle types, where the particles are pre-sorted in the order of decreasing transverse momentum, and the most energetic particle is the zeroth one. The missing transverse energy ($E_T^{miss}$) in the event is also mapped to a Lorentz vector with zero axial momentum. Additionally, neutrinos coming from boosted W boson decays are assigned a special object, which is a massless and chargeless particle with transverse momentum and azimuthal angle ($\phi$) values extracted from $E_T^{miss}$, but its pseudorapidity is assumed equal to that of the associated charged lepton.
CutLang framework also includes many predefined functions that are standard in an analysis, such as the invariant mass of particles, or angular distance measures between particles. The complete list can be found in~\cite{Sekmen:2018ehb}. Moreover, external user functions for calculating complex variables can be incorporated into the framework.
CutLang provides output in ROOT format, with all algorithm results and analysis histograms in separate directories in the resulting files. These directories also contain user definitions, derived objects and analysis cut-flows as text output, and event selection efficiencies as a histogram. Output of surviving events in ntuples format is planned for the upcoming release.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{$t\bar{t}$ reconstruction user definitions}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|>{}p{6.8cm}|l|} \hline
Step & Explanation & Definition syntax in CutLang \tabularnewline \hline \hline
1 & WH1 is reconstructed from 2 jets & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def WH1 : JET\_-1 JET\_-1}\tabularnewline \hline
2 & WH2 is reconstructed from 2 other jets & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def WH2 : JET\_-11 JET\_-11}\tabularnewline \hline
3 & mWH1 is the mass of WH1 & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def mWH1 : \{WH1 \}m}\tabularnewline \hline
4 & mWH2 is the mass of WH2 & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def mWH2 : \{WH2 \}m}\tabularnewline \hline
5 & mTopH1 is the mass of WH1 and another jet & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def mTopH1 : \{WH1 JET\_-2 \}m }\tabularnewline \hline
6 & mTopH2 is the mass of WH2 and another jet& \texttt{\footnotesize{}def mTopH2 : \{WH2 JET\_-4 \}m }\tabularnewline \hline
7 & WHbR1 is the angular separation between WH1 and its associated jet & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def WHbR1 : \{WH1 , JET\_-2 \}dR}\tabularnewline \hline
8 & WHbR2 is the angular separation between WH2 and its associated jet & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def WHbR2 : \{WH2 , JET\_-4 \}dR}\tabularnewline \hline
9 & topchi2 is the two top quark candidates mass difference squared & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def topchi2 :((mTopH1 - mTopH2)/4.2)\textasciicircum 2}\tabularnewline \hline
10 & Wchi2 is the squared sum of the deviation of W boson candidates from known value & \texttt{\footnotesize{}def Wchi2 :((mWH1-80.4)/2.1)\textasciicircum 2+((mWH2-80.4)/2.1)\textasciicircum 2 }\tabularnewline \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tab:userdefs}
\end{table}
\section{An example physics analysis \label{sec:ttrecoexample}}
Top quark pair reconstruction is a frequent procedure in both standard model and new physics analyses at the LHC.
A typical implementation for top pair reconstruction in a 6 jet final state, with no explicit use of b-jet tagging, performed in two alternative methods, would consist of the following steps:
\begin{itemize}
\item Define user keywords, shortcuts to be used in the analysis, e.g. for hadronic W bosons and top quarks, their masses, angular distances between them, and $\chi^2$ variables (see Table~\ref{tab:userdefs}).
\item Define the preselection region, consisting of 6 jets and low $E_T^{miss}$ requirements common to both algorithms (see Table~\ref{tab:preselection}).
\item Perform the single-step search algorithm, which finds the correct jet combinations for top pair reconstruction in a single step; impose further W mass and angular variable cuts; and plot some variables (see Table~\ref{tab:singlestep}).
\item Perform the alternative double-step search algorithm, which finds the correct jet combinations for top pair reconstruction in two steps, by first reconstructing the W bosons, and then finding the best associated b jet candidates; impose further W mass and angular variable cuts; and plot some variables (see Table~\ref{tab:doublestep}).
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{ The preselection algorithm}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|>{}p{7.1cm}|l|} \hline
Step & Explanation & Commands in CutLang \tabularnewline \hline \hline
1 & name this algorithm "preselection" & \texttt{\footnotesize{}algo preselection} \tabularnewline \hline
2 & count all events & \texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd ALL }\tabularnewline \hline
3 & select events with 6 or more jets & \texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd nJET >= 6 }\tabularnewline \hline
4 & select events with $E_T*{miss}$ less than 100 GeV& \texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd MET < 100 }\tabularnewline \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tab:preselection}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{ The "singlestep" algorithm}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|>{}p{6.5cm}|l|} \hline
Step & Explanation & Commands in CutLang \tabularnewline \hline \hline
1 & name this algorithm "singlestep" & \texttt{\footnotesize{}algo singlestep } \tabularnewline \hline
2 & execute preselection algorithm & \texttt{\footnotesize{}preselection } \tabularnewline \hline
3 & minimize the total $\chi^2$ and find all 6 jets & \texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd topchi2 + Wchi2 $\sim$= 0} \tabularnewline \hline
4 &mWH1 should be between 50 and 120 GeV &\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd mWH1 [] 50 120 } \tabularnewline \hline
5 &mWH2 should be between 50 and 120 GeV &\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd mWH2 [] 50 120 } \tabularnewline \hline
6 &WHbR1 should be greater than 0.6 &\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd WHbR1 > 0.6 } \tabularnewline \hline
7 &WHbR2 should be greater than 0.6 &\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd WHbR2 > 0.6 } \tabularnewline \hline
8 &Histogram the mass of WH1 &\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mWHh1, W2 mass (GeV), 50, 50, 150, mWH1" } \tabularnewline \hline
9 &Histogram the mass of WH2 &\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mWHh2, W1 mass (GeV), 50, 50, 150, mWH2" } \tabularnewline \hline
10 &Histogram the mass of TopH1 &\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mTopHh1, top1 mass (GeV), 70, 0, 700, mTopH1" } \tabularnewline \hline
11 & Histogram the mass of TopH2&\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mTopHh2, top2 mass (GeV), 70, 0, 700, mTopH2" } \tabularnewline \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tab:singlestep}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{ The "doublestep" algorithm}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|>{}p{6.5cm}|l|} \hline
Step & Explanation & Commands in CutLang \tabularnewline \hline \hline
1 &name this algorithm "doublestep"&\texttt{\footnotesize{}algo doublestep } \tabularnewline \hline
2&execute preselection algorithm&\texttt{\footnotesize{}preselection } \tabularnewline \hline
3&minimize the W$\chi^2$ & \texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd Wchi2 $\sim$= 0 } \tabularnewline \hline
4&minimize the top $\chi^2$ &\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd topchi2 $\sim$= 0 } \tabularnewline \hline
5&mWH1 should be between 50 and 120 GeV&\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd mWH1 [] 50 120 } \tabularnewline \hline
6&mWH2 should be between 50 and 120 GeV&\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd mWH2 [] 50 120 } \tabularnewline \hline
7&WHbR1 should be greater than 0.6 &\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd WHbR1 > 0.6 } \tabularnewline \hline
8&WHbR2 should be greater than 0.6 &\texttt{\footnotesize{}cmd WHbR2 > 0.6 } \tabularnewline \hline
9&Histogram the mass of WH1&\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mWHh1, W1 mass (GeV), 50, 50, 150, mWH1" } \tabularnewline \hline
10&Histogram the mass of WH2&\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mWHh2, W2 mass (GeV), 50, 50, 150, mWH2" } \tabularnewline \hline
11&Histogram the mass of TopH1&\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mTopHh1, top1 mass (GeV), 70, 0, 700, mTopH1" } \tabularnewline \hline
12&Histogram the mass of TopH2&\texttt{\footnotesize{}histo "mTopHh2, top2 mass (GeV), 70, 0, 700, mTopH2"} \tabularnewline \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\label{tab:doublestep}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions}
Increases in both the number and complexity of analysis tasks in collider experiments, as well as advancements in computing methods and resources are leading to new analysis approaches. One such approach is the utilization of domain-specific analysis description languages to define all analysis elements in an easy and unambiguous way. CutLang, the first implementation of such a domain specific ADL capable of expressing the complete set of event processing operations in a collider physics data analysis as a runtime interpreted language continues to be developed with addition of new features. CutLang aims to serve as a regular tool for the high energy community in general: from experimental analysts and phenomenologists to educators in areas from analysis design to preservation. The ultimate goal is to develop CutLang into an AI-based analysis tool with which scientists can easily communicate in their own languages.
\section*{References}
|
\section{Introduction}
Image registration is the alignment of two images in the same geometric space so that structures in images as are overlapped good as possible. Different medical imaging like MRI, fMRI and CT provides different information not only in the coordinate system and resolution but also on identifying different kinds of morphological and/or functional structures. To better use those different information one need to register images so that they overlap and align making possible to use the best information from each kind of imaging technique for a better clinical diagnosis. Other medical usage of registration is to compare multiple different patients. This multiple patients comparison generate medical atlas like the MNI-ICBM\cite{McKinstry2010,Collins} providing a common ground to morphological structures.
The standard technique in medical image registration is the Mutual Information (MI) introduced by Shannon \cite{shannon1963mathematical} and used first by Viola and Collignon \cite{Viola1997,Collignon97}, shown here in the Shannon entropy equations (\ref{eqn:eqshannon}) and the MI equation (\ref{eqn:eqmi}).
As MI only provides a measurement of how good is the alignment between two images we need to use an optimizer that will change the geometric transformation parameters trying to maximize (or minimize) the metric function to achieve the goal of image registration.
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:eqshannon}
\begin{split}
H(x) &\equiv -\sum p(x) \; \log \, p(x)
\\
H(x,y) &\equiv -\sum p(x,y) \; \log \, p(x,y)
\end{split}
\end{align}
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:eqmi}
I(A;B) = H(A) + H(B) - H(A,B)
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\caption{Registration Block Diagram}
\label{diagrama_bloco}
\resizebox{0.5\textwidth}{!}{
\input{block}
}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{diagrama_bloco} shows the basic block diagram of a image registration algorithm, the fixed and moving ($u(x)$ and $v(x)$) images are the inputs on the left with the moving image passing by a \texttt{Transform} block that receive parameters ($T$) from the \texttt{Optimizer} block, then the fixed and the transformed moving (now $v(T(x))$) image goes to the \texttt{Metric} function ($F_m(\cdot)$) that measures how good is the current transform in solving the registration. The \texttt{Optimizer} receives this measure information and updates the parameters sent to the \texttt{Transform} block until it reaches a value that shows a match on the registration ($\hat{T}$). This value can be the maximum or minimum of the \texttt{Metric} depending on the type of the function $F_m(\cdot)$ used. Mathematically this algorithm can be represented by the equation \ref{eq_argmax}.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_argmax}
\hat{T} = \argmax_{T} F_{m}(u(x), v(T(x))
\end{equation}
A very robust and still used optimizer is the gradient descent (created in 1847 by Cauchy \cite{Cauchy1847}) that evolved to the stochastic gradient descent method \cite{Kiefer1952a}. These methods use the gradient of the metric function to make steps in guessing of the best transformation parameters so each consecutive guess is better than the previous one. This guessing goes on until the global maximum is achieved and we find our solution or the optimizer locks in a local maximum that is not our solution and can't be further improved.
To make the registration process more robust we can use an optimizer that can deal with those various local maxima such as genetic algorithms or even exhaustive search over all the parameters, or we can use a metric that only have one maximum point. Our quest is to search for such metric function.
We believe that when using an information technique we need to use all information available and with recent computational improvements we can do that without the need to wait several hours for a single measurement. In this way our study goes beyond the simple change to a generalized entropy to measure how the information quantity provided to the MI metric affect it image registration capability.
We also provided an in-depth study of the generalized entropies, such as Tsallis entropy, when used for image registration in the geometric transforms of translation, rotation and scale. Those transforms forms the base of the affine family along the skew transform and cover mostly all simple image registration. When there is need for a more complex registration one can use the B-Spline transform.
\section{Methodology}
We used brain images kindly provided by the Human Connectome Project\cite{Glasser2013,VanEssen2011} in their HCP Young Adult study. The full image protocols can be found at their website\footnote{\url{http://protocols.humanconnectome.org/HCP/3T/imaging-protocols.html}}. In this study we only used the 3T pre-processed structural images.
Our main comparison was with the ITK Mattes Mutual Information technique\cite{Mattes2001a} provided by the ITK software\cite{Yoo2002} and used in the BRAINSFit\cite{brainsfit} module of the 3DSlicer software\footnote{\url{http://www.slicer.org/}}.
To allow visualization and comparison of the metric we generated 3D images by varying the parameters of a single family of transform (i.e. when we see the translation 3D image in the X axis we can see how the metric changes when the image was translated along the X axis). This is equivalent of an exhaustive search over the space, so what we did was to map with the MI function all the space in a finite range and build a 3D image with this map.
This separation of geometric transform in translation, rotation and scale was needed since a normal image registration can involve 12 or even more degrees of freedom (or dimensions) and visualization of multidimensional data like those can be very difficult. Separating the transforms we could generate simple 3D result images that can be easily analyzed.
Another benefit of separating is that we can process the parameters space in a finer way. To use 51 individuals positions of translations in 3 dimensions (i.e. using a translation from $-25mm$ to $25mm$ in every direction) can result in $51^3 = 132651$ measurements. Using 12 dimensions and only 3 individual parameter (i.e. a minus parameter, a plus parameter and zero) in each dimension or direction we have $3^{12} = 531441$ or $4\times$ the 3 dimension approach and pretty much no idea of how each dimension affect the output of the metric! This will become more clear in the results section.
Making all those measurements can be hard and time consuming. To improve the performance we migrate our initial code to a GPU based one using NVIDIA CUDA toolkit\footnote{\url{https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-zone}}. This allowed a huge gain in performance with a non expensive investment in hardware making our solution more viable to further research and clinical use. All the data here presented were made using a NVIDIA GTX 1060 and used less than 2GB of GPU memory allowing it to run on less powerful GPU hardware if needed.
\section{Results}
As said before our results are the mathematical image of the MI function of two images. We made a 3D cube with each point representing the result of the MI function analyzed with a transformation related to that point coordinates. So if we check a point in the cube at position $(10,10,150)$ that values represents the MI of two images with the moving image transformed with the $(10,10,150)$ parameters. If we take the transformation to be a translation that point would be the MI result of two images with the moving image translated by $10mm$ at axis X, $10mm$ at axis Y and $150mm$ at axis Z.
In this way we can understand what happens inside the registration algorithm. The gradient descent will see those MI results and try to register the image with the minimum value it can reach. The gold standard in our case is the central point $(0,0,0)$ in that the moving image would have not be transformed in any way since initially our images was the same or already registered.
Another point to remember is that different entropies will give different results, so some methods will give the center point as a local maximum as others will give as a local minimum. This is specially true in the Tsallis entropy when we go from $q<1.0$ to $q>1.0$ and will be noted on the following figures as some have the center in blue and some in brown reflecting this change.
\subsection{Translation}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_172635_51_translation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_172635_51_translation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo_com_centro}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_172635_51_translation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_172635_51_translation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_Y}}%
\caption{\label{path_mattes}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only translation transform and the ITK Mattes algorithm: (a) the paths emerging from the $z=-150$ plane on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before with the paths along the center added (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
We start by analyzing the paths the gradient descent algorithm will take when registering two images using different MI functions. Figure \ref{path_mattes} shows those paths when we use the ITK Mattes function with the same image on both fixed and moving. The first image (a) is the paths emerging from the lower plane ($z=-150mm$), it can be seen five different regions with a central region converging to the central point (our gold standard and correct point) and four regions on the corners converging to other points not related to our goal. The second image (b) we added the central block of paths, all connected to our central point and from where the ITK Mattes can correctly register the images.
As its difficult to see a 3D function we added two other views of the (b) images, as the view from the $X$ axis in (c) and from the $Y$ axis in (d). From those images it is very clear that beside that central region in (a) all other regions will not connect to the central point as there is no path between then opposed to the central region where there is always a path between it and the $(0,0,0)$ point as can now be seen in (c) and (d). The $(0,0,0)$ or central point is the very center of the upper structure visualized in (c) and (d) and added in (b).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo_com_centro}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_Y}}%
\caption{\label{path_shannon}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only translation transform and the MICUDA algorithm with Shannon entropy: (a) the paths emerging from the $z=-150$ plane on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before with the paths along the center added (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
The paths of the gradient descent algorithm changes dramatically when we use the MICUDA with the Shannon entropy in Figure \ref{path_shannon}. Now we can see in the first image (a) almost all regions converging to the central point, there is a small region that will not converge on the horizontal extremes that will converge to a local minimum under the central point. On the second image (b) the centrals paths added are much bigger than with ITK Mattes and now reach all the cube boundary. On the third image (c) we can see better that region of (a) that will not converge, showed on the bottom center, a smaller region than the one in Figure \ref{path_mattes}. On the fourth image (d) we can check that on the upper part of (a) now shown better here we have full convergence to the central point.
It should be noted that the central paths in Figures \ref{path_mattes} and \ref{path_shannon} don't show all the paths related to the central point but only those with bigger gradients, so even when the central point don't have visible paths to all regions on the images there can be paths to that regions. But regions with paths shown can't have other paths that diverge from those. So when we see a path going to a local minimum (not the center point) on those images they are really there guiding our Gradient Descent algorithm the wrong way.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=0.5_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=0.5_fundo_com_centro}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=0.5_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=0.5_eixo_Y}}%
\caption{\label{path_q_05}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only translation transform and the MICUDA algorithm with Tsallis entropy and $q=0.5$: (a) the paths emerging from the $z=-150$ plane on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before with the paths along the center added (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=2_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=2_fundo_com_centro}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=2_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=2_eixo_Y}}%
\caption{\label{path_q_20}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only translation transform and the MICUDA algorithm with Tsallis entropy and $q=2.0$: (a) the paths emerging from the $z=-150$ plane on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before with the paths along the center added (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
Next we look into the effects of Tsallis entropy on the MI function. Starting with Figure \ref{path_q_05} that have a $q$ value of $0.5$ we can see on the first image (a) a very nice convergence almost to the central point since the paths stop very near it forming some kind of closed loop (that will be discussed later). On the other images we can see that the central paths take almost all regions of the cube and the lower $z=-150mm$ plane paths don't form the ``bell'' shaped of former figures but now have a more direct way to the central point. That direct way is better since our gradient descent won't have to make corrections on it's course to the central point with each intermediate point having a gradient pointing almost equal to the former, in a quasi-direct line.
If we push the Tsallis $q$ value to $2.0$ we have the Figure \ref{path_q_20} showing in the first image (a) a full convergence to the central point. In the later images (b-d) we can see the same direct paths to the central point as the former Tsallis figure but now the central paths is not distributed as before but having much bigger gradients to the corners.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_172635_51_translation/Contour_Entropy_Q=1}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=1}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=0.5}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_172635_3T_T1w_MPR1_51_translation_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=2}}%
\caption{\label{contour}Isosurfaces from the MI of the same image with only translation transform with multiple methods: (a) ITK Mattes (b) MICUDA Shannon (c) MICUDA Tsallis $q=0.5$ (d) MICUDA Tsallis $q=2.0$}
\end{figure*}
Now that we know the paths the gradient descent we can begin to analyze the contour isosurfaces of the MI function keeping in mind that the gradient paths are always perpendicular (or normal) to those surfaces since they flow along the gradient field of the function and isosurfaces are surfaces were the field have the same value. In Figure \ref{contour} the first image (a) shows the ITK Mattes MI function. It's very clear the big mess on the periphery that will guide our gradient descent algorithm the wrong way. Even paths that can flow to the center point will be disturbed with detours caused by those mess. In more technical terms we say that the function have multiple local minima (or maxima). To the gradient descent algorithm those local minima seems to be the correct solution since the algorithm can't see all the mathematical space of the MI function as we are seeing and can't know that we have a center point that is much lower than those minima. This is the fundamental problem with the ITK Mattes registration in translation transforms.
On the other images (Figure \ref{contour} b-d) we can see that our algorithm provides a much cleaner mathematical space for registration. The second image (b) shows the MICUDA with Shannon entropy were we can see a much nicer local minima at the center point, the only problem here is the surfaces not providing a direct path to the center point so we will have some curves but as seen before we can register almost all the space. The third image (c) shows the Tsallis entropy with $q=0.5$ were we have very nice spherical surfaces but they are not smooth as we want. Some irregularities emerge from the solution and those explain the paths in Figure \ref{path_q_05} (a) not converging to the central point but to a space near it. If we pay attention to the very center of the surfaces we can see they start to look more irregular towards the center, stopping the paths to flow to it. On the fourth image (d) we see very smooth surfaces, not very spherical since they have some corners but the smooth provides a direct path to the center point, explaining the difference between Figures \ref{path_q_05} and \ref{path_q_20}. Now the paths can flow to the center point and we have a solution to our problem, at least in the translation transformation.
\subsection{Rotation}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo_angulo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_Y}}%
\caption{\label{path_rotation_mattes}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only rotation transform and the ITK Mattes algorithm: (a) the paths emerging from the $z<0$ hemisphere on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before from different angle (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
The rotation transform shows to be more difficult to solve than translation as we can see in the Figure \ref{path_rotation_mattes}. Since all points outside the sphere with $radius = 1$ are mapped to the sphere surface we only show this sphere volume here. It can be seen on the first image (a) that most paths converge to the center point but we have a region that converge to other local maxima on the sphere periphery. This regions is shown on the middle horizontal line of the first image (a), the left center of second image (b) and bottom of the two last images (c and d). On this colormap the gradient flows from the brown to yellow to blue. Noting those color flows we can see two connected graphs with only one converging to the central point. Those two graphs are more clear in the last two images, since the central point connected is on top and the divergent one is on bottom.
The change from ITK Mattes to MICUDA Shannon (Figure \ref{path_rotation_shannon}) don't show much improvement of the registration capability. The gradient is a little different as can be seen on the first image (a) of both methods. In Mattes the lines converge to central paths along the horizontal or vertical axis ($X$ and $Y$), and in the Shannon method the lines take their own path in a more direct way not related to the axis lines.
The best results using Tsallis came from $q=1.1$ (Figure \ref{path_rotation_tsallis_11}), it's very similar to the Shannon field but we have a little more capture range in some parts of the space. Values above ($q>1.1$) have some local maxima on the horizontal axis that will lower the capture range and values below Shannon ($q<1.0$) have a local maximum displaced from the center point and some other local maxima depending on the values (Figure \ref{path_rotation_tsallis_broken}).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo_angulo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_Y}}%
\caption{\label{path_rotation_shannon}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only rotation transform and the MICUDA Shannon ($q=1.0$) algorithm: (a) the paths emerging from the $z<0$ hemisphere on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before from different angle (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1.1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1.1_fundo_angulo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1.1_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1.1_eixo_Y}}%
\caption{\label{path_rotation_tsallis_11}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only rotation transform and the MICUDA Tsallis ($q=1.1$) algorithm: (a) the paths emerging from the $z<0$ hemisphere on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before from different angle (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
The contour isosurfaces of the rotation transform are shown in Figure \ref{contour_rotation}. In the first image we have the ITK Mattes function with an almost full range of capture with the exception of the diagonal corners of the figure, where we have some small local maxima. Almost all paths flow to the center point as we want. In the second image we have the MICUDA Shannon function very similar to the ITK Mattes, a nice range but now the local maxima are in the extreme horizontal and vertical of the image where we can see some yellow surfaces appearing. In the third image we have the MICUDA Tsallis function with $q=1.1$. Now we have a very definite and strong gradient field from the diagonal corners to the center point but we also have the periphery of the sphere not connecting to the center point. In other words the periphery of the sphere diverges and won't register in this situation. The fourth image have the MICUDA Tsallis with $q=2.0$ and the interesting feature is two strong local maxima showing in the horizontal center line and some small ones on the vertical center line. Those local maxima start to emerge from $q>1.1$ and will break our registration by forcing the image to register with a rotation angle. The fifth image is the MICUDA Tsallis with $q=0.5$ and shows a very disturbing gradient field to our registration process with the local maxima on the left diagonal corners and no local maxima on the center point. In this $q=0.5$ even perfect registered images will be rotated to a wrong angle by this function so it's completely useless for rotation transform. This problem appears on all $q<1.0$ researched by us on rotation.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation/Contour_Entropy_Q=1}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=1}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=1.1}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=2}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=0.5}}%
\caption{\label{contour_rotation}Isosurfaces from the MI of the same image with only rotation transform with multiple methods: (a) ITK Mattes (b) MICUDA Shannon (c) MICUDA Tsallis $q=1.1$ (d) MICUDA Tsallis $q=2.0$ (e) MICUDA Tsallis $q=0.5$}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=0.5_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1.5_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{final_tsallis_211821_3T_T2w_SPC1_51_rotation_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=2_fundo}}%
\caption{\label{path_rotation_tsallis_broken}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only rotation transform and the MICUDA Tsallis algorithm: (a) $q=0.5$ (b) $q=1.5$ (c) $q=2.0$}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Scale}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_N2T1_51_scale/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_N2T1_51_scale/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo_angulo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_N2T1_51_scale/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{simulation_Mattes_N2T1_51_scale/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_Y}}%
\hfill
\caption{\label{path_scale_mattes}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only scale transform and the ITK Mattes algorithm: (a) the paths emerging from the $z<0$ hemisphere on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before from different angle (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
The scale transform performs very well under ITK Mattes (Figure \ref{path_scale_mattes}) and we have all paths converging to the central point. One can only argue that the paths are not very direct but the true is that we can register the image from any scale transform and that is what matters.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_fundo_angulo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_X}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1_eixo_Y}}%
\hfill
\caption{\label{path_scale_shannon}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only scale transform and the MICUDA Shannon algorithm: (a) the paths emerging from the $z<0$ hemisphere on the back viewing from the $z$ axis (b) same as before from different angle (c) same as before from the $x$ axis (d) same as before from the $y$ axis}
\end{figure*}
The analysis of scale transform using the MICUDA Shannon function (Figure \ref{path_scale_shannon}) is very similar to the ITK Mattes one. The interesting aspect we can see is the upper right quadrant in the first image (a) have a different field than other quadrants. To understand this we need to understand the axis, this upper right quadrant is where $x>0$ and $y>0$, so we have a moving image that is scaled bigger than the fixed image in both $x$ and $y$ axis. One can reason that the algorithm scale down the bigger parameter first and then when we have some equal aspect ration on the scale ratios the algorithm will move to the central point. Such behavior appears in the lines flowing to a diagonal convergence and then flowing to the central point in the upper right quadrant.
On the other quadrants that we have any scale to bigger images (upper left and bottom right quadrant) we see a similar behavior were the paths flow first to eliminate this bigger scale parameter and then flow to the central point. This show some tendency of the MI function to first squeeze the moving image to a size similar to the fixed image, moving the parameters greater than zero to zero, and then growing the moving image in the axis it was smaller than the fixed or, in other words, moving the parameters lesser than zero to zero. In short MI with MICUDA Shannon seems to prioritize squeezing a bigger image than growing a small image.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=0.5_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=0.9_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1.1_fundo}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/caminhos_Entropy_Q=1.5_fundo}}%
\hfill\\
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=0.5}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=0.9}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=1.1}}%
\hfill
\subcaptionbox{}{\includegraphics[scale=\myhalfscale]{testing_tsallis_N2_T1_51_scale_linear/Contour_Entropy_Q=1.5}}%
\hfill
\caption{\label{path_scale_tsallis}Paths of the gradient divergent algorithm along the MI of the same image with only scale transform and the MICUDA Tsallis algorithm with different $q$ values: (a) $q=0.5$ (b) $q=0.9$ (c) $q=1.1$ (d) $q=1.5$ (e) Isosurfaces for $q=0.5$ (f) $q=0.9$ (g) $q=1.1$ (h) $q=1.5$}
\end{figure*}
Using the MICUDA Tsallis function we have very interesting but unfortunately not useful to registration. We see in Figure \ref{path_scale_tsallis} multiple graphs of different $q$ values. With $q<1.0$ (images a,b,e,f) we have the central point as a local maximum but we also have another local maximum and a very strong gradient field to the upper right quadrant. In those cases we can have a correct registration in only few cases that will direct to the central point. In any other case the algorithm will diverge in the sense to create a bigger moving image than the correct one. With $q>1.0$ (images c,d,g,h) the tendency changes and the algorithm will create a smaller image than the correct one.
Only if we start from a point very near the central point (i.e. our moving image is pretty close to the fixed image in terms of size and won't need to be scaled or only need a very small scale) we will have a correct registration. In the cases were we really need to scale the image to register it we probably will have a wrong image in the end of the algorithm using the Tsallis entropy.
\subsection{Performance}
First of all it's not fair to compare some mathematical computation of GPU and CPU since they are very different in concept, with that in mind we note that our situation of many matrix and vectors computation is very beneficial to GPU usage.
We compared our new algorithm called MICUDA with the ITK Mattes algorithm. MICUDA runs mostly on GPU while ITK Mattes runs on CPU only. The hardware available for our tests was an Intel\textsuperscript{\textregistered} i7-2600K with 8 cores, were we also run our GPU, and a dual Intel\textsuperscript{\textregistered} Xeon 6130 Gold totaling 64 cores. The GPU used was a NVIDIA GTX 1060.
In Table \ref{performance} we have the numbers of our comparison, it's pretty clear that MICUDA using GPU is the winner with a speed up of about $140\times$ a high end 8 core computer (simulated with the Xeon). In the scenario of reviving an old computer the algorithm plays a major role, since with a simple GPU card upgrade we have speed ups of roughly $250-300\times$.
It also must be noted that the Xeon used is a very expensive hardware, specially if we compare to the price of the GPU card used. So in most realistic situations it may not be available to end users of a medical registration software.
\begin{table*}
\begin{tabular}{llllllll}
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{ITK Mattes} & MICUDA & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Speed up (MICUDA vs)} \\
\cmidrule(lr){2-4} \cmidrule(lr){5-5} \cmidrule(lr){6-8}
Transform & Xeon $\times 8$ & Xeon $\times 64$ & i7-2600K & GTX 1060 & Xeon $\times 8$ & Xeon $\times 64$ & i7-2600K\\
\cmidrule(lr){1-5} \cmidrule(lr){6-8}
Translation & 0.8388 & 2.3060 & 0.4515 & 116.21 & 138.54 & 50.39 & 257.39\\
Rotation & 0.5862 & 1.6471 & 0.3097 & 86.30 & 147.22 & 52.40 & 278.66\\
Scale & 0.6665 & 1.8356 & 0.3076 & 99.46 & 149.23 & 54.18 & 323.34\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Performance comparison between ITK Mattes and MICUDA algorithms in values processed per second.}
\label{performance}
\end{table*}
\section{Discussion}
Following the results on the former section we can see that the main problem in the ITK Mattes function is the translation transform. This can be solved very well using the MICUDA Tsallis algorithm allowing us to register images from all points in the space tested.
The rotation and scale transforms have a nice performance under the ITK Mattes algorithm and a similar performance can be reached using the MICUDA Shannon algorithm. Tsallis entropy have a very bad performance on those transforms and should not be used under the risk of producing very wrong registrations.
Since the computational cost of the MI function is mostly in the transform and histogram build and we can use the same histogram to produce the Shannon and Tsallis results the reasonable strategy is to use multiple algorithms in the gradient descent. In this way we can use the Tsallis in the translation gradients and Shannon in the rotation and scale gradients, having the best of both algorithms without much extra computational costs.
The ITK Mattes uses a random sampling of the image in the calculation and also uses a histogram with bins while MICUDA uses all the voxels and produces a full histogram. Further study is needed to understand if the bins and random sampling benefits the rotation and scale transforms and can improve Tsallis values.
This study focus mostly on the capture range of the registration trying to fix the problem of registration not converging at all to the fixed image. More study is needed on the final accuracy of the registration in the very fine end or how close to the fixed image each algorithm can get. In some cases these final small tuning can be very difficult to reach since we start to see the effects of interpolation and our registered image may become offset by a few millimeters.
In the performance there's not much to say, the speed up of using a GPU card in this situation is huge. With a simple upgrade on actual or even older hardware we can have a better result with much less time, so it's a win in all aspects of the comparison.
\section{Acknowledgments}
Data were provided by the Human Connectome Project, WU-Minn Consortium (Principal Investigators: David Van Essen and Kamil Ugurbil; 1U54MH091657) funded by the 16 NIH Institutes and Centers that support the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research; and by the McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience at Washington University.
|
\section{Hinge spectrum of Superconducting HOTIs}
The hinge spectrum of superconducting HOTI given by Eqs.~(1) and (2) of the main text along the $x$ direction corresponding to zero modes of Fig.2c.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{SM_Fig_1}
\caption{The hinge spectrum along the $k_x$ direction (a) before [$\mu=0.2$] and (b) after [$\mu=0.5$] the surface phase transition. The tiny gap in (a) is finite-size effect. The systems size of $100\times100$ is used.}
\label{Fig:hingekx}
\end{figure}
\section{Two more models of chiral higher-order TIs }
Here we present the VPT spectrum for two more models of chiral HOTIs \cite{choti1,choti2,choti3,choti4,choti5,choti6,choti7}. The first is protected by a combination of fourfold rotation and inversion symmetries, i.e $C_4\mathcal{I}$. This model differs from the model in the main text by a simple perturbation, namely an extra magnetic field, $h$, along the $(0,0,1)$ direction:
\begin{align}\label{c4Isymmetric}
h_{c_4\mathbb{I}}(\vex{k})=\,\left(M+t_0\sum_i \cos (k_i)\right)\kappa_z\sigma_0+\,t_1\sum_i\sin (k_i)\kappa_x\sigma_i\,+\,t_2\large(\cos (k_x) - \cos (k_y)\large)\kappa_y\sigma_0\,+\,h\kappa_0\sigma_z.
\end{align}
On the other hand one can build a $\mathcal{I}$ symmetric HOTI by turning off the $C_4\mathcal{T}$ symmetric term ,$t_2=0$, but instead applying the magnetic field in all three directions to gap all the surfaces as,
\begin{align}\label{Isymmetric}
h_{\mathbb{I}}(\vex{k})=\,\left(M+t_0\sum_i \cos (k_i)\right)\kappa_z\sigma_0+\,t_1\sum_i\sin (k_i)\kappa_x\sigma_i\,+\,\kappa_0\bold{h}\,.\,\mathbf{\sigma}.
\end{align}
Fig~.\ref{Fig:VPTC4IandI} shows the VPT spectrum for model of Eq.~\ref{c4Isymmetric} (Fig.~\ref{Fig:VPTC4IandI}a) and Eq.~\ref{Isymmetric} (Fig.~\ref{Fig:VPTC4IandI}b), respectively. As we discussed in the main text a magnetic field parallel to the surface which vortex is passing through, does not affect the vortex phenomena. Therefore as we expected the physics discussed in the text remains valid for the $C_4\mathbb{I}$ symmetric model of Eq.~(\ref{c4Isymmetric}) along the $x$-direction. Of course, the magnetic field along the $z$-direction will gap out the $z$-surface, however, it does not lead to a surface phase transition on that surface. The Fig.~\ref{Fig:VPTC4IandI}b, shows the VPT spectrum along the $x$-direction for the case of the model of Eq.~(\ref{Isymmetric}). We observe that in the absence of $t_2$ term, the magnetic field alone would not lead to a surface phase transition (at least for the case with simple spin-singlet s-wave pairing) and MZMs exist up to vortex phase transition point.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{SM_Fig_2}
\caption{The VPT spectrum of a HOTI at $kx = 0$ having a vortex line parallel to $x$ for models of (a) Eq.~(\ref{c4Isymmetric}), (b) Eq.~(\ref{Isymmetric}). $M=-2.5,\,t_1=1,\,t_2=1,\,\delta_0=0.3$ and $h=0.15$ is used for all plots.}
\label{Fig:VPTC4IandI}
\end{figure}
\section{Other Superconducting pairings}
In the main text, we focused on the spin-singlet intra-orbital pairing which has the most experimental relevance. Here we show the VPT spectrum for five other possible $k$-independent pairings allowed by Fermi statistics. However, we do not intend to analyze the physics in depth as each
pairing deserves
to be discussed separately elsewhere.
Instead, we show the the spectrum and point out some qualitative remarks. We can write the BdG Hamiltonian as,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{hambdg}
h^{BdG}_{\vex{k}}=\begin{bmatrix}
H_{HOTI}(\vex{k})-\mu & \delta_0\Delta_i \\
\delta_0\Delta^*_i & -H^T_{HOTI}(-\vex{k})+\mu\\
\end{bmatrix}
\end{eqnarray}
The requirement that the pairing term satisfies Fermi-Dirac statistics implies that there are only six possible pairing matrices $\Delta_i$ (See e.g., \cite{Roy-Ghorashi,Fu-Berg,Sato}): (1) $\Delta_1=\kappa_0\sigma_y$, (2) $\Delta_2=\kappa_z\sigma_y$, (3) $\Delta_3=\kappa_x\sigma_y$, (4) $\Delta_4=\kappa_y\sigma_x$, (5) $\Delta_5=\kappa_y\sigma_z$, (6) $\Delta_6=\kappa_y\sigma_0$. In the main text we examined the simplest case of intra-orbital spin-singlet pairing of $\Delta_1$. This is exactly the same paring which is used in the original work of \cite{pavan-Ashvin}.
The results shown Fig.~\ref{Fig:VPTallpairing} were obtained using the same parameters, and system sizes, as the ones shown in Fig.2c of the main text.
To facilitate the comparison we also plotted them in the same energy range. Now, we make few qualitative remarks. First, comparing to the model $\Delta_1$ of the main text, all the plots of Fig.~\ref{Fig:VPTallpairing}, show many gapless points and often in a very narrow window of energies.
This fact makes
the analysis of the spectra and the identification of the nature of the low (zero) energy modes extremely difficult.
A full understanding of the physics for these pairings would require extensive full three dimensional
calculations, that we feel are beyond the scope of the current work.
For $\Delta_4,\,\Delta_5,\,\Delta_6$, the bulk spectrum become gapless at some finite doping $\mu$ which results in Majorana Fermi arcs on some of the surfaces. For $\Delta_2$ and $\Delta_3$ the system undergoes a bulk phase transition (bulk gap closure) in sharp contrast to the $\Delta_1$ of the main text. Because these we can have zero modes in the bulk, surface, and possibly hinges of the system, modes that and would affect the vortex physics.
Finally, we note, despite the all of the differences and difficulties mentioned here, it does not mean that they are less interesting (at least theoretically), but they deserve separate thorough investigation.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{SM_Fig_3_R}
\caption{The VPT spectrum of a HOTI at $kx = 0$ having a vortex line parallel to $x$ for (a) $\Delta_2$, (c) $\Delta_3$, (e) $\Delta_4$, (g) $\Delta_5$, (i) $\Delta_6$. The second column (b,d,f,h,j) shows the spectrum of corresponding pairings in the absence of vortex.$M=-2.5,\,t_1=1,\,t_2=1,\,\delta_0=0.3$ is used for all plots.}
\label{Fig:VPTallpairing}
\end{figure}
\section{Possible Experimental Setup}
Our findings could be directly relevant for potential chiral HOTIs and axion insulators candidates, such as in EuIn2As2 \cite{S_exhoti1}, CrI3/Bi2Se3/MnBi2Se4 heterostructures \cite{S_exhoti2}, MnBi2Te4 \cite{S_exhoti3,S_exhoti4,S_exhoti5,S_exhoti6,S_exhoti7} and EuSn2As2 \cite{S_exhoti7}, all of which are predicted to host chiral hinge states.
A possible setup to observe our theoretical predictions could be realized
by combining one of the materials above in a heterostructure consisting of an s-wave superconductor
and and an external gate (separated by the HOTI by a high quality dielectric) to tune the chemical potential of the HOTI,
in which a vortex is induced via an external magnetic field along the $x$ direction,
as shown schematically in Fig.~\ref{expschematic}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{SM_Fig_4}
\caption{A schematic sketch of a possible experimental setup. The "D" and "M" stands for dielectric and metal, respectively.}
\label{expschematic}
\end{figure}
|
\section{Introduction}
Privacy image classification is becoming increasingly important nowadays, owing to the prevalent presence of social media on the web where people share personal and private images. The privacy image classification systems allow people to know if the images they share are private or public.
Private images, such as images involving families, usually involve private information about the users. By contrast, public images generally involve scenes, objects, animals and so on, and do not include private information. The purpose of the privacy image classification is to make people alert while sharing images online. People sometimes may be unaware of whether they are doing right or wrong when sharing their images. In such cases, a system that is capable of classifying private and public images is very useful to users.
For image classification, feature extraction from images is a fundamental step.
Privacy images are challenging for classification, because they may contain high within-class dissimilarity. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:0}, we observe in both categories (private and public) that they have such patterns. Fortunately, there are only two categories in privacy images so that we do not need to consider such varying patterns as in other scene image classification which have far more than two categories \cite{8746125}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth,height=4.2cm,keepaspectratio]{private_public_images.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Images showing the private and public images from PicAlert\cite{zerr2012privacy} dataset.}
\label{fig:0}
\end{figure}
In general, the existing feature extraction methods for privacy images comprise of traditional vision-based methods\cite{zerr2012privacy}, deep learning-based methods\cite{tonge2015privacy,tonge2016image,zhong2017group,tonge2018use,tran2016privacy,tonge2018uncovering}, and semantic approaches \cite{spyromitros2016personalized,sitaula2019tagbased}. While comparing traditional vision-based features against the deep learning-based features, we notice a significant improvement in classification accuracy with the aid of the latter features learned from the pre-trained deep learning models. By the help of the fine-tuned deep learning models, it can even achieve a higher classification accuracy which required a massive amount of data \cite{tran2016privacy}. Nevertheless, in the task of privacy image classification, there is a very limited amount of data due to privacy issues. Simply extracting features from intermediate layers of those models makes the size of the features higher, thereby increasing computational burden during classification.
To sum up, these existing methods on privacy images suffer from \textbf{two} problems: 1) the curse of dimensionality of features; and 2) requirements of massive data if we want to obtain a fine-tuned model or new deep learning model.
As such, feature extraction methods favoring a low feature size and limited data are particularly needed for the task of privacy image classification.
In this paper, we propose a novel approach to extract the features of privacy images with the assistance of unsupervised feature learning, which not only works on a limited amount of privacy images but also yields a lower feature size. Inspired by the work in \cite{tonge2018use}, where the authors
claim the efficacy of the pre-trained models against the fine-tuned models over privacy images, we also choose a pre-trained model in this work. Specifically, among several pre-trained models, we choose the ResNet-50\cite{he2016deep} model,
which has been found to have a lower error rate for the classification of different types of images than the state-of-the-art deep learning models such as VGG-Net\cite{simonyan2014very} and GoogleNet\cite{szegedy2015going}. Furthermore, the ResNet-50 also has a lower number of layers than its other versions (ResNet-101 and ResNet-152), thereby having a faster speed.
To perform unsupervised feature learning, we perform the K-means clustering on the deep features extracted from the ResNet-50\cite{he2016deep} which has been pre-trained with a large dataset of labeled images (i.e., ImageNet\cite{imagenet_cvpr09}). Then, we encode the features using the triangle encoding\cite{coates2011analysis} to achieve our unsupervised deep features.
The K-means clustering can yield centroids of patterns (contexts) for privacy images. The features of the clustering method are (1) discriminable patterns of privacy images and (2) a lower feature size due to its dimension reduction capability.
We tested our unsupervised deep features on PicAlert\cite{zerr2012picalert} and found that our features can produce better classification accuracies than deep learning features extracted by state-of-the-art models.
\section{Related works}
Several studies have explored the privacy image classification problem with the use of different types of features such as SIFT (Scale Invariant Feature Transform) and RGB (Red Green Blue)~\cite{zerr2012privacy}, textual and deep learning based features ~\cite{tonge2015privacy,tonge2016image,zhong2017group,tonge2018use,tran2016privacy,tonge2018uncovering}, semantic features~\cite{spyromitros2016personalized}, and so on.
Zerr et al. \cite{zerr2012picalert}
used various types of visual features such as quantized SIFT, color histogram, brightness and sharpness and the text features of the image. They have shown that the features designed by the fusion of textual and visual features are prominent than the visual features only. Similarly, the authors
in~\cite{tonge2015privacy,tonge2016image,tonge2018use} emphasized the usage of textual features such as deep tags (object tags and scene tags) and user tags (user annotated tags)
based features for the classification of privacy images and claimed that the features designed based on tags outperform the state-of-the-art features such as SIFT, GIST (Generalized Search Tree) and fully connected features (${FC}$-features of VGG-Net). Zhong et al. \cite{zhong2017group} chose $FC$-features of a deep learning model for the group-based personalized approach which further proved the applicability of high-level features such as $FC$-features for this domain.
Similarly, Spyromitros et al. \cite{spyromitros2016personalized}
explored the semantic features based on the output of a large array of classifiers. Their proposed semantic features outperform the generic traditional vision-based features such as SIFT, EDCH (Edge Direction Coherence) feature, etc.
More recently,
Tonge et al. \cite{tonge2018uncovering}
explored textual features based on the pre-trained deep learning model, which yielded the scene information of the image, called scene tags. The authors unveiled that the combination of such scene tags with user tags and object tags outperforms features of individual tags.
Likewise, Tran et al. \cite{tran2016privacy}
extracted hierarchical features by the concatenation of object features and convolutional features. For the experiments, the authors used two pipelined CNNs (Convolutional Neural Networks). The $FC$-features obtained after the fine-tuning operation over two deep learning models were concatenated to get the final hierarchical features of the image.
Their method requires a massive amount of images for training.
However, in the recent research by Tonge et al. \cite{tonge2018use}
the features extracted from the pre-trained model (${FC}$-features of AlexNet\cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet}) outperform the hierarchical features
extracted from the fine-tuned deep learning models \cite{tran2016privacy}.
Thus,
task-generic features which are extracted from the pre-trained models, became more prominent than task-specific features which are extracted from fine-tuned deep learning models, for privacy images.
This opens a door to take advantage of the pre-trained models for the feature extraction of privacy images, given a limited amount of training images.
\section{Unsupervised Features Extraction}
\begin{figure*}[b
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth, keepaspectratio]{psivt_block_diagrams.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Block diagram of the extraction of our proposed unsupervised deep features (UDF) encoding.}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure*}
To extract the unsupervised deep features, we chose the pre-trained
ResNet-50 model. A pre-trained model is favorable owing to the following reasons: 1) fine-tuned models require massive data to overcome overfitting, and 2) there is a very limited amount of private images for the study.
The overall approach, shown as a block diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}, consists of three main steps to extract the unsupervised deep features, namely: initial deep features extraction (Sec. 3.1), K-means clustering on deep features (Sec. 3.2), and unsupervised deep features encoding (Sec. 3.3).
\subsection{Initial deep features extraction}
\begin{figure*}[b]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth, height=3.6cm,keepaspectratio]{psivt_block_diagram.png}
\end{center}
\caption{The steps to extract the initial deep features of the selected activation layers (e.g., activation 48) from the pre-trained ResNet-50 model.}
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure*}
We take the features from the top activation layers
as the candidate deep features which
can better represent images based on the objects' details in the images\cite{8746125}.
The original dimension of the deep features from the activation layers is $7*7*512$, which provides
512-D features (each feature map is $7*7$).
To represent a feature map as a single value, we operate the global average pooling that exploits the properties of deep features with both high and low values. This results in a 512-D vector of an image where each component represents its corresponding feature map.
Let $H$, $W$, and $D$ denote the height, width
, and depth of the candidate deep features of the top activation layers of the ResNet-50 model.
\begin{equation}
{f(x_a)}=\frac{1}{H*W}*\{\sum_{i=1}^{H*W}{x_{a1}^i}, \sum_{i=1}^{H*W}{x_{a2}^i}, \sum_{i=1}^{H*W}{x_{a3}^i},...\sum_{i=1}^{H*W}{x_{aD}^i}\},
\label{eq:1}
\end{equation}
where $f(x_a)$
is the average pooled features of image $x_a$ based on the feature maps $\{x_{a1}^{i}, x_{a2}^{i}, \cdots, x_{aD}^{i}\}_{i=1}^{H*W}$. Eq.~\eqref{eq:1} computes the representative values of the corresponding feature maps.
The pooled features obtained from Eq.~\eqref{eq:1} are further processed by the two normalization strategies: power-normalization and L2-normalization. We first use the signed square root norm of the features for power-normalization and then perform L2-normalization, due to their higher performance\cite{lin2017bilinear,lin2015bilinear}.
\begin{equation}
{f(x'_a)}=\sqrt{{f(x_a)}}
\label{eq:2}
\end{equation}
Eq.~\eqref{eq:2} calculates the square root based power normalization ($f(x'_a)$) of each element of the average pooled feature vector $f(x_a$). Now, the features are normalized, as shown in the Eq.~\eqref{eq:3}.
\begin{equation}
{f(x''_a)}=\frac{f(x'_a)}{\| f(x'_a)\|_2}
\label{eq:3}
\end{equation}
Similarly, Eq.~\eqref{eq:3} yields $f(x''_a)$, which is the L2-normalization of each element of the feature vector $f(x'_a)$.
The feature vectors of images extracted from Eq.~\eqref{eq:3} will be used to perform K-means clustering to learn the centroids (Sec. 3.2).
Table~\ref{tab:1} lists detailed information about the layers used in this work. The first five activation layers are 512-D with a feature map size of $7*7$.
For the average pooling layer (avg\_pool), the dimension is 2048-D in the ResNet-50 model with a feature map size of $1*1$.
We perform global averaged pooling of each feature map to get the aggregated value of the corresponding feature map.
\begin{table}[tb]
\centering
\caption{Deep layers with sizes of feature maps and features from the pre-trained ResNet-50 model. The names in the bracket represent the activation layer name of the ResNet-50 model. We call these layers such as 42, 44, 45 and so on as methods because they output features. }
\begin{center}
\label{tab:1}
\begin{tabular}{m{5cm} m{2cm} m{2.3cm}}
\hline
\textbf{Methods} & \textbf{Feat. map} & \textbf{Feat. size}\\
\hline
\textbf{ResNet-50(42)} & ${7*7}$ & 512-D \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(44)} & ${7*7}$ & 512-D \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(45)} & ${7*7}$ & 512-D\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(47)} & ${7*7}$ & 512-D\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(48)} & ${7*7}$ & 512-D \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(avg\_pool)} & ${1*1}$ & 2048-D \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{K-means clustering over deep features}
We perform K-means clustering to learn the centroids of the initial deep features for the training dataset. Firstly, we set $k$ as an initial centroid number.
Let $c^{k}$ represent the $k^{th}$ cluster center. The $k$ clusters and centroids are optimized based on the distances of data points
to centroids. $k$ is set to $250$ (Sec. \ref{k_analysis}) which empirically produces a higher accuracy than others.
While there are more delicately designed clustering algorithms, K-means is easy and simple to use, and we found it is effective in our context.
\subsection{Unsupervised deep features encoding}
After the calculation of the learned centroids $\{c^{k}\}$, we calculate the strength of all the initial deep features using the triangle encoding technique\cite{coates2011analysis}
which has a higher performance than hard assignment coding schemes as described by Coates et al.~\cite{coates2011analysis}.
\begin{equation}
{f(\hat{x_a})}=max\{0, {\mu-{z_k}\}},
\label{eq:4}
\end{equation}
\newcommand{\norm}[1]{\left\lVert#1\right\rVert}
where ${z_k}$=
$d{(f(x''_a),c^k)}$
and $\mu$ is the average distance of all $f(x''_a)$ to all centriods and $f(\hat{x_a})$ denotes the unsupervised deep features in Eq.~\eqref{eq:4}.
\begin{equation}
d{(f(x''_a),c^k)}=\sqrt{(\sum{(f(x''_a)-c^k})^2}
\label{eq:5}
\end{equation}
We calculate the Euclidean distances between any two points, shown in Eq.~\eqref{eq:5}.
After calculating the average distances from the corresponding initial features, we need to check if one distance is below or above its corresponding average distance. This is because the distances to all the centroids reveal the implicit relationship among centroids for the corresponding initial deep features. To do so, we set
the distance to $0$ if the distance is above the average distance. Otherwise we set it as the
difference between the average distance and Euclidean distance of the corresponding point.
Through this scheme, we are able to identify the importance of corresponding initial deep features to all centroids, which further facilitates the encoding of the features.
In this work, the dimension of the resulting unsupervised deep features are $k$. Here, $k=250$ resulting in a 250-D vector for each privacy image.
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Unsupervised deep features of training images}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\renewcommand{\algorithmicrequire}{\textbf{Input:}}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicensure}{\textbf{Output:}}
\REQUIRE $f(x'')\leftarrow$training initial deep features, $k\leftarrow$number of cluster centroids
\ENSURE $f(\hat{x})\leftarrow$training unsupervised deep features,\\ $c^k\leftarrow$cluster centroids of training features
\STATE Perform K-means clustering on $f(x'')$ and extract $c^k$ centroids.
\FOR {$i = 0$ to $n$}
\FOR {$j = 0$ to $k$}
\STATE $\sum$=$\sum_j$d($f(x''_i)$, $c^j$)
\ENDFOR
\FOR {$l = 0$ to $k$}
\STATE ${\mu\leftarrow} \sum/k$
\STATE ${z_l}\leftarrow d(f(x''_i),c^l)$
\STATE $\hat{x}_l\leftarrow max\{0, \mu-z_l\}$
\ENDFOR
\STATE $f(\hat{x_i}) \leftarrow \hat{x_l}$
\ENDFOR
\RETURN $f(\hat{x})
\end{algorithmic}
\label{algo:0}
\end{algorithm}
We assume that the initial deep features are represented by $f(x'')$ in Alg. \ref{algo:0} for training. To extract the proposed features, we perform several steps. First of all, we perform K-means clustering over such deep features to obtain $c_k$ cluster centroids and then perform the triangle encoding operation from lines 2 to 13. We repeat the lines from 2 to 13 for the extraction of proposed features of testing initial deep features, based on the centroids $\{c_k\}$ learned from training features.
\section{Experimental Results}
This section is divided into three sub-sections: Section \ref{dataset} explains the dataset used; Section \ref{implementation} explains our experimental setup; Section \ref{k_analysis} discusses the analysis of different values of $k$ in the experiment; and Section \ref{analysis} discusses the results and testing time.
\subsection{Dataset}
\label{dataset}
We conduct experiments on the Flickr images sampled from the only available privacy image dataset, PicAlert\cite{zerr2012privacy}, which was provided by Spyromitros et al. \cite{spyromitros2016personalized}.
The dataset contains two categories of images: private and public.
The number of private images in the dataset is lower than public images and we follow the similar configurations as suggested by Tonge et al. \cite{tonge2016image} for the train/test split in the experiment.
The total number of images is $4700$, in which, $3917$ ($83\%$) images are for training and $783$ ($17\%$) images are for testing.
Similarly, the ratio of private/public images in each subset (training and testing) is $3:1$.
\subsection{Experimental setup}
\label{implementation}
The experiments have been performed on a laptop with NVIDIA 1050 GeForce GTX GPU and 16GB RAM. We use the keras\cite{chollet2017kerasR} package implemented in R\cite{rcite}, which is open source. Also, we test our proposed unsupervised deep features by utilizing the L2-regularized Logistic Regression (LR) classifier in Liblinear\cite{Fan:2008:LLL:1390681.1442794}.
We fix bias as $1$ and tune $C$, which is the main parameter to tune in L2-regularized Logistic Regression (LR) classifier.
The grid search technique is used for $C$ in the range of $1$ and $50$, to search the optimal value.
\subsection{Analysis of $k$}
\label{k_analysis}
To select a best $k$, the number of clusters for our dataset, we perform an analysis using the features extracted from the ResNet-50(47) method in the experiment. The tested values for $k$ are in the range of 100 and 500 as seen in Table ~\ref{tab:k}.
While observing in Table~\ref{tab:k}, we notice that the number of cluster $k=250$ yielded a more prominent classification accuracy (\textbf{85.69}\%) than other values. Thus, we empirically employed $250$ as the number of clusters for K-means clustering to extract the proposed unsupervised deep features (UDF).
\begin{table}[tb]
\centering
\caption{Analysis of different $k$, number of clusters, using classification accuracy (\%) while extracting unsupervised deep features (UDF) using ResNet-50(47) method.
}
\begin{center}
\label{tab:k}
\begin{tabular}{m{2cm} m{1cm} m{1cm} m{1cm} m{1cm} m{1cm} m{1cm} m{1cm} m{1cm} m{1cm}}
\hline
\textbf{$k$} &100 &150 &200 &250 &300 &350 &400 &450 &500\\
\hline
\textbf{Accuracy} &84.54 &84.92 &85.05 &\textbf{85.69} &85.18 &85.18 &85.05 &85.18 & 85.56 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2cm}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Analysis of results}
\label{analysis}
We discuss the results of classification accuracy and prediction timings in this section.
\subsubsection{Classification accuracy}
We compare the proposed features with the state-of-the-art features (deep features extracted from various pre-trained deep learning models), in terms of classification accuracy.
To examine what deep features are more effective, we evaluate the deep features from six different layers of ResNet-50 model.
In Table~\ref{tab:4}, we see that our proposed unsupervised deep features extracted from each layer outperform the existing features of the corresponding layer. The highest accuracy is from the activation layer 48 (ResNet-50(48)), which is \textbf{85.95\%}, among all unsupervised deep features. Similarly, the least accuracy is generated by the ResNet-50(42) which is 84.80\%. We notice the interesting result from the ResNet-50(avg\_pool) layer whose accuracy (85.56\%) is same for both kinds of features. It is a top layer of the ResNet-50 model, which carries important information about objects in the images.
In spite of a lower size, the classification accuracies of the proposed features are consistently increased for each layer\cite{he2016deep} except the top layer, compared to the corresponding original deep features.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Comparisons of the proposed unsupervised deep features (UDF) with the initial deep features (IDF) with regard to classification accuracy (\%).
}
\begin{center}
\label{tab:4}
\begin{tabular}{m{5cm} m{2.2cm} m{2.2cm}}
\hline
\textbf{Methods} & \textbf{IDF} & \textbf{UDF}\\
\hline
\textbf{ResNet-50(42)} & 83.90 & \textbf{84.80} \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(44)} & 84.03 &\textbf{85.05}\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(45)} & 85.05 &\textbf{85.82}\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(47)} & 84.16 &\textbf{85.69}\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(48)} & 84.41 &\textbf{85.95} \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(avg\_pool)}& \textbf{85.56} & \textbf{85.56} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2cm}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\caption{Comparisons of the proposed features with the state-of-the-art deep features, which are extracted from different pre-trained deep learning models, in terms of classification accuracy (\%) and testing time (seconds). }
\begin{center}
\label{tab:5}
\begin{tabular}{m{6cm} m{2cm} m{1.6cm} m{1.7cm}}
\hline
\textbf{Methods} &\textbf{Feat. size}& \textbf{Acc.} & \textbf{Test. time}\\
\hline
\textbf{VGG-16}(${FC_1}$)\cite{simonyan2014very}&4096-D &84.67 &0.120\\
\textbf{VGG-16(\textbf{${FC_2}$})}\cite{simonyan2014very}&4096-D &84.80&0.090\\
\textbf{VGG-19(${FC_1}$)}\cite{simonyan2014very} &4096-D&84.67&0.060\\
\textbf{VGG-19(${FC_2}$)}\cite{simonyan2014very}&4096-D&84.54&0.090\\
\textbf{Inception-V3(avg\_pool)}\cite{szegedy2016rethinking}&2048-D&74.84&0.050\\
\textbf{DenseNet-121(avg\_pool)}\cite{huang2017densely}&1024-D&79.56&0.025\\
\textbf{DenseNet-169(avg\_pool)}\cite{huang2017densely}&1664-D&78.41&0.030\\
\textbf{DenseNet-201(avg\_pool)}\cite{huang2017densely}&1920-D&79.05&0.020\\
\textbf{Xception(avg\_pool)}\cite{chollet2017xception}&2048-D&75.00&0.050\\
\textbf{Inception-ResNet-v2(avg\_pool)}\cite{szegedy2017inception}& 1536-D&74.96 &0.020\\
\textbf{Ours (Serial Fusion)}&500-D&\textbf{86.33} &\textbf{0.015} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
Furthermore, to improve the classification for privacy images, we fuse two unsupervised deep features. We tested the combination of two different deep features and empirically found that the combination of ResNet-50(47) and ResNet-50 (avg\_pool) produces a higher separability. That is, the resulting features become more discriminable than other types of combinations.
We use the serial feature fusion strategy\cite{yang2003feature} which produces 500-D features in total.
The comparisons of our fused features with the state-of-the-art deep features are shown in Table~\ref{tab:5}. The compared deep features are extracted from various pre-trained deep learning models: VGG-Net\cite{simonyan2014very} (VGG-16 and VGG-19), ResNet-50\cite{he2016deep}, DenseNet-121\cite{huang2017densely}, DenseNet-169\cite{huang2017densely}, DenseNet-201\cite{huang2017densely}, Inception-V3\cite{szegedy2016rethinking}, Xception\cite{chollet2017xception}, Inception-ResNet-v2\cite{szegedy2017inception}.
We observe that the lowest accuracy is 74.84\% from Inception-ResNet-v2\cite{szegedy2017inception}. VGG-Net\cite{simonyan2014very} with VGG-16($FC2$) features yield an accuracy of 84.80\% (which is the second highest accuracy on the dataset), which clearly benefits from a greater feature size.
Our fused deep features produce an accuracy of \textbf{86.33}\% which is 11.49\% higher than the lowest accuracy\cite{szegedy2017inception}.
The features from other pre-trained models except VGG-Net\cite{simonyan2014very} and ResNet-50\cite{he2016deep} are not appropriate for the classification of privacy images because of their lower classification accuracies. We notice that our proposed features outperform the existing features in terms of classification accuracy.
\subsubsection{Testing time}
We also analyze the efficiency of our proposed deep features, i.e., the testing time during classification. The testing time of the proposed unsupervised features is compared with those of the state-of-the-art deep features (Table \ref{tab:5}).
The testing time is measured in seconds.
Our fused features achieve \textbf{0.015} seconds and is the fastest among all.
We also observe that the testing timings of the proposed features during classification are shorter compared to the corresponding deep features (Table~\ref{tab:2}). The minimum testing time reported is \textbf{0.003} seconds which is the least among all. This attributes to a lower size of the proposed features than the original deep features: a larger feature size often leads to a slower prediction speed.
We list the feature sizes of original deep features and the proposed features in Table~\ref{tab:3}. Since we set $250$ as the number of cluster centroids ($k$) during K-means clustering, the size of the proposed features is 250.
Here, we notice that our proposed features outperform state-of-the-art deep features in terms of testing time as well.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Testing timings (in seconds) of the proposed unsupervised deep features (UDF) as well as the initial deep features (IDF).}
\begin{center}
\label{tab:2}
\begin{tabular}{m{4cm} m{3cm} m{2cm}}
\hline
\textbf{Methods} & \textbf{IDF} & \textbf{UDF}\\%[1ex]
\hline
\textbf{ResNet-50(42)} & 0.017 & \textbf{0.011} \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(44)} & 0.009 &\textbf{0.004}\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(45)} & 0.015 &\textbf{0.003}\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(47)} & 0.011 &\textbf{0.003}\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(48)} & 0.009 &\textbf{0.003} \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(avg\_pool)} & 0.160 & \textbf{0.003} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Sizes of the proposed unsupervised deep features (UDF) and the initial deep features (IDF).}
\begin{center}
\label{tab:3}
\begin{tabular}{m{4cm} m{3cm} m{3cm}}
\hline
\textbf{Methods} & \textbf{IDF} & \textbf{UDF}\\
\hline
\textbf{ResNet-50(42)} & 512-D & 250-D \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(44)} & 512-D &250-D\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(45)} & 512-D &250-D\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(47)} & 512-D &250-D\\
\textbf{ResNet-50(48)} & 512-D &250-D \\
\textbf{ResNet-50(avg\_pool)} & 2048-D & 250-D \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have introduced the unsupervised deep features based on the deep features extracted from the ResNet-50 model.
We first extract the deep features from top activation layers of the ResNet-50 model for each image, and then perform the K-means clustering over training set to learn the centroids. Finally, we encode the computed features to a feature vector for each image based on the learned centroids. The feature vector is taken as an input to our trained model which gives the prediction. Experiments show that our proposed features are more accurate in privacy image classification and produce shorter testing time than state-of-the-art deep features. In the future, we would like to investigate a more complicated classification of privacy images which involve more than two categories.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Sec:Introduction}
The Cherenkov Telescope Array (CTA) is a future ground-based observatory of very-high-energetic (VHE) $\gamma$--rays of cosmic origin~\cite{Acharya:2013,Mazin:2019}.
Two arrays of imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes (IACTs) will detect Cherenkov radiation from air showers initiated by cosmic particles.
Improved energy reconstruction compared to the current systems will require reliable calibration of the telescope arrays as well as the atmosphere as an inseparable part of the detector~\cite{Maccarone:2017, Ebr:2017}.
A possible calibration approach for the CTA is the method of the Cherenkov transparency coefficient (CTC) which monitors the transparency ($T$) of the atmosphere to Cherenkov light from air showers~\cite{Hahn:2014}.
It uses telescope data and the assumption that the number of air showers recorded per unit time (trigger rate) is sensitive to the atmospheric transmission.
The method can also be used to assess the telescope optical throughput by utilizing the hardware dependence of the trigger~rate.
The original method of the CTC cannot be easily applied without loss of precision to arrays of tens of telescopes with diverse designs.
An extension of the CTC has been recently proposed as a feasible means of the atmospheric and array calibration at the CTA North observatory~\cite{Stefanik:2019a}.
Here, we continue with this work and present a preliminary feasibility study for the implementation of the extended CTC in the CTA array in the southern hemisphere~\cite{Maier:2019}.
The viability of the CTC is examined in the context of different characteristics of the southern observatory compared to the northern one: the size of the local geomagnetic field and the number of distinct telescope designs.
The study uses Monte Carlo (MC) simulations of proton-initiated air showers observed by the large- (LST), medium- (MST) and small-sized (SST) telescopes to be deployed at the CTA South.
In particular, the feasibility of the CTC for the SSTs is studied here for the first time.
We assume the SST-1M design~\cite{Heller:2019}, one of the initial prototypes of the CTA small telescopes.
The proceedings paper is structured as follows: an alternative approach to the original CTC calculation~\cite{Stefanik:2019a} is outlined in Section~\ref{Sec:CTC}.
Section~\ref{Sec:Application} presents results from our MC study on the feasibility of the CTC for atmospheric monitoring (\ref{Sec:Monitoring}) and array calibration (\ref{Sec:Cross_calibration}) at the CTA South.
Conclusions and further outlook are given in Section~\ref{Sec:Conclusions}.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\section{Cherenkov transparency coefficient}
\label{Sec:CTC}
In a first order approximation, trigger rates of IACTs are given by the integral flux of charged cosmic rays weighted by the effective area of telescopes~\cite{Hahn:2014}.
Since the flux of cosmic rays is assumed to be constant in time, variations of the trigger rates are indicative of changes in the atmospheric transparency, provided other phenomena affecting the rates are accounted for.
Complex dependencies of trigger rates in large telescope arrays are included in the updated method of the CTC~\cite{Stefanik:2019a}.
We differentiate two implementations of the method:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Atmospheric monitoring}.
An estimate of the atmospheric transparency to Cherenkov photons, given by the aerosol optical depth ($\tau$), is obtained as~\cite{Stefanik:2019a}:
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:CTC}
\tij{} = \frac{1}{P} \mathlarger{\sum}_{ \substack{i = 1 \\ i < j} }^{N} \tij{ij} (\tau) = \frac{1}{P \cdot \mathcal{K}} \mathlarger{\sum}_{ \substack{i = 1 \\ i < j} }^{N} \left( \frac{R_{ij} (\tau, \mathcal{O}, \varepsilon_{i}, \varepsilon_{j})}{\varepsilon_{i} \cdot \varepsilon_{j} \cdot \Fnom{ij} (\mathcal{O})} \right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma}},
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\end{equation}
\noindent
where $\hat{T}$ denotes the Cherenkov transparency coefficient, $\tij{ij}$ is the coefficient calculated for a pair of telescopes with identifiers $i,j$ and optical throughput efficiencies $\varepsilon_{i}, \varepsilon_{j}$.
$R_{ij}$ is the rate of events triggering telescopes $i,j$ in coincidence, $\Fnom{ij}$ is the estimate of the pairwise trigger rate recovered from MC simulations for observational conditions $\mathcal{O}$ and $\varepsilon_{i} = \varepsilon_{j} = 1$.
$N$ is the number of active telescopes during the observation, $P$ the number of telescope pairs and $\mathcal{K}$ is the normalization for the reference atmospheric profile.
Index $\gamma$ derives from the dependence of the flux of registered cosmic particles on their energy.
We assume $\gamma = \Gamma - 1$, where $\Gamma = 2.7$, as the trigger rates of IACTs are dominated by air showers induced by charged cosmic rays with differential flux $J(E) \propto E^{-\Gamma}$~\cite{Sanuki:2000}.
\item {\em Array calibration}.
Optical throughput efficiencies $\varepsilon_{i}$ in~Eq.\eqref{Eq:CTC} need to be provided by an independent calibration procedure.
If the efficiencies are not known or have to be cross-checked, the relationship between the CTC and the telescope hardware can be exploited for relative calibration of telescope responses.
Provided the atmospheric transparency in a given pointing direction of telescopes is stable across the array ($\tij{ij} = T, \forall i,j$), the inter-calibration of telescopes of the same type can be achieved by minimizing the objective function~\cite{Stefanik:2019a}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:chi2}
F(\varepsilon, T) = \mathlarger{\sum}_{ \substack{i = 1 \\ i < j} }^{N}{ \frac{ \left( \tnom{ij} - \left( \varepsilon_{i} \cdot \varepsilon_{j} \right)^{\frac{1}{\gamma}} \cdot T \right)^{2} }{\sigma^{2}_{ij}} },
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\end{equation}
\noindent
where $\tnom{ij} = \left( R_{ij} / \Fnom{ij} \right)^{1/\gamma}$, $\sigma_{ij}$ are the uncertainties of estimates $\tnom{ij}$ and $\varepsilon_{i}$, $T$ are free parameters.
Assuming the value of $T$ is not known beforehand, the scale of optimized efficiencies $\hat{\varepsilon}$ is not fixed.
The optical throughput of one telescope is arbitrarily chosen as a reference one ($\varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}$) and is not varied.
The efficiency estimates of other telescopes and the pairwise transparency estimates are expressed relatively as $\hat{\varepsilon}_{i} / \varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}$ and $q_{ij} = \tij{ij} \cdot \varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}^{-2 / \gamma}$, respectively.
The cross-calibration of optical throughput between two sub-systems of different telescope types $A$ and $B$ is then performed by relating the reference efficiencies as $\varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}^{A} = \left[ \langle q^{A} \rangle / \langle q^{B} \rangle \right]^{\gamma / 2} \cdot \varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}^{B}$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\columnwidth]{Fig1a.png}
\hspace{0.05\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\columnwidth]{Fig1b.png}
\caption{
Simulated trigger rates are shown for pairs of telescopes of the same type as a function of the telescope separation in the shower plane~($d_{\mathrm{SP}}$, see top panel in Fig.~\protect\ref{Fig:Bfield}) for zenith angles $\theta = 0^{\circ}$ (left) and $60^{\circ}$ (right).
Colours denote telescope classes.
The magnetic field in the simulations was assumed to be $B \approx 0$.
}
\label{Fig:Geometry}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\end{figure}
Trigger rates comprising events detected by two telescopes in coincidence are used in order to mitigate the contribution of accidental triggers.
Pairwise transparency estimates in Eq.\eqref{Eq:CTC}, and thus the CTC, are made hardware independent by accounting for the optical throughput of both instruments ($\varepsilon_{i}, \varepsilon_{j}$) constituting a telescope pair ($i,j$).
Telescope efficiencies are expressed relatively as a fraction of the nominal optical throughput, i.e.~$\varepsilon \in [0,1]$.
The term $\Fnom{ij}$ assures that the CTC is independent of the observational conditions, represented by the layouts of telescope pairs and the zenith and azimuth angles of incident air showers.
Fig.~\ref{Fig:Geometry} illustrates the relationship between the pairwise trigger rate and the distance $d_{\mathrm{SP}}$ between the telescope positions projected on the plane orthogonal to the air shower direction (shower plane, see the top panel in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Bfield}).
Stereo trigger rates were obtained from MC simulations for pairs constituting telescopes of the same type. Negligible strength of the magnetic field was assumed ($B \approx 0.001 \mu$T) to examine only the geometrical effects.
Three designs of different-sized telescopes foreseen at the CTA South were assumed.
The impact of the zenith angle ($\theta$) of observations is depicted for $\theta = 0^{\circ}$ (left panel) and $60^{\circ}$ (right).
Dashed lines denote the approximation of the trigger rate by a continuous function $\Fnom{ij} (\theta, d_{\mathrm{SP}})$ recovered from the fit of the MC data separately for each telescope class and for vanishing magnetic field, see e.g.~\mbox{\cite{Stefanik:2019a}}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.25\columnwidth]{Fig2a.pdf} \\
\vspace{0.2cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\columnwidth]{Fig2b.png}
\hspace{0.05\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\columnwidth]{Fig2c.png}
\caption{
Top: Shower plane (SP) orthogonal to the air shower direction.
T1$_{\mathrm{SP}}$ and T2$_{\mathrm{SP}}$ are the positions of a pair of telescopes projected from the horizontal to the shower plane.
The distance between both telescopes is~$d_{\mathrm{SP}}$.
$\vec{B}_{\perp}$ is the component of the Earth's magnetic field vector perpendicular to the air shower direction.
The angle between $\vec{B}_{\perp}$ and the line joining two telescopes in the shower plane is denoted $\alpha$.
Bottom: The ratio $R / \Fnom{}$ for the simulated SST pairwise trigger rates ($R$) assuming $B = B_{\mathrm{S}}$, where $B_{\mathrm{S}}$ is the modulus of the geomagnetic field vector at the CTA South site.
The rate estimates ($\Fnom{}(\theta, d_{\mathrm{SP}})$) were obtained from the fit of geometrical dependencies for $B \approx 0$ (see also Fig.~\protect\ref{Fig:Geometry}).
Shown are different scenarios for $B_{\perp} / B_{\mathrm{S}}$ (colors) and the angle $\alpha = 0^{\circ}$ (left) and $90^{\circ}$ (right).
Dashed lines denote a $5\%$ difference between $R$ and $\Fnom{}$.
}
\label{Fig:Bfield}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\end{figure}
In addition to the hardware and observation configurations, the local geomagnetic field ($\vec{B}$) also affects telescope trigger rates, see the bottom panels in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Bfield}.
As an example, we depict pairwise trigger rates ($R$) of the SSTs which were obtained from simulations with $B_{\mathrm{S}} = |\vec{B}_{\mathrm{S}}|$ corresponding to the CTA South site.
The evolution of the ratio $R / \Fnom{} (\theta, d_{\mathrm{SP}})$ with $d_{\mathrm{SP}}$ is shown for different relative sizes of the component of the magnetic field vector perpendicular to the air shower direction ($B_{\perp} / B_{\mathrm{S}}$, see the top panel in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Bfield}).
We explore also the impact of the angle $\alpha$ between $\vec{B}_{\perp}$ and the inter-telescope distance projected into the shower plane.
For $\alpha = 0^{\circ}$ (left) and $90^{\circ}$ (right), charged particles in an air shower are deflected predominantly in the direction orthogonal and parallel to the line joining the telescopes, respectively.
Due to the computational restrictions, the statistical uncertainties of the shown trigger rates reach up to $20\%$, depending on the inter-telescope distance.
The results of Fig.~\ref{Fig:Bfield} are regarded as estimates on the systematic uncertainties of the CTC.
If uncorrected, the mis-reconstruction of the pairwise trigger rates at the CTA South can be as much as $10\%$ (red lines) while the attainable accuracy is within $5\%$ for pointing directions roughly parallel with $\vec{B}_{\mathrm{S}}$ (blue lines).
It is worth noting that the modulus of the magnetic field vector at the CTA North is $B_{\mathrm{N}} \approx 1.7 B_{\mathrm{S}}$.
While all pointing directions at the CTA South with $\theta \leq 60^{\circ}$ are equivalent to $B_{\perp} / B_{\mathrm{N}} < 0.6$, only $\sim 17\%$ of configurations at the CTA North satisfy this inequality.
The accuracy of the CTC for uncorrected effects of the magnetic field is expected to be better at the southern observatory as larger values of $B_{\perp}$ are assumed to result in larger bias on the trigger rate.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\section{Application of the CTC at the CTA South}
\label{Sec:Application}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
The feasibility of the CTC was tested using simulations of proton-induced air showers observed by the full CTA South array consisting of 4 LSTs, 25 MSTs and 70 SSTs~\cite{Maier:2019}.
The observation altitude and magnetic field were set correspondingly to the CTA South site.
Zenith and azimuth angles were chosen as $60^{\circ}$ and $180^{\circ}$, respectively, in order to explore the performance of the method for a small influence of the geomagnetic field ($B_{\perp} / B_{\mathrm{S}} = 0.1$).
Telescopes were assigned randomly degraded optical throughput efficiencies from the normal distribution $\mathcal{N} (0.7, 0.1)$.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Atmospheric monitoring}
\label{Sec:Monitoring}
We test the performance of the CTC for the monitoring of changes in the atmospheric transmission due to different concentrations of aerosols.
We assume four different models of aerosol optical depth ($\tau$) as provided by the MODTRAN software~\cite{Berk:2014}.
The used atmospheric profiles simulate no aerosol extinction, extinction due to aerosols in the boundary layer close to the ground or extinction higher in the troposphere but below the production height of VHE air showers.
We~calculate the atmospheric transparency $T$ corresponding to these profiles as the median value of $\exp(-\tau (\lambda))$ weighted by the mirror reflectivity and the quantum efficiency of the camera photo-sensors which are both functions of the wavelength of incident Cherenkov light ($\lambda$).
Here, $\tau$ is the aerosol optical depth in a vertical air column\footnote{The zenith angle dependence of the optical depth is accounted for by the normalization $\Fnom{}$ in Eq.\eqref{Eq:CTC}.} from the observation level up to the height of 18~km above sea level, i.e. above the emission altitudes of the majority of Cherenkov photons from air showers.
The transparency is normalized so that $T = 1$ corresponds to no aerosol attenuation.
A single model of the molecular density of the atmosphere is assumed as it has been shown that the CTC is not sensitive to the seasonal variations of the local density profile~\cite{Stefanik:2019b}.
Out of the whole array we choose 6 LST, 72 MST and 100 SST pairs of telescopes of the same type with inter-telescope distances $<300$~m.
For each of the telescope pairs, an estimate of the pairwise trigger rate ($\Fnom{ij}$) is obtained from fits of MC trigger rates in a variety of geometrical configurations.
For details of the used fit functions see~\cite{Stefanik:2019a}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\columnwidth]{Fig3a.png}
\hspace{0.05\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.42\columnwidth]{Fig3b.png}
\caption{
The Cherenkov transparency coefficient ($\tij{}$) retrieved from the MC trigger rates of the full CTA South array.
Left: the CTC for the simulations assuming four different concentrations of aerosols in the ground layer below the altitudes of air showers.
Right: the CTC for clouds of various aerosol optical depths simulated at different altitudes (colors).
The reference MC atmospheric transparency ($T$) is calculated from the ground level (2.2~km) up to a height of 18~km a.s.l.
Dashed lines represent the equality $\tij{} = T$.
}
\label{Fig:Monitoring}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\end{figure}
The CTCs are calculated according to Eq.\eqref{Eq:CTC} as averages of pairwise transparency estimates over all selected 178 telescope pairs.
In the left panel in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Monitoring}, the CTCs ($\tij{}$) are compared with the MC atmospheric transparency ($T$) for the models of the ground layer aerosols.
The CTC is sensitive to the increased atmospheric attenuation and agrees with the input transparency within~$1\%$.
However, it has to be emphasized that the optical throughput ($\varepsilon$) used for the calculation is assumed to be perfectly known and is substituted by the throughput set in MC simulations.
In~reality, the optical throughput efficiencies will be provided by other calibration methods~\cite{Maccarone:2017}.
It~is expected that the resolution of the transparency estimates will worsen according to the precision of the reconstructed optical throughput, e.g. $\sim 4-5\%$ when using muon rings~\cite{Gaug:2019}.
A further contribution to the systematic uncertainty of the CTC stems from the influence of the geomagnetic field which is more significant in observations conducted under pointing directions nearly perpendicular to the field vector (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Bfield}).
Note that this uncertainty may be reduced through detailed MC simulations of the pairwise trigger rates in different bins of $B_{\perp} / B_{\mathrm{S}}$.
In addition to the ground layer aerosols, we inspect the CTC performance under the presence of clouds.
The MODTRAN input for our simulations assumes clouds with a uniform structure and thickness of 1~km.
Altitudes of cloud bases have been chosen to $5.2-15.2$~km~a.s.l.
Aerosol optical depths of clouds were chosen in the range $0.05-0.7$.
Besides the cloud specifications, all used models assume the same atmospheric profile with desert-like extinction due to aerosols.
The atmospheric transparency is again calculated from the total aerosol optical depth below 18~km.
The CTCs corresponding to each cloud configuration are shown in the right panel in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Monitoring}.
Atmospheric transparency estimates agree with the simulated values for low lying clouds which are completely below the maxima of Cherenkov radiation from VHE air showers ($\sim5$~km a.s.l.).
With increasing altitude, clouds obstruct less Cherenkov light and the atmospheric transparency is overestimated.
At 15~km, the CTC is almost insensitive to changes of the cloud optical properties.
For aerosol attenuation close to the ground, the CTC is a robust measure of the atmospheric influence on the energy reconstruction within the IACT technique.
However, the bias in the reconstructed energy of primary $\gamma$--rays is height-dependent for absorbers at higher altitudes.
While the CTC is sensitive to changes in the cloud altitude, neither the altitude nor the optical depth of the cloud can be ascertained.
For higher lying clouds, the CTC can be only used as a complementary method to approaches capable of assessing the altitude of an absorber, e.g.~the Raman~LIDAR~\cite{Vasileiadis:2019}.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Cross-calibration of telescope responses}
\label{Sec:Cross_calibration}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{Fig4.png}
\caption{
Relative estimates of the optical throughput ($\hat{\varepsilon}_{i} / \varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}$) from cross-calibration of telescopes in the full CTA South array are compared to the efficiencies assumed in MC simulations ($\varepsilon_{i} / \varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}$).
The results are shown relative to the optical throughput of a reference telescope which was not varied during the optimization outlined in Section~\protect\ref{Sec:CTC}.
Percentage residuals are shown below.
Colors denote different telescope classes.
}
\label{Fig:Cross_calibration}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\end{figure}
In another application of our method, we assume that the optical throughput of telescopes is not known and needs to be estimated.
To this end, we calculate pairwise transparency estimates ($\tnom{ij}$, see Section~\ref{Sec:CTC}) for the case of nominal optical throughput $\left( \varepsilon = 1 \right)$.
The true atmospheric transparency is not known but presumed to be uniform across the whole telescope array.\footnote{Given the extent of the array, this requirement might not always be met. In such case the inter-calibration may be performed within smaller groups of telescopes for which variations of atmospheric conditions are assumed to be small.}
In~each sub-system of telescopes of class $C$, where $C \in \left\lbrace \text{LST, MST, SST} \right\rbrace$, we select arbitrarily one reference telescope to fix the scale of the optical throughput ($\varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}^{C}$) and optimize the efficiencies of the remaining telescopes and the atmospheric transparency according to Eq.\eqref{Eq:chi2}.
The output of the minimization are three sets of inter-calibrated optical throughput efficiencies $\hat{\varepsilon}_{i}^{C} / \varepsilon_{\mathrm{R}}^{C}$.
The ambiguity between the reference efficiencies of individual classes is then removed by the cross-calibration outlined in Section~\ref{Sec:CTC}.
The reconstructed optical throughput efficiencies are drawn against those assumed in MC simulations in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Cross_calibration}.
In the shown example, the resolution of the cross-calibration is better than $4\%$ for the LSTs and MSTs and $7\%$ for the SSTs.
Outliers in the set of reconstructed SST efficiencies correspond to the telescopes at the edge of the array which have fewer other telescopes in their vicinity.
The inter-telescope distances for pairs constituting edge telescopes are larger than for instruments near the core of the array, leading to worse statistics for pairwise trigger.
We note that the method may perform differently under adverse observation conditions, e.g. elevated levels of the night-sky background or $B_{\perp} / B_{\mathrm{S}} \approx 1$ (unless accounted for).
Carried out in a relative way, the cross-calibration using the CTC is then complementary to the absolute calibration using muon ring images with a precision of $4\%$~\cite{Gaug:2019}.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{Sec:Conclusions}
We have demonstrated the feasibility of the amended Cherenkov transparency coefficient~\cite{Stefanik:2019a} for the atmospheric and array calibration at the southern array of the CTA observatory.
Utilizing the output from normal data taking, the CTC reproduces correctly the evolution of the atmospheric transmission to Cherenkov photons for the aerosol layers below the production height of VHE air showers.
While being in good agreement with the input transparency within the Monte Carlo study, systematic uncertainties of $5-8\%$ can be expected, dominated by the impact of the geomagnetic field and the precision of the optical throughput estimates.
As to the monitoring of the optical throughput using the CTC concept, a relative calibration of the telescope array has been achieved with a resolution of $4-7\%$, depending on the telescope class.
The influence of the geomagnetic field has been shown to be a less limiting factor compared to the usage at the CTA North.
For the first time, we investigated the applicability of the CTC for the CTA sub-array of small-size telescopes, the SST-1M design in particular chosen from three SST proposals.
Our simulation results are not expected to strongly depend on this choice because the CTC viability for the SSTs depends mainly on the size of the primary mirror dish and the telescope array layout.
The CTC concept has been shown to be a feasible means of the inter-calibration for the SSTs, albeit with worse precision than for the larger telescope classes (Fig.~\ref{Fig:Cross_calibration}) due to the sparser spacing of the~SSTs.
The focus of the future study will be on the stability of the CTC under different intensities of the night-sky background and variable trigger thresholds of the LSTs.
The verification of the CTC against other calibration approaches is foreseen with the installation of the first CTA telescopes.
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\acknowledgments
\vspace{-0.2cm}
This work was conducted in the context of the CTA Central Calibration Facilities.
We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the agencies and organizations listed here: http://www.cta-observatory.org/consortium\_acknowledgments.
We are also grateful for the support by the grants LTT17006 and LM2015046 of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic.
\vspace{-0.4cm}
|
\section{ INTRODUCTION }
Let $1<p<\infty$ and $ C_c^\infty((0,1])$ denote the set of all $C^\infty$ functions with compact supports in $(0,1]$.
One dimensional Hardy inequality with one-sided boundary condition is represented by
\begin{equation} \int_0^1 |u'(t)|^p \,dt\ge \left(1-\frac 1p\right)^p \int_0^1 \frac{|u(t)|^p}{t^p}\,dt+ \left(1-\frac 1p\right)^{p-1} |u(1)|^p \label{A}
\end{equation}
for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$.
When $u(1)=0$, this is a well-known Hardy inequality (see \cite{KO}.
To see the optimality of coefficient of the second term in the right hand side, by the density argument it suffices to employ $u_\varepsilon(t)= t^{1-1/p +\varepsilon}$ as a test function and make $\varepsilon \downarrow 0$.
Our first purpose in this paper is not only to establish a weighted version of (\ref{A}) but also improve it by adding sharp remainder terms.
As weight functions we consider power type weights $t^{\alpha p}$ for $t\in [0,1]$.
Surprisingly our result on this matter is essentially dependent on the range of parameter $\alpha$.
Let us explain with symbolic and most simple cases as examples.
To this end we classify the range of the parameter $\alpha$ into two cases and define the best constant $\Lambda_{\alpha,p}$ as follows:
\begin{df} The parameter $\alpha$ is said to be noncritical and critical if $\alpha$ satisfies $\alpha<1-1/p$ and $\alpha\ge 1-1/p$ respectively.
\end{df}
\begin{df}For $1<p<+\infty$ we set
\begin{equation}\Lambda_{\alpha,p}=\begin{cases} &\left |1-\frac{1}{p}-\alpha\right |^p,\qquad \text{ if } \alpha \neq
1-\frac{1}{p},\\ &\left(1-\frac{1}{p}\right)^p,\qquad
\qquad\text{ if } \alpha = 1-\frac{1}{p}.
\end{cases}\label{2.5}
\end{equation}
\end{df}
When $\alpha$ is noncritical under this definition, as a corollary to Theorem \ref{nct1} we have a sharp Hardy type inequality:
\begin{equation} \int_0^1 |u'(t)|^p t^{\alpha p}\,dt \ge
\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\int_0^1 \frac{|u(t)|^p}{t^p}{t^{\alpha p}}\,dt +
(\Lambda_{\alpha,p})^{1-1/p} |u(1)|^p,
\end{equation} for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$.
To see the optimality of coefficient of the second term in the right hand side, one can employ $u_\varepsilon(t)= t^{1-\alpha-1/p +\varepsilon}$ as a test function as before.
When $\alpha$ is critical, it follows from Proposition \ref{ct1} that
\begin{equation}\label{C}
\inf_{u\in W}
\int_0^1 |u'(t)|^p t^{\alpha p} =0,
\end{equation}
where $W= \{ u\in C^1([0,1]) : u(0)=0, u(1)=1\} $. Nevertheless we will have a sharp Hardy type inequalities (\ref{D}) and (\ref{E})
as a corollary to Theorem \ref{CT2}.
\par
In Section 2.2, as an important application, we will establish
$n$ dimensional weighted Hardy inequalities with
weight function being powers of the distance function $\delta (x)=\rm{ dist}(x,\partial\Omega)$ to the boundary $\partial\Omega$.
In this task it is crucial to establish sharp weighted Hardy inequalities in the tubler neighborhood $\Omega_\eta$ of $\Omega$, which are reduced to the one dimensional inequalities in Section 2.1.
To this end $\Omega $ is assumed to be a bounded domain of $\mathbf R^N$ ( $N\ge 1$ ) whose boundary $\partial\Omega$ is a $C^2$ compact manifolds in the present paper.
We prepare more notations to describe our results.
For $ \alpha \in \bf {R}$,
by
$ L^p(\Omega,\delta^{p\alpha})$ we denote the space of Lebesgue measurable functions with weight $ \delta^{\alpha p}$,
for which
\begin{equation} || u ||_{ L^p(\Omega,\delta^{p\alpha})} = \bigg( \int_{\Omega}|u|^p \delta^{\alpha p}\,
dx\bigg ) ^{1/p} < +\infty.\label{2.1} \end{equation}
$W_{\alpha,0}^{1,p}(\Omega)$ is given by the completion of $C_c^\infty(\Omega)$ with respect to the norm
defined by
\begin{equation}
|| u||_{ W_{\alpha,0}^{1,p}(\Omega)} =
|| |\nabla u| ||_{ L^p(\Omega, \delta ^{p\alpha})} + || u||_{ L^p(\Omega,\delta^{p\alpha})}. \label{2.2}
\end{equation}
Then
$W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega) $ becomes a Banach space with the norm $|| \cdot||_{ W_{\alpha,0}^{1,p}(\Omega)}
$.
Under these preparation
we will state the noncritical weighted Hardy inequality as
Theorem \ref{NCT1}, which is the counter-part to Theorem \ref{nct1}.
In particular as its corollary, we have the simplest one:
\begin{equation}\label{HI}
\int_\Omega |\nabla u|^p \delta^{\alpha p} \ge \mu \int_\Omega |u|^p \delta ^{ p(\alpha -1)}, \qquad \forall u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega),
\end{equation}
where $\alpha< 1-\frac 1p$ and $\mu$ is a positive constant essentially depending on the boundary $\partial\Omega$.
If $\alpha=0$ and $p=2$, then (\ref{HI}) is a well-known Hardy inequality and valid for a bounded domain $\Omega $ of $\mathbf R^N$ with Lipschitz boundary (c.f. \cite{BM,D, MMP}).
Further
if $\Omega$ is convex and $ \alpha=0$, then $\mu = \Lambda_{0,p}$ holds for arbitrary $1<p<\infty$ (see \cite{MS}). \par
It is worthy to remark that (\ref{HI}) is never valid in the critical case that $\alpha\ge 1-1/p$
by (\ref{C}) ( see also Proposition \ref{CT1} ). Nevertheless,
we will establish in this case a variant of
weighted Hardy's inequalities as Theorem \ref{CT3} which correspond to those in Theorem \ref{CT2}.
As its corollary we describe Hardy's inequalities with a compact perturbation which are closely relating to
the so-called weak Hardy property of $\Omega$. We remark that
a constant $\gamma^{-1}$ in (\ref{2.14}) and (\ref{2.15}) concerns the weak Hardy constant, but in this case the strong Hardy constant is $+\infty$ ( see \cite{D} for the detail).
In \cite{ah0}, two of the authors have improved the weighted Hardy inequalities
adopting $|x|^{\alpha p}$ (
powers of distance to the origin $O\in \Omega$ ) as weight functions instead of $\delta^{\alpha p}$.
In the present paper, some inequalities
of Hardy type in \cite{ah0} are employed with minor modifications, especially when $1<p<2$
(see also \cite{ah1,dha,dha2,aha3}).
We note that our results will be further improved in \cite{H} for
non-doubling weights.
Lastly we remark that our results will be applicable to variational problems in a coming paper \cite{ah2}.
\par
This paper is organized in the following way: The main results are described in Section 2.
Theorem 2.1 and Theorem 2.2 are established in Section 3. Theorem 2.3 and Theorem 2.5 together with their corollaries are proved in Section 4.
The proof of Theorem 2.4 is given in Section 5 and the proofs of Proposition 2.1 and Proposition 2.2 are given in Section 6.
In Appendix the proofs of Lemma 3.2 and Lemma 3.4 are provided for the sake of self-containedness.
\section{Main results }
\begin{df} \label{def1.1}For $t\in (0,1)$ and $R> e$, we set
\begin{equation}
A_1(t):=\log\frac{R}{t},\qquad
A_2(t):=\log A_{1}(t)
.\label{1.3}
\end{equation}\end{df}
\subsection{Results in the one dimensional case}
The proofs of Theorem \ref{nct1} and Theorem \ref{CT2} including corollaries will be given in Section 3 and Appendix.
\begin{thm}\mbox{( \rm Noncritical case )} \label{nct1}
Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$. Then, there exist positive numbers $C_0=C_0(\alpha,p,R )$, $C_1=C_1(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1 & \left( |u'|^p -\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t)^2}\right)\right) t^{\alpha p}\,dt \notag \\ &\ge C_1
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p + \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{\alpha p+1}\,dt +L|u(1)|^p.\label{nc1}
\end{align}
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}\label{cor2.1}
Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$ and $1<p<\infty$. Then, for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$
\begin{equation} \int_0^1 |u'(t)|^p t^{\alpha p}\,dt \ge
\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\int_0^1 \frac{|u(t)|^p}{t^p}{t^{\alpha p}}\,dt +
({\Lambda_{\alpha,p}})^{1-1/p} |u(1)|^p.\label{B}
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
In the critical case we have somewhat more precise results.
\begin{thm}\mbox{\rm ( Critical case)} \label{CT2}
\begin{enumerate} \item
Assume that $ \alpha>1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$. Then there exist positive numbers $C_0=C_0(\alpha,p,R )$, $C_1=C_1(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1 & \left( |u'|^p -\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t)^2}\right)\right) t^{\alpha p}\,dt +L |u(1)|^p \notag \\ &\ge C_1
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p + \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{\alpha p+1}\,dt.\label{c1}
\end{align}
\item
Assume that $ \alpha=1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e^e$. Then, there exist positive numbers $C_0=C_0(\alpha,p,R )$, $C_1=C_1(\alpha,p,R )$and and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1 & \left( |u'|^p - \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p\frac{1}{A_1(t)^p} \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_2(t)^2}\right)\right) t^{p-1}\,dt +L |u(1)|^p \notag \\ &\ge C_1
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p + \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p\frac{1}{A_1(t)^p} \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_2(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{p}\,dt. \label{2.10}
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}\label{cor2.2}
\begin{enumerate}\item If $\alpha>1-1/p$ and $1<p<\infty$, then for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$
\begin{equation} \int_0^1 |u'(t)|^p t^{\alpha p}\,dt + (\Lambda_{\alpha,p})^{1-1/p} |u(1)|^p\ge\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \int_0^1 \frac{|u(t)|^p}{t^p}{t^{\alpha p}}\,dt. \label{D}
\end{equation}
\item
If $\alpha=1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$, then for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$
\begin{equation} \int_0^1 |u'(t)|^p t^{p-1}\,dt +(\Lambda_{\alpha,p})^{\alpha} A_1(1)^{1-p} |u(1)|^p\ge\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \int_0^1 \frac{|u(t)|^p}{t A_1(t)^p}\,dt. \label{E}
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{rem}
We remark that Corollaries \ref{cor2.1} and \ref{cor2.2} follow direct from the arguments in the proofs of the corresponding theorems
except for the optimality of the constant $L =( \Lambda _{\alpha,p})^{1-1/p}$. For the proofs of the optimality, one can employ as test functions $u_{\varepsilon}= t^{1-\alpha-1/p+\varepsilon} $ in (\ref{B}), $u_{\varepsilon}= t^{1-\alpha-1/p+\varepsilon} $ in (\ref{D}) and $u_{\varepsilon}=
A_1(t)^{1-1/p-\varepsilon} $ in (\ref{E}) respectively with $\varepsilon$ being sufficiently small.
\end{rem}
Further we remark an elementary result which will be useful in the subsequent.
\begin{prop}\label{ct1} $( $\rm {Critical case} $)$
Assume that $ \alpha\ge 1-1/p$ and $1<p<\infty$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{}
\inf_{u\in W}
\int_0^1 |u'(t)|^p t^{\alpha p} =0,
\end{equation}
where $W= \{ u\in C^1([0,1]) : u(0)=0, u(1)=1\}. $
\end{prop}
The proof will be given in Section 6.
\subsection{Results in a domain of $\mathbf R^N $ }
The proofs of Theorem \ref{NCT1}, Corollary \ref{NCC1}, and Theorem \ref{CT3} will be given in Section 4. Theorem \ref{NCT2} will be proved in Section 5.
Let $\delta(x)= \rm{dist}(x,\partial\Omega)$. We use the following notations:
\begin{equation}
\Omega_\eta = \{ x\in \Omega: \delta(x)<\eta \}, \qquad
\Sigma_\eta = \{ x\in \Omega: \delta(x)=\eta \}. \label{NBD}
\end{equation}
\begin{thm}\mbox{ \rm ( Noncritical case )} \label{NCT1} Assume that $\Omega$ is a bounded domain of class $C^2$ in $\mathbf R^N$.
Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R> e\cdot\sup_{x\in \Omega}\delta(x)$. Assume that $\eta $ is a sufficienty small positive number. Then, there exist positive numbers $C_2=C_2(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$ such that for every $ u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{2.6}
\int_{\Omega_\eta} \left( |\nabla u|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\left| \frac{u}{\delta} \right|^p \right)\delta^{\alpha p}
\ge C_2 \int_{\Omega_\eta} \left | \frac{u}{\delta}\right |^p \frac{1}{ A_1(\delta)^2}\delta ^{p\alpha } +L \int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u|^p\delta^{\alpha p}.
\end{equation}
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}\label{NCC1}
Under the same assumptions as in Theorem \ref{NCT1}, there exists a positive number $\gamma=\gamma(\alpha,p,R)$ such that for every $ u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{2.7}
\int_{\Omega} \left( |\nabla u|^p -\gamma\left| \frac{u}{\delta} \right|^p \right)\delta^{\alpha p}
\ge 0.
\end{equation}
\end{cor}
Moreover
for any bounded domain $\Omega \subset \mathbf R^N$
we can prove the following:
\begin{thm}\label{NCT2}\mbox{ \rm( Noncritical case )} Assume that $\Omega$ is a bounded domain of class $C^2$ in $\mathbf R^N$.
Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R> e\cdot\sup_{x\in \Omega}\delta(x)$. Then, the followings are equivalent.
\begin{enumerate}
\item There exists positive a number $\gamma$ such that the inequality (\ref{2.7}) is valid for every $u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$.
\item For a sufficiently small $\eta>0$,
there exist positive numbers $\kappa$, $C_2$ and $L$ such that the inequality (\ref{2.6}) with $\Lambda_{\alpha,p}$ replaced by $\kappa$ is valid for every $u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\par\medskip
\begin{thm}\label{CT3} \mbox{\rm ( Critical case)} Assume that $\Omega$ is a bounded domain of class $C^2$ in $\mathbf R^N$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Assume that $ \alpha>1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R> e^e\cdot\sup_{x\in \Omega}\delta(x)$.
Assume that $\eta $ is a sufficienty small positive number.
Then, there exist positive numbers $C_2=C_2(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$ such that
for every $ u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{2.11}
\int_{\Omega_\eta} \left( |\nabla u|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\left| \frac{u}{\delta} \right|^p \right)\delta^{\alpha p} + L \int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u|^p\delta^{\alpha p}
\ge C_2 \int_{\Omega_\eta} \left | \frac{u}{\delta}\right |^p \frac{\delta ^{p\alpha }}{ A_1(\delta)^2}.
\end{align}
\item
Assume that $ \alpha=1-1/p$,$1<p<\infty$ and $R> e^e\cdot\sup_{x\in \Omega}\delta(x)$.
Assume that $\eta $ is a sufficienty small positive number.
Then, there exist positive numbers $C_2=C_2(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$
such that for every $ u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{2.12}
\int_{\Omega_\eta} & \left( |\nabla u|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\left| \frac{u}{\delta} \right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(\delta)^p}\right)\delta^{p-1} + L \int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u|^p\delta^{p-1} \\ &
\ge C_2 \int_{\Omega_\eta} \left | \frac{u}{\delta}\right |^p \frac{1}{ A_1(\delta)^p}\frac{1}{A_2(\delta)^2} \delta ^{p-1}.
\notag \end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{cor} \label{CCT3}Assume that $\Omega$ is a bounded domain of class $C^2$ in $\mathbf R^N$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Assume that $ \alpha>1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $\gamma=\gamma(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$.
Then, there exists a positive number $L'=L'(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$ such that for every $ u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{2.14}
\int_{\Omega} & \left( |\nabla u|^p -\gamma \left| \frac{u}{\delta} \right|^p \right)\delta^{\alpha p} + L' \int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u|^p\delta^{\alpha p}
\ge0.
\end{align}
\item
Assume that $ \alpha=1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R> e^e\cdot\sup_{x\in \Omega}\delta(x)$.
Then, there exists positive numbers $\gamma$ and $L'=L'(\alpha,p,R,\eta)$
such that for every $ u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$, we have
\begin{align}\label{2.15}
\int_{\Omega} \left( |\nabla u|^p -\gamma\left| \frac{u}{\delta} \right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(\delta)^p}\right)\delta^{p-1} + L' \int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u|^p\delta^{p-1}
\ge 0.
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
\begin{prop}\label{CT1} $( $\rm {Critical case} $)$ Assume that $\Omega$ is a bounded domain of class $C^2$ in $\mathbf R^N$.
Assume that $1<p<\infty$ and $ \alpha \ge1-1/p$.
Then for arbitrary $\eta \in (0, \sup_{x\in \Omega} \delta(x) )$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{2.8}
\inf
\left\{
\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u|^p \delta^{\alpha p} : u\in C^1_c (\Omega), u=1 \mbox{ on } \{ \delta(x)=\eta\}\right \}=0.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
The proof will be given in Section 6.
From this
it is worthy to remark that Hardy's inequality (\ref{HI}) never holds in the critical case.
\section{Proofs of Theorem \ref{nct1} and Theorem \ref{CT2} }
\subsection{Auxiliary inequalities in the noncritical case}
When $p=2$ and $\alpha=0$, the first lemma is established in \cite{BM}.
\begin{lem}\label{l2} \mbox{\rm ( Noncritical case)}
Assume that $ f\in C^{}([0,1])\cap C^1((0,1])$ is a monotone nondecreasing function such that $f(1)\le 1$. Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$ and $1<p<\infty$.
Then for every
$u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{equation} \int_0^1\left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \right)t^{\alpha p}\,dt \ge
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \right)t^{\alpha p} f \,dt. \label{3.2}
\end{equation}
In particular we have
\begin{equation} \int_0^1 |u'|^p t^{\alpha p}\,dt \ge
\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \int_0^1\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p t^{\alpha p} \,dt.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\par\medskip
\noindent{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{l2}:} Without loss of generality
we assume that $f\ge 0$, $f(1)=1$, and $u\ge0$. Define $ g= 1-f$. Then $g\ge 0$ and $ g'\le 0$.
By integration by parts we have
\begin{align*} (1-\alpha-1/p) & \int_0^1 u^p t^{p(\alpha-1)} g\,dt = -1/p \left[ u^p t^{p(\alpha-1)+1} g\right]_0^1 \\ &
+ 1/p \int_0^1 u^p t^{p(\alpha-1)+1} g'\,dt + \int_0^1 u^{p-1} u' t^{p(\alpha-1)+1} g\,dt.
\end{align*}
Since $g'=-f'\le 0$ and $g\ge 0$,
\begin{align*} (1-\alpha-1/p) \int_0^1 u^p t^{p(\alpha-1)} g\,dt\le \int_0^1 u^{p-1} u' t^{p(\alpha-1)+1} g\,dt.
\end{align*}
By H\"older's inequality, noting that ${p(\alpha-1)+1}= {(p-1)(\alpha-1)+\alpha}$, we have
\begin{align*} (1-\alpha-1/p)\left( \int_0^1 u^p t^{p(\alpha-1)} g\,dt \right)^{1/p}\le \left(\int_0^1 |u' |^pt^{p\alpha} g\,dt\right)^{1/p}.
\end{align*}
Using $ g=1-f$ and the definition of $\Lambda_{\alpha,p}$, we have
\begin{equation*} \int_0^1 ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p}({u}/{t})^p)t^{\alpha p}\,dt \ge
\int_0^1 ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p}({u}/{t})^p)t^{\alpha p} f \,dt.
\end{equation*}
\hfill $\Box$
\begin{lem}\label{l3} \mbox{\rm ( Noncritical case)} Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$,$1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$. Then, there exist positive numbers $C_3=C_3(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{equation} \int_0^1 \left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \right)t^{\alpha p}\,dt \ge C_3
\int_0^1 \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p t^{\alpha p} \frac{1}{A_1(t)^{2} } \,dt + L|u(1)|^p.\label{3.3}
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
The proofs of Lemma \ref{l3} together with Lemma \ref{l7} will be given in \S 6.
It follows from Lenma \ref{l2} and Lemma \ref{l3} that we have
\begin{lem}\label{l4} \mbox{\rm ( Noncritical case)} Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$. There exist positive numbers $C_4=C_4(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{equation} \int_0^1\left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \right )t^{\alpha p}\,dt \ge C_4
\int_0^1\left ( |u'|^p +\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \right) \frac{t^{\alpha p} }{A_1^{2} } \,dt + L|u(1)|^p.\label{3.4}
\end{equation}
In particular $C_4$ is given by
$ C_4= C_3/(1+2\Lambda_{\alpha,p} ).$
\end{lem}
\noindent{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{l4}}
We use Lemma \ref{l2} for $f= C_3 A_1^{-2} $ with $C_3$ being small. Multiplying (\ref{3.3}) by $2\Lambda_{\alpha,p} $ and adding it to (\ref{3.2}), we have (\ref{3.4}) for
$C_4= C_3/(1+2\Lambda_{\alpha,p} )$. \par \hfill $\Box$
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{nct1}}
By adding $$-C_0\int_0^1 \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(t)^2} t^{\alpha p}\,dt$$ to the both side
of
(\ref{3.4}) we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1 & \left( |u'|^p -\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{\alpha p}\,dt \\
&\ge C_4
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p + \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left( \Lambda_{\alpha,p}-\frac{C_0}{C_4} \right)\right) \frac{1}{A_1(t)^2} t^{\alpha p}\,dt +L|u(1)|^p.\notag
\end{align}
Now we set $\, C_0= {\Lambda_{\alpha,p} C_4}/{3} ,\, C_1'={ C_4}/{3}.$
Assuming that $C_0\le \Lambda_{\alpha,p} (\log R)^2$, we have
$ C_0/A_1(t)^2 \le C_0 /( \log R)^2\le \Lambda_{\alpha,p}$, and hence
$$ \Lambda_{\alpha,p}-\frac{C_0}{C_4} = \frac23 \Lambda_{\alpha,p}\ge \frac 13 \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0}{A_1(t)^2}\right).$$
Then we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1 & \left( |u'|^p -\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{\alpha p}\,dt \notag \\
&\ge C_1'
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p + \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \left( \Lambda_{\alpha,p}+\frac{C_0}{A_1(t)^2} \right)\right) \frac{1}{A_1(t)^2} t^{\alpha p}\,dt +L|u(1)|^p.\notag
\end{align}
By a calculation we see that $ t A_1^{2} \le 4R/e^2 \,\, ( t\in [0,1]).$
Thus the desired inequality holds for $C_1= C_1' e^2/(4R)$.
\hfill $\Box$
\subsection{Auxiliary inequalities in the critical case}
The following lemma will be established in Section 6 together with Lemma \ref{l3}.
\begin{lem}\mbox{\rm ( Critical case)} \label{l7}
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Assume that $\alpha>1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$. There exist positive numbers $C_5=C_5(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1 \left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \right) & t^{\alpha p}\,dt +L |u(1)|^p
\ge C_5
\int_0^1 \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{ t^{\alpha p}}{A_1^2} \,dt. \label{3.7}
\end{align}
\item
Assume that $\alpha=1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$. There exist positive numbers $C_5=C_5(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1 \left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1^p} \right) t^{p-1}\,dt +L |u(1)|^p
\ge C_5
\int_0^1 \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{ t^{p-1} }{A_1^p A_2^2} \,dt. \label{3.8}
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{l10} \mbox{\rm ( Critical case)}
\begin{enumerate}\item
Assume that $\alpha>1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e$. There exist positive numbers $C_6=C_6(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1\left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \right ) t^{\alpha p}\,dt + L|u(1)|^p
\ge C_6
\int_0^1 |u'|^p \frac{t^{\alpha p}}{A_1^2} \,dt. \label{3.9}
\end{align}
\item
Assume that $\alpha=1-1/p$, $1<p<\infty$ and $R>e^e$. There exist positive numbers $C_6=C_6(\alpha,p,R )$ and $L=L(\alpha,p,R )$ such that for every $u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$, we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1\left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1^p} \right ) t^{p-1}\,dt + L|u(1)|^p
\ge C_6
\int_0^1|u'|^p \frac{t^{p-1}}{A_2^2} \,dt. \label{3.10}
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\noindent{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{l10}:} Admitting Lemma \ref{l7} for the moment, we prove Lemma \ref{l10}.
Unfortunately we can not employ a counterpart of
Lemma \ref{l2}, hence we use a direct argument. We establish (\ref{3.10}) (the assertion 2 ) only because the argument for
(\ref{3.9}) is quite similar.
We prepare the following fundamental inequalities which are established in \cite{anm} as Lemma 2.1 for $X>-1$.
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.1}
\begin{enumerate}\item
For $p\ge 2$ we have
\begin{equation}
|1+X|^p-1-pX\ge c(p)|X|^q, \quad \mbox{ for any } q\in [2,p] \mbox{ and } X\in \mathbf {R}.
\label{3.0}\end{equation}
\item
For $1<p\le2$ and $M\ge1$, we have
\begin{equation} |1+X|^p-1-pX\ge c(p)\begin{cases} &M^{p-2}X^2,\qquad |X|\le M,\\
& |X|^p,\qquad\qquad |X|\ge M.\end{cases}\label{3.1}\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
Here $c(p)$ is a positive number independent of each $X$, $M\ge1$ and $q\in [2,p]$.
\end{lem}
{\noindent\bf Proof.} By Taylar expansion we have (\ref{3.0}) with $q=2$.
For $p>1$, we note that
\begin{equation} \lim_{X\to 0} \frac{|1+X|^p-1-pX}{X^2}=\frac{p(p-1)}{2}, \quad \lim_{|X|\to \infty} \frac{|1+X|^p-1-pX}{|X|^p} =1. \label{Add}
\end{equation}
Therefore (\ref{3.0}) is valid for any $q\in [2,p]$ for a small $c(p)>0$.
If $X>-1$, then (\ref{3.1}) also follows from Taylar expansion and (\ref{Add}).
If we choose $c(p)$ sufficiently small, then it
remains valid for $X\le -1$.
\hfill$\Box$\par
First we assume that $p\ge 2$ and $ \alpha=1-1/p$. For any $u\in C^1_c((0,1])$,
let us set $ u= A_1^{\alpha} h$, where $ A_1(t)= \log(R/t)$ and $ h\in C^1_c((0,1])$.
Without a loss of generality we assume $u\ge 0$. Letting $X=- {tA_1h' }/{(\alpha h)}\, (h\neq0); 0\, (h=0)$, we have
\begin{align}|u'|^p t^{p-1}-\Lambda_{\alpha,p}u^p \frac{ t^{p-1}}{t^p A_1^p}
& =\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \frac{h^p}{tA_1}\left( |1+X|^p-1\right) \label{3.14}\\
&\ge - (\Lambda_{\alpha,p})^{1-\frac 1p} (h^p)' +{c(p)} |h'|^p (A_1 t )^{p-1}.\notag
\end{align}
Here we used (\ref{3.0}) with $q=p$.
On the other hand we have
\begin{align} |u'|^p \frac{t^{p-1}}{A_2(t)^2} &= \alpha^p \frac{h^p}{tA_1 A_2^2}|1+X|^p
\le 2^p\alpha^p \frac{h^p}{tA_1 A_2^2} \left(1+|X|^p\right) \label{3.15} \\
&=2^p\alpha^p \frac{u^p}{tA_1^p A_2^2} + 2^p |h'|^p (tA_1)^{p-1} \frac{1}{A_2^2}.\notag
\end{align}
Here we used a trivial inequality:
$|1+X|^p \le 2^p (1+ |X|^p).
$
By integrating (\ref{3.14}) and (\ref{3.15}) on $(0,1)$ and employing Lemma \ref{l7},
the desired inequality follows for a sufficiently small constant $C_6>0$.\par
Secondly we assume that $1<p<2$.
If $|X|\ge M$, then (\ref{3.15}) is valid.
If $|X|\le M$, again from (\ref{3.15}) we immediately have
\begin{align} |u'|^p \frac{t^{p-1}}{A_2(t)^2} \le 2^p\alpha^p \left(1+M^p\right) \frac{h^p}{tA_1 A_2^2}= C(M) \frac{u^p}{tA_1^p A_2^2}
\qquad \left( |X|\le M \right).\label{3.17}
\end{align}
Thus we have
\begin{equation} |u'|^p \frac{t^{p-1}}{A_2(t)^2} \le C(M)\frac{u^p}{tA_1^p A_2^2} + 2^p \chi_{|X|\ge M}(t) |h'|^p (tA_1)^{p-1} \frac{1}{A_2^2}. \label{3.19}
\end{equation}
Here $\chi_S(t)$ is a characteristic function of $S$. We have (\ref{3.14}) provided that $|X|\ge M$.
Since $A_2^{-2} \le 1$, for a sufficiently small $C_6$
the desired inequality (\ref{3.10}) follows from (\ref{3.14}), (\ref{3.19}) and Lemma \ref{l7} (2).
\hfill $\Box$
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{CT2} }
It follows from (\ref{3.8}) and (\ref{3.10}) that we have
\begin{align} \int_0^1\left ( |u'|^p -\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1^p} \right )& t^{p-1}\,dt + L|u(1)|^p \label{3.16} \\&
\ge C_7
\int_0^1 \left(|u'|^p +\Lambda_{\alpha,p} \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{ 1 }{A_1^p } \right)
\frac{t^{p-1}}{A_2^2} \,dt \notag
\end{align}
for every
$u\in C_c^\infty((0,1])$. Here $C_7= \displaystyle{{\min( C_5, \Lambda_{\alpha,p}C_6)}/{2}}$.
By adding $$-C_0\int_0^1 \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(t)^p} \frac{1}{A_2(t)^2} t^{p-1}\,dt$$ to the both side
of (\ref{3.10}) we have
\begin{align*} \int_0^1 & \left( |u'|^p -\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(t)^p}\left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_2(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{p-1}\,dt +L|u(1)|^p \\
&\ge C_7
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p + \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(t)^p} \left( \Lambda_{\alpha,p}-\frac{C_0}{C_7} \right)\right) \frac{1}{A_1(t)^2} t^{p-1}\,dt,
\end{align*}
Now we set $\, C_0={\Lambda_{\alpha,p} C_7}/{3} \, $ and $\ C_1'= {C_7}/{3}.$
Assuming that $C_0\le \Lambda_{\alpha,p} (\log\log R)^2$, we have
$ C_0/A_2(t)^2 \le C_0 /( \log\log R)^2\le \Lambda_{\alpha,p}$. Then
\begin{align*} \int_0^1 & \left( |u'|^p -\left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(t)^p}\left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_2(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{p-1}\,dt +L|u(1)|^p\\
&\ge C_1'
\int_0^1 \left( |u'|^p + \left|\frac{u}{t}\right|^p \frac{1}{A_1(t)^p} \left( \Lambda_{\alpha,p}+ \frac{C_0 }{A_2(t)^2} \right)\right) \frac{1}{A_1(t)^2} t^{p-1}\,dt.
\end{align*}
By a calculation we see that for some $C(R)>0$, $ t A_2^{2} \le C(R)\, \mbox{ for any } \, t\in [0,1] . $
Therefore the desired inequality holds for $C_1= C_1' C(R)^{-1}$.
\hfill $\Box$
\section{ Proofs of Theorems \ref{NCT1}, \ref{CT3} and Corollaries \ref{NCC1}, \ref{CCT3}}
We first establish Theorem \ref{NCT1} using Theorem \ref{nct1}.
Theorem \ref{CT3} is proved in a quite similar way using Theorem \ref{CT2}.
Then we prove Corollary \ref{NCC1} and Corollary \ref{CCT3}.
\par \medskip
\noindent{\bf Proofs of Theorem \ref{NCT1} and Theorem \ref{CT3}:}
Let us prepare some notations and fundamental facts.
Define $\Sigma = \partial \Omega$ and $\Sigma_t =\{ x\in \Omega : \delta(x)= t\}$.
Since $\Sigma$ is is of class $C^2$, there exists an $\eta_0>0$ such that we have
a $C^2$ diffeomorphism $ G: \Omega_\eta \mapsto (0,\eta)\times \Sigma$
for any $\eta\in (0,\eta_0)$. By $G^{-1}(t, \sigma) \, ((t,\sigma) \in (0,\eta_0) \times \Sigma)$ we denote the inverse of $G$. Let $H^{}_t$ denote the mapping
$G^{-1}(t, \cdot) $ of $\Sigma$ onto $\Sigma_t$.
This mapping is also a $C^2$ diffeomorphism and its Jacobian is close to $1$ in $(0,\eta_0)\times \Sigma$.
Therefore,
for every non-negative continuous function $u$ on $\overline{\Omega_\eta}$ with $\eta\in (0,\eta_0)$ we have
\begin{align}& \int_{\Omega_\eta}u = \int _0^\eta \,dt \int_{\Sigma_t} u \,d\sigma_t =\int _0^\eta \,dt \int_\Sigma u(t, H_t(\sigma)) ( \rm{Jac}\, H_t )\,d\sigma,\\
& | \rm{Jac}\, H_t (\sigma)-1|\le ct, \quad \mbox{ for every } (t,\sigma)\in (0,\eta_0)\times \Sigma,
\end{align}
where $c$ is a positive constant independent of each $(t,\sigma)$, $d\sigma$ and $d\sigma_t$ denote surface elements on $\Sigma$ and $\Sigma_t$ respectively.
Further we have
\begin{align} &
\int _0^\eta \,dt \int_\Sigma u(t, H_t(\sigma)) ( 1-ct)\,d\sigma \le \int_{\Omega_\eta}u\le \int _0^\eta \,dt \int_\Sigma u(t, H_t(\sigma)) ( 1+ct)\,d\sigma, \label{4.1}\\
&
\int_\Sigma u(\eta, H_\eta(\sigma)) ( 1-c\eta)\,d\sigma \le
\int_{\Sigma_\eta}u\,d\sigma_\eta\le \int_\Sigma u(\eta, H_\eta(\sigma)) ( 1+c\eta)\,d\sigma. \label{4.2}
\end{align}
Then we immediately have
\begin{align}
\int_{\Sigma} \,d\sigma \int_0^\eta \left |\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} \right |^p (1-ct) t^{\alpha p} \,dt &\le \int_{\Omega_\eta}|\nabla u|^p \delta^{\alpha p}
\notag\\
\int_{\Sigma} \,d\sigma \int_0^\eta \left |\frac{ u}{t} \right |^p (1-ct) t^{\alpha p} \,dt \le \int_{\Omega_\eta}| u|^p \delta^{p(\alpha -1)}&\le \int_{\Sigma} \,d\sigma \int_0^\eta \left |\frac{ u}{t} \right |^p (1+ct) t^{\alpha p} \,dt. \notag
\end{align}
\noindent{\bf Proof of (\ref{2.6}):} Under these consideration,
(\ref{2.6}) is reduced to one-dimensional Hardy's inequality. Setting $v(t) =u(t,\sigma)$ and $v'= \partial u/\partial t$ we have
\begin{align} \int_0^\eta & \left( |v'|^p -\left|\frac{v}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_2 }{A_1(t)^2}\right)\right) t^{\alpha p}\,dt \notag \\ &\ge c
\int_0^\eta \left( |v'|^p + \left|\frac{v}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_2 }{A_1(t)^2}\right) \right) t^{\alpha p+1}\,dt+ L |v(\eta)|^p \eta^{\alpha p}(1+c\eta).
\end{align}
By a change of variable $t=s \eta$, putting $w(s)= v( s\eta)$ with $v\in C^1_c((0,1])$,
\begin{align}& \int_0^1 \left( |w'|^p -\left|\frac{w}{s}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_2 }{A_1(s\eta)^2}\right)\right)s^{\alpha p}\,ds \\ &\ge c\eta
\int_0^1 \left( |w'|^p + \left|\frac{w}{s}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_2 }{A_1(s\eta)^2}\right) \right) s^{\alpha p+1}\,ds+ L|w(1)|^p\eta^{p-1}(1+c\eta).\notag
\end{align}
On the other hand,
by Theorem \ref{nct1} with $R$ changed to $R/\eta$, we have, for every $w\in C^1_c((0,1])$,
\begin{align} \int_0^1 & \left( |w'|^p -\left|\frac{w}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t\eta)^2}\right)\right) t^{\alpha p}\,dt \\ &\ge C_1
\int_0^1 \left( |w'|^p + \left|\frac{w}{t}\right|^p \left(\Lambda_{\alpha,p} + \frac{C_0 }{A_1(t\eta)^2}\right) \right) t^{\alpha p+1}\,dt + L |w(1)|^p,\notag
\end{align}
where $C_0$ and $C_1$ may depend on $\eta$ but independent of each function $v$.
Now we take $\eta$ and $C_2$ so that $C_1/\eta> c$, $C_2 \le C_0$ and $\eta^{p-1}(1+c\eta) <1$ respectively. Since $w$ is an arbitrary function in $ C^1_c((0,\eta])$, we get (\ref{2.6}).
\hfill$\qed$
\par\bigskip
\noindent{\bf Proof of (\ref{2.11}) and (\ref{2.12}):}
In parallel to the verification of (\ref{2.6}), (\ref{2.11}) and (\ref{2.12}) can be proved using (\ref{c1}) and (\ref{2.10}) together with (\ref{4.2}).
Hence we omit the detail.\hfill$\qed$
\par\bigskip
\noindent{\bf Proof of Corollary \ref{NCC1}:}
Assume on the contrary
that Hardy inequality (\ref{2.7}) does not hold. Then there exists a sequence of functions $\{u_k\} \subset W^{1,p}_{\alpha, 0}(\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation} \lim_{k\to \infty}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx =0,\quad
\int_{\Omega} {|u_k|^p}\delta^{p(\alpha-1)}\, dx =1 \quad (k=1,2,\cdots).
\end{equation}
By Theorem {\ref{NCT1}} we have
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx = \int_{\Omega_\eta} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx + \int_{\Omega\setminus \Omega_\eta} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx\\
&\ge \Lambda_{\alpha ,p}\left( 1- \int_{\Omega \setminus \Omega_\eta} {|u_k|^p}\delta^{p(\alpha-1)}\, dx\right)
+L \int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}
+ \int_{\Omega\setminus \Omega_\eta} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx.
\end{align*}
Since $\delta \ge \eta$ in $\Omega\setminus \Omega_\eta$, by the standard argument we have $u_k\to C \,( constant)$ in $W^{1,p}(\Omega\setminus \Omega_\eta)$ as $k\to \infty$. Since $L>0$, we have $C=0$.
Hence
we see
$ 0 \ge \Lambda_{\alpha ,p}$, and we reach to a contradiction. \hfill $\Box$
\par
\noindent{\bf Proof of Corollary \ref{CCT3}:}
Assume on the contrary
that Hardy inequality (\ref{2.14}) does not hold. Then there exists a sequence of functions $\{u_k\} \subset W^{1,p}_{\alpha, 0}(\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation} \begin{cases}& \lim_{k\to \infty}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx =0, \,
\lim_{k\to\infty}\int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u|^p\delta^{\alpha p} =0,\\
& \int_{\Omega} {|u_k|^p}\delta^{p(\alpha-1)}\, dx =1 \quad (k=1,2,\cdots).
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
By Theorem {\ref{CT3}} we have
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx +L \int_{\Sigma_\eta} |u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p} \\
&\ge \Lambda_{\alpha ,p}\left( 1- \int_{\Omega \setminus \Omega_\eta} {|u_k|^p}\delta^{p(\alpha-1)}\, dx\right)
+ \int_{\Omega\setminus \Omega_\eta} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx.
\end{align*}
Since $\delta \ge \eta$ in $\Omega\setminus \Omega_\eta$, as before we have $u_k\to 0$ in $W^{1,p}(\Omega\setminus \Omega_\eta)$ as $k\to \infty$. Hence
we have
$ 0 \ge \Lambda_{\alpha ,p}$, and we get a contradiction. \hfill $\Box$
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{NCT2} }
It suffices to show the implication $1\to 2$. Since
$A_1(\delta)^{-1} \le 1$ in $\Omega$ and the trace operator $T: W^{1,p}_{0,\alpha}(\Omega_\eta^c) \mapsto
L^p(\Sigma_\eta; \delta^{\alpha p} )$ is continuous for a small $\eta>0$, one can assume that $C_2= L=0$.
Now, we assume on the contrary that
there exists a sequence of functions $\{u_k\} \subset W^{1,p}_{\alpha, 0}(\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{3.17bis} \lim_{k\to \infty}\int_{\Omega_\eta} |\nabla u_k|^p\delta^{\alpha p}\,dx =0,\quad
\int_{\Omega_\eta} {|u_k|^p}\delta^{p(\alpha-1)}\, dx =1 \quad (k=1,2,\cdots).
\end{equation}
Here we prepare a lemma on extension:
\begin{lem}\label{l11}\mbox{\rm ( Extension )} For any $\eta >0 $ there exists an extension operator $E=E(\eta) : W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega_\eta)\mapsto W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}\item $E (u)= u \quad $ a.e. in $\Omega_\eta$
\item There exists some positive number $C=C(\eta)$ such that for any $u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0} (\Omega_\eta)$,
$$ || |\nabla E( u)|||_{L^p(\Omega, \delta^{\alpha p})} \le C\Big( |||\nabla u|||_{L^p (\Omega_{\eta/2},\delta^{\alpha p} )}+ ||u||_{W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0} (\Omega_\eta \setminus \Omega_{\eta/2})}\Big).$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
Admitting this for the moment, we prove Theorem \ref{NCT2}.
Let $v_k= E(u_k) \in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$ for $k=1,2,\ldots$.
It follows from (\ref{3.17}), the assumption 1 and the property of $E$ that
$v_k$ becomes a Cauchy sequence and $v_k\to v $ in $ W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$ for some $v\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0}(\Omega)$ as $k\to\infty$.
On the other hand
by choosing a subsequence if necessary, we see that
$u_k\to c$ a.e. in $\Omega_\eta$ for some constant $c$ as $k\to\infty$. Then, by the assumption 1
\begin{align*} 1 &\le \int_\Omega |E(u_k)|^p \delta^{p(\alpha-1)}\le \gamma^{-1}
\int_\Omega |\nabla E(u_k)|^p\delta^{\alpha p} \\
& \le \gamma^{-1}C\Big( |||\nabla u_k|^p||_{L^p (\Omega_{\eta/2},\delta^{\alpha p} )}+ ||u_k||_{W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0} (\Omega_\eta \setminus \Omega_{\eta/2})}\Big)<\infty.
\end{align*}
Since $(\alpha-1)p<-1$, we have $c=0$.
Thus $u_k \to 0 $ in $L^p(\Omega_\eta\setminus \Omega_{\eta/2})$.
Thus we see that $ ||u_k||_{W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0} (\Omega_\eta \setminus \Omega_{\eta/2})}\to 0 $ as $k\to\infty$. From this together with (\ref{2.6}) we have a contradiction.
\hfill $\Box$
\par\medskip
\noindent{\bf Proof of Lemma \ref{l11}: } Since $\delta$ is Lipschitz continuous,
we see that $\partial \Omega_\eta$ and $\partial \Omega_{\eta/2}$ are Lipschitz compact manifolds. By the standard theory we have an extension operator $\tilde{E} : W^{1,p} (\Omega_\eta \setminus \Omega_{\eta/2})\mapsto
W^{1,p}(\Omega\setminus \Omega_{\eta/2})$ such that $\tilde E(u)= u$ a.e. in $\Omega_\eta \setminus \Omega_{\eta/2}$, and
$$ || |\nabla \tilde{E}( u)|^p||_{L^p(\Omega\setminus \Omega_{\eta/2}, \delta^{\alpha p})} \le C(\eta) ||u||_{W^{1,p}_{\alpha,0} (\Omega_\eta \setminus \Omega_{\eta/2})}.$$
Define for $u\in W^{1,p}_{\alpha, 0}(\Omega_\eta)$
\begin{equation} E(u) = u \,\, (x\in \Omega_{\eta/2},); \quad \tilde{E}(u) \,\, (x \in \Omega\setminus \Omega_{\eta/2} ).
\end{equation}
Then the assertion follows.\hfill$\Box$
\section{Proofs of Propositions \ref{ct1} and \ref{CT1}}
Proposition \ref{ct1} is known in a more general fashion. In fact
a variant is seen in Maz'ya \cite{Ma} ( Lemma 2, p144). For the sake of reader's convenience we give a direct verification.
We note that
Proposition \ref{CT1} is a consequence of Proposition \ref{ct1}.
\par
\noindent{\bf Proof of Proposition \ref{ct1}:}
First we assume that $ \alpha> 1-\frac 1p$. Define for $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$,
$\, u_\varepsilon= t/{\varepsilon}\, (0\le t\le \varepsilon);\,
1\, ( t\ge \varepsilon).$
Then we immediately have $u_\varepsilon(0)=0, u_\varepsilon(1)=1$ and
$ \int _0^1|u _\varepsilon'|^p t^{\alpha p} \,dt
\to 0\,\mbox{ as } \varepsilon\downarrow 0.$
By using $C^1$ approximation of each $u_\varepsilon$, the assertion is proved.
Further we note that
$ \int_0^1 |u_\varepsilon|^p t^{(\alpha-1)p}\,dt
\to 1/ ({\alpha p-p+1})>0
\, \mbox{ as } \varepsilon\downarrow 0.$
In the critical case, define for $\varepsilon \in (0,1/2)$
\begin{equation} u_\varepsilon= \,
0 \,( 0\le t\le \varepsilon) ; \quad \frac {A_1(\varepsilon)-A_1(t) }{A_1(\varepsilon)-A_1(1/2) }\, \,(\varepsilon \le t\le 1/2);\quad 1\, \,(1/2 \le t \le 1). \end{equation}
Then
$ \int _0^1|u_\varepsilon '|^p t^{p-1} \,dt=( A_1(\varepsilon)-A_1(1/2))^{1-p} \to 0 \, \mbox{ as } \varepsilon\downarrow 0.$
On the other hand we have $u_\varepsilon(0)=0, u_\varepsilon(1)=1$ and hence the assertion is now clear.
Further we note that
$$\int_\varepsilon^1 |u_\varepsilon|^p \frac{1}{t A_1(t)^p}\,dt\ge \frac{A_1(1)^{1-p}- A_1(1/2)^{1-p}}{p-1} >0
\quad \mbox{ as } \varepsilon\downarrow 0.$$
\qed
\noindent{\bf Proof of Proposition \ref{CT1}:}
We give a proof when $\alpha>1-\frac 1p$, because the argument is quite similar in the rest of the case.
If a positive number $\eta_0$ is sufficiently small, then one can assume that $\delta\in C^2(\Omega_{\eta_0})$ and
a manifolds $\{ x\in \Omega; \delta =\eta\}$ is of $C^2$ class for $\eta \in (0,\eta_0]$.
By virtue of (\ref{4.1}) we have
$$ \int_{\Omega_\eta}| u|^p \delta^{p(\alpha -1)}\le \int_{\Sigma} \,d\sigma \int_0^\eta \left |\frac{ u}{t} \right |^p (1+ct) t^{\alpha p} \,dt,$$
hence the assertion follows from Proposition \ref{ct1}.\qed
\section{Appendix; Proofs of Lemma \ref{l3} and Lemma \ref{l7} }
\subsection{Preliminary }
In this section we prepare a series of one dimensional weighted Hardy's inequalities.
The followings are given in \cite{ah0} as Lemma {3.1} and Lemma {3.4} respectively.
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.3}
Assume that $R>e$. Then, for any $h\in C^1_c((0,1])$
we have
\begin{equation}
\int_0^1|h^\prime(t)|^2 tdt\geq\frac14
\int_0^1|h(t)|^2A_1(t)^{-2}\frac{dt}{t} -\frac12 A_1(1)^{-1}h(1)^2.\label{6.3}
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
{\noindent\bf Proof.} Let $h(t)=A_1(t)^\frac12 w(t)$. Then we have
\begin{align}
|h^\prime(t)|^2t=\frac{t}{A_1(t)}\left(-\frac{1}{2t}w(t)+w^\prime(r)A_1(t)\right)^2
&\geq \frac{|h(t)|^2}{4t A_1(t)^{2}}-
\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d}{dt}w^2(t)\right).
\label{6.5}\end{align}
Since $w(0)=0$,
we have (\ref{6.3}) and
the rest of the proof is clear.\hfill$\Box$\par
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.4}
Assume that $R>e^e$. Then, for any $h\in C^1_c((0,1])$ we have
\begin{equation}
\int_0^1|h^\prime(t)|^2 t A_1(t) \,dr\geq \frac14
\int_0^1
\frac{|h(t)|^2}{ A_1(t)\cdot A_2(t)^{2}}\frac{dt}{t} -\frac12 A_2(1)^{-1}h(1)^2.\label{6.6}
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
{\noindent\bf Proof.}
For $h(t)= A_2(t)^\frac12 w(t)$, we have in a similar way
\begin{align}
|h^\prime(t)|^2 t A_1(t)
\geq\frac{1}{4}\frac{|h(t)|^2}{ A_1(t)
A_2(t)^{2}}-
\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d}{dt}w^2(t)\right).
\end{align}
Then the rest of the proof is clear.\hfill$\Box$\par
\begin{df}\label{df3.1} A function $\varphi\in C^1([0,1])$ is said to belong to $G([0,1])$
if and only if
\begin{equation} \varphi(0)= 0, \quad \varphi'(0)\neq 0 \quad \text{ and } \quad \varphi'(1)=0. \label{case1}\end{equation}
\end{df}
\begin{df}\label{df3.2} For $\varphi \in G([0,1])$ and $M>1$ we define three subsets of $[0,1]$ as
follows:
\begin{equation}\begin{cases}&A(\varphi,M)=\left\{ t\in [0,1] \,| \,|\varphi'(t)|\le
M\frac{|\varphi(t)|}{t}
\right\},\\
& B(\varphi,M)=\left\{ t\in [0,1] \,| \,|\varphi'(t)|> M\frac{|\varphi(t)|}{t} \right\},\\
& C(\varphi,M)=\left\{ t\in [0,1] \,| \,|\varphi'(t)|= M\frac{|\varphi(t)|}{t} \right\}.\end{cases}
\label{6.10}\end{equation}
\end{df}
Clearly $[0,1] =A(\varphi,M)\cup B(\varphi,M)$. From (\ref{case1}) we see $0, 1\in A(\varphi,M)$.
We note that
the set $ C(\varphi,M)$ coincides with the set of
critical points of $ \log (|\varphi|r^{\pm M})$.
By a standard argument we have the following approximation lemma ( cf. Lemma 3.5 in \cite{ah0}).
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.5}Let $M>1$ and $\varphi\in G([0,1])\cap C^2([0,1])$. Assume that $\varphi\ge 0$. Then there
exists a sequence of functions
$\varphi_k\in G([0,1])\cap C^2([0,1])$ such that $\varphi_k>0$ in $(0,1)$, $\varphi_k\to \varphi$ in
$C^1([0,1])$ as
$k\to+\infty$ and
$C(\varphi_k,M) $ consists of finite points for any
$k$.
\end{lem}
We prepare some estimates for the proofs of Lemma \ref{l3} and Lemma \ref{l7}.
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.6} Assume that $1<p<2$ and $R>e$. Then for any $\varepsilon>0$ there is a positive
number $M$ such that we have for any $\varphi\in G([0,1])$
\begin{equation}\int_{B(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi|| \varphi'|}{ A_1(t)}\,dt\le \varepsilon
\int_{B(\varphi,M)}|\varphi|^{2-p}|\varphi'|^p t^{p-1}\,dt. \label{6.14}
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
{\noindent\bf Proof.}
We may assume that $\varphi>0$. Then by the definition we have $t{|\varphi'|}/{\varphi}>M
$ on $B(\varphi,M)$. Hence we immediately have
\begin{equation} \varphi^{2-p}|\varphi'|^p t^{p-1}= \varphi| \varphi'| \cdot
\left(t\frac{|\varphi'|}{\varphi}\right)^{p-1}\ge M^{p-1}\varphi| \varphi'|, \qquad\text{ on }
B(\varphi,M).\end{equation}
Therefore it suffices to choose $M$ so that
$ M^{1-p}(\log R)^{-1}\le \varepsilon$.
\hfill$\Box$\par
\begin{lem} \label{lem3.7} Assume that $1<p<2$ and $R>e$. Then we have for any $\varphi\in G([0,1])$
\begin{align}\int_{A(\varphi,M)}|\varphi'(t)|^2t\,dt &\ge
\frac14\int_{A(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi|^{2}}{t A_1(t)^2}\,dt -\frac 12 \frac{\varphi(1)^2}{A_1(1)}\label{6.17}\\&+\frac12
\int_{B(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi|^{2}}{t A_1(t)^2}\,dt-
\int_{B(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi||\varphi'|}{ A_1(t)}\,dt.\notag
\end{align}
\end{lem}
{\noindent\bf Proof.} By Lemma \ref{lem3.5}
we can assume that $C(\varphi,M)$ consists of
finitely many points. Recall that $0,1\in A(\varphi,M)$.
From the argument of Lemma \ref{lem3.3} we have
\begin{align}\int_{A(\varphi,M)}|&\varphi'(t)|^2t\,dt\ge
\frac14\int_{A(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi|^{2}}{t A_1(t)^2}\,dt
-\frac12 \int_{A(\varphi, M)}\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{\varphi(t)^2}{ A_1(t)}\right)\,dt
\label{6.19}\\
&=\frac14\int_{A(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi|^{2}}{t A_1(t)^2}\,dt
+\frac12 \int_{B(\varphi,M)}\frac{d}{dt}\left(\frac{\varphi(t)^2}{ A_1(t)}\right)\,dt -\frac 12 \frac{\varphi(1)^2}{A_1(1)}. \notag
\end{align}
Thus we have the desired estimate.
\hfill$\Box$\par
In a quite similar way we have
\begin{lem}\label{lem3.8} Assume that $1<p<2$ and $ R>e^e $. Then we have for any $\varphi\in G([0,1])$
\begin{align}\int_{A(\varphi,M)}|\varphi'(t)|^2r A_1(t)\,dt &\ge
\frac14\int_{A(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi|^{2}}
{t A_1(t) A_2(t)^2}\,dt -\frac 12 \frac{\varphi(1)^2}{A_2(1)}\label{6.20}\\&+\frac12
\int_{B(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi|^{2}}{t A_1(t) A_2(t)^2}\,dt-
\int_{B(\varphi,M)}\frac{|\varphi||\varphi'|}{A_2(t)}\,dt. \notag
\end{align}
\end{lem}
\subsection{Proof Lemma \ref{l3} }
Assume that $ \alpha<1-1/p$.
For $u\in C^1_c((0,1])$, we define
\begin{equation}
u(t)=h(t)t^{\beta},\quad \beta= 1-\frac{1}{p} -\alpha,\quad( \beta^p= \Lambda_{\alpha,p}).\label{6.21}
\end{equation}
Without the loss of generarity we assume that $u\ge0$ in $(0,1)$, then we have
\begin{equation}\begin{split}
\int_{0}^1|u'|^p t^{\alpha p}\, dt-&\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\int_{0}^1\frac{|u|^p}{t^{p}}t^{\alpha p}\,dt
=\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\int_0^1 h^p
\left\{\left|1+\frac{rh'}{\beta h}\right|^p-1\right\}\frac{dt}{t}.\end{split}\label{6.23}
\end{equation}
For the moment we assume $p\ge 2$.
By the fundamental inequality (\ref{3.0}) with $q=2$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\begin{split} &\text{(R.H.S.) of (\ref{6.23})}
\ge \frac{\Lambda_{\alpha,p}}{\beta}\int_0^1p h^{p-1}h'\,dt+
c(p)\frac{\Lambda_{\alpha,p}}{\beta^2} \int_0^1h^{p-2}(h')^2t\,dt\\
&=\beta^{p-1} h(1)^p+
c(p) \beta^{p-2}\frac{4}{p^2}\int_0^1\left|\left(h^{\frac{p}{2}}(t)\right)^\prime
\right|^2tdt.\, \quad(\text{ Note that }
h(0)=0.)
\end{split} \label{spit}\end{equation}
Using Lemma \ref{lem3.3} we get
\begin{align*}
\int_0^1\left|\left(h^{\frac{p}{2}}(t)\right)^\prime\right|^2tdt
\ge \frac{1}{4}\int_{0}^1\frac{|u(t)|^p}{t^{p}} A_1(r)^{-2}t^{\alpha p}dt
-\frac 12 A_1(1)^{-1} h(1)^p.
\end{align*}
Combining this with (\ref{spit}), we get the inequality (\ref{3.3}) with $C_3=c(p) \beta^{p-2}/{p^2}$ and $L=\beta^{p-1}-2C_3 A_1(1)^{-1}
$, making $c(p)$ smaller if necessary.
\par We proceed to the case that $1<p<2$.
For
$u\in C^1_c((0,1])$, we retain the notation (\ref{6.21}). Suppose that $M$ is sufficiently large.
In Definition \ref{df3.2}
we replace
$\varphi$ and $M$ by $h$ and $\beta M$ respectively, and assume that $h\in G([0,1])$ again.
Lemma \ref{lem3.1} (2) implies
\begin{align}
&\int_{0}^1|u'|^pt^{\alpha p}\, dt-\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\int_{0}^1\frac{|v|^p}{t^{p}}t^{\alpha p}\,dt
=\Lambda_{\alpha,p}\int_0^1 h^p(t)
\left\{\left|1+\frac{th'}{\beta h}\right|^p-1\right\}\frac{dt}{t}\label{6.26}
\\
&\ge \beta^{p-1}h(1)^p+
\frac{4 c(p) (M\beta)^{p-2}}{p^2}\int_{ A(h,\beta M)}((h^{\frac{p}{2}})')^2t\,dt
+c(p) \int_{ B(h,\beta M)}|h'|^{p}
t^{p-1}\,dt.\notag
\end{align}
Using Lemma \ref{lem3.7} with $A(h,\beta M)=A(h^{\frac{p}{2}},{p\beta M}/{2})$ and
$B(h,\beta M)=B(h^{\frac{p}{2}},{p\beta M}/{2})$,
\begin{align}
&\int_{ A(h,\beta M)}((h^{\frac{p}{2}})')^2t\,dt
\label{6.27}\\&\ge
\frac14\int_{ A(h,\beta M)}\frac{h^p}{t A_1(t)^2}\,dt -\frac12 \frac{h(1)^p}{ A_1(1)}+\frac12
\int_{ B(h,\beta M)}\frac{h^p}{t A_1(t)^2}\,dt
-\frac{p}{2}\int_{ B(h,\beta M)} \frac{h^{p-1}|h'|}{ A_1(t)}\,dt.\notag
\end{align}
We can estimate the last term to obtain
\begin{equation}\frac{p}{2}\int_{ B(h,\beta M)} \frac{h^{p-1}|h'|}{ A_1(t)}\,dt\le
\frac{p}{2}\frac{1}{(\beta M)^{p-1}\log R}
\int_{ B(h,\beta M)} |h'|^p t^{p-1}\,dt.\label{6.28}
\end{equation}
Here we simply used the fact that $t|h'|>\beta M h$ holds on the set $B(h,\beta M)$.
Combining this with (\ref{6.26}) and (\ref{6.27}) for sufficiently large $M$, we have the desired inequality.\hfill $\Box$
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{l7} }
We treat
the case $\alpha=1-{1}/{p}$ only, because the argument for $\alpha>1-1/p$ is similar to the previous subsection.
For $u\in C^1_c((0,1])$ we define \begin{equation}u(t)= A_1(t)^\beta h(t), \quad \beta=
1-\frac{1}{p}.\label{6.29}
\end{equation} Without loss of generality we assume $ u,h\ge 0$.
First we assume $p\ge 2$.
Using (\ref{3.0}) with $q=2$ and
$X=- \beta^{-1} t A_1(t) h'(t) h(t)^{-1}$,
we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\int_{0}^1| u'|^pt^{p-1}\, dt-\beta^p\int_{0}^1\frac{|u(t)|^p }{t A_1(t)^{p}}\,dt \\&
=\beta^p\int_0^1 \frac{h(t)^p}{tA_1(t)} \left( \left|1- \frac{ t A_1(t) h'(t)}{\beta
h(t)}\right|^p-1
\right)\,dt\\&
\ge
-\beta^{p-1} h(1)^p + \frac{4 c(p){\beta^{p-2}}}{p^2 }\int_0^1\left|\left(h(t)^{\frac{p}{2}}(t)\right)^\prime
\right|^2t A_1(t)\,dt.\\
\end{split}\label{6.31}
\end{equation}
Using Lemma \ref{lem3.4} we get
\begin{equation}
\int_0^1\left|\left(h(t)^{\frac{p}{2}}\right)^\prime\right|^2t
A_1(t)\,dt
\ge \frac{1}{4}\int_{0}^1\frac{|u(t)|^p}{t A_1(t)^pA_2(t)^2}dt -\frac 12 A_2^{-1}(1)h(1)^p.
\label{6.32}\end{equation}
Combining this with (\ref{6.31}) we get the desired inequality where $C_5=c(p)\beta^{p-2}p^{-2}$ and
$L= A_1^{1-p}(\beta^{p-1}+2C_5 A_2^{-1})$.
Then we proceed to the case that $1<p<2$.
Since the argument is
quite similar,
we give a sketch of proof.
Suppose that $M$ is sufficiently large. We retain the notation (\ref{6.29}) and modify Definition \ref{df3.2} as follows:
\begin{df}\label{df4.1}For $\varphi \in G([0,1])$ and $M>1$ we define three subsets of $[0,1]$ as
follows:
\begin{equation}\begin{cases}& A(\varphi,M)=\left\{ t\in [0,1] \,| \,|\varphi'(t)|\le
M\frac{|\varphi(t)|}{tA_1(t)}
\right\},\\
& B(\varphi,M)=\left\{ t\in [0,1] \,| \,|\varphi'(t)|> M\frac{|\varphi(t)|}{tA_1(t)} \right\},
\\
& C(\varphi,M)=\left\{ t\in [0,1] \,| \,|\varphi'(t)|= M\frac{|\varphi(t)|}{tA_1(t)} \right\}.
\end{cases}\label{6.33}\end{equation}
\end{df}
Again we replace $\varphi$ and $M$ by $h$ and $\beta M$ respectively and assume
$h\ge 0 $ in $ (0,1) $.
By Lemma {\ref{3.8}}, the first line of (\ref{6.31}) is estimated from below by the following:
\begin{align}
&
- {\beta^{p-1}}\int_0^1p h^{p-1}h'\,dt
+
\beta^p\int_{ A(h,\beta M)}h^{p} c(p) M^{p-2}
\left(\frac{tA_1(t)h'}{\beta h}\right)^2\frac {A_1(t)^{-1}} t\,dt \label{6.34}
\\&
+\beta^p \int_{ B(h,\beta M)}h^{p} c(p)
\left|\frac{tA_1(t)h'}{\beta h}\right|^p\frac{A_1(t)^{-1}}t\,dt
\notag
\\&
= -\beta^{p-1} h(1)^p+c(p) (M\beta)^{p-2}\int_{ A(h,\beta M)}h^{p-2}|h'|^2tA_1(t)\,dt
\notag
\\&
+c(p) \int_{ B(h,\beta M)}|h'|^{p}
t^{p-1}A_1(t)^{p-1}\,dt.
\notag
\end{align}
Here we note that $A(h,\beta M)=A(h^{\frac{p}{2}},{p}\beta M/{2})$ and $B(h,\beta M)=B(h^{\frac{p}{2}},{p}\beta
M/{2})$. Then applying Lemma {\ref{lem3.8}} for $\varphi =h^{\frac{p}{2}}$, $A(h^{\frac{p}{2}},{p}\beta M/{2})$ and $B(h^{\frac{p}{2}},{p}\beta
M/{2})$ we have
\begin{align}
\int_{ A(h,\beta M)}&h^{p-2}(h')^2tA_1(t)\,dt= \frac{4}{p^2}\int_{ A(h,\beta
M)}((h^{\frac{p}{2}})')^2tA_1(t)\,dt\label{6.35}\\&\ge
\frac{4}{p^2}\bigg(
\frac14\int_{A(h,\beta M)}\frac{h(t)^p}
{tA_1(t) A_2(t)^2}\,dt -\frac12 A_2(1)^{-1} h(1)^p \notag\\&+\frac12
\int_{B(h,\beta M)}\frac{h(t)^p}{tA_1(t) A_2(t)^2}\,dt-\frac{p}{2}
\int_{B(h,\beta M)}\frac{h(t)^{p-1}|h'(t)|}{A_2(t)}\,dt\notag\bigg).\notag
\end{align}
From an easy variant of Lemma \ref{lem3.6} we can estimate the last term to obtain
\begin{equation}\frac{p}{2}\int_{ B(h,\beta M)} \frac{h^{p-1}|h'|}{A_2(t)}\,dt\le
\frac{p}{2}\frac{1}{(\beta M)^{p-1}\log(\log R)}
\int_{ B(h,\beta M)} |h'|^p A_1(t)^{p-1}t^{p-1}\,dt.\label{6.36}
\end{equation}
Here we simply used the fact that $tA_1(t)|h'|>\beta M h$ holds on the set $B(h,\beta M)$.
Combining this with (\ref{6.34}) and (\ref{6.35}), for a large $M$, we have the desired inequality. \hfill $\Box$
|
\section{Introduction}
Nuclear star clusters (NSCs) are the densest stellar systems in the Universe \citep{Walcher2005, Misgeld_Hilker2011, Norris2014} with masses from 10${^6}$-10${^8}$\,M$_{\odot}$ and half-light radii of about 1-10\,pc \citep{Georgiev_Boker2014, Georgiev2016}.
High resolution Hubble Space Telescope (HST) imaging of nearby galaxies has revealed that NSCs are found in $\gtrsim$70\% of galaxies across the Hubble sequence \citep{Phillips1996, Carollo1998, Boker2002, Boker2004, Cote2006, Turner2012, Georgiev_Boker2014} covering a wide range of galaxy stellar masses with an occupation fraction peaking at galaxy masses in the range of 10$^{8-10}~M_\odot$ \citep{Georgiev2009, Ordenes-Briceno2018, sanchez2018}.
In addition, NSCs are known to co-exist with supermassive black holes \citep[SMBH,][]{Seth2008, Neumayer_Walcher2012}, as observed in the Milky Way \citep{Genzel2010, Schoedel2014, schoedel2014b, feldmeier2014}.
NSCs may also be relevant for the origin of the most massive globular clusters (GCs), which is still a debated question. Many of the most massive clusters in the Milky Way and M31 show significant spreads in metallicity \citep{Meylan2001,Fuentes-Carrera2008,Willman-Strader2012,Bailin2018}, and the most massive Milky Way GC, $\omega$~Cen \citep[2.5$\times$10$^6~M_\odot$,][]{vandeVen2006}, seems to have age spreads as well \citep{Hilker2004,Villanova2014}. Terzan\,5 is another multi-component cluster that resides in the bulge of the Milky Way. It displays a high spread in iron \citep{Massari2014} and age \citep{Ferraro2016, Origlia2019}, with a chemical composition similar to the Galactic bulge.
This led to the suggestion that they are former NSCs of dwarf galaxies that have been accreted \citep{Boker2008,daCosta2016}, as nuclear star clusters are known to have extended star formation histories \citep[e.g.][]{Walcher2005,Kacharov2018}.
Metallicity spreads alone could also be due to self-enrichment during formation \citep{Bailin2018}, however age spreads are likely a strong indicator of a stripped NSCs. \citet{Pfeffer2014} predict, via cosmological simulations of the Milky Way, that between one and three GCs with masses higher than 10$^5~$M$_\odot$ are tidally striped nuclei, with a high likelihood of remnants above 10$^6~$M$_\odot$.
The most massive compact stellar systems are often referred to as Ultracompact Dwarfs (UCDs), which blend smoothly in mass and size with the massive GCs with no clear dividing line between them. For massive UCDs, above 10$^7~M_\odot$, a large fraction do appear to be stripped nuclei, as they host SMBHs that make up a large fraction of their mass \citep{Seth2014,Ahn2017,Ahn2018,Afa2018} or have an extended star formation history \citep{Norris2015}. At masses below 10$^7~M_\odot$, no equivalent evidence has been found outside of $\omega$~Cen's extended star formation history, but stripped NSCs at these masses are expected to be quite common \citep{Georgiev_Boker2014,Pfeffer2014}.
In this context, the following questions arise: how many of the massive GCs in our Milky Way are former nuclei of low-mass galaxies? What are the detailed properties (morphology, stellar ages, metallicity, and kinematics) we would expect these systems to have?
To address these questions, we focus here on an ideal target in the nucleated Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal galaxy \citep{Ibata1994} - hereafter Sgr dSph. This galaxy is currently being disrupted by the tidal field of the Milky Way \citep{Ibata1997}, leaving visible streams as evidence. The original luminosity of the galaxy has been estimated to be $\sim$10$^8$~L$_\odot$ \citep[$M_v \sim -15$;][]{Niederste-Ostholt2012}.
The NSC of this galaxy was discovered as the globular cluster Messier~54 (NGC\,6715) long before the remainder of the galaxy was discovered. M54 has a mass of \mbox{1.41$\pm0.02\times$10${^6}$\,M$_\odot$} \citep{Baumgardt2018}, making it the second most massive GC in the galaxy after $\omega$~Cen. It is located in the densest region of the Sagittarius stream at the photometric center of the galaxy \citep{Ibata1994, Mucciarelli2017} at a distance of 28.4\,kpc \citep{Siegel2011}.
The Sgr dSph NSC is composed of at least two distinct populations, a metal poor and metal rich, with the metal-rich population having stars as young as $\sim$2~Gyr, while the metal-poor population is consistent with an age of $\sim$13~Gyr \citep{Monaco2005b, Siegel2007, Bellazzini2008}. Some authors have referred to these two components as separate objects, a massive metal-poor GC (M54), and a metal-rich component associated with the galaxy (Sgr, or Sgr NS). However, in the context of extragalactic NSCs (where these two populations could not easily be separated), and given the populations' identical photocenters \citep{Monaco2005a} and radial velocities \citep{Bellazzini2008} we prefer to think of these components as two (or more) subpopulations of the Sgr dSph NSC.
Hence, we will refer throughout the paper to the different subpopulations in the NSC of the Sgr dSph considering their stars physical parameters (e.g metallicity, age).
\citet{Monaco2005a} found that the metal-rich subpopulation presents a cusp with a peak located in an indistinguishable position from the center of the metal-poor population, thus displaying a different radial profile in the inner parts in comparison with the rest of Sgr dSph galaxy \citep{Majewski2003}. \citet{Ibata2009} reported that the metal-poor subpopulation shows a stellar density cusp, together with a peak in the velocity dispersion. The density profiles from both subpopulations are found to be different \citep{Monaco2005a, Bellazzini2008}.
\citet{Siegel2007}, using HST photometry, suggested that at least four discrete stellar populations are present in the nucleus of the Sgr dSph galaxy, revealing a very complex star formation history.
These populations are:\\
\mbox{(i) [Fe/H]$=-1.8$}, \mbox{$[\alpha/\mathrm{Fe}]=+0.2$} with ages of 13\,Gyr;\\
\mbox{(ii) [Fe/H]$=-0.6$}, \mbox{$[\alpha/\mathrm{Fe}]=-0.2$} with ages of 4 to 6\,Gyr;\\
(iii) [Fe/H]$=-0.1$, $[\alpha/\mathrm{Fe}]=-0.2$ with ages of 2.3\,Gyr; and\\
\mbox{(iv) [Fe/H]$=+0.6$}, \mbox{$[\alpha/\mathrm{Fe}]=0.0$} with ages of 0.1 to 0.8\,Gyr.
Previous spectroscopic studies have focused on the division of the cluster into metal-rich and metal-poor subpopulations (i.e.~population (i) above vs. all others). \citet{Bellazzini2008} used $\sim$400 stars to show that the systemic velocities of the stars in both metallicity regimes coincide within $\simeq\pm1.0$\,km~s$^{-1}$, consistent with previous findings based on samples with a considerably lower number of stars \citep{Dacosta1995, Ibata1997, Monaco2005b}.
Despite this coincidence in radial velocities, the velocity dispersion profiles differ significantly for these populations, with the metal-rich stars having a much flatter dispersion profile than the metal-poor stars \citep{Bellazzini2008}.
To explain the spatial coincidence and the differing dispersion and surface brightness profiles of the different populations, \citet{Monaco2005a} and \citet{Bellazzini2008} suggested the following possible scenarios:
(1) Both were formed {\em in situ} at the bottom of the potential well of the galaxy, first the metal-poor stars, followed by the metal-rich stars in subsequent star-forming episodes from enriched gas.
(2) The metal-poor stars were an ordinary globular cluster that was driven by dynamical friction to the center of the galaxy where a nucleus had either already formed independently, or formed subsequently.
Using $N$-body simulations \citet{Bellazzini2008} showed that the latter scenario is feasible even with a pre-existing NSC. More specifically, the dynamical friction inspiral time scale of the metal-poor progenitor GC is $<$3~Gyr for a wide range of starting radii and initial relative velocities (unlike the other GCs in the Sgr dSph). Furthermore, the end state of these simulations results in radial velocity differences between the pre-existing NSC and migrated GC of $<$2~km~s$^{-1}$.
Studies on the abundances of the metal-poor and metal-rich population and radial variations of the metallicity have also been published. The metal-poor population displays a large spread in the iron content of its stars \citep[$\sigma_{\mathrm{[Fe/H]}}$$=0.186$,][]{Carretta2010b, Willman-Strader2012}.
In addition, \citet{Carretta2010b} reported that a Sodium-Oxygen anticorrelation similar to those seen in other globular clusters is present in the metal-poor population. On the other hand, the authors do not observe any signatures of this anti-correlation in the metal-rich population.
\citet{Mucciarelli2017} found a metallicity gradient in the metal-rich population, with this component becoming more metal-poor at larger radii. They also
estimated that the chemical distribution they found for the Sgr dSph galaxy is consistent with a progenitor of M$_{DM}=6\times10^{10}$\,M$_\odot$, in agreement with the estimate by \citet{Gibbons2017}.
Finally, kinematic observations of the metal-poor population have also been used to determine if it hosts a central massive black hole. Two studies have reported a possible detection based on dynamical modeling ($M_{BH} \sim 10{^4}$\,M$_{\odot}$, \citealt{Ibata2009, Baumgardt2017}).
All of these characteristics make the nucleus of the Sgr dSph galaxy a key object for understanding NSCs. Its proximity enables us to estimate parameters for individual stars, providing valuable information of the nucleus itself and its co-evolution with the progenitor galaxy. This object offers the opportunity to better understand the link between the most massive GCs and NSCs as stripped nuclei from low-mass galaxies. The MUSE spectrograph is an excellent instrument for studying individual stars in GCs \citep[e.g.][]{Husser2016, Kamann2018}. In this work, we present a powerful MUSE data set centered on M54. With these data we perform a spectroscopic study of over 6\,500 stars, an order of magnitude increase over previous spectroscopic samples.
In this paper we present our data in Section\,\ref{data}, including the extraction of the single stellar spectra. Section\,\ref{analysis} presents our analysis, including radial velocity, membership probability, metallicity and age measurements. Our results are presented in Section\,\ref{results}, we discuss these in Section\,\ref{discussion} and conclude in Section\,\ref{conclu}.
\section{Data} \label{data}
\subsection{Observations and data reduction}
The data set was acquired with MUSE \citep{Bacon2014}, an integral field spectrograph mounted at the UT4 of the Very Large Telescope at the Paranal Observatory in Chile, between June 29th and September 19th 2015 in run 095.B-0585(A) (PI: L\"utzgendorf).
A total of 16 pointings, with a field of view (FoV) of $59\farcs9 \times 60\farcs0$ each, create a 4$\times$4 mosaic that covers a contiguous area out to $\sim$2.5 times the half-light radius of M54 \citep[R$_{\mathrm{HL}}=0\farcm82$,][2010 edition]{Harris1996}, equivalent to $\sim$25 times its core radius \citep[R$_{\mathrm{c}}=0\farcm09$,][2010 edition]{Harris1996}. The estimated tidal radius of M54 is R$_{\mathrm{t}}=9\farcm87$ \citep[assuming a King-model central concentration of c$=2.04$,][2010 edition]{Harris1996}.
Due to overlaps between neighboring pointings, the observations cover a field of view of $\sim$3\farcm5$\times$3\farcm5 ($1\farcm$ corresponds to 8.27\,pc at an assumed distance of $28.4$\,kpc, \citealt{Siegel2011}). This results in a total field of view of \mbox{29\,pc$\times$29\,pc}.
The data have a wavelength coverage of 4800\,-\,9300\,\AA~and a spectral resolution increasing with wavelength from \mbox{R$\sim1750$} to \mbox{R$\sim3750$}. The spatial sampling is $0\farcs2$/pix.
Each field was observed with three exposures, applying offsets in rotation of 90$\degree$ between them (no dithering) to increase the homogeneity of the data across the field of view. The exposure time for each of the three exposures was chosen to be 400\,s for the inner 4 pointings and 610\,s for the outer 12 pointings. This was done to avoid saturation of the innermost crowded region with high surface brightness.
During the observations, the airmass varied from 1.0 to 1.9; and the seeing between $0\farcs5$\,-\,$1\farcs2$. Figure\,\ref{muse_mosaic} shows the color image of the 4$\times$4 mosaic obtained from the MUSE data using synthetic i, r, and z filters.
The data reduction was performed using the MUSE pipeline \citep[Version 1.2.1,][]{Weilbacher2014}. The pipeline includes all tasks for the data reduction process: bias creation/subtraction, flat fielding, illumination correction and wavelength calibration. Before combining the single exposures, they were flux calibrated using a standard star and corrected for the barycentric motion of the Earth.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=450px]{fig1.png}
\caption{Color image obtained from the MUSE data of Sgr dSph NSC, using synthetic i, r, and z filters. The image is a 4$\times$4 mosaic of 16 MUSE pointings, covering $\sim$2.5\,R$_\mathrm{{HL}}$ (R$_{\mathrm{HL}}=0\farcm82$, \citealt[][2010 edition]{Harris1996}) of this NSC. The total covered field of view - considering overlaps - is $\sim 3\farcm5 \times 3\farcm5$, corresponding to 29\,pc $\times$29\,pc ($1\farcm=8.27$\,pc). North is up and East is to the left.}
\label{muse_mosaic}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Stellar spectra extraction} \label{stellar_extraction}
We extract individual stellar spectra with PampelMuse \citep{Kamann2013}. This tool takes a photometric catalogue as a reference for the positions and magnitudes of the stars in the field of view. It models the change in the point spread function (PSF) as a function of wavelength and allows deblending of sources efficiently even in crowded and dense regions.
A reference stellar catalogue for M54 was published by \citet{Siegel2007} as part of the ACS Survey of Galactic Globular Clusters \citep{Sarajedini2007}. The catalogue includes source positions and F606W (V) and F814W (I) magnitudes with their respective uncertainties. Its total coverage is larger than the MUSE data set FoV.
We extract the spectra of $\sim$55\,000 stars from the entire field. For our subsequent analysis we only consider the spectra with signal-to-noise ratio S$/$N$\geq$10, which are labeled by PampelMuse as good extracted spectra.
Within the entire MUSE FoV, we extract good spectra for a total of $\sim$7\,000 different stars in the magnitude range of $22<\mathrm{F814W}<13$ (I band).
In our stellar sample we do not include main sequence (MS) stars below the oldest turn-off point since they are fainter than $\mathrm{I}\sim21$ and their spectra are typically below our $\mathrm{S/N}=10$ threshold.
\section{Analysis} \label{analysis}
To measure physical stellar parameters we use ULySS \citep[University of Lyon Spectroscopic Analysis Software,][]{Koleva2009}, a tool for determination of atmospheric parameters of stars through interpolating and fitting stellar library templates to the observed spectrum in the wavelength range of 3900 to 6800\AA. We note that the spectral wavelength range of MUSE allow us to fit from 4800 to 6800\AA\, only and we masked the Na I D line region between 5850 and 5950\,\AA\, of the observed spectrum.
The observed spectrum is compared with a library of synthetic spectra with varying metallicity, surface gravity, and temperature. The best fit is achieved by interpolation within the synthetic library and $\chi^2$ minimization. The fit performed by UlySS is a Levenberg-Marquart local minimization for non-linear parameters, while for the linear ones uses a bounded-values least square.
The synthetic spectroscopic grid available in ULySS is built on the basis of the ELODIE 3.2 library \citep{elodie}. It is limited to a metallicity range of $-2.5<$[Fe/H]$<0.5$.
ULySS also simultaneously estimates the radial velocity shifts of the input spectra.
Finally, ULySS derives the uncertainties of the different physical parameters via Monte-Carlo simulations.
For stars in overlapping regions, where multiple spectra are extracted, the final values for the radial velocity and metallicity are the weighted mean and its uncertainty of the multiple ULySS measurements.
Figure\,\ref{ulyss} shows three examples of the fitting performed by ULySS for stars with a spectrum of signal to noise of 14 (close to the minimum value of 10), 48 and 100. We use a multiplicative polynomial of order 6, which provides sufficiently good normalization of the observed spectra without the danger of overfitting.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=400px]{fig2.png}
\caption{Three examples of the fitting performed by ULySS \citep{Koleva2009} for different types of stars with signal to noise of 14 (close to minimum of 10), 48 and 100, in the wavelength range of 4701 to 6800\AA\,.
Top panels: The best fit is represented in blue; data not considered for the fit in red (both panels); and the multiplicative polynomial in turquoise. Bottom panels: Residual of the spectrum fitting (black). Overplotted in dashed and solid green are the mean and the 1$\sigma$ deviation, respectively.}
\label{ulyss}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Radial velocity} \label{velocity_measurement}
From the spectral fitting performed by ULySS we obtain the radial velocities for each star.
Since the space motion of the nucleus can mimic the effect of an additional rotation component, we correct the radial velocity values for this effect, known as perspective rotation, using equation 6 in \citet{vandeVen2006}.
We use the absolute proper motion of the cluster M54 \mbox{V$_W=-2.82\pm0.11$\,mas/yr} and \mbox{V$_N=-1.51\pm0.14$\,mas/yr} \citep{Sohn2015}. These values are in good agreement with the recent values based on \textit{Gaia} data by \citet{Vasiliev2019}. We obtain correction values between $-0.3$ and $0.3$\,km~s$^{-1}$.
In Appendix\,\ref{repeated_stars}, we discuss the agreement between velocity measurements derived for stars observed in multiple MUSE pointings.
\subsection{Sgr dSph NSC membership} \label{member_estimate}
The position of the Sgr dSph galaxy with respect to the Milky Way and the large field of view of the MUSE data mosaic result in a considerable amount of contamination of non-member stars in our Sgr dSph NSC sample.
We determine the membership probability based on the iterative expectation maximization technique using "clumPy"\footnote{\url{https://github.com/bkimmig/clumpy}} \citep{Kimmig2015}. We use our radial velocity measurements and the distance of the stars to the center of the cluster M54 as input values (no metallicity estimates considered).
This procedure is described in detail by \citet{Walker2009} and later with some variations by \citet{Kimmig2015}. The technique iteratively estimates the mean velocity and velocity dispersion of the cluster plus the membership probability of each star until all the parameters converge. We use a foreground/background contamination model for the Milky Way based on the Besan\c{c}on model of the Galaxy \citep{Robin2003}.
The membership probability obtained with the expectation maximization technique for each star is represented by color in the radius versus velocity plot in Figure\,\ref{membership}.
From our total sample of 7\,000 stars we consider those with probability \mbox{$\geq70\%$} to be members of the Sgr dSph NSC, leaving a total of 6\,651 members.
We obtain a maximum likelihood median radial velocity for the member stars (dark red points) of $141.34\pm0.18$\,km~s$^{-1}$ and a median central velocity dispersion of $16.31\pm0.28$\,km~s$^{-1}$. The radial velocity estimate is in good agreement with previous works, e.g V$_r\sim141$\,km~s$^{-1}$ by \citet{Bellazzini2008} for the metal-poor and metal-rich populations.
From this point, the analysis is carried out on a sample that only includes the members of the Sgr dSph NSC determined by this technique.
In the color-magnitude diagram (CMD) in Figure\,\ref{cmd_sn} we show the full sample of extracted single stellar spectra. Member stars of the Sgr dSph NSC (probability $\geq70\%$) are color coded by the signal-to-noise logarithm, while non-members (probability $<70\%$) are shown in gray. The stellar photometry information in F606W (V) and F814W (I) filters are extracted from the M54 HST reference catalogue.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=250px]{fig3.png}
\caption{{\bf Top:} Distribution of the radial velocities for the extracted stars with S/N$\geq10$ from the entire MUSE FoV. {\bf Bottom:} Radius versus velocity for our stellar sample color coded by the cluster membership probability (P$_{\mathrm{Membership}}$). We consider as member stars of the Sgr dSph NSC those with probability $\geq70\%$.}
\label{membership}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=250px]{fig4.png}
\caption{CMD for the total number of extracted spectra with \mbox{S/N$\geq10$}. Stellar photometry information in F606W (V) and F814W (I) filters (HST/ACS WFC) taken from the M54 catalogue \citep{Siegel2007} of the ACS Survey of Galactic Globular Clusters \citep{Sarajedini2007}. Member stars of the Sgr dSph NSC (probability $\geq70\%$) are color coded by the signal-to-noise logarithm and non-members (probability $<70\%$) are shown in gray.}
\label{cmd_sn}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Metallicity from full spectrum fitting} \label{met_ulyss}
The top panel of Figure\,\ref{rad_met} shows the metallicity histogram for the member stars of the Sgr dSph NSC. This metallicity distribution is highly consistent with the one presented by \citet{Mucciarelli2017} for a total of 76 stars in a radius range of $0\farcm0<\mathrm{R}\leqslant2\farcm5$. We cross matched our sample with those from \citet{Carretta2010a} and \citet{Mucciarelli2017}, and compare the measurements for the stars we have in common. The values are consistent within the errors. We obtain a mean difference of 0.15$\pm$0.03\,dex, when comparing with \citet{Carretta2010a}, with a standard deviation of $\sigma=0.16$. From the comparison with \citet{Mucciarelli2017}, we obtain a mean difference of 0.05$\pm$0.02\,dex with a standard deviation of $\sigma=0.17$. This comparison is included in Appendix\,\ref{feh_comparison}.
In the bottom panel, we present the relation between radius and metallicity for the sample of 6\,651 stars as derived with ULySS, color coded by the metallicity uncertainties. Two clear distributions in metallicity become apparent: a metal-poor population at [Fe/H]$=-1.5$ and a metal-rich population around [Fe/H]$=-0.3$ with a separation at [Fe/H]$=-0.8$. The median metallicity uncertainty is 0.05\,dex.
The top panels in Figure\,\ref{cmds} show the CMD color coded by metallicity (hereafter CMD+metallicity) corresponding to all the Sgr dSph NSC members (and a zoom-in onto the turn-off region, top right panel). We overplotted in blue, green and orange isochrones from the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Database \citep{Dotter2008} corresponding to different stellar populations in the Sgr dSph NSC, using as a reference the work by \citet{Siegel2007}.
We are able to see stars in different evolutionary stages: turn-off point (TO), red giant branch (RGB), horizontal branch (HB), asymptotic giant branch (AGB), red clump (RC), even the extreme horizontal branch (EHB) and the blue plume (BP). The CMD shows clear evidence for an old metal poor population, as well as at least two distinct younger populations with metallicity $\gtrsim-0.4$ that agree well with the 4.5-6\,Gyr isochrone highlighted by \citet{Siegel2007}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=230px]{fig5.png}
\caption{\textbf{Top:} Metallicity histogram of the member stars of Sgr dSph NSC. \textbf{Bottom:} Radius versus metallicity plot for the same sample. The stars are color coded by the uncertainties in the [Fe/H] measurements.}
\label{rad_met}
\end{figure}
For our complete sample of member stars we estimate a mean metallicity of [Fe/H]$=-1.06$, with a standard deviation of $\sigma=0.64$.
For the metal poor stars (\mbox{[Fe/H]$<-0.8$}) we obtain a mean metallicity of \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-1.45$} and a standard deviation of $\sigma=0.32$. This is in good agreement with previous works, such as \citet{Brown1999} and \citet{Dacosta1995} with an estimate of [Fe/H]$=-1.55$, and later by \citet{Carretta2010a}, who estimated a metallicity of \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-1.559\pm0.021$\,dex}.
In the case of the stars in the metal rich regime (\mbox{[Fe/H]$>-0.8$}), we obtain a mean value of [Fe/H]$=-0.27$ and a standard deviation of $\sigma=0.29$. In this case, the metallicity measurement differs from previous studies. \citet{Carretta2010a} obtained a value of \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.622\pm0.068$\,dex}, and \citet{Mucciarelli2017} \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.52\pm0.02$\,dex}. A possible explanation for this difference is discussed in Section\,\ref{3pop}.
We repeated the metallicity measurements with a second method, using Ca\,II triplet lines, and obtained consistent metallicity measurements using the two independent methods (see Appendix \ref{caii}).
\subsection{Stellar age estimates} \label{stellar_age_estimates}
Valuable information about the star formation history (SFH) of the Sgr dSph NSC can be obtained from age and metallicity estimates together.
For the age estimates of individual stars we use a grid of isochrones, which we compare with the magnitudes and colors of the stars as measured from the HST photometry in V (F606W) and I (F814W) bands with their respective uncertainties ($\sigma_\mathrm{V}$, $\sigma_\mathrm{I}$), and metallicities Z, obtained from the MUSE spectra, including their uncertainties $\sigma_{\mathrm Z}$. We set the metallicity uncertainty to 0.1\,dex when lower than that value.
We consider age the only free parameter of the model.
We use Bayes' theorem to estimate the ages through the posterior probability as:
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{ P(\tau\,|\,V_{obs},I_{obs},Z_{obs})\,\propto\,P(V_{obs},I_{obs},Z_{obs}\,|\,\tau)}\times \mathrm{P}(\tau),
\end{equation}
where the normalized likelihood function P(V$_{\mathrm{obs}}$,I$_{\mathrm{obs}}$,Z$_{\mathrm{obs}}$\,|\,$\tau$) of the observables at a given age is a trivariate Gaussian:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
P(\mathrm{V_{obs},I_{obs},Z_{obs}\,|\,\tau})\,=\, & \frac{1}{\mathrm{ \sigma_{V_{obs}} \, \sigma_{I_{obs}} \, \sigma_{Z_{obs}} \, (2\pi)^{3/2}}} \\
& \times \mathrm{exp\frac{ -(V_{obs} - V_{0})^2 }{2\sigma_{V_{obs}}^2}} \\
& \times \mathrm{exp\frac{ -(I_{obs} - I_{0})^2}{2 \sigma_{I_{obs}}^2}} \\
& \times \mathrm{exp\frac{ -(Z_{obs} - Z_{0})^2}{2 \sigma_{Z_{obs}}^2} } ,
\end{split}
\label{lkhd}
\end{equation}
where V$_0$, I$_0$, and Z$_0$ denote the real magnitudes and metallicity of the star given its age and the $\sigma$ values represent the independent errors in each measurement .
We marginalize over the unknown true magnitudes and metallicity of the star by integrating over the isochrones \citep[see e.g.][for a similar approach]{Pont2004}.
Due to the lack of Extended Horizontal Branch isochrone models, we have excluded stars with colors between \mbox{${\mathrm V-\mathrm I}=-0.2$} and 0.4 and I in the range of 21 to 17 in our age analysis.
Initially, we used a flat prior in age P($\tau$) for all the remaining stars. The age-metallicity relation (AMR) found for the TO region stars turned out to be very well represented by the empirical model published by \citet{Layden_Sarajedini2000}. On the other hand, the obtained ages for a fraction of metal-poor RGB stars were lower than expected for such metallicity regime. This degeneracy could be a consequence of high abundance of elements like oxygen, which has been reported to display a high spread in this metal-poor population \citep{Carretta2010a}. In fact, \citet{vandenberg2012} showed the impact of different elemental abundances on computed evolutionary tracks at similar [Fe/H] values and how this affects the color of the stars, thus their position in the CMD. After this examination of the initial ages, to guard against systematic age uncertainties, we set a weak Gaussian age prior P($\tau$) to their model with a standard deviation of $3$\,Gyr for the age estimates of all extracted member stars from the MUSE cube.
We built the isochrone grid with a resolution of 0.2\,Gyr with ages from 0.2 to 15\,Gyr from the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Database \citep{Dotter2008} assuming the HST/ACS WFC photometric system. The metallicity range is from $-2.495$ to $0.500$\,dex with steps of $0.005$\,dex, considering $[\alpha/\mathrm{Fe}]=0.0$.
We correct the isochrone magnitudes by extinction of A${_ \mathrm{V}}=0.377$ and A${_\mathrm{I}}=0.233$ from NED\footnote{The NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.}. These are obtained using the calibration published by \citet{Schlafly2011} for the F606W and F814W bands for a reddening of $E(B-V)=0.15$ estimated in the central $5\farcm$ radius of M54 \citep{SFD1998} with R$_\mathrm{V}=3.1$. We shifted the grid of isochrones adopting a distance modulus of $(m-M_0)=17.27$ \citep{Siegel2007}. For comparison, we performed the same analysis considering a reddening of $E(B-V)=0.16$ and a distance modulus of $(m-M_0)=17.13$ \citep{Sollima2010}, obtaining consistent age estimates.
We take the mode of the likelihood distribution of ages as the best age estimate and the highest density interval that accommodates 68\% of the probability as the age uncertainty.
The CMD for the clean stellar sample color coded by age (hereafter CMD+age) is presented in the bottom left panel of Figure\,\ref{cmds}, with a zoom-in to the TO region in the bottom right panel of the figure.
Three isochrones based on those presented in \citet{Siegel2007} are overplotted; they are also from the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Database \citep{Dotter2008}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=500px]{fig6.png}
\caption{Left panels: CMDs for the Sgr dSph NSC members color-coded by metallicity (CMD+metallicity) estimated with ULySS at the top and color coded by age (CMD+age) at the bottom.
Right panels: Zoom into the TO region.
Updated isochrones from the Dartmouth Stellar Evolution Database are overplotted in blue, green and orange for three stellar populations published by \citet{Siegel2007}.}
\label{cmds}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Populations split by age and metallicity} \label{pop_split}
We use Gaussian Mixture Models (GMM) in age-metallicity space to separate the stars into distinct multiple populations.
To this aim, we used only TO region stars, where we obtain the most reliable age estimates as we describe in Section\,\ref{stellar_age_estimates}.
We tested GMM with three, four, and five components and found that a GMM with four components gives the best representation of our data set based on the Akaike Information Criterion \citep[AIC,][]{Akaike1974}.
We optimized the GMM using the Affine-Invariant Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm \citep{Goodman2010, Foreman-Mackey2013}.
We then computed the probabilities of all stars in the observed sample of belonging to any of the GMM defined populations. The fourth Gaussian component of the GMM captures outliers and is not further considered in our analysis.
We estimate the mean and spread in both age and metallicity for each of the subpopulations. We start by taking stars with a high probability ($>50$\%) of belonging to each subpopulation. We then perform a maximum likelihood fit for the ages and metallicities of these stars using a 2-dimensional Gaussian and accounting for the observational uncertainties in each stars' age and metallicity. The result is a mean and {\em intrinsic} spread in both age and metallicity for each population. We assumed that the [Fe/H] Probability Distribution Functions (PDF) are Gaussian and integrated numerically over the non-Gaussian individual stellar age PDFs.
From the results of this procedure we define three different subpopulations as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item YMR: young metal rich (red), with mean age of $2.16\pm0.03$\,Gyr and mean \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.04\pm0.01$}.
\item IMR: intermediate age metal rich (orange), with mean age of $4.28\pm0.09$\,Gyr and mean \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.29\pm0.01$}.
\item OMP: old metal poor (blue), with mean age of $12.16\pm0.05$\,Gyr and mean \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-1.41\pm0.01$}.
\end{itemize}
We find that the YMR population has an intrinsic $1\sigma$ spread of $0.20\pm0.03$\,Gyr in age and $0.12\pm0.01$\,dex in metallicity; the IMR population has an intrinsic spread of $1.16\pm0.07$\,Gyr in age and $0.16\pm0.01$\,dex in metallicity; the OMP population has an intrinsic spread of $0.92\pm0.04$\,Gyr in age and $0.24\pm0.01$\,dex in metallicity. The uncertainties are represented by the standard deviation in each parameter in the converged part of the MCMC, thus obtaining low errors. The age-metallicity correlation coefficients, $\rho$, for the three populations are $\rho_{\mathrm{YMR}}=-0.35$, $\rho_{\mathrm{IMR}}=-0.70$ and $\rho_{\mathrm{OMP}}=-0.97$.
To check for consistency, we use the same method to estimate the intrinsic spread in metallicity for stars with \mbox{$\mathrm{I}\leqslant16.5$\,mag} where the signal-to-noise of the stars is mostly $>100$. This leaves a total of 22 stars for the YMR (5\% of YMR sample) and 208 for the OMP ($\sim9$\% of OMP sample). For the YMR subpopulation we obtain an intrinsic $1\sigma$ spread of $0.11\pm0.06$\,dex, and $0.13\pm0.03$\,dex for the OMP subpopulation. The spread for the YMR subpopulation derived from the brightest stars is consistent with the one measured for the stars of all magnitudes. For the OMP subpopulation, we observe a difference of 0.11\,dex. This can be consequence of the low number of stars in comparison with the entire sample, and the effects of the age uncertainties at the RGB region, which can be more uncertain, as we mention in the previous section. Since these values are obtained from a reduced fraction of the entire sample ($<10$\%), we will consider the intrinsic spread measured from the sample at all magnitudes.
The AMR is presented in Figure\,\ref{amr}, where we include all stars for which ages were measured and have relative age errors $\leq40\%$. The overplotted crosses represent the intrinsic spreads of the different populations: YMR in red, IMR in orange, and OMP in blue.
The intrinsic age and metallicity spreads together with the age-metallicity correlation coefficient $\rho$ define the inclination angle of the crosses for each subpopulation.
We discuss the possible origin of these populations in Section \ref{discussion}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=490px]{fig7.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Top}: Age histogram.
\textbf{Bottom}: Density plot of the age-metallicity relation.
The crosses show the intrinsic spread of the different stellar populations in the Sgr dSph NSC: young metal rich (YMR) in red, intermediate age metal rich (IMR) in orange and old metal poor (OMP) in blue. The subpopulations stellar parameters are summarized in Table\,\ref{table}. All the stars included in both panels have age relative errors $\leqslant$40\%. The vertical dashed lines show where the probability is equal for the two neighbouring subpopulations. {\bf Note:} The inclination of the crosses is given by the correlation coefficient obtained from the Gaussian mixture model.}
\label{amr}
\end{figure*}
For the RC stars in the sample we were able to obtain reliable measurements in metallicity and found that they all fall in the metal-rich regime. The complexity of this stage of stellar evolution prevents us from getting reliable ages for the RC stars from simple isochrone fits.
Due to this effect, the RC stars were not considered to belong to any of the subpopulations when we decompose the stars into subpopulations via the maximum likelihood method.
For completeness, these stars are shown in Figure\,\ref{amr} and fall on the diagram clustered together as the overdensity at $\sim$1\,Gyr in a metallicity range of $-0.5<\mathrm{[Fe/H]}<0.0$.
To get a better estimate of the likely age distribution of RC stars, we follow \citet{Girardi2016} and compute the RC age distribution for representative SFHs of Sagittarius. We do this for two assumptions of the SFH: (i) Sgr dSph galaxy has a constant SFH and (ii) SFH follows the observed SFH from the CMD analysis of \citet{Boer2015}.
The \citet{Boer2015} SFH shows a declining SFR with time, but is constructed from the tail of the Sgr dSph, so is likely missing the most metal rich and young stars - biasing the star formation to early times. Inclusion of the younger populations in the CMD analysis might produce a SFH more closely represented by a constant SFH. We therefore consider these two cases as plausible bounds on the likely true SFH of Sgr. For the constant SFH case we find that the RC stars are predominantly ($\sim51$\%) younger than 2.2\,Gyr, thus being more likely to belong to the YMR subpopulation than to the IMR (10\%.)
For case (ii), we obtain that anywhere from 10 to 70\% of RC stars are younger than 2.2\,Gyr, with probabilities of less than 10\% for the IMR.
Taking these two cases into consideration, we consider it most likely that the majority of the RC stars is associated with the YMR subpopulation, and consider them as part of that population in our further analysis.
\section{Results} \label{results}
\subsection{Population analysis} \label{3pop}
Comparing the metallicity and age information presented in the CMDs in Figure\,\ref{cmds}, we observe that in the TO region in the CMD+age we distinguish three, well separated subpopulations with different age ranges. The faintest stars have ages over 9\,Gyrs. This subpopulation belongs to the metal poor regime in the CMD+metallicity. The middle sub-giant branch population has ages of $\sim$3-9\,Gyr, while the brightest stars have ages younger than 3\,Gyr. These last two populations belong to the metal rich regime in the CMD+metallicity. From the CMD+metallicity figure, some small difference in metallicity ($\sim$0.3 dex) is also visible between these two younger populations.
In the CMD+metallicity the metal poor RGB is well defined by stars with metallicity below \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.8$}, displaying a wide range toward \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-2.5$}, corresponding to an intrinsic iron spread of \mbox{$\sigma_{\mathrm{[Fe/H]}}=0.24$\,dex}.
In addition, we observe that the stars in the blue plume region between $18.5\leqslant \mathrm{I} \leqslant20.5$ and $0.1\leqslant \mathrm{V-I} \leqslant0.5$ show a wide range in metallicity (from $-2.0$ to 0.5). We discuss this further in Section\,\ref{IMR}.
From the CMDs and the age-metallicity relation (Figure\,\ref{amr}), we can decipher the star formation history of the Sgr dSph NSC. It appears to be extended from 0.5 to 14\,Gyr, showing a clear metallicity enrichment towards younger stars.
We present a CMD comparing the three subpopulations in Figure\,\ref{3pop_cmd}.
In both panels the subpopulations are represented as: YMR in red, IMR in orange and OMP in blue. In the top panel we can see how the different populations fall in different positions in the CMD, this is easier to see in the zoom into the TO region showed in the bottom panel.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=245px]{fig8.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=220px]{fig9.png}\\
\caption{For the two panels: red points represent the YMR subpopulation ($2.2$\,Gyr, \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.04$}), orange points for the IMR (4.3\,Gyr, \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.29$}) and blue for the OMP ($12.2$\,Gyr, \mbox{[Fe/H]$-1.41$}). Gray points show the stars with age relative error greater than 40\% or for which age was not estimated. Top panel: Color-magnitude diagram. Bottom panel: zoom into the top panel showing just the TO region.}
\label{3pop_cmd}
\end{figure}
Our findings are in good agreement with the characteristics of three (of four) subpopulations obtained with isochrone fitting by \citet{Siegel2007}, and later also by \citet{Mucciarelli2017}. From their fitting of the CMD, \citet{Siegel2007} suggest the presence of four populations: (i) the old metal poor, with ages of 13\,Gyr and [Fe/H]$=-1.8$, (ii) intermediate age metal rich, with ages between 4-6\,Gyr and [Fe/H]$=-0.6$, (iii) young metal rich population with 2.3\,Gyr and [Fe/H]$=-0.1$, and (iv) very young, very metal-rich population with [Fe/H]$=0.6$ and ages 0.1-0.8\,Gyr. We do not detect any stars belonging to their fourth population.
We do find a higher mean metallicity for the metal-rich regime population compared to \citet{Carretta2010a} and \citet{Mucciarelli2017}. This may be due to several factors. First, we separate the metal-rich stars into two subpopulations, with the YMR having significantly higher mean metallicity than the IMR; the latter, older stars have metallicity closer to previous measurements. Second, our spatial coverage is confined to much smaller radii in comparison to \citet{Carretta2010a} and \citet{Mucciarelli2017}, which cover out to a larger radius. Third, the resolution of our data allow us to extract more stars from the most crowded central regions. Fourth, on average, our metallicity estimates are slightly higher. We obtain a mean $\Delta$[Fe/H] of 0.15$\pm$0.03\,dex when comparing with \citet{Carretta2010a}, and 0.05$\pm$0.02\,dex with \citet{Mucciarelli2017}. The differences in the measurements might be caused by the method used and/or spectral resolution (see Appendix\,\ref{feh_comparison}).
In Table\,\ref{table} we include a summary of all the estimated parameters for the subpopulations.
\begin{deluxetable*}{c|ccc}
\tablecaption{Summary of the stellar subpopulations in M54. \label{table}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{subpopulations} & \colhead{YMR} & \colhead{IMR} & \colhead{OMP} }
\startdata
[Fe/H] & $-0.04\pm0.01$ & $-0.29\pm0.01$ & $-1.41\pm0.01$ \\
$\sigma_{\mathrm{[Fe/H]}}$ & $0.12\pm0.01$ & $0.16\pm0.01$ & $0.24\pm0.01$ \\
Age (Gyr) & $2.16\pm0.03$ & $4.28\pm0.09$ & $12.16\pm0.05$ \\
$\sigma_{\mathrm{Age}}$ (Gyr) & $0.20\pm0.03$ & $1.16\pm0.07$ & $0.92\pm0.04$ \\
Correlation factor ($\rho$) & $-0.35$ & $-0.70$ & $-0.97$ \\
Median V${_r}$ (km~s$^{-1}$) & $141.92\pm0.54$ & $142.61\pm0.59$ & $141.22\pm0.26$ \\
RA Centroid (degrees) & $283.76351\pm0.00176$ & * & $283.76299\pm0.00094$ \\
Dec Centroid (degrees) & $-30.476992\pm0.000977$ & * & $-30.477067\pm0.000673$ \\
Half-light radius (arcmin) & $1.47\pm0.20$ & * & $1.90\pm0.12$ \\
Ellipticity & $0.31\pm0.10$ & * & $0.16\pm0.06$ \\
Position Angle (rad) & $4.23\pm11.14$ & * & $16.43\pm13.75$ \\
Number of stars & $440$ & $536$ & $2550$ \\ \hline
\enddata
\tablecomments{~*: Measurements do not converge. $\sigma_{\mathrm{[Fe/H]}}$ and $\sigma_{\mathrm{Age}}$ correspond to the [Fe/H] and age intrinsic spreads, respectively. V${_r}$: Radial velocity. The correlation factor ($\rho$) indicates how age and metallicity are correlated and is estimated using Gaussian Mixture Models.}
\end{deluxetable*}
\subsection{subpopulations spatial distributions} \label{spatial_dist}
We now analyze the spatial distribution of the three subpopulations in the Sgr dSph NSC defined in the previous section.
In Figure\,\ref{distr} we present the cumulative radial distribution for the three subpopulations: YMR (red), IMR (orange) and OMP (blue). We consider all the member stars extracted with signal to noise $\geqslant10$. In order to fairly compare the three subpopulations distribution in terms of completeness, we also constrain the sample to magnitudes $\mathrm{I}\leqslant20.5$\,mag.
In Figure\,\ref{distr} we observe that the YMR subpopulation is the most centrally concentrated of the three in this NSC. The second highest central density is shown by the OMP subpopulation, which is the dominant in stellar number with over 2\,000 stars.
Finally, the lowest central concentration is shown by the IMR subpopulation. Comparing the distribution of these subpopulations with a uniform distribution (magenta dashed line), we observe that the stars in the IMR subpopulation are the least centrally concentrated in the most central 40". However, they are still not uniformly distributed, as we observed in Figure\,\ref{distr}, the distribution shows the stars in the IMR subpopulation are still significantly centrally peaked. This difference in the spatial distribution between the subpopulations suggests different origins. We discuss this in detail through Section\,\ref{discussion}.
It is important to consider that due to extreme central crowding and the limitations of our spatial resolution we are not able to extract all the stars that actually reside in this NSC. Improved spatial resolution is needed to more accurately derive the spatial distribution of the different stellar populations.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=240px]{fig10.png}
\caption{Cumulative radial distribution for the three subpopulations for the member stars extracted with S/N$\geqslant10$ and magnitudes $\mathrm{I}\leqslant20.5$\,mag. YMR subpopulation in red ($2.2$\,Gyr, \mbox{[Fe/H$=-0.04$}), IMR in orange (4.3\,Gyr, \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.29$}) and OMP ($12.2$\,Gyr, \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-1.41$}) in blue. The magenta dashed line describes a uniform stellar distribution. The vertical black dashed line shows the half-light radius of M54 \citep[R$_{\mathrm{HL}}=0\farcm82$,][2010 edition]{Harris1996}.}
\label{distr}
\end{figure}
\subsection{2D morphology of subpopulations}
Using the coordinate information of the stars and the data FoV, we fit a 2-dimensional Plummer profile \citep{Plummer1911} to each of the subpopulations, optimizing the best profile using a MCMC algorithm \citep{Goodman2010, Foreman-Mackey2013}. We set the centroid, ellipticity, position angle (PA), and half-light radius as free parameters, thus obtaining the best estimates for each stellar subpopulation.
The estimated parameters are summarized in Table\,\ref{table}. The likelihood for the YMR and OMP populations converge and give good estimates for the centroid, ellipticity and PA. However, for the IMR it does not converge due to the less centrally concentrated distribution that this subpopulation shows (see Section\,\ref{spatial_dist}).
\newpage
\section{Discussion} \label{discussion}
We show the systemic velocities of the three subpopulations in Table~\ref{table}.
The difference of $\sim1$ to $2\sigma$ between them could be a consequence of the number of stars in each sample, which is considerably higher for the OMP with $\sim$5 times more stars than the YMR and IMR subpopulations. This results in lower errors for the OMP. In spite of the slight difference the velocities are consistent.
The nearly identical systemic velocities derived from a high number of stars strongly supports the idea that all three subpopulations are spatially coincident, as also suggested in previous studies \citep[e.g.][]{Dacosta1995, Ibata1997, Monaco2005b, Bellazzini2008}.
We also add another piece of evidence to this with their respective centroids (Table\,\ref{table}), showing that the subpopulations OMP and YMR are actually spatially coincident with the same centroid.
This strongly argues against a chance alignment in projection between the metal poor and metal rich populations \citep{Siegel2011}.
\subsection{A possible merger remnant as the seed of the Sgr dSph NSC} \label{merger}
We find that the stars in the metal poor regime show a large spread in age, $\sigma_{\mathrm{age}}=0.9$\,Gyr, and iron content, $\sigma_{\mathrm{[Fe/H]}}=0.24$, a higher spread in comparison with the literature ($\sigma_{\mathrm{[Fe/H]}}=0.186$, \citealt{Carretta2010b,Willman-Strader2012}).
Large iron spreads in GCs can be explained by a scenario in which two GCs merge \citep[][and references therein]{Gavagnin2016,Bekki2016,Khoperskov2018}.
\citet{Gavagnin2016} using N-body simulations studied the structural and kinematic signatures in the remnants of GC mergers with a sample of progenitors of different densities and masses. They pointed out that if two GCs were formed in the same dwarf galaxy (or molecular cloud) and display a low relative velocity they could merge, making the merging scenario more likely in dwarf galaxies. They actually mention the Sgr dSph galaxy as a good candidate for this scenario to happen. \citet{Bellazzini2008} found the velocity dispersion profile is the close to flat with values of $\sim$10\,km~s$^{-1}$ in the innermost $80\farcm$.
\citet{Gavagnin2016} also include a kinematic analysis focused on the rotation of the remnants of merging GCs. We will discuss this in a second paper focusing on the kinematic analysis for the different stellar subpopulations.
\citet{Bekki2016} used numerical simulations to suggest that GC mergers explain the existence of complexity in high-mass GCs, with multiple stellar populations and a large spread in metallicity, what the authors called "anomalous" GCs.
Performing several tests, \citet{Bekki2016} found that the merger between GCs with masses greater than 3$\times$10$^5$\,M$_\odot$ will occur inevitably in the host dwarf galaxy with a mass in the range of M$_{dh}=3\times10^9$- $3\times10^{10}$\,M$_\odot$.
This is due to a stronger dynamical friction effects on the GCs compared to the field stars in those shallow, low dispersion galaxies. The authors mention that if the clusters are massive enough, the timescale for the merger is just a few Gyr and it occurs before the total disruption of the dwarf galaxy due to the Galactic tidal field. They find that with a merger of at least two GCs it would be possible to observe GCs with an internal metallicity spread.
In the case of the Sgr dSph galaxy, the progenitor dark halo mass before infall to the Milky Way has been estimated with a lower limit of 6$\times10^{10}$\,M$_\odot$ by \citet{Gibbons2017}, in good agreement with \citet{Mucciarelli2017}. The mass estimated for M54 is \mbox{1.41$\pm0.02\times10^6$}\,M$_\odot$ \citep{Baumgardt2018}, consistent with mergers of GCs of $10^5$\,M$_\odot$.
The merger scenario might explain the high mass, and the large iron and age spreads in the OMP subpopulation. The mass of the Sgr dSph progenitor would be conducive for the GCs to merge. From simulations, the infall of a massive GC to the center of Sgr dSph galaxy due to dynamical friction effects has been estimated to occur $\sim$5-9\,Gyr ago \citep{Bellazzini2006a, Bellazzini2008}. The infall time is at most 3\,Gyr \citep{Bellazzini2008} for a cluster with M54's mass.
The spread in age and metallicity of the oldest, metal-poor stars is consistent with the scenario where multiple GCs were driven to the center of the Sgr dSph galaxy and merged, thus building up the metal-poor component of the NSC.
\subsection{In situ formation in the Sgr dSph NSC: YMR subpopulation} \label{YMR}
From the metallicity and age characterization of our stellar sample we distinguish two subpopulations in the metal rich regime.
We are able to separate them using the age-metallicity relation and CMD position of the stars. We observe that the youngest population - YMR - has the highest central density in the Sgr dSph NSC. The high metallicity, young age, and spatial distribution suggest that the formation of the YMR subpopulation formed {\em in situ} starting $\sim$3\,Gyr ago.
Additional evidence for {\em in situ} formation of the YMR population is that it appears more flattened than the OMP population. We measure an ellipticity of 0.31$\pm$0.10 for the YMR component, while the OMP population has an ellipticity of 0.16$\pm$0.06 (Table\,\ref{table}). Centrally concentrated and sometimes flattened young sub-components are commonly found in other NSCs in both early- and late-type galaxies \citep{Seth2006, Carson2015, Feldmeier-Krause2015, Nguyen2017}; given the young age of these populations, {\em in situ} formation is strongly favored, with the flattening suggestive of formation in a star forming gas disk.
We note that the difference in ellipticity between the YMR and OMP subpopulations is small, given the measurement uncertainties. However, this difference becomes meaningful when we combine the ellipticity with the kinematics. In a second paper we will present the kinematic characterization of the subpopulations, adding a new diagnostic to address this issue.
These young, flattened populations can survive despite being embedded in an older hotter population. \citet{mastrobuono-Battisti2013, Mastrobuono-Battisti2016} modelled the evolution of stellar disks in dense stellar clusters using $N$-body simulations, finding that even after several Gyr (around the Milky Way GCs age) the stars are still not fully mixed. Thus, both generations of stars show different distributions. They observed that the second population is concentrated at the center after 12\,Gyr with no relaxed spherical shape.
The amount of rotation is also evidence for this model, where the second generation of stars is found to rotate faster than the first one. From our kinematic analysis, we found that the YMR subpopulation rotates faster than the OMP. We will present the evidence on this matter in our upcoming paper on this NSC kinematics.
To form the youngest and metal rich subpopulation enriched gas is needed, however no neutral gas has been detected in this galaxy.
Using simulations, \citet{Tepper2018} found that the Sgr dSph galaxy might have lost all its gas after the second encounter with the Galactic disk. They found that two pericentric passages happened $\sim$2.8 and $\sim$1.3\,Gyr ago. The first produced a gas loss of 30 to 50\%, while the second would be responsible for the stripping of all the residual gas. The timescale of both encounters are consistent with the latest bursts of star formation seen in Figure~\ref{amr}, and were suggested based solely on the photometry by \citet{Siegel2007}.
This suggests that the YMR population may have formed by gas being driven into the nucleus during encounters with the Milky Way, supporting the {\em in situ} formation of this population.
The {\em in situ} formation of a new generation of stars could alternatively be explained for a massive NSC with a deep enough potential well to collect the enriched gas ejected from metal-rich and high-mass stars at larger radii that cools and sinks to the center \citep{Bailey1980}. This seems plausible given the characteristics of the stars in the IMR subpopulation and the relatively small fraction of YMR stars in comparison with the OMP.
\subsection{Sgr dSph galaxy field stars in its NSC: IMR subpopulation} \label{IMR}
A different situation is observed for the IMR population in comparison to the YMR. These stars seem to be less centrally concentrated in the field with a wide spread in ages from 3 to 8\,Gyr. These findings suggest that the star formation in the Sgr dSph galaxy during this period was not particularly concentrated in the nucleus. The metallicity range of these stars is consistent with those found for stars close to the center of the galaxy \citep{Hasselquist2017}.
In addition, comparing the IMR sample of our age-metallicity relation (Figure~\ref{amr}) with the one presented by \citet{Boer2015} for the Sagittarius bright stream we see a good agreement in both age (4-14\,Gyr) and metallicity ($-2.5<$[Fe/H]$<-0.1$). Thus, supporting our good recovery of the underlying chemical evolution of the host galaxy.
The spatial distribution of these two subpopulations - YMR and IMR - has also been reported by \citet{Mucciarelli2017}. Using a sample of 109 stars with [Fe/H]\,$\geqslant-1.0$ and a magnitude limit of I$_{\mathrm{mag}}=18$, the authors observed a shift in the metallicity peak in the metal rich population at different projected distances from its center. At $0\farcm0<\mathrm{R}<2\farcm5$ the peak is at [Fe/H]$=-0.38$, changing to [Fe/H]$=-0.45$ at $2\farcm5<\mathrm{R}<5\farcm0$, noticing a metallicity gradient for this population.
In addition, the authors present the cumulative radial distribution of the two young populations where they found that the youngest subpopulation is more centrally concentrated than the intermediate age population. With this finding they suggest the youngest population is the dominant population in the Sgr dSph NSC, with the intermediate age one becoming more important at larger radii. Since our observations reach out to $\sim 2\farcm$ from the center of this NSC we are not able to see a change in the peak at larger radii. However, we also see this behavior between the two youngest metal rich subpopulations.
Our spectroscopic sample also includes stars in the blue plume (BP) region, which could be populated by young metal rich stars of [Fe/H]$=0.6$ and $0.1-0.8$\,Gyr \citep{Siegel2007} or blue straggler stars (BSS). However, we measure a wide range of metallicities for these stars, suggesting they are BSS instead of young stars, which would be expected to display a more homogeneous metallicity, e.g. as observed in the YMR subpopulation. \citet{Mucciarelli2017} found the BP and the intermediate age metal rich stars cumulative radial distributions were not distinguishable. Since this is a less dense environment in comparison to the center of the NSC, these BSS could be the product of mass transfer between binaries as has been found in other dSph \citep[e.g.][]{Momany2007, Mapelli2007, Mapelli2009}.
As discussed in this section, the stars from the IMR subpopulation seem to have properties consistent with those at larger radii in the galaxy. This population shows a central concentration, shallower than the other two. With the current information we are not able to tell if the stars in the inner regions are actually dynamically bound to the NSC (with the YMR and OMP) or if they are part of the main body of the host galaxy.
\subsection{The Formation History of the Sgr dSph NSC}
From this work and previous studies of the populations in the Sgr dSph NSC, we can put together the story of this NSC. It starts with two or more massive GCs that eventually merge at the centre of the Sgr dSph galaxy, forming a massive nucleus consisting of old and metal poor stars with a large metallicity spread.
The two encounters of the Sgr dSph galaxy with the Galactic disk occurred $\sim2.8$ and $\sim1.3$\,Gyr ago \citep{Tepper2018}, could have triggered two new episodes of star formation before the total stripping of the gas, creating in the first the YMR subpopulation. This results in a complex multi-population NSC.
This NSC is on its way to become a stripped nucleus considering the ongoing strong interaction between its host - the Sgr dSph galaxy - and the Milky Way. In fact, \citet{Bellazzini2008} suggested that this nucleus will probably end up as a compact remnant with two populations: old metal poor and young metal rich, with no signatures of the progenitor galaxy. This puts the Sgr dSph NSC in close company with the most massive cluster in the Milky Way, $\omega$Cen, which has long been considered a potential stripped nucleus \citep[e.g.][]{Lee1999,Carretta2010b}.
$\omega$Cen presents a centrally concentrated disk-like component \citep[][see their Fig. 19, 20]{vandeVen2006}, very similar to the YMR subpopulation we detect in the Sgr dSph NSC. The age spread in $\omega$Cen \citep[at least 2\,Gyr,][]{Hilker2004, Villanova2014}, similar to the spread we see in the OMP suggests the merging of globular clusters early on in the nucleus of a progenitor galaxy \citep[e.g.][]{Bekki2016}.
Unlike $\omega$Cen, the stripping around the Sgr dSph NSC is ongoing, and thus we have the opportunity to understand the role mergers and stripping have played in creating the cluster we see today.
Given all the evidence we have presented in this paper, our suggestion to the community is to revert to the original naming and use "M54" in the same manner as it was given to the object upon its discovery by Charles Messier in 1778. The evidence consistently suggests M54 is not a normal metal-poor globular cluster but a complex NSC.
\section{Conclusion} \label{conclu}
In this work we present a rich sample of $\sim$6600 stellar spectra extracted from a mosaic of sixteen pointings of MUSE data on M54, the nuclear star cluster of the Sgr dSph galaxy, a dwarf galaxy currently being disrupted by the Milky Way.
Through radial velocity, metallicity ([Fe/H]) and age measurements we have characterized M54's stellar populations. We were able to detect at least three subpopulations with the same systemic velocity, differentiated by age and metallicity, where two of them have the same centroid.
The subpopulations we find are: (i) YMR: young metal rich, with ages $2.2$\,Gyr and average metallicity \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.04$}, (ii) IMR: intermediate-age metal rich, with ages of $4.3$\,Gyr and metallicity \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-0.29$}, and (iii) OMP: old metal poor, with ages $12.2$\,Gyr and metallicity \mbox{[Fe/H]$=-1.41$}.
The existence of these three distinct subpopulations with the displayed differences in age and metallicity suggest the following conclusions:
\begin{itemize}
\item The stars in the OMP population have ages and metallicity consistent with it being assembled by two or more star clusters in-spiralling to the nucleus via dynamical friction.
\item The YMR population is both more flattened and more centrally concentrated than the other two populations. These features suggest {\em in situ} formation from enriched gas retained in the deep potential well of M54. This young, centrally concentrated component is similar to features observed in other NSCs. We estimate the YMR subpopulation formation episode started around 3\,Gyr ago, consistent with the time of the first big encounter between Sgr dSph and the Milky Way, suggesting gas was channeled into the nucleus during this encounter. The youngest stars in the YMR population, $<$3\,Gyr, might be related to when Sgr dSph lost its gas during its ongoing interaction with the Milky Way. Alternatively, the YMR subpopulation could have formed from gas ejected from high-mass and metal-rich stars in the IMR subpopulation retained in the deep potential of the massive OMP subpopulation.
\item Our metallicity measurements for the IMR subpopulation are consistent with those for the field star population of the galaxy, including regions close to the center. This subpopulation shows the lowest central concentration in M54, but is still significantly centrally peaked. Additional information is needed to determine if these stars are actually dynamically bound to the NSC. \\
\end{itemize}
M54 is a unique test case. In this complex nucleus we find evidence for two processes that build up the NSC: (i) infall of two or more GCs, which merge to create a single high-mass cluster with a large metallicity spread, and (ii) in-situ star formation from enriched gas in the nucleus. In this case, the first scenario could be the key for the second to occur. This detailed formation history of the Sgr dSph NSC helps us understand the processes of NSC formation and the role of galaxy-galaxy interaction in this formation.
In a second paper we will present a kinematic analysis for the sample. We will include a kinematic analysis for the three age-metallicity subpopulations found in this work, giving additional insight on M54's formation. \\
\acknowledgments{
We thank the referee, Michele Bellazzini, for the constructive comments and suggestions that helped to improve this work.
SK gratefully acknowledges funding from a European Research Council consolidator grant (ERC-CoG-646928- Multi-Pop).
RL acknowledges funding from a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada PDF award and RL and NN acknowledge support by Sonderforschungsbereich SFB 881 "The Milky Way System" (subprojects A7, A8 and B8) of the German Research Foundation (DFG). MAC, RL and PB acknowledge support from DAAD PPP project number 57316058 "Finding and exploiting accreted star clusters in the Milky Way".
GvdV and LLW acknowledge funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 724857 (Consolidator Grant ArcheoDyn). This research has made use of NASA's Astrophysics Data System. We thank to Brian Kimmig for kindly provide his code "clumPy"\footnote{\url{https://github.com/bkimmig/clumpy}} for stellar cluster membership estimates.
We thank Alessandra Mastrobuono-Battisti and Iskren Georgiev for their helpful comments and discussions on this work.}
\bibliographystyle{yahapj}
|
\section{Introduction}
Named entity recognition (NER) is the task of identifying text spans that mention named entities (NEs) and classifying
them into predefined categories, such as person, organization, location, or any other classes of interest. Despite being conceptually simple, NER is not an easy task. The category of a named entity is highly dependent on textual semantics and its surrounding context. Moreover, there are many definitions of named entity and evaluation criteria, introducing evaluation complications \cite{marrero2013named}.
Current state-of-the-art NER systems employ neural architectures that have been pre-trained on language modeling tasks. Examples of such models are ELMo~\cite{peters2018deep}, OpenAI GPT~\cite{radford2018improving}, BERT~\cite{devlin2018bert}, XLNet~\citep{yang2019xlnet}, RoBERTa~\citep{liu2019roberta}, Albert~\citep{lan2019albert} and T5~\citep{raffel2019t5}. It has been shown that language modeling pre-training significantly improves the performance of many natural language processing tasks and also reduces the amount of labeled data needed for supervised learning \cite{howard2018universal, peters2018deep}.
Applying these recent techniques to the Portuguese language can be highly valuable, given that annotated resources are scarce, but unlabeled text data is abundant. In this work, we assess several neural architectures using BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representation from Transformers) models to the NER task in Portuguese and compare feature-based and fine-tuning based training strategies. This is the first work to employ BERT models to the NER task in Portuguese. We also discuss the main complications that we face when on existing datasets. With that in mind, we aim to facilitate the reproducibility of this work by making our implementation and models publicly available.\footnote{Code will be available at \href{https://gist.github.com/fabiocapsouza/62c98576d1c826894be2b3ae0993ef53}{\url{https://gist.github.com/fabiocapsouza/62c98576d1c826894be2b3ae0993ef53}}.} \footnote{BERT models available at \href{https://github.com/neuralmind-ai/portuguese-bert}{\url{https://github.com/neuralmind-ai/portuguese-bert}}.}
\section{Related Work}
\label{sect:related_work}
NER systems can be based on handcrafted rules or machine learning approaches. For the Portuguese language, previous works explored machine learning techniques and a few ones applied neural networks models. \citet{amaral2014nerp} created a CRF model using 15 features extracted from the central and surrounding words. \cite{pirovani2018portuguese} combined a CRF model with Local Grammars, following a similar approach.
Starting with \citet{collobert2011natural}, neural network NER systems have become popular due to the minimal feature engineering requirements, which contributes to a higher domain independence \cite{yadav2018survey}. The CharWNN model \cite{santos2015boosting} extended the work of \citet{collobert2011natural} by employing a convolutional layer to extract character-level features from each word. These features were concatenated with pre-trained word embeddings and then used to perform sequential classification.
The CharWNN model \cite{santos2015boosting} extended the work of \citet{collobert2011natural} by employing a convolutional layer to extract character-level features from each word. The LSTM-CRF architecture \cite{lample2016neural} has been commonly used in NER task \cite{castro2018, de2018lener, fernandes2018applying}. The model is composed of two bidirectional LSTM networks that extract and combine character-level and word-level features. A sequential classification is then performed by the CRF layer.
Recent works explored contextual embeddings extracted from language models in conjunction with the LSTM-CRF architecture. \citet{Santos2019MultidomainCE, santos2019assessing} employ Flair Embeddings \citep{akbik2018flair} to extract contextual word embeddings from a bidirectional character-level LM trained on Portuguese corpora. These embeddings are concatenated with pre-trained word embeddings and fed to a BiLSTM-CRF model. \citet{castro2019elmo} uses ELMo embeddings that are a combination of character-level features extracted by convolutional neural networks and the hidden states of each layer of a bidirectional LM (biLM) composed of a BiLSTM model.
\section{Model}
\label{sect:model}
In this section we describe the model architecture and the training and evaluation procedures for NER.
\subsection{BERT-CRF for NER}
The model architecture is composed of a BERT model with a token-level classifier on top followed by a Linear-Chain CRF. For an input sequence of $n$ tokens, BERT outputs an encoded token sequence with hidden dimension $H$. The classification model projects each token's encoded representation to the tag space, i.e. $ \mathbb{R}^H \mapsto \mathbb{R}^K$, where $K$ is the number of tags and depends on the the number of classes and on the tagging scheme. The output scores $\mathbf{P} \in \mathbb{R}^{n\times K}$ of the classification model are then fed to the CRF layer, whose parameters are a matrix of tag transitions $\mathbf{A} \in \mathbb{R}^{K+2 \times K+2}$. The matrix $\mathbf{A}$ is such that $A_{i,j}$ represents the score of transitioning from tag $i$ to tag $j$. $\mathbf{A}$ includes 2 additional states: start and end of sequence.
As described by \citet{lample2016neural},
for an input sequence $ \mathbf{X} = (\mathbf{x}_1, ..., \mathbf{x}_n) $
and a sequence of tag predictions
$ \mathbf{y} = (y_1, ..., y_n), y_i \in \{1, ..., K\} $, the score of the sequence is defined as
$$ s(\mathbf{X}, \mathbf{y}) = \sum_{i=0}^{n} A_{y_i, y_{i+1}} + \sum_{i=1}^{n} P_{i, y_{i}} ,$$
where $y_0$ and $y_{n+1}$ are start and end tags. The model is trained to maximize the log-probability of the correct tag sequence:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cost}
\log(p(\mathbf{y}|\mathbf{X})) = s(\mathbf{X}, \mathbf{y}) - \log\left(\sum_{\mathbf{\tilde{y}}\in\mathbf{Y_X}}^{} e^{s(\mathbf{X},\mathbf{\tilde{y}})} \right)
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{Y_X}$ are all possible tag sequences. The summation in Eq. \ref{eq:cost} is computed using dynamic programming. During evaluation, the most likely sequence is obtained by Viterbi decoding.
Following \citet{devlin2018bert}, we compute predictions and losses only for the first sub-token of each token.
\subsection{Feature-based and Fine-tuning approaches}
We experiment with two transfer learning approaches: \textit{feature-based} and \textit{fine-tuning}. For the feature-based approach, the BERT model weights are kept frozen and only the classifier model and CRF layer are trained. The classifier model consists of a 1-layer BiLSTM with hidden size $d_{LSTM}$ followed by a Linear layer. Instead of using only the last hidden representation layer of BERT, we sum the last 4 layers, following \citet{devlin2018bert}. The resulting architecture resembles the LSTM-CRF model \citet{lample2016neural} but with BERT embeddings.
For the fine-tuning approach, the classifier is a linear layer and all weights, including BERT's, are updated jointly during training. For both approaches, models without the CRF layer are also evaluated. In this case, they are optimized by minimizing the cross entropy loss.
\subsection{Document context and max context evaluation}
\label{sect:max-context}
To take advantage of longer contexts when computing the token representations from BERT, we use document context for input examples instead of sentence context.
Following the approach of \citet{devlin2018bert} on the SQuAD dataset, examples longer than $S$ tokens are broken into spans of length up to $S$ using a stride of $D$ tokens. Each span is used as a separate example during training. During evaluation, however, a single token $T_i$ can be present in $N=\frac{S}{D}$ multiple spans $s_j$, and so may have up to $N$ distinct tag predictions $y_{i,j}$. Each token's final prediction is taken from the span where the token is closer to the central position, that is, the span where it has the most contextual information. Figure \ref{fig:outline} illustrates the evaluation procedure.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sect:experiments}
In this section, we present the experimental setups for BERT pre-trainings and NER training. We present the datasets that are used, the training setups and hyperparameters.
\subsection{BERT pre-trainings}
We train Portuguese BERT models for the two model sizes defined in \citet{devlin2018bert}: BERT Base and BERT Large. The maximum sentence length is set to \hbox{$S=512$} tokens. We train cased models only since capitalization is relevant for NER \cite{castro2018}.
\subsubsection{Vocabulary generation}
A cased Portuguese vocabulary of 30k subword units is generated using SentencePiece \citep{kudo2018sentencepiece} with the BPE algorithm and 200k random Portuguese Wikipedia articles, which is then converted to WordPiece format. Details about SentencePiece to WordPiece conversion can be found in Appendix \ref{appendix:wordpiece-conversion}.
\subsubsection{Pre-training data}
For pre-training data, we use the brWaC corpus \citep{filho2018brwac}, which contains 2.68 billion tokens from 3.53 million documents and is the largest open Portuguese corpus to date. On top of its size, brWaC is composed of whole documents and its methodology ensures high domain diversity and content quality, which are desirable features for BERT pre-training.
We use only the document body (ignoring the titles) and we apply a single post-processing step on the data to remove \textit{mojibakes}\footnote{Mojibake is a kind of text corruption that occurs when strings are decoded using the incorrect character encoding. For example, the word ``codifica\c{c}\~ao'' becomes ``codifica\~A\S\~A\pounds o'' when encoded in UTF-8 and decoded using ISO-8859-1.} and remnant HTML tags using the \textit{ftfy} library \citep{speer-2019-ftfy}. The final processed corpus has 17.5GB of raw text.
\subsubsection{Pre-training setup}
The pre-training input sequences are generated with default parameters and use whole work masking (if a word composed of multiple subword units is masked, all of its subword units are masked and have to be predicted in Masked Language Modeling task). The models are trained for 1,000,000 steps. We use a learning rate of 1e-4, learning rate warmup over the first 10,000 steps followed by a linear decay of the learning rate.
For BERT Base models, the weights are initialized with the checkpoint of Multilingual BERT Base. We use a batch size of 128 and sequences of 512 tokens the entire training. This training takes 4 days on a TPUv3-8 instance and performs about 8 epochs over the training data.
For BERT Large, the weights are initialized with the checkpoint of English BERT Large. Since it is a bigger model with longer training time, we follow the instructions of \citet{devlin2018bert} and use sequences of 128 tokens in batches of size 256 for the first 900,000 steps and then sequences of 512 tokens and batch size 128 for the last 100,000 steps. This training takes 7 days on a TPUv3-8 instance and performs about 6 epochs over the training data.
Note that in the calculation of the number of epochs, we are taking into consideration a duplication factor of 10 when generating the input examples. This means that under 10 epochs, the same sentence is seen with different masking and sentence pair in each epoch, which effectively is equal to dynamic example generation.
\subsection{NER experiments}
\subsubsection{NER datasets}
\begin{center}
\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\bf{Dataset} & \bf{Documents} & \bf{Tokens} & \thead{\bf Entities \\ (selective/total)} \\ \hline
First HAREM & 129 & 95585 & 4151 / 5017 \\ \hline
MiniHAREM & 128 & 64853 & 3018 / 3642 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\captionof{table}{Dataset and tokenization statistics for the HAREM I corpora. The \textit{Tokens} column refers to whitespace and punctuation tokenization. The \textit{Entities} column comprises the two defined scenarios.}
\label{table:dataset}
\end{center}
\begin{table*}[ht]
\small
\centering\resizebox{1.0\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multirow[c]{2}{*}{\bf Architecture} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{\bf Total scenario} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{ \bf Selective scenario} \\ \cline{2-7}
& \bf{Prec.} & \bf{Rec.} & \bf{F1} & \bf{Prec.} & \bf{Rec.} & \bf{F1} \\ \hline
CharWNN \cite{santos2015boosting} & 67.16 & 63.74 & 65.41 & 73.98 & 68.68 & 71.23 \\
LSTM-CRF \cite{castro2018} & 72.78 & 68.03 & 70.33 & 78.26 & 74.39 & 76.27 \\
BiLSTM-CRF+FlairBBP \cite{santos2019assessing} & 74.91 & 74.37 & 74.64 & 83.38 & 81.17 & 82.26 \\\hline\hline
ML-\bertbase-LSTM \dag & 69.68 & 69.51 & 69.59 & 75.59 & 77.13 & 76.35 \\
ML-\bertbase-LSTM-CRF \dag & 74.70 & 69.74 & 72.14 & 80.66 & 75.06 & 77.76 \\
ML-\bertbase & 72.97 & 73.78 & 73.37 & 77.35 & 79.16 & 78.25 \\
ML-\bertbase-CRF & 74.82 & 73.49 & 74.15 & 80.10 & 78.78 & 79.44 \\ \hline
PT-\bertbase-LSTM \dag & 75.00 & 73.61 & 74.30 & 79.88 & 80.29 & 80.09 \\
PT-\bertbase-LSTM-CRF \dag & 78.33 & 73.23 & 75.69 & 84.58 & 78.72 & 81.66 \\
PT-\bertbase & 78.36 & 77.62 & 77.98 & 83.22 & 82.85 & \textbf{83.03} \\
PT-\bertbase-CRF & 78.60 & 76.89 & 77.73 & 83.89 & 81.50 & 82.68 \\ \hline
PT-\bertlarge-LSTM \dag & 72.96 & 72.05 & 72.50 & 78.13 & 78.93 & 78.53 \\
PT-\bertlarge-LSTM-CRF \dag & 77.45 & 72.43 & 74.86 & 83.08 & 77.83 & 80.37 \\
PT-\bertlarge & 78.45 & 77.40 & 77.92 & 83.45 & 83.15 & \textbf{83.30} \\
PT-\bertlarge-CRF & 80.08 & 77.31 & \textbf{78.67} & 84.82 & 81.72 & \textbf{83.24} \\\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Comparison of Precision, Recall and F1-scores results on the test set (MiniHAREM). All metrics are calculated using the CoNLL 2003 evaluation script.
\textbf{Bold} values indicate SOTA results (multiple results bolded if difference within 95\% bootstrap confidence interval). Reported values are the average of multiple runs with different random seeds. \mbox{\dag: feature-based approach.}}
\label{table:results}
\end{table*}
Popular datasets for training and evaluating Portuguese NER are the HAREM Golden Collections (GC) \cite{santos2006, freitas2010second}.
We use the GCs of the First HAREM evaluation contests, which is divided in two subsets: First HAREM and MiniHAREM. Each GC contains manually annotated named entities of 10 classes: Location, Person, Organization, Value, Date, Title, Thing, Event, Abstraction and Other.
Following \citet{santos2015boosting} and \citet{castro2018}, we use the First HAREM as training set and MiniHAREM as test set. The experiments are conducted on two scenarios: a Selective scenario, with 5 entity classes (Person, Organization, Location, Value and Date) and a Total scenario, that considers all 10 classes. Table \ref{table:dataset} contains some dataset statistics.
\subsubsection{HAREM preprocessing}
\label{sect:harem-preprocessing}
The HAREM datasets were annotated taking into consideration vagueness and indeterminacy in text, such as ambiguity in sentences. This way, some text segments contain {\small\textless ALT\textgreater} tags that enclose multiple alternative named entity identification solutions. Additionally, multiple categories may be assigned to a single named entity.
To model NER as a sequence tagging problem, we must select a single truth for each undetermined segment and/or entity. To resolve each {\small\textless ALT\textgreater} tag in the datasets, our approach is to select the alternative that contains the highest number of named entities. In case of ties, the first one is selected. To resolve each named entity that is assigned multiple classes, we simply select the first valid class for the scenario. The dataset preprocessing script is available on GitHub\footnote{\href{https://github.com/fabiocapsouza/harem_preprocessing}{https://github.com/fabiocapsouza/harem\_preprocessing}} and Appendix \ref{appendix:dataset-preprocessing-example} contains an example.
\subsubsection{NER experimental setup}
For NER training, we use 3 distinct BERT models: Multilingual BERT-Base,\footnote{Available at \href{https://github.com/google-research/bert}{https://github.com/google-research/bert}} Portuguese BERT-Base and Portuguese BERT-Large. We use the IOB2 tagging scheme and a stride of $D=128$ tokens to split the input examples into spans.
The model parameters are divided in two groups with different learning rates: \mbox{5e-5} for BERT model and \mbox{1e-3} for the rest. The numbers of epochs are 100 for BERT-LSTM, 50 for BERT-LSTM-CRF and BERT, and 15 for BERT-CRF. The numbers of epochs are found using a development set comprised of 10\% of the First HAREM training set. We use a batch of size $16$ and the customized Adam optimizer of \citet{devlin2018bert} with weight decay of $0.01$. Similar to pre-training, we use learning rate warmup for the first 10\% of steps and linear decay of the learning rate for the remaining steps.
To deal with class imbalance, we initialize the bias term of the "O" tag in the linear layer of the classifier with value of $6$ in order to promote a better stability in early training \cite{lin2017focal}. We also use a weight of $0.01$ for "O" tag losses when not using a CRF layer.
For the feature-based approach, we use a \mbox{biLSTM} with 1 layer and hidden dimension of $d_{LSTM} = 100$ units for each direction.
When evaluating, we produce valid predictions by removing all invalid tag transitions for the IOB2 scheme, such as "I-" tags coming directly after "O" tags or after an "I-" tag of a different class. This post-processing step trades off recall for a possibly higher precision.
\section{Results}
\label{sect:results}
The main results of our experiments are presented in Table \ref{table:results}. We compare the performances of our models on the two scenarios (total and selective). All metrics are computed using CoNLL 2003 evaluation script,\footnote{\url{https://www.clips.uantwerpen.be/conll2002/ner/bin/conlleval.txt}} that consists of an entity-level micro F1-score considering only exact matches.
Our proposed Portuguese BERT-CRF model outperforms the previous state-of-the-art (BiLSTM-CRF+FlairBBP), improving the F1-score by about 1 point on the selective scenario and by 4 points on the total scenario. Interestingly, Flair embeddings outperforms BERT models on English NER \citep{akbik2018flair}. Compared to LSTM-CRF architecure without contextual embeddings, our model outperforms by 8.3 and 7.0 absolute points on F1-score on total and selective scenarios, respectively.
We also remove the CRF layer to evaluate its contribution. Portuguese BERT (PT-BERT-BASE and PT-BERT-LARGE) also outperforms previous works, even without the enforcement of sequential classification provided by the CRF layer. Models with CRF improves or performs similarly to its simpler variants when comparing the overall F1 scores. We note that in most cases they show higher precision scores but lower recall.
While Portuguese \bertlarge\ models are the highest performers in both scenarios, we observe that they experience performance degradation when used in the feature-based approach, performing worse than their smaller variants but still better than the Multilingual BERT. In addition, it can be seen that \bertlarge\ models do not bring much improvement to the selective scenario when compared to \bertbase\ models. We hypothesize that it is due to the small size of the NER dataset.
The models of the feature-based approach perform significantly worse compared to the ones of the fine-tuning approach. The performance gap is found to be much higher than the reported values for NER on English language \citep{peters2019tune}.
The post-processing step of filtering out invalid transitions for the IOB2 scheme increases the F1-scores by 1.9 and 1.2 points, on average, for the feature-based and fine-tuning approaches, respectively. This step produces a reduction of 0.4 points in the recall, but boosts the precision by 3.5 points, on average.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sect:conclusion}
We present a new state-of-the-art on the HAREM I corpora by pre-training Portuguese BERT models on a large corpus of unlabeled text and fine-tuning a BERT-CRF model on the Portuguese NER task. Our proposed model outperforms the previous state of the art (BiLSTM-CRF+FlairBBP), even though it was pre-trained on much less data.
Considering the issues regarding preprocessing and dataset decisions that affect evaluation compatibility, we give special attention to reproducibility of our results and we make our code and models publicly available. We hope that by releasing our Portuguese BERT models, others will be able to benchmark and improve the performance of many other NLP tasks in Portuguese. Experiments with more recent and efficient models, such as RoBERTa and T5, are left for future works.
\section{Acknowledgements}
R Lotufo acknowledges the support of the Brazilian government through the CNPq Fellowship ref. 310828/2018-0.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction}
Long gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) are thought to represent a specific subset of supernovae in which high-mass progenitors manage to retain a significant amount of angular momentum such that they launch a relativistic jet along their rotation axis at the point of stellar collapse \citep{Woosley1993}. The highly variable emission of gamma rays is thought to be produced by shocks internal to this expanding and collimated outflow \citep{Paczynski1986, Goodman1986, Rees1994}, resulting in the most energetic bursts of electromagnetic emission in the Universe. This prompt emission is followed by long-lived broadband afterglow emission that is thought to arise from the interaction of the expanding jet with the circumstellar environment \citep{Rees1992, Meszaros1993}.
Over ten years of joint observations by the {\it Fermi~Gamma-ray Space Telescope} and the {\it Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory} have dramatically expanded our understanding of the broadband properties of both the prompt and afterglow components of GRBs. The \emph{Fermi}\xspace Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM) has detected over 2300 GRBs in the 11 years since the start of the mission \citep{GBMBurstCatalog_6Years,2FLGC}, with approximately 8$\%$ of these bursts also detected by the \emph{Fermi}\xspace Large Area Telescope (LAT). These observations have shown a complex relationship between the emission observed by the GBM in the keV to MeV energy range and that observed by the LAT above 100 MeV. The LAT-detected emission is typically, although not always, delayed with respect to the start of the prompt emission observed at lower energies and has been observed to last considerably longer, fading with a characteristic power-law decay for thousands of seconds in some cases \citep{Abdo+09, 2013ApJS..209...11A}; see also the Second LAT GRB catalog \citep[][2FLGC]{2FLGC}. Spectral analysis of the GBM- and LAT-observed emission has shown that it is typically not well fit by a single spectral component, but rather requires an additional power-law component to explain the emergence of the emission above 100 MeV \citep{2009ApJ...706L.138A,Ackermann+11,Ackermann2013,Ackermann2014,2016ApJ...833..139A}.
Simultaneous observations by the X-ray Telescope (XRT) on \emph{Swift}\xspace of a small subset of LAT detected bursts have revealed that the delayed power-law component observed above 100 MeV is largely consistent with an afterglow origin \cite[e.g.,][]{Ackermann2013}. This component is commonly observed at X-ray, optical, and radio frequencies, but the extension of the afterglow spectrum to higher energies shows that it is also capable of producing significant emission at MeV and GeV energies. The observation of such a component in the LAT has significantly constrained the onset of the afterglow, allowing for estimates of the time at which the relativistic outflow begins to convert its internal energy into observable radiation.
In both the prompt and afterglow phases, non-thermal synchrotron emission has long been suggested as the radiation mechanism by which energetic particles accelerated in these outflows radiate their energy to produce the observed gamma-ray emission \citep[see][for reviews]{Piran-99, 2004RvMP...76.1143P}. Evidence for synchrotron emission, typically attributed to shock-accelerated electrons, has been well established through multi-wavelength observations of long-lived afterglow emission \citep{Gehrels2009}. Analysis of GBM observations has also shown that many of the long-standing challenges to attributing the prompt emission to the synchrotron process can be overcome \citep{2011ApJ...741...24B, 2011ApJ...727L..33G, 2013ApJ...769...69B}. Synchrotron emission from shock-accelerated electrons should, in many scenarios, be accompanied by synchrotron self-Compton (SSC) emission, in which some fraction of the accelerated particles transfer their energy to the newly created gamma rays before they escape the emitting region \citep[e.g.,][]{Sari2001, 2008FrPhC...3..306F}. The result is a spectral component that mirrors the primary synchrotron spectrum, but boosted in energy by the typical Lorentz factor of the accelerated electrons.
Despite the predicted ubiquity of an SSC component accompanying synchrotron emission from accelerated charged particles, no unambiguous evidence has been found for its existence in either prompt or afterglow spectra \citep[although see][]{2007ChJAA...7..509W, 2013ApJ...776...95F, 2013ApJ...771L..13T, 2013ApJ...771L..33W}. The LAT detection of only 8\% of 2357 GRBs detected by the GBM (2FLGC) disfavors the ubiquity of bright SSC components in the $0.1-100$ GeV energy range during the prompt emission. When there is detectable emission in the LAT, its delayed emergence, as well as low-energy excesses observed in the GBM data, have likewise disfavored an SSC origin of the prompt high-energy emission above 100 MeV \citep{Abdo2009, Ackermann2011, Ackermann2013}. Likewise, a recent study by \citet{Ajello2018} has also shown that simultaneous detections of GRB afterglows by \emph{Swift}\xspace XRT and LAT could be sufficiently well modeled as the high-energy extension of the synchrotron spectrum, with no need for an extra SSC component to explain the late-time LAT-detected emission.
At the same time, there is a maximum energy beyond which synchrotron emission produced by shock-accelerated charged particles becomes inefficient. This occurs when the shock acceleration timescale approaches the radiative loss timescale, resulting in charged particles that lose their energy faster than they can regain it. This maximum photon energy has been shown to be violated by high-energy photons detected by the LAT from GRB~130427A \citep{Ackermann2014}, including a 95 GeV photon (128 GeV in its rest frame) a few minutes after the burst and a 32 GeV photon (43 GeV in the rest frame) observed after 9 hours. These apparent violations of the maximum synchrotron energy would require an emission component in addition to the shock-accelerated synchrotron emission typically used to model LAT-detected bursts. SSC and/or inverse-Compton (IC) emission from the afterglow's forward shock are both expected at TeV energies during the prompt emission, although a spectral hardening and/or a flattening of the LAT light curves is expected as a distinct SSC or IC component passes through the LAT energy range, neither of which was observed in GRB~130427A. In addition, late-time observations by \emph{NuSTAR} provide further support for a single spectral component ranging from keV to GeV energies in GRB~130427A almost a day after the event \citep{2013ApJ...779L...1K}. Synchrotron emission could still be a viable explanation for these observations, but only for an acceleration mechanism that imparts energy to the radiating particles faster than the electron synchrotron energy loss rate, such as through magnetic reconnection.
Here we report on the high-energy detection of GRB 190114C by the \emph{Fermi}\xspace GBM and LAT and the \emph{Swift}\xspace Burst Alert Telescope (BAT), XRT, and UV Optical Telescope (UVOT). The early-time observations show a delayed high-energy emission above 40 MeV in the first few seconds of the burst, before a transition to a harder spectrum that is consistent with the afterglow emission observed by the XRT and GBM. We find that the temporal and spectral evolution of the broadband afterglow emission can be well modeled as synchrotron emission from a forward shock propagating into a wind-like circumstellar environment. We estimate the initial bulk Lorentz factor using the observed high-energy spectral cutoff. Considering the onset of the afterglow component, we constrain the deceleration radius in order to estimate the maximum synchrotron energy, which is in tension with high-energy photons observed by the LAT. The violation of the maximum synchrotron energy is further compounded by the detection of very high energy (VHE) emission above 300 GeV by MAGIC from this burst \citep{2019ATel12390....1M}. We find that the detection of high-energy photons from GRB~190114C requires either an additional emission mechanism at high energies, a particle acceleration mechanism, or revisions to the fundamental assumptions used in estimating the maximum photon energy attainable through the synchrotron process.
The paper is organized as follows. We present an overview of the \emph{Fermi}\xspace and \emph{Swift}\xspace instruments in $\S 2$, and a summary of our observations in $\S 3$. The results of our temporal and spectral analyses are described in $\S 4$ and we use those results to model the high-energy afterglow in $\S 5$. We summarize our findings and discuss their implications for future VHE detections in $\S 6$. Throughout the paper we assume a standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmology with $\Omega_{\Lambda}=0.7, \Omega_{M}=0.3, H_0=0.7$. All errors quoted in the paper correspond to 1-$\sigma$ confidence region, unless otherwise noted.
\section{Overview of Instruments} \label{sec:InstrumentOverview}
\subsection{Fermi GBM and LAT} \label{sec:InstrumentOverview:Fermi}
The {\it Fermi~Gamma-ray Space Telescope} consists of two scientific instruments, the GBM and the LAT. The GBM is comprised of fourteen scintillation detectors designed to study the gamma-ray sky in the $\sim8$ keV to 40 MeV energy range \citep{Meegan2009}. Twelve of the detectors are semi-directional sodium iodide (NaI) detectors, which cover an energy range of 8--1000 keV, and are configured to view the entire sky unocculted by the Earth. The other two detectors are bismuth germanate (BGO) crystals, sensitive in the energy range 200 keV to 40 MeV, and are placed on opposite sides of the spacecraft. Incident gamma rays interact with the NaI and BGO crystals creating scintillation photons, which are collected by attached photomultiplier tubes and converted into electronic signals. The signal amplitudes in the NaI detectors have an approximately cosine response relative to the angle of incidence $\theta$, and relative rates between the various detectors are used to reconstruct source locations.
The LAT is a pair-conversion telescope comprising a $4\times4$ array of silicon strip trackers and cesium iodide (CsI) calorimeters covered by a segmented anti-coincidence detector to reject charged-particle background events. The LAT detects gamma rays in the energy range from 20\,MeV to more than 300\,GeV with a field of view (FoV) of $\sim 2.4$ steradians, observing the entire sky every two orbits ($\sim$3 hours) while in normal survey mode. The deadtime per event of the LAT is nominally 26\,$\mu$s, the shortness of which is crucial for observations of high-intensity transient events such as GRBs. The LAT triggers on many more background events than celestial gamma rays; therefore onboard background rejection is supplemented on the ground using event class selections that are designed to facilitate the study of a broad range of sources of interest \citep{LATPaper}.
\subsection{Swift BAT, XRT, and UVOT} \label{sec:InstrumentOverview:Swift}
The {\it Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory} \citep{Gehrels2005} consists of the BAT \citep{Barthelmy05}, the XRT \citep{Burrows05}, and the UVOT \citep{Roming05}. The BAT is a wide-field, coded mask gamma-ray telescope, covering a FoV of 1.4 sr with partial coding fraction cutoff choice of 50$\%$, and an imaging energy range of 15--150 keV. The instrument's coded mask allows for positional accuracy of 1--4 arcminutes within seconds of the burst trigger. The XRT is a grazing-incidence focusing X-ray telescope covering the energy range 0.3--10 keV and providing a typical localization accuracy of $\sim$1--3 arcseconds. The UVOT is a telescope covering the wavelength range 170 -- 650 nm with 11 filters and determines the location of a GRB afterglow with sub-arcsecond precision.
\emph{Swift}\xspace operates autonomously in response to BAT triggers on new GRBs, automatically slewing to point the XRT and the UVOT at a new source within 1--2 minutes. Data are promptly downloaded, and localizations are made available from the narrow-field instruments within minutes (if detected). \emph{Swift}\xspace then continues to follow-up GRBs as they are viewable within the observing constraints and if the observatory is not in the South Atlantic Anomaly (SAA), for at least several hours after each burst, sometimes continuing for days, weeks, or even months if the burst is bright and of particular interest for follow-up.
\section{Observations} \label{sec:observations}
On 2019 January 14 at 20:57:02.63 UT ($T_0$), GBM triggered and localized GRB~190114C. The burst occurred 68$^\circ$ from the LAT boresight and 90$^\circ$ from the Zenith at the time of the GBM trigger. The burst was especially bright the GBM \citep{2019GCN.23707....1H}, producing over $\sim$30,000 counts per second above background in the most illuminated NaI detector. The LAT detected a gamma-ray counterpart at R$.$A$.$ (J2000), decl.(J2000) = 03$^{\rm h}$38$^{\rm m}$17$^{\rm s}$, $-$26$^\circ$59$^{\prime}$24$^{\prime \prime}$ with an error radius of 3 arcmin \citep{Kocevski2019GCN}. Such a high GBM count rate would normally trigger an Autonomous Repoint Request (ARR), in which the spacecraft slews to keep the burst within the LAT FoV. Unfortunately ARR maneuvers have been disabled since 2018 March 16 due to Sun pointing constraints as a result of an anomaly with one of the two Solar Drive Assemblies that articulate the pointing of the spacecraft's solar panels\footnote{\url{https://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/observations/types/post_anomaly/}}. As a result, the burst left the LAT FoV at $T_0$+ 180 s, and the GBM FoV at $T_0$+260 s when it was occulted by the Earth. The burst re-emerged from Earth occultation at $T_0$ + 2500 s, but remained outside the LAT field of view for an additional orbit, re-entering the LAT FoV at $T_0$ + 8600 s.
GRB~190114C triggered the \emph{Swift}\xspace BAT at 20:57:03 UT and the spacecraft immediately slewed to the on-board burst localization \citep{2019GCN.23688....1G}. The XRT began observing the field at 20:58:07.1 UT, 64.63 s after the GBM trigger, with settled observations beginning at $T_{0}$ + 68.27 s. UVOT began observing the field at $T_0$+73.63 s with a 150 s finding chart exposure using a White filter. The XRT and UVOT detected X-ray and optical counterparts, respectively, with a consistent location, with a UVOT position of R$.$A$.$ (J2000), decl.(J2000) = 03$^{\rm h}$38$^{\rm m}$01$^{\rm s}_.$16, $-$26$^\circ$56$^\prime$46$^{\prime \prime}_.$9 with an uncertainty of 0.42 arcsec \citep{2019GCN.23704....1O,2019GCN.23725....1S}, which is also consistent with the LAT position. Both the XRT and the UVOT continued observing the burst location throughout the following two weeks, with the last observation occuring 13.86 days post trigger. The XRT light curve is taken from the XRT GRB light curve repository \citep{2007A&A...469..379E,2009MNRAS.397.1177E}. However, the lower energy limit was raised from the default of 0.3 keV to 0.7 keV in order to avoid an apparent increase in the low-energy background caused by additional events created by the effects of trailing charge on the Windowed Timing (WT) readout mode data (see Section \ref{sec:analysis:spectral:late} and www.swift.ac.uk/analysis/xrt/digest\_cal.php\#trail).
The burst was also detected at high-energies by the MCAL on {\it AGILE} \citep{Ursi2019}, SPI-ACS on {\it INTEGRAL} \citep{Minaev2019}, and Insight-HXMT \citep{Xiao2019}. Most notably the MAGIC Cherenkov telescopes \citep{Mirzoyan2019} also detected the burst, which reported a significant detection of high-energy photons above 300 GeV. The MAGIC observations mark the first announcement of a significant detection of VHE emission from a GRB by a ground-based Cherenkov telescope.
A host galaxy was identified in Pan-STARRS archival imaging observations by \citet{deUgartePostigo2019} and subsequent spectroscopic observations by \citet{Selsing2019} with the Nordic Optical Telescope found absorption lines in the afterglow spectrum, yielding a redshift of $z = 0.42$. The source was also detected in radio and sub-millimeter \citep{Schulze2019, Tremou2019, Cherukuri2019, Alexander2019, Giroletti2019}. The VLA location of the afterglow as reported by \citet{Alexander2019} was R$.$A$.$ (J2000), decl.(J2000) = 03$^{\rm h}$38$^{\rm m}$01$^{\rm s}_.$191 $\pm$ 0.04 arcsec, $-$26$^\circ$56$^\prime$46$^{\prime \prime}_.$73 $\pm$ 0.02 arcsec, a distance of 4.36 and 0.01 arcmin from the LAT and UVOT locations, respectively. We adopt this location for the analysis carried out throughout the rest of the paper.
\section{Analysis} \label{sec:analysis}
\subsection{Temporal Characteristics} \label{sec:analysis:temporal}
Figure \ref{composite_lightcurve} shows the BAT, GBM, and LAT light curves for GRB 190114C in several different energy ranges. The BAT and GBM light curves can be characterized by highly variable prompt emission episodes, separated by a quiescent period lasting approximately $\sim$7 s. A strong energy dependence of the light curves is clearly evident, with pulse widths being narrower at higher energies; a feature commonly attributed to hard-to-soft spectral evolution within an emission episode. This trend can be seen to extend up to the LAT Low Energy (LLE) data below 100 MeV \citep{2010arXiv1002.2617P}, although the LAT emission above 100 MeV does not appear to be significantly correlated with the emission at lower energies. Photons with energies $>100$ MeV are first observed at $T_{\rm 0}$ + 2.4 s, consistent with a delayed onset of the high-energy emission seen in other LAT-detected bursts \citep{2FLGC}. Photons with energies $>1$ GeV are first observed at $T_{\rm 0}$+4.0 s and the highest energy photon was detected at $T_{\rm 0}$+20.9 s with an energy of 21.0 GeV.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\columnwidth]{CompositeLC_190114873-Modified_linewidth1_v5.eps}
\caption{Composite light curve for GRB\,190114C: the first panel displays the flux in the 15--50 keV energy range as measured with \emph{Swift}\xspace/BAT. The second and third panels show the light curves for the most brightly illuminated GBM detectors, NaI (4, 7) and BGO (0) in the 50--300 keV and 0.3--10 MeV energy ranges, respectively. The bottom two panels show the LAT data for the LAT Low Energy (LLE) and {\tt P8R3Transient010} class events in the 30--100 MeV and $>$100 MeV energy ranges, respectively. In the last panel we show the arrival times and energies of the individual LAT photons with probabilities p$>$0.9 to be associated with the GRB. The red vertical dashed line is the GBM trigger time.}
\label{composite_lightcurve}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The prompt emission appears superimposed on a smoothly varying emission component that is present during the quiescent period and extends beyond the cessation of the highly variable emission. The $T_{90}$ and $T_{50}$ durations, defined as time intervals within which 90\% and 50\% of the GRB flux was collected, reveal that significant GBM emission above background exists longer than the prompt emission seen within the first 25 s of the burst. We estimate the $T_{90}$ and $T_{50}$ durations, in the 50--300 keV energy range, to be 116.4$\pm$2.6 s and 6.9$\pm$0.3 s, respectively. We also estimate the shortest coherent variation in the light curve, also called the minimum variability time, to be $t_{\rm min}$ = 5.41 $\pm$ 0.13 ms in the NaI detectors, 6.49 $\pm$ 0.38 ms in the BGO detectors and 30.00 $\pm$ 4.74 ms in the LLE band (20--200 MeV) of the LAT detector \citep{2013arXiv1307.7618B}.
\subsection{Spectral Characteristics} \label{sec:analysis:spectral}
\subsubsection{GBM--LAT Joint Spectral Analysis} \label{sec:analysis:spectral:early}
We examined the underlying spectral characteristics of the prompt emission from GRB 190114C by performing joint time-resolved spectral analysis using the GBM and LAT data from $T_{0}$ to the start of the settled XRT observations at $T_{0}$ + 68.27 s. For GBM, we used the Time-Tagged Event data for two NaI detectors (n4 and n7) from 10 keV -- 1 MeV, and one BGO detector (b0) from 250 keV -- 40 MeV, after considering the spacecraft geometry and viewing angles of the instruments to the burst location. We also include the LLE data, covering an energy range of 30 MeV -- 100 MeV. For both the GBM and LLE data, the background rate for each energy channel was estimated by fitting a second-order polynomial to data before and after GRB 190114C, taking care to exclude a weak soft precursor emission and any extended emission during the power-law decay observed in the GBM.
For the LAT data, we selected {\tt P8R3Transient010} class events in the 100 MeV -- 100 GeV energy range from a region of interest (ROI) of 12$^\circ$ radius centered on the burst location. We applied a maximum zenith angle cut of 105$^\circ$ to prevent contamination from gamma rays from the Earth limb produced through interactions of cosmic rays with the Earth's atmosphere.
We use {\tt gtbin} from the standard ScienceTools (version v11r5p3)\footnote{\url{http://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/}} to generate the counts spectrum of the observed LAT signal and {\tt gtbkg} to extract the associated background by computing the predicted counts from cataloged point sources and diffuse emission components in the ROI. We draw cataloged point sources from the 3FGL catalog and we use the publicly available\footnote{\url{http://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/data/access/lat/BackgroundModels.html}} isotropic ({\tt gll\_iem\_v06}) and Galactic diffuse ({\tt iso\_P8R2\_TRANSIENT020\_V6\_v06}) templates\footnote{The difference between the P8R2 and P8R3 isotropic spectra are small and do not affect the results of this analysis.} to model the diffuse emission components. The LAT instrument response for the each analysis interval was computed using {\tt gtrspgen}.
The spectral fits were performed using the \textit{XSPEC} software package (version 12.9.1u) \citep{1996XspecProc}, in which we minimize the $PG_{\rm stat}$ statistic for Poisson data with Gaussian background \citep[][]{2011hxra.book}. The best-fit model is selected by minimizing the Bayesian information criterion \citep[BIC;][]{schwarz1978}. For each time interval, we test a variety of spectral models, including a power law (PL), a power law with an exponential cutoff (CPL), the Band function \citep[Band;][]{1993ApJ...413..281B}, a black body (BB), and combinations thereof.
The time interval from $T_{0}$ to $T_{0}$ + 25 s was subdivided into 7 intervals after considering the temporal characteristics shown in Figure~\ref{SED}. Figure~\ref{SED} also shows the best-fit model for each time interval. The spectrum of the first pulse phase ($T_{0}$ + 0 -- 2.3 s) is best fitted with the Band + BB model. The addition of the BB component to the Band component is weakly preferred ($\Delta$BIC $\sim$ 2). The peak energy ($E_{\rm pk}$) for the Band component is 586 $\pm$ 14 keV, and the temperature of the BB component is 44 $\pm$ 5 keV. The temperature of the BB component is consistent with similar components seen in other bright GRBs \citep{2012ApJ...757L..31A, 2011ApJ...727L..33G, 2013ApJ...770...32G}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.90\columnwidth]{SED_v2.pdf}
\caption{The scaled light curves and the $\nu$F$_{\nu}$ model spectra (and $\pm$1$\sigma$ error contours) for each of the time intervals described in Section~\ref{sec:analysis:spectral:early}. Each SED extends up to the energy of the highest-energy photon detected by LAT. The color coding used in the shading of time intervals in the top--left panel is carried over to the energy spectra in the other three panels. The dotted lines represent the components of the model spectra. The best-fit model and its parameters are listed in Table~\ref{tab:Fermi}. }
\label{SED}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\tiny
\centering
\caption{Spectral fitting to GBM + LLE + LAT data (10 keV--100 GeV) for various time intervals }
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c}
\hline\hline
& & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Main component} & &\multicolumn{4}{c}{Additional component} \\\cline{4-7}\cline{9-12}
From & To & Model\footnote{For the PL, CPL, and Band models, the pivot energy is fixed to 100 keV} & Norm.\footnote{photons cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ keV$^{-1}$} & $\Gamma_{\rm ph,low}$ & $\Gamma_{\rm ph,high}$ & $E_{pk}$ & & Norm.$^{b}$ &$\Gamma_{\rm ph,PL}$ & $E_{pk}$ & kT & $PG_{\rm stat}/dof$ & BIC\\
{[ s ]} & [ s ] & & & & & [ keV ] & & & & [ MeV ] &[ keV ]\\\hline\hline
0.0 & 2.3 & Band & 0.518$^{+0.005}_{-0.005}$ & -0.73$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & -4.00$^{+0.27}_{-0.42}$ & 548.6$^{+7.7}_{-7.6}$ & & & & & & 518/353&542\\
& & Band+BB & 0.481$^{+0.011}_{-0.011}$& -0.77$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & -4.20$^{+0.31}_{-0.46}$ & 585.4$^{+14.2}_{-13.6}$ & &11.54$^{+5.46}_{-4.30}$ & & &44.2$^{+4.9}_{-4.7}$ & 505/351&540\\\hline
2.3 & 2.8 & CPL+PL & 0.555$^{+0.009}_{-0.009}$ & -0.36$^{+0.03}_{-0.03}$ & & 730.0$^{+16.2}_{-15.5}$ & &0.018$^{+0.004}_{-0.003}$ &-1.96$^{+0.05}_{-0.06}$ & & & 425/352&454 \\\hline
2.8 & 3.8 & CPL+PL& 0.374$^{+0.006}_{-0.006}$& -0.09$^{+0.03}_{-0.03}$ & & 840.8$^{+13.1}_{-12.9}$ & &0.040$^{+0.002}_{-0.002}$ & -1.68$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & & & 769/352&799\\
& & CPL+CPL& 0.355$^{+0.007}_{-0.007}$& -0.04$^{+0.03}_{-0.03}$ & & 814.9$^{+13.4}_{-13.0}$ & &0.061$^{+0.004}_{-0.004}$ & -1.43$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ &26.1$^{+2.6}_{-2.3}$ & &477/351& 512
\\\hline
3.8 & 4.8 & Band+PL &0.706$^{+0.011}_{-0.011}$ &
-0.05$^{+0.03}_{-0.03}$ & -3.60$^{+0.19}_{-0.28}$ & 562.8$^{+9.6}_{-9.2}$ & &0.050$^{+0.003}_{-0.003}$ &-1.64$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ & & & 577/351&612\\
& & Band+CPL & 0.675$^{+0.010}_{-0.010}$& -0.05$^{+0.03}_{-0.03}$ & -3.63$^{+0.21}_{-0.26}$ & 563.1$^{+8.8}_{-9.6}$ & &0.065$^{+0.004}_{-0.004}$ &-1.64$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ & 51.5$^{+9.8}_{-7.4}$& & 519/350&560\\\hline
4.8 & 7.0 & CPL+PL &0.322$^{+0.006}_{-0.006}$ & -0.30$^{+0.04}_{-0.04}$ & & 425.4$^{+7.7}_{-7.4}$ & & 0.057$^{+0.002}_{-0.002}$& -1.86$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$& & & 467/352&494\\\hline
15 & 18.5 & CPL+PL & 0.080$^{+0.005}_{-0.005}$ & -1.41$^{+0.08}_{-0.06}$ & & 122.9$^{+7.5}_{-6.7}$ & & 0.014$^{+0.003}_{-0.003}$ & -2.00 $_{\rm fixed}$ & & & 407/353&430 \\\hline
18.5 & 25 & CPL+PL & 0.030$^{+0.005}_{-0.004}$ & -1.74$^{+0.09}_{-0.08}$ & & 27.7$^{+3.3}_{-4.1}$ & & 0.008$^{+0.001}_{-0.001}$ & -2.00 $_{\rm fixed}$ & & &454/353& 478 \\\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item Errors correspond to 1-$\sigma$ confidence region.
\end{tablenotes}
\label{tab:Fermi}
\end{table*}
The main spectral component during the brightest emission episode observed from $T_{0}$ + 2.3 s to $T_{0}$ + 7.0 s is characterized by many short and overlapping pulses and is best fit by either a CPL or Band function. During this phase, the low-energy spectral index is very hard, ranging between $-$0.4 -- 0.0 (see Table~\ref{tab:Fermi}). The peak energy ($E_{\rm pk}$) reaches a maximum value of $E_{\rm pk}$ $\sim$ 815 keV from $T_{0}$ + 2.8 s to $T_{0}$ + 3.8 s, before decreasing in time (see Table~\ref{tab:Fermi}).
An additional PL or CPL component begins to appear during the $T_{0}$ + 2.3 s to $T_{0}$ + 2.8 s time interval and lasts throughout the prompt emission phase. Arrival of the first LAT events above 100 MeV associated with the source begins at $T_{0}$ + $\sim$2.7 s, consistent with the emergence of this spectral component. In the third ($T_{0}$ + 2.8 s to $T_{0}$ + 3.8 s) and fourth ($T_{0}$ + 3.8 s to $T_{0}$ + 4.8 s) time intervals, this additional component increases in brightness and exhibits a high-energy cutoff which increases in energy with time, ranging from 26 -- 52 MeV (see Table~\ref{tab:Fermi}). The high-energy cutoff is strongly required in both time intervals compared to the models without the high-energy cutoff ($\Delta$BIC $\gg$ 10). After $\sim$ 4.8 s, the high-energy cutoff in this additional component disappears, and the high-energy emission is well described by a PL with a photon index ($dN/dE \propto E^{\Gamma_{\rm ph}}$) of $\Gamma_{\rm ph,PL} = -1.86 \pm 0.01$ or correspondingly an energy index ($F_{\nu} \propto \nu^{\beta}$) of $\beta_{\rm PL} = -0.86 \pm 0.01$.
After the bright emission phase, the long-lived extended emission observed by the LAT is best described by a PL with an almost-constant photon index of $\Gamma_{\rm ph,PL} \sim -2$, as shown in Figure~\ref{Component}. Figure~\ref{Component} also shows that the energy flux of this extended emission phase (100 MeV--1 GeV) shows a power-law decay in time ($F_{\nu} \propto t^{\alpha}$), with an exponent of $\alpha_{\rm LAT} = -1.09 \pm 0.02$. Extrapolation of this extended emission back into the earlier bright emission phase reveals that the flux from the additional spectral component in the prompt emission evolves similarly to the extended emission. This implies that the emission from the additional component and the extended emission may be from the same region. Since the power-law spectral and temporal characteristics of this broadband emission resemble the representative features of GRB afterglows, the end of the bright emission phase at about $\sim$ 7 s represents the transition from the prompt to afterglow-dominated emission.
In addition to the extended emission, a weaker, short-duration pulse, with soft emission primarily below $\lesssim$ 100 keV, is observed from $T_{0}$ + 15 s to $T_{0}$ + 25 s. This weak pulse, along with the long-lasting extended emission, is well described by the CPL + PL model. For these periods, we fix the photon index of the PL component to $-2.0$, assuming that the photon index of the energy spectrum of the extended emission is unchanged in time.
\subsubsection{Fermi--Swift Joint Spectral Analysis \label{sec:analysis:spectral:late}}
We continue the time-resolved spectral analysis from $T_{0}$ + 68.27 s to $T_{0}$ + 627.14 s, but now include \emph{Swift}\xspace data. For GBM, we prepared the data using the same process as described in Section~\ref{sec:analysis:spectral:early}, although for this time interval we excluded channels below 50 keV because of apparent attenuation due to partial blockage of the source by the spacecraft that is not accounted for in the GBM response. For LAT, we decreased the ROI radius to 10$^\circ$ and increased the maximum zenith angle cut to 110$^\circ$. Both changes are made in order to reduce the loss of exposure that occurs when the ROI crosses the zenith angle cut and begins to overlap the Earth’s limb. This increase in exposure, though, comes at the expense of increased background during intervals when the Earth’s limb is approaching the burst position. The rest of the process is the same as described in Section~\ref{sec:analysis:spectral:early}.
We retrieve \emph{Swift}\xspace data from the HEASARC archive. The BAT spectra are generated using the event-by-event data collected from $T_{\rm 0,\, BAT}-239$ s to $T_{\rm0,\, BAT}+963$ s, with the standard BAT software (HEASOFT 6.25\footnote{http://heasarc.nasa.gov/lheasoft/}) and the latest calibration database (CALDB\footnote{http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/heasarc/caldb/swift/}). The burst left the BAT FoV at $\sim T_{\rm0,\,BAT} + 720$ s, and was not re-observed until $\sim T_{\rm0,\,BAT} + 3800$ s. For the intervals that include spacecraft slews, an average response file is generated by summing several short-interval (5 s) response files, weighted by the counts in each interval \citep[see][for a more detailed description]{Lien2016}.
The XRT acquired the source at $T_{0}$ + 64.63 s, and started taking WT data at $T_{0}$ + 68.27 s. In the analysis that follows the XRT data were initially processed by the XRT data analysis software tools available in {\sc HEASOFT} version 6.25, using the gain calibration files released on 2018-Jul-10. Prior to extracting spectra, we processed the WT event data using an updated, but as yet unreleased, version of the XRT science data analysis task {\sc xrtwtcorr} (version 0.2.4), which includes a new algorithm for identifying unwanted events caused by the delayed emission of charge from deep charge traps that have accumulated in the CCD due to radiation damage from the harsh environment of space. Such trailing charge appears as additional low-energy events and can cause a significant spectral distortion at low energies, especially for a relatively absorbed extragalactic X-ray source, like GRB~190114C. Once identified, the trailing charge events were removed from the event list, resulting in clean WT spectra that are usable below 0.7 keV.
The XRT spectral extraction then proceeded using standard \emph{Swift}\xspace analysis software included in HEASOFT software (version 6.25). Grade 0 events were selected to help mitigate pile-up and appropriately sized annular extraction regions were used, when necessary, to exclude pile-up from the core of the WT point spread function (PSF) profile when the source count rate was greater than $\sim 100$ cts s$^{-1}$. PSF and exposure-corrected ancillary response files were created to ensure correct recovery of the source flux during spectral fitting.
We tested three models in the joint spectral fits, a PL, a broken power law (BKNPL), and a smoothly broken power law (SBKNPL). Each model was multiplied by two photoelectric absorption models, one for Galactic absorption (``TBabs'') and another for the intrinsic host absorption (``zTBabs''). For the Galactic photoelectric absorption model, an equivalent hydrogen column density is fixed to 7.54 $\times$ 10$^{19}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$ \citep{2013MNRAS.431..394W}. We let the equivalent hydrogen column density for the intrinsic host absorption model be a free parameter in the fit, but fixed the redshift to $z = 0.42$.
We divided the extended emission phase, $T_{\rm 0}$ + 68.27 s to $T_{\rm 0}$ + 627.14 s, into four time intervals covering 68.27--110 s, 110--180 s, 180--380 s, and 380--627.18 s. The fit results for all four time intervals are listed in Table~\ref{tab:Swift_Fermi}. For the first two time intervals, we fit the XRT, BAT, GBM, and LAT data simultaneously {by using different fit statistics for each data type: $C_{\rm stat}$ (Poisson data with Poisson background) for the XRT, $\chi^{2}$ for the BAT data, and $PG_{\rm stat}$ for GBM and LAT. These statistics are reported independently for each data set in Table~\ref{tab:Swift_Fermi}.} As shown in Table~\ref{tab:Swift_Fermi} and Figure~\ref{late_phase_SED}, a BKNPL function is statistically preferred over the PL and SBKNPL functions in both time intervals, where Figure~\ref{late_phase_SED} also includes the spectral fitting results using each individual instrument. When the smoothness parameter $s$ in the SBKNPL model is left free to vary, a sharp break with $s > 10$ is obtained, at which point a SBKNPL resembles a traditional BKNPL model. The low- and high-energy photon indices in the BKNPL model are consistent in both time intervals, yielding $\Gamma_{\rm ph,low}$ $\sim -1.6$ and $\Gamma_{\rm ph,high}$ $\sim -2.1$, respectively, with break energies of 4.22$^{+0.31}_{-0.67}$ keV and 5.11$^{+0.42}_{-0.37}$ keV. We note that the high-energy photon index is consistent with the values in the additional component seen in the prompt phase. This result implies that BAT, GBM, and LAT are observing emission from the same side of the break in the energy spectrum from 10 keV to 100 GeV, which starts to appear during the prompt emission phase in the form of an additional spectral component, whereas the low-energy channels of the XRT are measuring the energy spectrum below this break.
Since the burst is outside the LAT FoV during the last two time intervals, we limit the joint fit during these intervals to XRT and BAT data. We again simultaneously fit the data to PL and BKNPL models, using again different fit statistics for each data type, $\chi^{2}$ for the BAT data and $C_{\rm stat}$ for the XRT. Again the BKNPL model is statistically preferred over the simpler PL model. For the time interval from $T_{\rm 0}$ + 180 s to 380 s, the low- and high-energy photon indices, as well as the break energy, in the BKNPL model are consistent with those found during the earlier intervals. For the last time interval from $T_{\rm 0}$ + 380 s to 627.14 s, the low-energy photon index is slightly softer than previous intervals, with $\Gamma_{\rm ph,low} = -1.71 \pm 0.05$, and the break energy is almost consistent with previous intervals.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\columnwidth]{Fit_params_v4.eps}
\caption{Temporal and spectral evolution of each spectral component. \textit{Top Panel}: energy flux in the 10 keV--1 MeV (blue) and 100 MeV--1GeV (green) energy ranges, \textit{Middle Panel}: photon index (for the Band function we refer to the low-energy photon index), and \textit{Bottom Panel}: $E_{\rm pk}$, where we use the trigger time $T_{\rm 0}$}
\label{Component}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{SED_late_phase_rev.pdf}
\caption{Spectral energy distributions from optical to gamma-ray energies for the four time intervals ($T_0$ + 68.27 s to 110 s, $T_0$ + 110 s to 180 s, $T_0$ + 180 s to 380 s and $T_0$ + 380 s to 627 s) described in Section~\ref{sec:analysis:spectral:late}. The solid black lines represent the best-fitting broken power-law function. Each filled region corresponds to the 1-$\sigma$ error contour of the power-law function best-fit to the data from each individual instrument. The cyan regions are an extrapolation from the best-fitting broken power-law function. The dotted line denotes the best-fit break energy $E_{\rm break}$. The simultaneous UVOT white and $u$ band observations taken during the $T_0$ + 180 s to 380 s and $T_0$ + 380 s to 627 s intervals are also shown, but are not included in the joint spectral fit. Note that the UVOT observations are uncorrected for Galactic or host absorption and as such serve as lower limits to the UV and optical flux.}
\label{late_phase_SED}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}
\tiny
\centering
\caption{Spectral fitting to \emph{Fermi}\xspace and \emph{Swift}\xspace data (1 keV--100 GeV) for various time intervals}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c}
\hline\hline
From & To & Model\footnote{Since the XRT data are included, a model is multiplied by the photoelectric absorption models, TBabs with fixed hydrogen column density of 7.54 $\times$ 10$^{19}$ cm$^{-2}$ and zTBabs with fixed redshift of 0.4245.}\footnote{Note that a ``constant'' factor is included to the model, which accounts for the potential of relative calibration uncertainties in the recovered flux (i.e. normalization) between BAT and GBM. The factor ranges from 0.8 to 1.3, which is acceptable.} &$\Gamma_{\rm ph,low}$ & $\Gamma_{\rm ph,high}$ & $E_{\rm break}$ & \textit{p} & N(H) & $PG_{\rm stat}$ & $C_{\rm stat}$ & $\chi^{2}$ & $dof$ & BIC\\
{[ s ]} & [ s ] & & & & [ keV ] & & [ 10$^{22}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$ ] & & \\\hline
68.27 & 110 & PL & -2.09$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & & & & 10.55$^{+0.27}_{-0.26}$ & 504 & 655 & 52 & 1086 & 1239\\
& & BKNPL& -1.55$^{+0.12}_{-0.12}$ & -2.11$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ & 4.72$^{+1.20}_{-0.37}$ & & 8.22$^{+0.54}_{-0.52}$ & 502 & 625 & 56 & 1084 & 1225\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm ISM}$\footnote{Smoothness parameter \textit{s} = 1.15 - 0.06\textit{p} \citep{Granot:2002}}& -(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2 & 4.63$^{+3.38}_{-3.28}$ & 2.46$^{+0.08}_{-0.11}$ & 9.91$^{+0.27}_{-0.26}$ & 504 & 642 & 55 & 1085 & 1236\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm wind}$\footnote{Smoothness parameter \textit{s} = 0.80 - 0.03\textit{p} \citep{Granot:2002}}& -(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2 & 7.46$^{+72.89}_{-6.63}$ & 2.54$^{+0.15}_{-0.16}$ & 10.06$^{+0.27}_{-0.26}$ & 504 & 644 & 54 & 1085 & 1238\\\hline
110 & 180 & PL & -2.00$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ & & & & 10.42$^{+0.23}_{-0.23}$ & 616 & 671 & 50 & 1087 & 1364\\
& & BKNPL & -1.57$^{+0.08}_{-0.08}$ & -2.06$^{+0.02}_{-0.02}$ & 5.60$^{+0.76}_{-0.46}$ & & 8.30$^{+0.40}_{-0.39}$ & 616 & 627 & 51 & 1085 & 1336\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm ISM}$& -(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2 & 2.56$^{+4.20}_{-1.54}$ & 2.24$^{+0.10}_{-0.08}$ & 9.74$^{+0.23}_{-0.23}$ & 621 & 653 & 50 & 1087 & 1358\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm wind}$& -(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2 & 1.69$^{+4.63}_{-0.69}$ & 2.26$^{+0.10}_{-0.10}$ & 9.89$^{+0.23}_{-0.23}$ & 621 & 656 & 50 & 1086 & 1362\\\hline
180 & 380 & PL & -1.90$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & & & & 9.57$^{+0.17}_{-0.15}$ & &774 &66 & 810 & 866\\
& & BKNPL & -1.54$^{+0.06}_{-0.06}$ & -1.99$^{+0.05}_{-0.05}$ & 5.18$^{+0.46}_{-0.36}$ & & 7.93$^{+0.29}_{-0.28}$ & & 727 & 63 & 808 & 830\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm ISM}$&-(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2 & 5.60$^{+0.145}_{-1.512}$ & 2.20$^{+0.10}_{-0.02}$ & 9.07$^{+0.15}_{-0.14}$ & & 756 & 64 & 809 & 854\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm wind}$&-(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2 & 6.88$^{+0.35}_{-0.44}$ & 2.25$^{+0.16}_{-0.02}$ & 9.21$^{+0.16}_{-0.15}$ & & 761 & 64 & 809 & 858\\\hline
380 & 627.14 & PL & -1.86$^{+0.01}_{-0.01}$ & & & & 9.09$^{+0.13}_{-0.14}$ & &700 & 47 & 839 & 775 \\
& & BKNPL& -1.71$^{+0.05}_{-0.05}$ & -2.11$^{+0.08}_{-0.09}$ & 5.52$^{+0.72}_{-0.38}$ & & 8.43$^{+0.24}_{-0.23}$ & & 686 & 42 & 837 & 768\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm ISM}$&-(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2 & 8.67$^{+37.30}_{-6.78}$ & 2.18$^{+0.20}_{-0.16}$ & 8.67$^{+0.20}_{-0.11}$ & & 694 & 44 & 838 & 772\\
& & SBKNPL$_{\rm wind}$&-(\textit{p}+1)/2 & -(\textit{p}+2)/2& 9.16$^{+36.96}_{-4.91}$ & 2.20$^{+0.19}_{-0.10}$ & 8.77$^{+0.18}_{-0.09}$ & & 695 & 45 & 838 & 774\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item Errors correspond to 1-$\sigma$ confidence region.
\end{tablenotes}
\label{tab:Swift_Fermi}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Multiwavelength Afterglow Light Curves} \label{sec:multi-lc}
Figure~\ref{multi-wavelength_lightcurve} shows light curves of GRB 190114C for the XRT, BAT, GBM, and LAT data. The selection for the GBM and LAT data is described in Section~\ref{sec:analysis:spectral:early} and the flux is calculated from the best-fit function for each time interval in the spectral analysis with each individual instrument. The XRT (0.7 keV -- 10 keV), and BAT (15 keV -- 50 keV) light curves are obtained from the UK \emph{Swift}\xspace Science Data Centre. The UVOT (2 -- 5 eV for the white band) light curve is obtained by {\tt uvotproduct} of HEASoft package. The BAT, GBM, and LAT light curves show an obvious transition from the highly variable prompt emission to a smoothly decaying afterglow component ($\alpha_{\rm BAT} = -1.00 \pm 0.01$, $\alpha_{\rm GBM} = -1.10 \pm 0.01$, and $\alpha_{\rm LAT} = -1.22 \pm 0.11$). At later times, all three light curves decay in time with consistent decay indices, $\alpha$ $\sim -1$, implying that they originate from the same emitting region.
The XRT light curve is well described by a broken power law with temporal indices $\alpha_{\rm XRT}$ of $-1.30 \pm 0.01$ and $-1.49 \pm 0.02$ with the break occurring at approximately $t_{\rm break}$ $\sim$ $T_{0}$ + $\sim$19.8 $\times$ 10$^{3}$ s ($\sim$ 5.5 hrs) (see inset in Figure~\ref{multi-wavelength_lightcurve}). The pre-break decay index of the XRT light curve differs from the indices measured for the BAT, GBM and LAT data. This difference in decay slopes indicates that the XRT is probing a different portion of the afterglow spectrum, a conclusion that is consistent with the observed spectral breaks in the \emph{Swift}\xspace and \emph{Fermi}\xspace joint-fit spectral analysis (Section~\ref{sec:analysis:spectral:late}).
On the other hand, the UVOT light curve exhibits decay slopes and a temporal break that are distinct from the XRT and BAT data. The temporal break occurs at $\sim$ 400 s, with temporal indices $\alpha_{\rm UVOT}$ before and after the break of $-1.62 \pm 0.04$ and $-0.84 \pm 0.02$, respectively. These decay indices are steeper than the decay observed in the XRT before the break in the UVOT data and shallower than the XRT decay afterwards. This implies that the UVOT is observing yet another distinct portion of the afterglow spectrum. These observations can be interpreted as the contribution of an optically bright reverse shock that becomes sub-dominant to the forward shock emission at the time of the observed temporal break. In such a scenario, the post-break decay index seen in the UVOT would then reflect a distinct portion of the afterglow spectrum below the X-ray regime.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\columnwidth]{multiLC_Modified_v3.eps}
\caption{Multi-wavelength afterglow light curves for the UVOT (purple), XRT (orange), BAT (red), GBM (green), and LAT (blue) data from GRB 190114C. The flux for the GBM (10 keV -- 1 MeV) and LAT (100 MeV -- 1 GeV) data is calculated from the best-fit model for each time interval in the spectral analysis with each instrument. The BAT, GBM, and LAT emission show a transition after $\sim$ T$_{0}$ + 10 s to an extended emission component decaying smoothly as a power law in time (solid lines). Both the XRT and the UVOT light curves are well described by a broken power law, respectively (solid lines), and their break times are 19.8 $\times$ 10$^3$ s ($\sim$ 5.5 hrs) and 377 s, respectively (dotted lines). The inset shows the light curves of the LAT, XRT and UVOT up to $\sim$ T$_{0}$ + 23 days. }
\label{multi-wavelength_lightcurve}.
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion} \label{sec:discussion}
\subsection{Prompt Emission} \label{subsec:prompt}
The prompt emission observed in GRB 190114C resembles the complex relationship between multiple emission components commonly seen in LAT-detected GRBs. The emission observed in the first $\sim2$ s is best characterized as a Band function spectrum with a possible sub-dominant BB component, which combined produce no detectable emission in the LAT energy range. The energy fluxes of the thermal and non-thermal components in the energy band from 10 keV to 1 MeV are $\sim$ 1.1 $\times$ 10$^{-6}$ and $\sim$ 3.9 $\times$ 10$^{-5}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$, respectively. We estimate the ratio of the thermal to non-thermal emission during this period to be approximately 3$\%$.
The delay in the onset of the LAT-detected emission is related to the emergence of a hard PL component superimposed on the highly variable Band+BB component seen in the GBM. Furthermore, the PL component is initially attenuated at energies greater than $\sim100$ MeV and we interpret this spectral turnover as due to opacity to electron-positron pair production ($\gamma\gamma \rightarrow e^{+}e^{-}$) within the source. The cutoff energy associated with this turnover is observed to increase with time before disappearing entirely at later times. Similar behavior has been observed in other LAT-detected bursts \citep[e.g.,\ GRB~090926A;][]{Ackermann2011} and has been attributed to the expansion of the emitting region, as the pair production opacity is expected to scale as $\tau_{\gamma\gamma} \propto R^{-1}$ for a fixed mean flux, where $R$ is the distance from the central engine.
As has also been noted for other LAT-detected GRBs, e.g., GRBs 081024B \citep{2010ApJ...712..558A}, 090510 \citep{Ackermann10}, 090902B \citep{2009ApJ...706L.138A}, 090926A \citep{Ackermann+11}, 110731A \citep{Ackermann2013}, and 141207A \citep{2016ApJ...833..139A}, the existence of the extra PL component can be seen as a low-energy excess in the GBM data. This observation disfavors SSC or IC emission from the prompt emission as the origin of the extra PL component, as SSC emission cannot produce a broad power-law spectrum that extends below the synchrotron spectral peak. Instead, we identify this component as the emergence of the early afterglow over which the rest of the prompt emission is superimposed.
\subsection{Afterglow Emission} \label{subsec:afterglow}
The \emph{Swift}\xspace and \emph{Fermi}\xspace data reveal that the power-law spectral component observed during the prompt emission transitions to a canonical afterglow component, which fades smoothly as a power law in time. In the standard forward shock model of GRB afterglows \citep{1998ApJ...497L..17S}, specific relationships between the temporal decay and spectral indices, the so-called ``closure relations", can be used to constrain the physical properties of the forward shock as well as the type of environment in which the blast wave is propagating.
Our broadband fits to the simultaneous XRT, GBM, BAT, and LAT data show evidence for a spectral break in the hard X-ray band (5--10 keV). In the context of the forward shock model, this spectral break could represent either the frequency of the synchrotron emission electrons with a minimum Lorentz factor $\nu_{\rm m}$ or the cooling frequency of the synchrotron emission $\nu_{\rm c}$. Since there are no additional spectral breaks observed up to and through the LAT energy range, if we assume the observed spectral break is either $\nu_{\rm m}$ or $\nu_{\rm c}$, then we naturally hypothesize that $\nu_{\rm c} < \nu_{\rm m}$ or $\nu_{\rm m} < \nu_{\rm c}$, respectively. In the case that the spectral break is $\nu_{\rm m}$, the low-energy and high-energy photon indices are expected to be $\nu^{-1.5}$ for $\nu < \nu_{\rm m}$ and $\nu^{-(p+2)/2} \sim \nu^{-2.1}$ for $\nu > \nu_{\rm m}$, when assuming an electron spectral index of $p \sim$ 2.1. These values are consistent with the observed photon indices, although the expected temporal index when $\nu < \nu_{\rm m}$ is expected to be $\propto t^{-1/4}$, which is inconsistent with the XRT decay index of $\propto t^{-1.32\pm0.01}$ for either a constant density (ISM) or wind-like (wind) circumstellar environment. Therefore this scenario in which the break is due to $\nu_{\rm m}$ is disfavored.
In the case that the spectral break is $\nu_{\rm c}$, the low-energy and high-energy photon indices are expected to be $\nu^{-(p+1)/2} \sim \nu^{-1.6}$ for $\nu < \nu_{\rm c}$ and $\nu^{-(p+2)/2} \sim \nu^{-2.1}$ for $\nu > \nu_{\rm c}$, again assuming $p \sim 2.1$, again consistent with the observed values. The expected temporal behavior when $\nu > \nu_{\rm c} $, in both the ISM and wind cases is $\propto t^{(2-3p)/4} \sim t^{-1.1}$, which is consistent with the temporal decay measured in the BAT, GBM and LAT energy ranges. For $\nu < \nu_{\rm c}$, the expected temporal behavior significantly depends on the density profile of the circumstellar environment. In the ISM case, the temporal index is expected to be $\propto t^{3(1-p)/4} \sim t^{-0.8}$, inconsistent with the decay observed in the XRT, whereas for the wind case the expected temporal index is $\propto t^{(1-3p)/4} \sim t^{-1.3}$, matching the decay seen in X-rays.
If we are indeed observing an afterglow spectrum in which the XRT data are below $\nu_{\rm c}$, then we can follow the formalism established in \cite{2000ApJ...535L..33S} and \cite{2009MNRAS.394.2164V} to estimate an arbitrary circumstellar density profile index $k$, for $n(r) \propto R^{-k}$, to be $k$ = (12$\beta$ - 8$\alpha$)/(1 + 3$\beta$ - 2$\alpha$) = 1.92 $\pm$ 0.07, which also supports a wind profile ($k$ = 2) scenario.
Figure \ref{time_vs_nuc} shows the observed evolution of $E_{\rm break}$ in the four time intervals we analyzed, along with the expected evolution of the cooling break $\nu_{\rm c} \propto t^{+1/2}$ in a wind-like environment. Despite an initial increase in the break energy between the first two intervals, the break energy is consistent with remaining constant after $T_{\rm 0} > 150$ s. This behavior is similar to that observed for GRB~130427A, in which the broadband modeling preferred a wind-like environment \citep{2014ApJ...781...37P}, but for which $\nu_{\rm c}$ was nonetheless observed to remain constant through the late-time observations \citep{Kouveliotou2013}. \citet{Kouveliotou2013} concluded that GRB~130427A may have occurred in an intermediate environment, possibly produced through a stellar eruption late in the life of the progenitor which altered the circumstellar density profile \citep{2006ApJ...647.1269F}. Nonetheless, a wind-like environment for GRB~190114C matches conclusions drawn by \citet{2011ApJ...732...29C, Ackermann2013, Ajello2018} from a growing number of bursts for a possible preference for LAT-detected bursts to occur in stratified environments, despite the observation that the majority of long GRB afterglows are otherwise consistent with occurring in environments that exhibit uniform density profiles \citep{2011A&A...526A..23S}.
The temporal decay of the UVOT data, although uncorrected for either Galactic or host-galaxy extinction, can provide additional constraints on the location of $\nu_{\rm m}$. The UVOT emission decays as a broken power-law function, starting with $t^{-1.62\pm0.06}$ from 70--400 s, before transitioning to a slower decay of $t^{-0.84\pm0.03}$ for 400--10$^5$ s. The pre-break emission can be interpreted as the contribution from a reverse shock which is expected to exhibit a temporal index of $\propto t^{-(73p+21)/96} \sim t^{-1.82}$, assuming $p$ = 2.1 \citep{2000ApJ...545..807K}, roughly consistent with observations. If the UVOT observed emission after $T_{\rm 0}$ + $\sim$400 s is due to the forward-shock component in which the UVOT data are above $\nu_{\rm m}$ but below $\nu_{\rm c}$, then the temporal decay is expected to be $\propto t^{(1-3p)/4} \sim t^{-1.3}$ for $p$ = 2.1, which is too steep with respect to the observed post-break UVOT decay ($t^{-0.84 \pm 0.03}$). On the other hand, if the UVOT data are below both $\nu_{\rm m}$ and $\nu_{\rm c}$, the temporal decay is expected to be flat, $\propto t^{0}$. Without a clear preference for either of the two scenarios, we conjecture that the UVOT-detected emission may have a different origin or emission site than the X-ray and gamma-ray emission.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{time_vs_nuc.pdf}
\caption{Observed spectral break energy versus time. The blue and green points represent the break energy ($E_{\rm break}$) in the BKNPL and SBKNPL$_{\rm wind}$ models in the four time intervals, respectively. The dashed line represents the cooling frequency with time ($\nu_{\rm c} \propto t^{+1/2}$) expected from the afterglow parameters. Despite an initial increase in the break energy between the first two intervals, the break energy is consistent with remaining constant after $T_{\rm 0}$ + $\sim$150 s.}
\label{time_vs_nuc}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Energetics}
GRB~190114C was exceptionally bright in the observer frame. The 1-second peak photon flux measured by GBM is 247 $\pm$ 1 photons s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$, with a total fluence of $(4.433 \pm 0.005) \times 10^{-4}$ erg cm$^{-2},$ both in the 10-1000 keV band. This makes GRB~190114C the fourth brightest in peak flux and the fifth most fluent GRB detected by GBM, placing it in the top $0.3$ percentile of GRBs in the 3rd GBM catalog \citep{GBMBurstCatalog_6Years}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{GBMFLUENCE_LATFLUENCE_AG_v3.eps}
\caption{Fluence in the energy range of 0.1--100 GeV versus 10 keV--1 MeV for GRB\,190114C (star) compared with the sample of 186 LAT-detected GRBs from the 2FLGC. Red points are for short GRBs while blue points are for long GRBs.}
\label{fluence}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The fluence in the 100 MeV--100 GeV energy band measured by the LAT, including the prompt and extended emission, is (2.4 $\pm$ 0.4) $\times$ $10^{-5}$ erg cm$^{-2}$, which sets GRB\,190114C as the second most fluent GRB detected by the LAT. Figure~\ref{fluence} shows the 10-1000 keV fluence versus the 0.1--100 GeV fluence for GRB\,190114C in comparison with the sample of GRBs detected by the LAT from the 2FLGC. The fluence measured by the LAT is only slightly smaller than that of GRB\,130427A, currently the most fluent GRB detected by the LAT.
At a redshift of $z=0.42$ ($d_{\rm L}=2390$ Mpc), the total isotropic-equivalent energies $E_{\rm iso}$ released in the rest frame GBM (1 keV--10 MeV), LAT (100 MeV--10 GeV), and combined (1 keV--10 GeV) energy ranges are (2.5 $\pm$ 0.1) $\times10^{53}$ erg, (6.9 $\pm$ 0.7) $\times10^{52}$ erg, and (3.5 $\pm$ 0.1) $\times10^{53}$ erg, respectively. We also estimate a 1-second isotropic equivalent luminosity of $L_{\gamma,{\rm iso}} = (1.07 \pm 0.01 )\times 10^{53} \: {\rm erg} \: {\rm s}^{-1}$ in the 1-10000 keV energy range.
Figure \ref{energetic} shows $E_{\rm iso}$ estimated in the 100 MeV--10 GeV rest frame along with the sample of the 34 LAT-detected GRBs with known redshift in the 2FLGC.
We note that GRB\,190114C is among the most luminous LAT-detected GRBs below $z < 1$, with an $E_{\rm iso}$ just below GRB\,130427A, which also exhibited the highest-energy photons detected by the LAT from a GRB, including a 95 GeV photon emitted at 128 GeV in the rest frame of the burst.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{LIKE_LAT_EISO52_RF_REDSHIFT_v2.eps}
\caption{Scatter plot of $E_{\rm iso}$ (100 MeV -- 10 GeV) versus redshift for various GRBs including GRB 190114C (star). Colors indicate the energy of the highest-energy photon for each GRB with an association probability $>$90\%. }
\label{energetic}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Bulk Lorentz Factor}\label{subsec:bulkLF}
GRBs are intense sources of gamma rays. If the emission originated in a non-relativistic source it would render gamma-ray photons with energies at the $\nu F_{\nu}$-peak energy and above susceptible to $e^\pm$-pair production ($\gamma\gamma\to e^\pm$) due to high optical depths ($\tau_{\gamma\gamma}(\Gamma_{\rm bulk},E)\gg1$) for $\gamma\gamma$-annihilation. This is the so-called `compactness problem' which can be resolved if the emission region is moving ultrarelativistically, with $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}\gtrsim100$, toward the observer \citep{1997ApJ...491..663B, Lithwick-Sari-01, Granot+08,Hascoet+12}. In this case, the attenuation of flux, which either appears as an exponential cutoff or a smoothly broken power law \citep[][hereafter G08]{Granot+08}, due to $\gamma\gamma$-annihilation occurs at much higher photon energies above the peak of the $\nu F_\nu$ spectrum where $\tau_{\gamma\gamma}(\Gamma_{\rm bulk},E>E_{\rm cut})>1$. Such spectral cutoffs have now been observed in several GRBs, e.g., GRB 090926A \citep{Ackermann+11}; GRBs 100724B and 160509A \citep{Vianello+18}; also see \citet{Tang+15} for additional sources. Under the assumption that these cutoffs indeed result from $\gamma\gamma$-annihilation, they have been used to obtain a direct estimate of the bulk Lorentz factor of the emission region. When no spectral cutoff is observed, the highest energy observed photon is often used to obtain a lower limit on $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ instead. In many cases, a simple one-zone estimate of $\tau_{\gamma\gamma}$ was employed, which makes the assumption that both the test photon, with energy $E$, and the annihilating photon, with energy $\gtrsim \Gamma_{\rm bulk}^2(m_ec^2)^2/E(1+z)^2$, were produced in the same region of the flow \citep[e.g.,][]{Lithwick-Sari-01,Abdo+09}. Such models yield estimates of $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ that are typically larger by a factor $\sim 2$ than that obtained from more detailed models of $\tau_{\gamma\gamma}$. The latter either feature two distinct emission regions \citep[a two-zone model;][]{Zou+11} or account for the spatial, directional, and temporal dependence of the interacting photons \citep[G08;][]{Hascoet+12}. Here we use the analytic model of G08 which assumes an expanding ultrarelativistic spherical thin shell and calculates $\tau_{\gamma\gamma}$ along the trajectory of each test photon that reaches the observer. The results of this model have been independently confirmed with numerical simulations \citep{Gill-Granot-18}, which show that it yields an accurate estimate of $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ from observations of spectral cutoffs if the emission region remains optically thin to Thomson scattering due to the produced $e^\pm$-pairs. In this case, the initial bulk Lorentz factor of the outflow $\Gamma_{\rm bulk,0}$ is estimated using
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Gamma-min}
\Gamma_{\rm bulk,0} = 100\left[\frac{396.9}{C_2 (1+z)^{\Gamma_{\rm ph}}}\left(\frac{L_0}{10^{52}\,{\rm erg~s}^{-1}}\right)\left(\frac{5.11\,{\rm GeV}}{E_{\rm cut}}\right)^{1+\Gamma_{\rm ph}}
\left(\frac{-\Gamma_{\rm ph}}{2}\right)^{-5/3}\frac{33.4\,{\rm ms}}{t_v}\right]^{1/(2-2\Gamma_{\rm ph})}~.
\end{equation}
Here $t_v$ is the variability timescale, $\Gamma_{\rm ph}$ is the photon index of the power-law component,
and $L_0 = 4\pi d_L^2(1+z)^{-\Gamma_{\rm ph}-2}F_0$, where $d_L$ is the luminosity
distance of the burst, $F_0$ is the (unabsorbed) energy flux ($\nu F_\nu$) obtained at $511\,$keV from the power-law component of the spectrum. The parameter $C_2\approx1$ is constrained from observations of spectral cutoffs in other GRBs \citep{Vianello+18}. The estimate of the bulk Lorentz factor in Eq.(\ref{eq:Gamma-min}) should be compared with $\Gamma_{\rm bulk,max}=(1+z)E_{\rm cut}/m_ec^2$, which corresponds to the maximum bulk Lorentz factor for a given observed cutoff energy and for which the cutoff energy in the comoving frame is at the self-annihilation threshold, $E_{\rm cut}'= (1+z)E_{\rm cut}/\Gamma_{\rm bulk} = m_ec^2$
\citep[however, see, e.g.,][where it was shown that the comoving cutoff energy can be lower than $m_ec^2$ due to Compton scattering by $e^\pm$-pairs]{Gill-Granot-18}. The true bulk Lorentz factor is then the minimum of the two estimates.
In GRB 190114C, the additional power-law component detected by the LAT exhibits a significant spectral cutoff at $E_{\rm cut} \sim 140\,$MeV (where $E_{\rm cut} = E_{\rm pk}/(2+\Gamma_{\rm ph})$) in the time period from $T_{0}$ + 3.8 s to $T_{0}$ + 4.8 s. Using the variability timescale in the GBM band of $t_v \sim$ 6 ms, where we assume that the GBM and LAT emissions are co-spatial, we obtain the bulk Lorentz factor
$\Gamma_{\rm bulk,0} \sim 210$ from Eq.(\ref{eq:Gamma-min}), which is lower than $\Gamma_{\rm bulk,max}\approx400$ and is therefore adopted as the initial bulk Lorentz factor of the outflow.
\subsection{Forward Shock Parameters} \label{subsec:forward_shock}
The timescale on which the forward shock sweeps up enough material to begin to decelerate and convert its internal energy into observable radiation depends on the density of the material into which it is propagating $A$, the total kinetic energy of the outflow
($E_{\rm iso}$/$\eta$ $\sim$ 1.8$\times$10$^{54}$ erg, where $E_{\rm iso}$ = 3.5$\times$10$^{53}$ erg $\sim$ 10$^{53.5}$ erg and $\eta$ = 0.2 is the conversion efficiency of total shock energy into the observed gamma-ray emission), and its initial bulk Lorentz factor $\Gamma_{\rm bulk, 0}$.
Here, in a wind environment, we define a timescale $t_\gamma$ on which the accumulated wind mass is 1/$\Gamma_{\rm bulk, 0}$ of the ejecta mass as
\begin{equation}
t_{\gamma} = \frac{E_{\rm iso} (1+z)}{16 \pi A m_p c^3 \eta \Gamma_{\rm bulk, 0}^4 }\sim 2\,{\rm s}\,\, A_{\star}^{-1}\left( \frac{E_{\rm iso}}{ 10^{53.5}\,{\rm ergs} }\right)\left( \frac{\eta}{0.2} \right)^{-1} \left( \frac{\Gamma_{\rm bulk, 0}}{200} \right)^{-4}~,
\label{eq:t_onset_wind}
\end{equation}
where $A=3\times10^{35}A_\star~{\rm cm}^{-1}$ with a mass-loss rate 10$^{-5}$ $M_{\sun}$ yr$^{-1}$ in the wind velocity of 10$^{3}$ km s$^{-1}$ for $A_{\star}$ = 1.
If the reverse shock is Newtonian, or at least mildly relativistic (i.e.\ the thin-shell limit; \cite{Sari-Piran-95,2003ApJ...595..950Z}), $t_\gamma$ is the deceleration time $t_{\rm dec}$. In the thin-shell case,
to obtain the observed temporal onset at $T_{\rm 0}$ + $\sim$10 s, $A_\star$ = 0.2 is needed.
If the reverse shock is relativistic (thick-shell limit), one has $t_{\rm dec} \sim t_{\rm GRB} > t_{\gamma}$ ($t_{\rm GRB}$ is the burst duration), which approximately gives $A_\star >$ 0.2.
Having constrained the location of the synchrotron break energies and the likely environment into which the blast wave is propagating,
we can invert the equations governing the energies of these breaks to estimate the physical properties of the forward shock. These
include the microphysical parameters describing the partition of energy within the shock, the total energy of the shock $E_{\rm K}$ (= $E_{\rm iso}$/$\eta$), and the
circumstellar density normalization $A_{\star}$. The equations governing
the location of $\nu_{\rm m}$, $\nu_{\rm c}$, and the flux at which the cooling break occurs $F_\nu(\nu_{\rm c})$ in the case of only synchrotron radiation can be expressed as \citep{2002ApJ...568..820G}:
\begin{equation}
\nu_{\rm c} = 9.1\times10^{11}\, \epsilon_{\rm B}^{-3/2} \left( \frac{A_{\star}}{0.2}\right)^{-2} \left( \frac{t}{90 \:{\rm s}}\right)^{1/2} \left(\frac{E_{\rm iso}}{10^{53.5} \:{\rm ergs}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{\eta}{0.2 }\right)^{-1/2}~{\rm Hz}
\label{eq:nu_c}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
F_\nu(\nu_{\rm c}) = 4.2\times10^{8} \, \epsilon_{\rm e}^{p-1} \epsilon_{\rm B}^{p-1/2} \left( \frac{A_{\star}}{0.2}\right)^{p}\left( \frac{t}{90 \:{\rm s}}\right)^{1/2-p} \left(\frac{E_{\rm iso}}{10^{53.5} \:{\rm ergs}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{\eta}{0.2 }\right)^{-1/2} ~{\rm mJy}
\label{eq:f_nu_c}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nu_{\rm m} = 2.1\times10^{19} \, \epsilon_{\rm e}^{2} \epsilon_{\rm B}^{1/2} \left( \frac{t}{90 \:{\rm s}}\right)^{-3/2} \left(\frac{E_{\rm iso}}{10^{53.5} \:{\rm ergs}}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{\eta}{0.2 }\right)^{-1/2} ~{\rm Hz}
\label{eq:nu_m}
\end{equation}\textbf{
}
Combining the observed constraints of $\nu_{\rm c} \sim 4$ keV or $9.7 \times 10^{17}$ Hz and $F_\nu(\nu_{\rm c}) \sim 5~{\rm mJy}$ at $T_{\rm 0}$ + 90 s, and the estimated $A_{\star}= 0.2$ assuming the thin-shell case, we estimate the fraction of energy in the magnetic fields $\epsilon_B$ to be 9.9$\times$10$^{-5}$, the fraction of energy in the accelerated electrons $\epsilon_e$ to be 4.0$\times$10$^{-2}$, and $\nu_{\rm m}$ to be $\sim 4 \times 10^{14}$ Hz ($\sim$ 2 eV), which approximately corresponds to the white band of the UVOT. Note that these estimates are derived without taking into account the effect of SSC emission. These parameters allow us to calculate the expected evolution of the synchrotron cooling frequency with time, which is shown in Figure \ref{time_vs_nuc}, roughly matching the temporal evolution of the observed spectral break in the broadband data. In the thick-shell case with $A_\star >$ 0.2, if we use fiducial values as $A_\star$ = 1--10, we obtain $\epsilon_{\rm e}$ = (4.2--4.5)$\times$10$^{-2}$, $\epsilon_{\rm B}$ = (120--5) $\times$10$^{-7}$, and $\nu_{\rm m}$ = (1.3--0.3) $\times 10^{14}$ Hz, respectively.
\subsection{Maximum synchrotron energy}\label{subsec:maximum_sync_energy}
The analysis of our broadband data has shown that the observed spectral and temporal characteristics of the early afterglow emission from GRB 190114C are in good agreement with predictions from synchrotron radiation due to electrons accelerated in an external shock.
The existence of late-time high-energy photons detected by the LAT, though, poses a direct challenge to this interpretation. The electrons in this scenario are accelerated via the Fermi process, in which they gain energy as they traverse from one side of the shock front to the other. The maximum photon energy that can be produced by such electrons is set by equating the electron energy loss timescale due to synchrotron radiation to the Larmor timescale for an electron to execute a single gyration (i.e., the shortest route an electron can take across the shock front), and is considered to be roughly $\nu_{\rm max,rest}$ = 2$^{3/2}$ 27$m_{\rm e} c^2$/(16$\pi h \alpha_{\rm f}$) $\sim$ 100 MeV in the comoving frame where $h$ and $\alpha_{\rm f}$ are the Planck and the fine-structure constants, respectively, independent of the magnetic field strength \citep{Ackermann2014}. In the observer frame, this limit is boosted by the bulk Lorentz factor and becomes $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}\nu_{\rm max,rest}/(1+z)$.
We estimated the bulk Lorentz factor at the transition from the coasting to deceleration phases in the previous section. After this transition, the outflow begins to transfer its internal energy to the circumstellar medium and $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ of the forward shock decreases with distance from the central engine as $\Gamma_{\rm bulk} \propto R^{-(3-k)/2}$ \citep{1997ApJ...489L..37S}. As a result, the maximum synchrotron energy decreases with time as the external shock expands. Using the formalism described in the supplementary material in \cite{Ackermann2014}, we calculate the evolution of $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}(t)$ and use it to estimate the evolution of the maximum synchrotron energy $\nu_{\rm max}(t)$. Figure \ref{maximum_syn_photon} shows the expected maximum synchrotron energy as a function of time along with the observed LAT photons above 1 GeV. Several high-energy photons exceed the expected maximum synchrotron energy at the time of their arrival, including an 18.9 GeV photon arriving approximately 8900 s after $T_{\rm 0}$, almost an order of magnitude higher in energy than our estimate for $\nu_{\rm max}$ at this time. Given the arrival direction of this photon, we estimate that its association probability with GRB~190114C to be approximately 99.8\%, providing one of the most stringent violations of $\nu_{\rm max}$ observed by the LAT. It is clear that these high-energy detections either necessitate an additional emission mechanism at higher energies, or a revision of the fundamental assumptions used to calculate $\nu_{\rm max}$.
The SSC and IC mechanisms could both produce significant emission above $\nu_{\rm max}$. Synchrotron emission from shock-accelerated electrons should be accompanied by SSC emission, in which the newly created gamma rays gain energy by scattering off energetic electrons before they escape the emitting region. The result is a spectral component that mirrors the primary synchrotron spectrum, but one that is boosted in energy. In particular, as discussed in Section~\ref{subsec:forward_shock}, for both thin- and thick-shell cases, the observed afterglow parameters indicate a Compton $Y$-parameter of $\epsilon_{\rm e}$/$\epsilon_{\rm B}$ $\sim$ $Y$ $\gg$ 1, in which contributions from the effect of inverse Compton scattering \citep{2000ApJ...543...66P, Sari2001} would be expected. For a bulk Lorentz factor $>$ 100, the peak of the SSC component is expected to be at TeV energies, although as the blast wave decelerates, this peak is expected to evolve into the LAT energy range. The emergence of such a component should result in a hardening of the LAT spectrum and/or be apparent as deviations in the observed light curve, neither of which has ever been observed in any LAT-detected GRB during their smoothly decaying extended emission.
One possible solution would require an SSC component to remain sub-dominant to the forward shock synchrotron emission throughout the evolution of the LAT observed emission. Such a scenario could occur when the local energy density of the synchrotron photons is lower than the energy density of the local magnetic field (e.g., \ $Y$ $<$ 1). Furthermore a detailed numerical simulation of the SSC emission considering the evolution of the external-shock emission by \citet{2017ApJ...844...92F} showed that the expected SSC emission could remain weaker than the primary synchrotron emission even if the Compton $Y$-parameter were large. This effect could prevent a significant contribution to the LAT light curve and spectra, while still producing high-energy photons that exceed the maximum synchrotron limit.
Alternatively, a strong Klein-Nishina (KN) effect could also significantly constrain SSC emission at high energies. This occurs when the energy of the seed photon in the rest-frame of the electrons exceeds $m_{\rm e}c^2$, i.e
$\gamma_{\rm e} E^\prime_{\rm seed} > m_{\rm e}c^2$, where $\gamma_{\rm e}$ and $E^\prime_{\rm seed}$ are the electron Lorentz factor and the energy of the seed photon in the comoving frame, respectively,
beyond which SSC emission becomes increasingly inefficient. This results in the suppression of high-energy photons, yielding a cutoff in the SSC spectrum. We can estimate the energy at which this cutoff should manifest by reconsidering the forward shock parameter discussed in Section~\ref{subsec:forward_shock} and taking into account SSC and KN effects. Following \citet{2002ApJ...568..820G}, both $\nu_{\rm c}$ from Eq. \ref{eq:nu_c} and $F_\nu(\nu_{\rm c}$) from Eq. \ref{eq:f_nu_c} are multiplied by the factors of (1+$Y$)$^{-2}$ and (1+$Y$)$^{p-1}$. If we consider a case with no KN effect, we find that there are no self-consistent solutions for $\epsilon_{\rm e}$ and $\epsilon_{\rm B}$\footnote{When including the effects of SSC, one finds self-consistent solutions for $\epsilon_{\rm e}$ and $\epsilon_{\rm B}$ only when adopting $A_\star$ $\sim$ 10$^{-3}$: $\epsilon_{\rm e}$ = 1.9$\times$10$^{-1}$, $\epsilon_{\rm B}$ = 4.5$\times$10$^{-3}$, $Y$ = 4.9 for $A_\star$ = 1.3$\times$10$^{-3}$. However, such a very low $A_{\star}$ is not likely for this GRB as discussed in Section~\ref{subsec:forward_shock}. }, emphasizing the need to account for the KN effect when considering the effect of SSC emission. If we assume that the observed $\nu_{\rm c}$ is in the KN regime (e.g.,\ the observed synchrotron spectrum is unaffected by significant IC losses), then $Y \ll$ 1. Such a scenario would require that the Lorentz factor above which electrons are cooled efficiently, $\gamma_c$, to already be above the Lorentz factor $\hat{\gamma_{\rm c}}$ at which photons cannot be efficiently up-scattered by electrons because they are above the KN limit, where $\hat{\gamma_{\rm c}}$ is given by $m_{\rm e}c^2 \Gamma_{\rm bulk} / h\nu_{\rm syn}(\gamma_{\rm c})$ \citep{2009ApJ...703..675N}. We estimate $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ to be $\sim$100 at $T_{\rm 0}+90$ s and $h\nu_{\rm syn}(\gamma_{\rm c})$ to be $\sim$4 keV, which yields $\gamma_{\rm c} > 10^4$. When $\gamma_{\rm m}$ $<$ $\gamma_{\rm c}$ and $\hat{\gamma_{\rm c}} < \gamma_{\rm c}$, high-energy SSC photons are not expected to be strongly damped above energies of $>\Gamma_{\rm bulk}\gamma_{\rm c}m_{\rm e}c^2 \sim 0.5$ TeV. Therefore the LAT-detected photons are not expected to be significantly affected by KN suppression, although the VHE spectrum observed by MAGIC could exhibit curvature due to this effect.
Revisions to fundamental assumptions about collisionless shock physics have also been put forth to explain apparent violations of the maximum synchrotron energy. \cite{2012MNRAS.427L..40K} showed that the upper limit for synchrotron emission could be raised substantially by relaxing the assumption of a uniform magnetic field in the emitting region. The authors argue that a magnetic field that decays ahead of the shock front could raise $\nu_{\rm max}$ substantially, but only if the magnetic field gradient varied on a length scale smaller than the distance traveled by the most energetic electrons. This solution could result in a value of $\nu_{\rm max}$ that is orders of magnitude above the canonical estimate and help explain many of the LAT-detected bursts with late-time high-energy photons.
Finally, synchrotron emission above our estimated $\nu_{\rm max}$ could still be possible through contributions from a high-energy hadronic component \citep{Razzaque2010}, or if the electrons were accelerated through a process other than shock acceleration, such as magnetic reconnection, which could act on timescales faster than the Fermi process \citep{1994MNRAS.270..480T, 2001A&A...369..694S, 2003ApJ...597..998L, 2007A&A...469....1G, 2010ApJ...725L.234L, 2015SSRv..191..545K}. The latter scenario can occur in an outflow with a random magnetic field, for example through relativistic turbulence, such that magnetic field dissipation and jet acceleration can occur on a time scale much shorter than the diffusion time \citep{2003ApJ...597..998L, 2009MNRAS.395..472K, 2009ApJ...695L..10L,Granot2016}.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{Maximu_Syn_Photon.pdf}
\caption{Photon energy versus time. Photons with energies $>$ 1 GeV and $>$90\% probability of association with GRB190114C are indicated with black dots. Dashed line represents the maximum synchrotron limit for the adiabatic jet with the wind case. Here we use the estimated bulk Lorentz factor $\Gamma_{\rm bulk}$ = 213, $E_{\rm iso}$ = 3.5 $\times$ 10$^{53}$ erg and the efficiency of total shock energy in converting into the gamma-ray emission $\eta$ = 0.2. The deceleration time for the wind case is calculated with $A_{\star}$ = 0.2. The red shaded region represents a non-observable period for GRB 190114C due to Earth occultation.}
\label{maximum_syn_photon}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec:conclusions}
The joint observations of GRB 190114C by \emph{Fermi}\xspace and \emph{Swift}\xspace provide a rich data set with which to examine the complex relationship between prompt and afterglow-dominated emission often observed in LAT-detected GRBs. GRB 190114C is among the most luminous GRBs detected by GBM and LAT below $z < 1$, and exceeded only by GRB~130427A in isotropic-equivalent energy above 100 MeV. Our analysis of the prompt emission shows evidence for both thermal (BB) and non-thermal (CPL or Band) spectral components commonly seen in GRB spectra, in addition to the emergence of an additional PL component extending to high energies that explains the delayed onset of the LAT-detected emission. This additional PL component shows strong evidence for spectral attenuation above 40 MeV in the first few seconds of the burst, before transitioning to a harder spectrum that is consistent with the afterglow emission observed by the XRT and BAT at later times. We attribute the spectral attenuation of this component to opacity to electron-positron pair production and its evolution to the expansion of the emitting region. We find that the presence of this extra PL component is also evident as a low-energy excess in the GBM data throughout its evolution, disfavoring SSC or external IC emission from the CPL or Band components as the origin of the extra PL component.
The long-lived afterglow component is clearly identifiable in the GBM light curve as a slowly fading emission component over which the rest of the prompt emission is superimposed. This allows us to constrain the transitions from internal shock to external shock-dominated emission in both the GBM and the LAT. The subsequent broadband \emph{Fermi}\xspace and \emph{Swift}\xspace data allow us to model the temporal and spectral evolution of the afterglow emission, which is in good agreement with predictions from synchrotron emission due to a forward shock propagating into a wind-like circumstellar environment. We use the onset of the afterglow component to constrain the deceleration radius and initial Lorentz factor of the forward shock in order to estimate the maximum photon energy attainable through the synchrotron process for shock-accelerated electrons. We find that even in the LAT energy range, there exist high-energy photons that are in tension with the theoretical maximum photon energy that can be achieved through shock-accelerated synchrotron emission. The detection of VHE emission above 300 GeV by MAGIC concurrent with our observations further compounds this issue and challenges our understanding of the origin of the highest energy photons detected from GRBs. The SSC and IC mechanisms could both produce significant emission above $\nu_{\rm max}$, although as was the case with GRB~130427A, a single power law from X-ray to the LAT energy range is capable of adequately fitting the broadband data, and no significant deviations from a simple power-law decay are evident in the late-time LAT light curve. We conclude that the detection of high-energy photons from GRB~190114C necessitates either an additional emission mechanism in the LAT energy range that is difficult to separate from the synchrotron component, or revisions to the fundamental assumptions used in estimating the maximum photon energy attainable through the synchrotron process. The detection of VHE emission from GRBs will be crucial for distinguishing between these two possibilities.
\acknowledgments
The \textit{Fermi} LAT Collaboration acknowledges generous ongoing support from a number of agencies and institutes that have supported both the development and the operation of the LAT as well as scientific data analysis. These include the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Department of Energy in the United States, the Commissariat \`a l'Energie Atomique and the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique / Institut National de Physique Nucl¥'eaire et de Physique des Particules in France, the Agenzia Spaziale Italiana and the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare in Italy, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK) and Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) in Japan, and the K.~A.~Wallenberg Foundation, the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish National Space Board in Sweden. Additional support for science analysis during the operations phase is gratefully acknowledged from the Istituto Nazionale di Astrofisica in Italy and the Centre National d'\'Etudes Spatiales in France.
The USRA co-authors gratefully acknowledge NASA funding through contract NNM13AA43C. The UAH co-authors gratefully acknowledge NASA funding from co-operative agreement NNM11AA01A and that this work was made possible in part by a grant of high performance computing resources and technical support from the Alabama Supercomputer Authority. E. B. is supported by an appointment to the NASA Postdoctoral Program at the Goddard Space Flight Center, and C. M. is supported by an appointment to the NASA Postdoctoral Program at the Marshall Space Flight Center, administered by Universities Space Research Association under contract with NASA. C. M. H. and C. A. W.-H. gratefully acknowledge NASA funding through the Fermi GBM project. Support for the German contribution to GBM was provided by the Bundesministerium f¨ur Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) via the Deutsches Zentrum f¨ur Luft und Raumfahrt (DLR) under contract number 50 QV 0301.
This work was performed in part under DOE Contract DE-AC02-76SF00515 and support by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP17H06362, the JSPS Leading Initiative for Excellent Young Researchers program and Sakigake 2018 Project of Kanazawa University (M.A.).
This work made use of data supplied by the UK Swift Science Data Centre at the University of Leicester.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
In the \lcdm cosmological model, tiny density fluctuations in the early Universe evolved into today's cosmic web of overdense dark matter halos, filaments, and sheets. Imprinted on this large-scale structure is information about the underlying cosmological model, provided one knows how and where to look. Measurements that describe the large scale distribution of matter in the Universe carry information about the cosmological model that drove its formation. These measurements include descriptions of the spatial distribution and clustering of galaxies \citep[e.g.,][]{1990ApJS...72..433H, 1996ApJ...470..172S, 2001MNRAS.327.1297P, 2004ApJ...606..702T}, the abundance of massive galaxy clusters \citep[e.g.,][]{2009ApJ...692.1060V, 2015MNRAS.446.2205M,2016ApJ...832...95D}, the weak gravitational lensing of galaxies by intervening large-scale structure \citep[e.g.,][]{2000MNRAS.318..625B, 2000astro.ph..3338K, 2000Natur.405..143W, 2000A&A...358...30V, 2017arXiv170801530D, 2018arXiv181206076H, 2019PASJ...71...43H}, and the length scale of baryon acoustic oscillations \citep[e.g.,][]{2005ApJ...633..560E, 2005MNRAS.362..505C, 2017MNRAS.470.2617A}. \new{A hallmark difference between these and probes of the earlier Universe is non-Gaussianity: though the early Universe is well-described by a Gaussian random field \citep[e.g.,][]{2014A&A...571A..16P, 2014A&A...571A..24P}, gravitational collapse drives the formation of non-Gaussian correlations in the late-time matter distribution.} See \cite{2013PhR...530...87W} for a review of these and other observational cosmological probes.
Galaxies live in dark matter halos and are tracers, albeit biased ones, of large-scale structure. Large spectroscopic surveys such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey \citep[SDSS,][]{2000AJ....120.1579Y} have produced maps of the 3D distribution of galaxies in the Universe, and upcoming spectroscopic surveys such as the
Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument \citep[DESI,][]{2016arXiv161100036D}, Subaru Prime Focus Spectrograph \citep[PFS,][]{2014PASJ...66R...1T}, 4-metre Multi-Object Spectroscopic Telescope \citep[4MOST,][]{2014SPIE.9147E..0MD}, and \textit{Euclid} \citep{2013LRR....16....6A} will produce exquisitely detailed maps of the sky. The galaxy power spectrum provides one handle on summarizing and interpreting these 3D galaxy maps and can be used to put constraints on the parameters that describe a \lcdm cosmology \citep[e.g.,][]{2004ApJ...606..702T}, but care must be taken when disentangling the effects of cosmology and galaxy bias \citep[e.g.,][]{2013MNRAS.430..725V, 2013MNRAS.430..747M, 2013MNRAS.430..767C}.
Though it is an abundantly useful compression of the information contained in the distribution of galaxies, the power spectrum is not a \textit{complete} accounting of this information because the late-time galaxy distribution is not a Gaussian random field. The deviations from Gaussian correlations are enormous at small length scales ($\lesssim$ a few Mpc), where dark matter halos have collapsed and virialized, but remain substantial at intermediate scales due to the cosmic web of filaments, walls, and voids. Additional statistics such as the squeezed 3-point correlation function \citep{2018MNRAS.478.2019Y}, redshift space power spectrum \citep{2019arXiv190708515K}, counts-in-cylinders \citep{2019arXiv190309656W}, and the minimum spanning tree \citep{2019arXiv190700989N} have been shown to be rich in complementary cosmological information\new{ by capturing non-Gaussian details of the galaxy distribution that are not described by the power spectrum alone.}
These higher-order statistical descriptions of how galaxies populate 3D space typically need to be calibrated on cosmological simulations. Cosmological hydrodynamical simulations that trace the formation of galaxies are computationally expensive, so a more tractable approach is to use less expensive $N$-body simulations that have been populated with galaxies. The can be accomplished through a technique that matches galaxies to the simulated structure of dark matter, for example, through a halo occupation distribution \citep[HOD, e.g.,][]{2000MNRAS.318.1144P, 2001ApJ...546...20S, 2002ApJ...575..587B, 2005ApJ...633..791Z}.
Under its simplest assumptions, an HOD uses halo mass as the sole property that determines whether a halo will host a particular type of galaxy. The breakdown of this assumption is known as galaxy assembly bias, which asserts that mass alone is insufficient and that additional environmental and assembly factors come into play. These factors include formation time \citep{2005MNRAS.363L..66G} and halo concentration \citep{2006ApJ...652...71W}. Modern HOD implementations often provide flexibility to account for assembly bias \citep[e.g.,][]{2016MNRAS.460.2552H, 2018ascl.soft12011Y, 2019arXiv190811448B}.
Machine learning (ML) offers a number of methods that can find and extract information from complex spatial patterns imprinted on the 3D distribution of galaxies. ML, therefore, is an enticing approach for inferring cosmological models in spite of myriad complicating effects. One promising class of tools for this task are Convolutional Neural Networks \citep[CNNs, e.g.~][]{fukushima1982neocognitron, lecun1999object, NIPS2012_4824, DBLP:journals/corr/SimonyanZ14a}, which are often used in image recognition tasks. CNNs employ many hidden layers to extract image features such as edges, shapes, and textures. Typically, CNNs pair layers of convolution and pooling to extract meaningful features from the input images, followed by deep fully connected layers to output an image class or numerical label. Because these deep networks learn the filters necessary to extract meaningful information from the input images, they require very little image preprocessing. See \cite{2014arXiv1404.7828S} for a review of deep neural networks.
CNNs are traditionally applied to 2D images, which may be monochromatic or represented in several color bands. 2D CNNs can extract information from non-gaussianities in simulated convergence maps, remarkably improving cosmological constraints over a more standard statistical approach \citep[e.g.,][]{2017arXiv170705167S, 2018PhRvD..97j3515G, 2019arXiv190203663R, 2019NatAs...3...93R}, and recent work has extended this to put cosmological constraints on observations using CNNs \citep{2019arXiv190603156F}.
However, the application of CNNs is not limited to flat Euclidean images \citep[e.g.][]{2019A&C....27..130P}, nor is it limited to two dimensions. The algorithm can be extended to three dimensions, where the third dimension may be, for example, temporal \citep[e.g., video input, as in][]{ji20133d} or spatial \citep[e.g., a data cube, as in][]{DBLP:journals/corr/KamnitsasLNSKMR16}. \cite{2017arXiv171102033R} employed the first cosmological application of a 3D CNN, showing that the tool can infer the underlying cosmological parameters from a simulated 3D dark matter distribution.
We present an application of 3D CNNs to learn cosmological parameters from simulated galaxy maps.
\new{Our hybrid deep learning architecture learns directly from the calculated 2D power spectrum and simultaneously harnesses non-Gaussianities by also learning directly from the raw 3D distribution of galaxies.} In Section \ref{sec:mocks}, we describe our mock observations: the suite of cosmological simulations (\ref{sec:abacus}), the range of HODs applied to these simulations (\ref{sec:hod}), the training and validation mock observations (\ref{sec:trainset}), and the carefully constructed and independent test mock observations at the \planck cosmology (\ref{sec:test}). We describe our trio of deep learning architectures, including the hybrid method, in Section \ref{sec:cnn}. We present our results in Section \ref{sec:results} and a discussion and conclusions in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}. Appendix \ref{sec:lifecycle} is more pedagogical in nature; it describes how the range of model predictions evolves with training and suggests new tests for assessing a model's fit.
\clearpage
\section{Methods: Mock Observations}
\label{sec:mocks}
We use the \abacus suite of simulations\footnote{\url{https://lgarrison.github.io/AbacusCosmos/}} \citep{2018ApJS..236...43G, 2019MNRAS.485.3370G} to create three data sets: a training set, a validation set, and a testing set. The training set is used to fit the machine learning model; it spans a range of CDM cosmologies and is populated with galaxies in a way to mimic a variety of galaxy formation models. The validation set is used to assess how well the machine learning model has fit; it also spans a range of cosmological parameters and galaxy formation models. The testing set is independent of both the training and validation sets; it is at the \planck fiducial cosmology \citep{2015arXiv150201589P}, built from simulations with initial conditions not used in the training or validation data sets, and populated with galaxies using HODs not used in the training or testing data sets. The creation of the three data sets are described in the following subsections.
\subsection{\abacus Simulations}
\label{sec:abacus}
The \abacus simulations are a suite of publicly available $N$-body simulations. The suite includes the \abacus \texttt{1100box} simulations, a sample of large-volume $N$-body simulations at a variety of cosmologies, as well as the \texttt{1100box} \planck simulations, a sample of simulations with cosmological parameters consistent with the \planck fiducial cosmology.
The \abacus \texttt{1100box} simulations are used to create the training and validation sets. This suite of simulations comprises 40 simulations at a variety of cosmologies that differ for six cosmological parameters: $\Omega_{CDM}\,h^2$, $\Omega_b\,h^2$, \sig, \Ho, $w_0$, and $n_s$. The cosmologies for this suite of simulations were selected by a Latin hypercube algorithm, and are centered on the \planck fiducial cosmology \citep{2015arXiv150201589P}. Each simulation has side length $1100\Mpch$ and particle mass $4\times10^{10}\Msolarh$. The suite of 40 simulations are phase-matched.
While the \abacus \texttt{1100box} simulations are used to create the training and validation sets, the \abacus \planck simulations are used to create the testing set. These 20 simulations have cosmological parameters consistent with \cite{2015arXiv150201589P}: $\Omega_b \, h^2=0.02222$, $\Omega_m\,h^2=0.14212$, $w_0=-1$, $n_s=0.9652$, $\sigma_8=0.830$, $H_0=67.26$, $N_\mathrm{eff}=3.04$. They have identical side length ($1100\Mpch$) and particle mass ($4\times10^{10}\Msolarh$) to the \texttt{1100box} suite of simulations, but each uses unique initial conditions and none are phase-matched to the \texttt{1100box} simulations. See \cite{2018ApJS..236...43G} for more details about the \abacus suite of simulations.
\subsection{Halo Occupation Distribution}
\label{sec:hod}
A halo occupation distribution (HOD) is a way to populate dark matter halos with galaxies. In their most basic form, HODs are probabilisitic models that assume that halo mass is the sole halo property governing the halo-galaxy connection \citep{2002ApJ...575..587B}. A standard HOD models the probability of a halo hosting a central galaxy, $\overline{n}_\mathrm{central}$, and the mean number of satellites, $\overline{n}_\mathrm{satellite}$, as a function of a single halo property, the mass $M$. The standard HOD by \cite{2007ApJ...659....1Z} gives the mean number of central and satellite galaxies as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\overline{n}_\mathrm{central} & = \frac{1}{2} \mathrm{erfc}\left[ \frac{\ln(M_\mathrm{cut}/M)}{\sqrt{2}\sigma} \right]\\[3ex]
\overline{n}_\mathrm{satellite} & = \left[ \frac{M-\kappa M_\mathrm{cut}}{M_1} \right] ^\alpha \overline{n}_\mathrm{central},
\end{split}
\label{eq:HOD}
\end{equation}
where $M_\mathrm{cut}$ sets the halo mass scale for central galaxies, $\sigma$ sets the width of the error function of $\overline{n}_\mathrm{central}$, $M_1$ sets the mass scale for satellite galaxies, $\alpha$ sets the slope of the power law, and $\kappa M_\mathrm{cut}$ sets the limit below which a halo cannot host a satellite galaxy. $M$ denotes the halo mass, and we use the virial mass definition $M_{vir}$. The actual number of central galaxies in a halo follows the Bernoulli distribution with the mean set to $\overline{n}_\mathrm{central}$, whereas the number of satellite galaxies follows the Poisson distributions with the mean set to $\overline{n}_\mathrm{satellite}$.
While this standard HOD populates halos probabilistically according to halo mass, recent variations of the HOD incorporate more flexibility in modeling. These flexible HODs allow additional halo properties \textemdash{} beyond the halo mass \textemdash{} to inform galaxy occupation \citep[e.g.,][]{2016MNRAS.460.2552H, 2018ascl.soft12011Y}.
The HOD implemented here is one such flexible model; it uses the publicly available \code{GRAND-HOD} package\footnote{\url{https://github.com/SandyYuan/GRAND-HOD}}. This HOD implementation introduces a series of extensions to the standard HOD, including flexibility in the distribution of satellite galaxies within the halo, velocity distribution of the galaxies, and galaxy assembly bias. To add this flexibility, we invoke two extensions: the satellite distribution parameter, $s$, and the galaxy assembly bias parameter, $A$. The satellite distribution parameter allows for a flexible radial distribution of satellite galaxies within a dark matter halo, and the galaxy assembly bias parameter allows for a secondary HOD dependence on halo concentration. For complete information about \code{GRAND-HOD} and its HOD extensions, see \cite{2018MNRAS.478.2019Y}.
Fifteen sets of HOD model parameters are generated for each \abacus simulation box, and 31 are generated for each \planck box. For each simulation box, a baseline HOD model is selected as a function of cosmology; these baseline models vary only in $M_\mathrm{cut}$ and $M_1$, and baseline values of all the other HOD parameters remain the same. This ensures that the combined effect of perturbing the cosmology and HOD is mild. This is done because, despite the fact that the cosmological parameters of each simulation are only perturbed by a few percent, coupling these cosmological changes with perturbations to the HOD can lead to drastic changes to the mock catalogs and the clustering statistics. To minimize these effects, instead of populating galaxies according to HOD parameters in an ellipse aligned with the default parameter basis, we populate according to parameter in an ellipse defined over a custom parameter basis.
\begin{figure*}[]
\begin{tabular}{c c c}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{figures/imgslice_train_22.png} & \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{figures/imgslice_train_10.png} & \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{figures/imgslice_train_17.png}\\[-3ex]
$\sig=0.92$, $\om= 0.28$ & $\sig=0.83 $, $\om= 0.32$ & $\sig=0.71 $, $\om= 0.34$ \\[5ex]
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{figures/imgslice_train_22_sig=1_smoothed.png} & \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{figures/imgslice_train_10_sig=1_smoothed.png} & \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{figures/imgslice_train_17_sig=1_smoothed.png}\\[-3ex]
$\sig=0.92$, $\om= 0.28$ & $\sig=0.83 $, $\om= 0.32$ & $\sig=0.71 $, $\om= 0.34$ \\[5ex]
\end{tabular}
\caption[]{Top: A sample of train input images. Shown is a two-dimensional projection of the three-dimensional image (or ``slab''). The train, validate, and test samples include a number of choices designed to reduce the likelihood of giving the machine learning model an unfair advantage: we employ a zero-point shift to minimize learning from images with correlated structure, we use random HODs and seeds to allow for uncertainties in galaxy formation physics, we use axial flips of the slabs to augment the data, and we use unique portions of the simulation and unique HODs in the validation set to provide a way to test that the model does not rely on the particulars of the structure or HOD. To highlight the differences in the images that are strictly due to cosmology and HOD, the zero-point shift has been omitted for these images. Bottom: The same images as above, smoothed with a Gaussian filter ($\sigma=1\,\mathrm{pixel}$) to emphasize the differences between images that are due to cosmological models.}
\label{fig:slabs}
\end{figure*}
For the \planck cosmology, the HOD parameters are chosen in reference to the parameter ranges in \cite{2015ApJ...810...35K}: $\log_{10}(M_\mathrm{cut}/\Msolarh)=13.35$, $\log_{10}(M_1/\Msolarh)=13.8$, $\sigma=0.85$, $\alpha=1$, $\kappa=1$, $s=0$, and $A=0$. However, we modify two baseline HOD parameter values \textemdash{} $M_\mathrm{cut}$ and $M_1$ \textemdash{} for the non-\planck simulations. We set the baseline value of $M_\mathrm{cut}$ in each cosmology box such that the projected 2-point correlation function $w_p(5-10\rm{Mpc})$ of all the halos with $M > M_{\mathrm{cut}}$ is equal to the $w_p(5-10\rm{Mpc})$ of the centrals in the baseline HOD at Planck cosmology, where $w_p(5-10\rm{Mpc})$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
w_p(5-10\textrm{Mpc}) = \int_{5\textrm{Mpc}}^{10\textrm{Mpc}} w_p d (r_\perp).
\end{equation}
This effectively holds the baseline $w_p$ of the centrals approximately constant across all the cosmology boxes. Then $M_1$ is selected such that the baseline satellite-central fraction in each cosmology box is the same as that of the baseline HOD in Planck cosmology.
For each \texttt{1100box}, seven additional pairs of model parameters uniformly sample the parameter space within $5\%$ of the baseline HOD (15 additional pairs for each \planck box). For HOD parameters $s$ and $A$, whose baseline parameters are 0, we draw uniform samples between $-0.05$ and $0.05$. The two HODs of each pair are symmetrically offset across the baseline HOD. Excluding the baseline HOD, fourteen unique HODs are generated for \textit{each} \abacus \texttt{1100box} simulation, and 30 unique HODs are generated for each \planck simulation. Four random seeds are used to populate the simulations with realizations of galaxies according to the HOD; this results in four unique galaxy catalogs for each HOD. The details of how these are used are described in the next section. For complete information about the HOD implementation, see \cite{2019arXiv190705909Y}.
\subsection{Training \& Validation Sets}
\label{sec:trainset}
The training sample of mock observations (for training the deep learning models) and validation sample of mock observations (for assessing when the models have sufficiently fit) are created from the \abacus suite of \texttt{1100box} simulations.
\abacus includes 40 simulated cosmologies, and for each of these, we select a random distance along the $x$ and $y$ axes to become the new 0-point of the box ($z=0$, along the line of sight direction, which includes redshift space distortion, remains unchanged). Because the \texttt{1100box} simulations all have the same initial conditions, this random reshuffling minimizes the chances of our model learning about correlated structure across simulations.\footnote{Simulations with matched initial conditions will produce portions of the cosmic web with, for example, a unique or unusual fingerprint of filamentary structure. The evolutionary stage of a particular structure is highly dependent on the simulation's \sig and other cosmological parameters. Because CNNs are particularly adept at pattern finding, care must be taken to prevent a CNN from learning to identify some unique structure \textemdash{} especially one which is particular to a suite of simulations and the initial conditions of those simulations \textemdash{} and infer cosmological parameters from its details. This is not an approach that will generalize to real observations, and can give overly optimistic results.} The mock observations of the training set are built from the portion of the box with $220\Mpch \leq z < 1100\Mpch$, while the validation set is built from the structure in the range $0\Mpch \leq z < 220 \Mpch$. By completely excluding this portion of the simulation from the training set, we can test and ensure that the machine learning model does not rely on its ability to identify or memorize large-scale structure correlations stemming from the matched initial conditions.
The box is divided into 20 non-overlapping slabs, which are $550\Mpch$ in the $x$ and $y$ directions and $220\Mpch$ along the line of sight $z$ direction. Halo catalogs generated by the \code{ROCKSTAR} halo finder \citep{2012ascl.soft10008B} become the basis for four mock observations per slab.
For each slab, we select and apply one HOD from the 15 that are available. Eleven of the HODs are reused as necessary in the 16 training slabs. The remaining four HODs are reserved exclusively for the four validation slabs. By setting aside four HODs for the validation set, the validation set is populated with galaxies in a way that is unique from the observations used for training, and we can ensure that the ML model results are not dependent on memorization or previous knowledge of the details of the HOD.
For each of the four random HOD seeds, the slabs are populated with galaxies. These training slabs vary in the number of galaxies, ranging from $\sim17000$ to $\sim46000$ galaxies per slab,
with the number of galaxies correlating weakly with the underlying cosmology. To prevent the CNN from learning correlations between cosmological parameters and the number of galaxies in the mock observation, we randomly subselect the galaxy population so that all observations have $15000$ galaxies.
The selected galaxies are binned into a $275\times275\times55$, three-dimensional, single-color image. Galaxies are assigned to voxels using a triangular shaped cloud (TSC) and $2 \times 2 \times 5\Mpch$ voxels. Projected galaxy densities for three sample cosmologies are shown in Figure \ref{fig:slabs}.
Because the machine learning model described in Section \ref{sec:cnn} is not invariant under mirroring of images, we augment our data by applying an axial flip along the $x$- and/or $y$-directions to three of the four slabs. For each of these three mirror images, we use a new random seed for the HOD and uniquely subselect to 15000 galaxies.
The power spectrum of the galaxy density field is computed for each slab. To perform this calculation, we pad the galaxy density field with zeros to double the image size in each direction to account for the lost periodic boundary conditions, Fourier transform the resulting $550\times550\times110$ image, and convert the result to a power spectrum in physical units. This 3-dimensional power spectrum is next de-convolved to account for the TSC-aliased window function \citep[as in, e.g.,][]{2010PhDT.........4J}, and summarized as a 1-dimensional power spectrum by averaging the power in binned spherical annuli. Due to the anisotropic nature of the slab and voxel dimensions, the most conservative choices for minimum and maximum $k$ values are selected. These are set by the shortest box dimension ($220\Mpch$) and the Nyquist frequency of the largest pixel dimension ($5\Mpch$), respectively. Power spectra for a sample of galaxy catalogs are shown in Figure \ref{fig:ps}.
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/Fig2_powerspect.pdf}\\
\end{centering}
\caption[]{Mean galaxy power spectra, $P(k)$, for 4 of the 40 training cosmologies (yellow, orange, purple, and blue) as well as for the \planck test cosmology (pink). Points indicate the mean power, while error bars show the middle 68\% of the mock observations. The ``Vector Features'' input, shown in Figure \ref{fig:architecture}, is a single realization of this power spectrum; for each mock observation, the power spectrum is calculated directly from a single 3D mock galaxy observation.}
\label{fig:ps}
\end{figure}
To recap, the method for building mock observations from each of the simulations is as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep-0.3em
\item A random $x$ and $y$ value is selected to be the new 0-point of the box. $z=0$, along the line of sight direction with redshift space distortion, remains unchanged.
\item The box is divided into 20 non-overlapping slabs, each $550 \times 550\times 220\Mpch$.
\item For each slab: \\[-4 ex]
\begin{itemize}
\itemsep-0.3em
\item An HOD is selected. Eleven HODs, some of which are reused as necessary, are used to populate the 16 training slabs with galaxies. Four unique HODs are reserved exclusively for the four validation slabs.
\item 15000 galaxies are randomly selected. These are binned in $2\times 2\times 5\Mpch$ bins using a TSC.
\item The previous step is repeated for each of 4 random seeds, incorporating mirror image(s) of the slab.
\item The power spectrum of the slab is calculated.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
This method results in 3200 mock observations built from 40 simulations, with 20 slabs per simulation and 4 seeds (with axial flips) per slab.
The 2560 slabs built from the portion of the simulation with $z\geq220\Mpch$ comprise the training set, and are used to train the machine learning model described in Section \ref{sec:cnn}. The remaining 640 slabs are built from a non-overlapping portion of the simulation ($z<220\Mpch$). These make up the validation set and are used to assess the models' fit.
Our creation of the test and validation sets include a number of choices to reduce the likelihood of giving the machine learning model an unfair advantage: we employ a recentering of the box to minimize learning from images with correlated structure, we use random HODs and seeds to allow for uncertainties in galaxy formation physics, we use axial flips of the slabs to augment the data to account for rotational invariance, and we use unique portions of the simulation and unique HODs in the validation fold to provide a way to ensure that the model does not rely on the details of the structure or HOD.
\subsection{Planck Testing Set}
\label{sec:test}
The testing sample is built from the \abacus \planck simulations. The 20 \planck simulations each have initial conditions that are unique from the simulation sample described in Section \ref{sec:trainset}. Mock observations of the \planck testing set are built using a similar process as described in Section \ref{sec:trainset} with one exception: the 20 non-overlapping slabs are each populated with galaxies according to 20 unique HODs selected randomly from the 31 HODs available. Accounting for the axial flips to augment the data, the resulting testing sample is 1600 slabs with associated power spectra. Our testing set is a truly independent sample from the training and validation sets. Though the cosmologies used in the training and validation sets are near the \planck fiducial cosmology, this exact cosmology is never explicitly used for training or testing.
\section{Methods: Machine Learning Models}
\label{sec:cnn}
We assess three machine learning models:
1.~a standard convolutional neural network (CNN) that learns from the 3D galaxy images to regress cosmological parameters,
2.~a neural network (NN) that learns from the power spectrum of the galaxy images to regress cosmological parameters, and
3.~a hybrid CNN (hCNN) that employs a standard CNN but also can take advantage of meaningful summary information \textemdash{} in this case, the galaxy power spectrum \textemdash{} to inject physically meaningful information into the fully connected layers. These three models are described in detail below.
\subsection{Standard CNN}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/architecture_vert.pdf}\\
\end{centering}
\caption[]{A visual summary of the three ML models. The neural network (NN) uses a vector input (green) with the fully connected layers for processing (orange). The standard convolutional neural network (CNN) uses an image input with the image processing layers (blue) plus fully connected layers (orange). The hybrid CNN (hCNN) joins these by concatenating the vector features with the final layer of the image processing; the result is fed into the fully connected layers. For further details about the NN, CNN, and hCNN, see Section \ref{sec:cnn}.\\}
\label{fig:architecture}
\end{figure}
Convolutional Neural Networks \citep[CNNs, ][]{fukushima1982neocognitron, lecun1999object, NIPS2012_4824} are a class of machine learning algorithms that are commonly used in image recognition tasks. Over many cycles, called ``epochs,'' the network learns the convolutional filters, weights, and biases necessary to extract meaningful patterns from the input image. For cosmological applications, CNNs are traditionally applied to monochromatic \citep[e.g.,][]{2018MNRAS.473.3895L, 2018arXiv181007703N, 2019arXiv190205950H} or multiple-color 2D images \citep[e.g.,][]{ 2018arXiv181008211L}. However, CNNs are not confined to 2D training data; they can also be used on 3D data cubes. Three-dimensional CNNs became popular for interpreting videos, using time as the third dimension \citep[e.g.,][]{ji20133d}, but recent cosmological applications of this algorithm have applied the technique to 3D data \citep[e.g.,][]{2017arXiv171102033R, 2018arXiv181106533H, 2018arXiv180804728M, 2018arXiv181011030P, 2019MNRAS.484.5771A, 2019MNRAS.482.2861B, 2019arXiv190205965Z, 2019arXiv190810590P}.
CNNs typically use pairs of convolutional filters and pooling layers to extract meaningful patterns from the input image. These are followed by several fully connected layers. Our standard CNN architecture includes several consecutive fully convolutional layers at the onset and mean and max pooling branches in parallel. It is implemented in Keras \citep{chollet2015} with a Tensorflow \citep{45381} backend, and is shown in Figure \ref{fig:architecture}. The full architecture is as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\itemsep-0.3em
\item $3\times3\times3$ convolution with 4 filters
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[]batch normalization
\item $3\times3\times3$ convolution with 4 filters
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[]batch normalization
\item $3\times3\times3$ convolution with 4 filters
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[]batch normalization
\item Max pooling branch (in parallel with \# \ref{item:meanpool}): \label{item:maxpool}
\begin{enumerate}
\itemsep-0.2em
\item $5\times5\times1$ max pooling
\item $3\times3\times3$ convolution with 4 filters
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[]batch normalization
\item $5\times5\times5$ max pooling
\item $3\times3\times3$ convolution with 32 filters
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[]batch normalization
\item $5\times5\times5$ max pooling, flattened \label{item:maxpooloutput}
\end{enumerate}
\item Mean pooling branch (in parallel with \# \ref{item:maxpool}): \label{item:meanpool}
\begin{enumerate}
\itemsep-0.2em
\item $5\times5\times1$ max pooling
\item $3\times3\times3$ convolution with 4 filters
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[]batch normalization
\item $5\times5\times5$ max pooling
\item $3\times3\times3$ convolution with 32 filters
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[]batch normalization
\item $5\times5\times5$ max pooling, flattened \label{item:meanpooloutput}
\end{enumerate}
\item Concatenation of the max pool branch output (\ref{item:maxpooloutput}) and mean pool branch output (\ref{item:meanpooloutput})
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item 1024 neurons, fully connected
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[] 30\% dropout
\item 512 neurons, fully connected \label{item:nnstart}
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[] 30\% dropout
\item 512 neurons, fully connected
\item[] leaky ReLU activation
\item[] 30\% dropout
\item 256 neurons, fully connected
\item[] leaky ReLU activation
\item[] 30\% dropout
\item 128 neurons, fully connected
\item[]leaky ReLU activation
\item[] 30\% dropout
\item 64 neurons, fully connected
\item[] linear activation
\item[] 30\% dropout
\item 2 output neurons, one each for \om and \sig \label{item:nnend}
\end{enumerate}
We use a mean absolute error loss function and the Adam Optimizer \citep{2014arXiv1412.6980K}. In practice, we scale \om and \sig linearly so that the range of training values lies between $-1$ and $1$. The output predictions are scaled back to physically interpretable values according to the inverse of the same linear scaling. While this may not be an important detail for these particular cosmological parameters (\sig and \om are of the same order of magnitude), problems can arise when training multiple outputs with significantly different value ranges (e.g. if \Ho in units of $\mathrm{km}\,s^{-1}\,\mathrm{Mpc}^{-1}$ were added as a third output parameter). Details about the training scheme and learning rate are discussed in Section \ref{sec:training}.
In our model, small-scale feature extraction is performed by several consecutive layers of 3D $3\times3\times3$ convolutional filters. This feature extraction is followed by aggressive pooling in parallel max and mean pooling branches that each reduce the data cube to 32 neurons. The outputs of these branches are concatenated and are followed by fully connected layers. We use a rectified linear unit \citep[ReLU,][]{nair2010rectified} activation function throughout. The dropout, in which 30\% of neurons are ignored during training, reduces the likelihood of the model overfitting \citep{srivastava2014dropout}.
The model takes a $275\times275\times55$ image as input and learns the filters, weights, and biases necessary to regress two cosmological parameters \textemdash{} the amplitude of matter fluctuations (\sig) and the matter density parameter (\om); each of the two output neurons maps to a cosmological parameter.
\subsection{Standard NN}
\label{sec:nn}
The standard neural network uses only the fully connected layers, with the power spectrum as the only input, fed into steps \ref{item:nnstart} through \ref{item:nnend} in the above architecture. It is shown in Figure \ref{fig:architecture}. The model takes the binned power spectra as input and learns the weights and biases necessary to regress the cosmological parameters of interest.
\subsubsection{Hybrid CNN}
\label{sec:mcnn}
The hybrid convolutional neural network (hCNN) takes advantage of a standard CNN, but also utilizes information that is known to be important and meaningful. The power spectrum, which carries cosmological information, is folded in by inserting this information at step \ref{item:nnstart} in the standard CNN architecture. It should be noted that the use of incorporating physically meaningful parameters into a deep learning technique is not new to this work, and has been used previous in astronomy \citep{2019arXiv190310507D}, though it has not yet been widely adopted.
The hCNN model uses both the $275\times275\times55$ images as well as the binned power spectra as input to learn \om and \sig. This architecture is shown in Figure \ref{fig:architecture}
\begin{figure*}[]
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/error_0.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/error_1.pdf} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption[]{Mean squared error (MSE) as a function of scaled epoch, $\mathcal{E}$. While the standard neural network (NN, green dotted) quickly settles to a low error solution, the convolutional neural network (CNN, blue dashed) and hybrid CNN (hCNN, purple solid) have large fluctuations during the initial phase of training ($\mathcal{E}\lesssim0.32$). Here, the error on the validation set predictions are regularly worse than a guess of the mean value (gray line) for both \sig (left) and \om (right). The learning rate is decreased at $\mathcal{E}\approx0.32$, and the CNN and hCNN settle into a low-error regime.
To remove fluctuations that visually detract from overall trends in error and slope, the curves shown in this figure have been smoothed with a Gaussian filter.}
\label{fig:err}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Training}
\label{sec:training}
For training the CNN and hCNN, we adopt a two-phase training scheme. Our training approach takes advantage of a large step size during the initial phase of training to capture the diversity of cosmologies and HOD models, then transitions to a smaller step size during the second phase of training to improve the fit (see Appendix \ref{sec:lifecycle} for a further discussion of this). We train for 550 epochs, 175 in the first phase and 375 in the second phase. The last 50 epochs will be used to select a model that meets criteria more nuanced than simply minimizing the loss function. It is discussed further in Section \ref{sec:stop}. Note that the NN, which is less sensitive to the details of training and trains significantly faster than models with convolutional layers, is trained for 800 epochs according to the details of phase one, described below.
We use the Adam Optimizer \citep{2014arXiv1412.6980K}, which has a step size that varies as a function of epoch according to
\begin{equation}
\alpha(t) = \alpha_0 \frac{\sqrt{1-\beta_2^t}}{1-\beta_1^t},
\label{eq:stepsize}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the step size, $t$ denotes a time step or epoch, $\alpha_0$ is the \textit{initial} step size\footnote{The initial step size is denoted, simply, ``learning rate'' in the keras documentation.}, and parameters $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$ control the step size at each epoch. We adopt the default values of $\beta_1=0.9$ and $\beta_2=0.999$.
Phase one of training is 175 epochs with an initial step size of $\alpha_0=1.0\times10^{-5}$. We find that this first phase, with its larger initial step size, is necessary for the models to learn the diversity of cosmologies. Smaller learning rates tend to produce models with predictions that cluster near the mean values for \sig and \om, while larger learning rates tend to produce models that fluctuate wildly in bias or overfit the training data. Near epoch 175, we find evidence in the CNN and hCNN that the learning rate is too large. This is characterized by swings in the tendency to over- or underpredict the validation set, and can be seen in the large, fluctuating mean squared error (MSE) shown in Figure \ref{fig:err}. The MSE is plotted as a function of scaled epoch, $\mathcal{E}$, defined as epoch divided by the maximum number of training epochs.
We adopt the model at epoch 175 as a pre-trained model and transition to a second phase of training with a lower learning rate. Phase two of training is an additional 375 epochs with an initial step size of $\alpha_0=0.2\times10^{-5}$. For clarity, we refer to the first training epoch of phase two as ``epoch 176'' for the remainder of this work. However, for the purposes of Equation \ref{eq:stepsize} only, $t$ is reset to $0$. Figure \ref{fig:err} shows the effect of decreasing the learning rate: at $\mathcal{E}\approx 0.32$, the mean squared error decreases dramatically as the model settles into a stable fit that describes the validation data.
Overfitting is defined as the tendency of the model to produce excellent predictions on the testing set but to fail on the validation set. (The term ``overfit'' is occasionally used to describe a deep learning method identifying features in a cosmological simulation that do not describe actual observations, but we use the term in the more traditional sense.) Two changes to the learning scheme tend to result in an overfit model: first, an increased learning rate and second, the use of max pooling only via eliminating the mean pooling branch. When the model is overfit, the validation set dramatically biases toward the mean, despite the fact that the training data are well-described even at extreme values of \sig and \om.
We caution, however, that we have not explored a full grid of hyperparameters for model optimization. It is likely that the two-phase training scheme could be avoided with carefully selected values of $\beta_1$ and $\beta_2$ to smoothly decrease step size. Likewise, we have not thoroughly vetted the tendency to overfit by increasing learning rate or removing mean pooling under many hyperparameter combinations. Such a comprehensive grid search is expensive and intractable with current computational resources. Therefore, the effects of learning rate and pooling described in this section should serve as a word of caution for those training other deep models, but should not be overinterpreted.
\section{{Results}}
\label{sec:results}
\begin{figure*}[]
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/slope_0.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/slope_1.pdf}\\ \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/bias_0.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/bias_1.pdf}
\end{tabular}
\caption[]{Top: slope of the best fit line as a function of scaled epoch, $\mathcal{E}$. A slope of 1 indicates that the model captures the full range of \sig and \om, while a slope of 0 is indicative of the model predicting at or near the mean for all data in the validation set. As the models train, they increase the diversity of predictions. However, slope never reaches a value of $1$ for any model, indicating that the predictions will bias toward the mean for any mock observation with extreme values of \sig or \om.
Bottom: prediction bias, b, as a function of scaled epoch, $\mathcal{E}$. While the standard neural network (NN, green dotted) quickly settles to a solution with low bias, the convolutional neural network (CNN, blue dashed) and hybrid CNN (hCNN, purple solid) have large fluctuations during the initial phase of training ($\mathcal{E}\lesssim0.32$). The learning rate is decreased at $\mathcal{E}=0.32$, and the CNN and hCNN settle into a low-bias regime.
To remove fluctuations that visually detract from overall trends in error and slope, the curves shown in this figure have been smoothed with a Gaussian filter.}
\label{fig:biasandslope}
\end{figure*}
Here, we present results from the validation set as a way of assessing the model's fit, both near the median model and also toward extreme values of \sig and \om. We also present results from the testing set to explore how the technique might generalize into the more realistic case where the cosmological model, galaxy formation details, and initial conditions are not explicitly known.
\subsection{{Validation Set Results}}
We define the prediction bias, $b$, as
\begin{equation}
b\equiv \left< \left| x_\mathrm{predicted} - x_\mathrm{true} \right| \right>,
\label{eq:bias}
\end{equation}
where $<\cdot>$ denotes a mean and $x$ is a placeholder for either \sig or \om. Figure \ref{fig:biasandslope} shows the bias as a function of scaled epoch, $\mathcal{E}$. During phase two of the training, the CNN and hCNN bias drop significantly, indicating that the lower learning rate is indeed reducing errors in a meaningful way and learning the spatial galaxy patterns that correlate with cosmological parameters.
While MSE and bias both assess the typical offset of the validation set predictions, these statistics alone cannot tell the full story. It is also important to understand how the model might perform near the edges of the training set. For this, we assess the slope of a best fit line through the true and predicted values of \sig, and separately, the best fit line through the true and predicted values of \om. A slope close to $1$ indicates that the model fits well near the extreme values of \sig and \om, while a slope of $0$ is indicative of a model biasing toward the mean. Overfit models will tend to have a larger MSE and bias coupled with a smaller slope. Figure \ref{fig:biasandslope} shows the slope of this linear best fit line. We can infer from the value of this fit, $\sim0.7-0.8$ for both \sig and \om, that the model may not predict well for \sig and \om values near the edges of the training data, and will likely bias toward the mean when presented with a cosmological parameter set far from the mean.
\subsection{{Testing Set Results}}
While it is an interesting academic exercise to discuss the results of the validation set, the Universe, unfortunately, gives us one galaxy sample. This sample may differ from our training set in cosmological parameters and galaxy formation physics (and most certainly differs in initial conditions!). If we aim to eventually use a CNN or hCNN to constrain cosmological models from an observed galaxy sample, is imperative to develop tools to assess ML models, going beyond a simple minimization of loss or performance on validation data. Though the model trains to minimize the mean absolute error, this is not necessarily the most interesting \textemdash{} or the most useful \textemdash{} test statistic for a cosmological analysis of a large galaxy survey. Next, we lay out a technique for selecting a relatively unbiased model.
\begin{figure*}[]
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/vector_scatter0.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/vector_scatter1.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/conv_scatter0.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/conv_scatter1.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/conv+vector_scatter0.pdf} & \includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{figures/conv+vector_scatter1.pdf} \\
\end{tabular}
\caption[]{True and predicted values of \sig (left) and \om (right) for the neural network (NN, green, top), convolutional neural network (CNN, blue, middle) and hybrid CNN (hCNN, purple, bottom). For the validation data of each of the 40 cosmological models, the median (circles) and middle 68\% (error bars) are shown. While the predictions typically lie close to the one-to-one line (black dashed) near the central values of \sig and \om, the bias toward the mean is more pronounced at extreme values. For illustrative purposes, \sig and \om values below the 16th percentile and above the 84th precentile are set against a gray background, while the middle 1-$\sigma$ are shown against a white background. The CNN and hCNN predictions for the validation set display a significantly tighter scatter than the NN. This is unsurprising because the NN learns only from the power spectrum (see Figure \ref{fig:ps}), while the CNN and hCNN have more flexibility to learn from the un-preprocessed mock galaxy catalog.}
\label{fig:scatter}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Unbiased Model Selection}
\label{sec:stop}
As highlighted in Figure \ref{fig:biasandslope}, the models do not perform well at extreme values of \sig and \om. This is unsurprising; machine learning models tend to interpolate much better than they extrapolate. In practice, one would want to train on a large range of simulated cosmologies extending well beyond a region containing the expected results. Furthermore, one would expect a bias toward the mean for any cosmology near the edges of the training sample. Because of this (and for the purposes of model selection only), we limit our analysis to the simulations enclosed in a 68\% ellipse in the \sig-\om plane.\footnote{The selection of simulations used here are shown in a lighter shade of gray in Figure \ref{fig:planck}; the simulations shown in dark gray are near the edges of the \sig-\om plane, are expected to have results that bias to the mean, and are excluded from this particular analysis for this reason.}
In addition to limiting this analysis to the 27 simulations with \sig and \om values closest to the mean cosmology, we also only assess the last 50 epochs of the CNN and hCNN trainings ($0.91<\mathcal{E}\leq 1.0$). Importantly, we only use the validation data to assess models. Recall that the training data should not be used in such a way because the model has already explicitly seen this data. Likewise, the testing data should not be used to assess models because doing so would unfairly bias the results.
For \textit{each} of the 27 simulations and at each epoch, we calculate the distance between the predicted and true cosmology according to the following: for each of the 16 validation mock observations per simulation, we predict \sig and \om. The 68\% error ellipse in the \sig-\om plane is calculated, as is the distance between the true cosmological parameters ($\Omega_{m,\,\mathrm{true}}$ and $\sigma_{8,\,\mathrm{true}}$) and the middle of the ellipse of predicted cosmological parameters ($\Omega_{m,\,\mathrm{mid}}$ and $\sigma_{8,\,\mathrm{mid}}$). This distance, $\mathcal{Z}$, is calculated according to
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{Z} \, =\, & \frac{(\Omega_{m,\,\mathrm{true}}-\Omega_{m,\,\mathrm{mid}})\cos{\alpha}+(\sigma_{8,\,\mathrm{true}}-\sigma_{8,\,\mathrm{mid}})\sin{\alpha}}{a^2} +\\
\\
& \frac{(\Omega_{m,\,\mathrm{true}}-\Omega_{m,\,\mathrm{mid}})\sin{\alpha}-(\sigma_{8,\,\mathrm{true}}-\sigma_{8,\,\mathrm{mid}})\sin{\alpha}}{b^2}
\end{split}
\label{eq:Z}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the angle of the best fit 68\% ellipse, $a$ is the length of the semimajor axis, and $b$ is the length of the semiminor axis. $\mathcal{Z}$, then, is a 2-dimensional z-score, where $\mathcal{Z}=1$ can be interpreted as the true value being on the edge of the 68\% ellipse and $\mathcal{Z}=0$ means that the true and mean predicted values are identical. We note that this choice favors accuracy over precision because larger error ellipses are more forgiving of large offsets between the predicted and middle predicted cosmological models.
For each epoch, the mean squared error, MSE, as a function of epoch is calculated according to
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{MSE(e)} = \frac{1}{N_\mathrm{sims}}\sum_{i=1}^{N_\mathrm{sims}} \mathcal{Z}^2_i(e)
\label{eq:MSE}
\end{equation}
We select the epoch with the smallest MSE as the final model \textemdash{} and the model least likely to produce biased results \textemdash{} for the CNN and hCNN. Coincidentally, these ``unbiased'' models are from training epochs that are rather close to each other, epochs 520 and 524 ($\mathcal{E}\approx0.95$) for the CNN and hCNN, respectively. Selecting, instead, to define a 2-D error ellipse that is averaged over all models and epochs selects the same hCNN model, but prefers a CNN model with marginally tighter error bars and a more significant offset.
Figure \ref{fig:scatter} shows the median and middle 68\% predictions for each of the 40 cosmologies represented in the validation set at these unbiased epochs. As expected, the model visibly pulls toward the mean for outlying values of \sig and \om. The CNN and hCNN produce tighter correlations between the true and predicted values than does the NN.
\subsubsection{Planck Testing Set Results}
\label{sec:planck}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{figures/errscatter.pdf}\\
\end{centering}
\caption[]{The MSE of the validation set, calculated in equations \ref{eq:Z} and \ref{eq:MSE}, is tightly correlated with the testing set error $\mathcal{Z}_{Planck}$. Shown are the binned median and 68\% scatter for the CNN (blue dash) and hCNN (purple solid). The values tabulated here are restricted to epochs 501-550 ($0.91<\mathcal{E}\leq1.0$). The tighter correlation between low-MSE and low-$\mathcal{Z}_{Planck}$ models is mildly more pronounced for the hCNN, suggesting that the hCNN might be a more robust approach for producing unbiased results.}
\label{fig:MSE}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{figures/omsig8_unbiased.pdf}\\
\end{centering}
\caption[]{Testing set predictions of the NN (green dotted), CNN (blue dashed), and hCNN (purple filled); shown are the 68\% and 95\% error ellipses. The NN is heavily influenced by the degeneracy of the training simulations (gray x's) in the \sig-\om plane, and predicts cosmological parameters that are significantly biased toward the mean. The CNN and hCNN have tighter error ellipses and smaller biases. The bias toward the mean is mildly smaller for the hCNN (white circle denoting the center of the error ellipse) compared to the CNN (white square).}
\label{fig:planck}
\end{figure*}
Recall that the training set comprises mock observations built from 40 matched-phase cosmological simulations, while the validation set comprises mock observations from a unique portion ($z<200\Mpch$) of those same simulations. In contrast, the testing set comprises mock observations from non-matched-phase simulations at the \planck cosmology which were populated with galaxies according to an HOD not yet seen by the trained model. With previously unseen cosmological parameters, HOD, and initial conditions, the \planck testing set is a more fair test of expected error and biases under a realistic set of conditions.
In the previous section, we posited that the MSE of the validation set might serve as a fair proxy assessment for selecting an unbiased model to apply to an unseen cosmology. Indeed, the validation MSE and the $\mathcal{Z}$ value for the \planck testing data (denoted $\mathcal{Z}_{Planck}$), are highly correlated, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:MSE}. The $\log(MSE)$-$\log(\mathcal{Z}_{Planck})$ distribution has a Pearson R correlation coefficient of 0.88 for the CNN and a slightly tighter correlation of 0.93 for the hCNN. There is no strong evidence of evolution in the MSE-$\mathcal{Z}_{Planck}$ plane as a function of epoch; while low MSE is correlated with low $\mathcal{Z}_{Planck}$, the model is not taking a slow and steady march toward high or low MSE as it trains during epochs 501-550. The model's loss function should drive a decrease in mean absolute error across the 40 training cosmologies as it trains, while the test shown assesses a different measure of the goodness of fit.
Figure \ref{fig:planck} shows the cosmological constraints for the NN, CNN, and hCNN. Despite the goodness of training suggested by the results in Figures \ref{fig:err}, \ref{fig:biasandslope}, and \ref{fig:scatter}, the NN never moves beyond predictions that are heavily influenced by the degeneracy of the training simulations. This is, perhaps, unsurprising. The power spectrum on which it is trained is calculated from a relatively small volume, $\sim 0.07\,h^{-3}\,\mathrm{Gpc}^3$, in contrast with the effective volume of $\sim6\,\mathrm{Gpc}^3$ of the SDSS DR11 Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS) observation \citep{2015MNRAS.451..539G}. The volume of the mock observations used in this work is too small to isolate the baryon acoustic peak and reliably measure the acoustic scale. As a result, while the NN predicts \sig in an unbiased way, its predictions for \om are biased very low and pull toward the mean \om of training simulations.
Compared to the NN, the CNN and hCNN predictions are substantially unbiased. The cosmological constraints in Figure \ref{fig:planck}, as well as the sample of low-$\mathcal{Z}_{Planck}$ models in Figure \ref{fig:MSE} suggest that the vector features included in the hCNN \textit{may} make the model more robust to biasing, though the evidence for the effects of bias as a function of vector features is not strong.
Table \ref{table:summary} tabulates the simulation parameters and testing set results. For reference, we include the \planck testing set true values; recall that all simulations in the \planck suite of simulations were run at identical cosmologies, so the scatter of these values is $0$. Table \ref{table:summary} also gives parameters that describe the distribution of the training data for reference. These include the training set mean \sig, mean \om, and the standard deviation of these, and are used as a benchmark for how the distribution of simulated cosmologies compares to the error bars presented.
For the trio of ML models, the mean ($\bar{x}$), offset ($\bar{x}-x_\planck$), standard deviation of the predictions (denoted $\sigma$), and 1D $z$-score (offset$/\sigma$) are also given. The NN is the most biased of the trio, particularly in \om, with the mean prediction $\sim$1.3-$\sigma$ away from the true value. From the bias and error bars associated with the NN, we can conclude that the box volume is likely not large enough for the power spectrum to be diagnostic. Moving to a larger mock observations that can more reliably measure the acoustic scale is likely to improve the NN technique.
The CNN and hCNN, on the other hand, both predict \sig to within 3\% and \om to within 4\%. The CNN and hCNN error bars are similarly sized, but the hCNN exhibits a bias that is smaller than the CNN by about a factor of $2$. However, the bias in both the CNN and hCNN are small, and further studies on larger mock observations are needed to make strong claims about the potential de-biasing advantage of the hCNN architecture.
\begin{deluxetable*}{l r r r r r r r r}
\tablecaption{{Results Summary}\label{table:summary}}
\tablehead{ & \multicolumn{4}{c}{\sig}& \multicolumn{4}{c}{\om}\\
\colhead{}
& \colhead{mean} & \colhead{offset} & \colhead{$\sigma$} & \colhead{$z$}
& \colhead{mean}& \colhead{offset} & \colhead{$\sigma$} & \colhead{$z$}}
\startdata
Training Set & $ 0.818 $ & \nodata & $ 0.083 $ & \nodata & $ 0.303 $ & \nodata & $ 0.027 $ & \nodata \\
\planck Testing Set & $ 0.830 $ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata & $0.314$ & \nodata & \nodata & \nodata \\
\tableline
NN & $ 0.825 $ & $ 0.005 $ & $ 0.035 $ & $ 0.147 $ & $ 0.299 $ & $ 0.015 $ & $ 0.012 $ & $ 1.307 $ \\
CNN & $ 0.824 $ & $ 0.006 $ & $ 0.022 $ & $ 0.278 $ & $ 0.311 $ & $ 0.003 $ & $ 0.012 $ & $ 0.268 $ \\
hCNN & $ 0.827 $ & $ 0.003 $ & $ 0.023 $ & $ 0.144 $ & $ 0.312 $ & $ 0.002 $ & $ 0.012 $ & $ 0.121 $ \\
\enddata
\label{table:summary}
\end{deluxetable*}
\section{Discussion \& Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We have presented a trio of ML approaches for learning \sig and \om from a mock 3D galaxy survey.
The neural network (NN) uses the binned power spectrum as input, and is processed through a fully connected neural network architecture. The convolutional neural network (CNN) uses a spatially binned 3D galaxy distribution; this is processed through a series of convolutions and pooling, and finally through a fully connected network. The hybrid CNN (hCNN) merges the two.
The methods are trained and tested on a sample of mock surveys are built on the \abacus suite of cosmological $N$-body simulations, and the mock surveys include a variety of galaxy formation scenarios through the implementation of generalized halo occupation distributions (HODs). The full training sample spans a large parameter space \textemdash{} 6 cosmological parameters and 6 HOD parameters.
We describe a number of best practices for preventing the a 3D CNN or 3D hCNN from memorizing structure and producing overly-optimistic results on the validation data. Most important is setting aside an independent portion of \textit{all} simulations as a validation set to assess the goodness of fit. This validation set should ideally drawn from the same portion of the box to prevent the deep network from memorizing correlated structure across simulations stemming from simulations with matched initial phases. Other best practices include recentering the box, aggressive pooling to restrict the models' knowledge of slab-size length scales, subsampling the galaxy catalog to prevent the model from learning from the aggregate number of galaxies within a volume, and employing the standard suite of axial flips and rotations to account for rotational invariance.
We have shown that the validation set MSE is a useful proxy for selecting a model that will produce unbiased estimates of the cosmological parameters, even when presented with previously unseen cosmological and HOD parameters.
The model is limited by the availability of simulated data: it is trained and tested on relatively small volumes ($\sim 0.07\,h^{-3}\,\mathrm{Gpc}^3$, which is 1/20 of the simulation box volume). Furthermore, we train with only 40 training simulations at a variety of cosmologies that vary in $\Omega_{CDM}\,h^2$, $\Omega_b\,h^2$, \sig, \Ho, $w_0$, and $n_s$, which have been populated with galaxies according to a flexible HOD with 6 parameters. Yet, even within these limitations \textemdash{} the small volumes and large cosmological and HOD parameter space \textemdash{} we have shown that it is possible to robustly train a model that can learn
\sig and \om directly from a catalog of galaxies.
Developing more realistic mock observations that span the cosmological and galaxy formation parameter space is an essential next step for applying 3D hybrid CNNs to observational data. These extensions to the existing mock observations include adopting more diversity in cosmological parameters, taking advantage of larger training mock observations, employing additional flexibility in galaxy models, and modeling real survey embeddings. As such training data become available, 3D hybrid CNNs have the potential to become a powerful tool for extracting cosmological information from next-generation spectroscopic surveys.\\ \\
\acknowledgments{We thank Alexei Efros, Melanie Fernandez, Zolt\'an Haiman, Paul La Plante, Jos\'e Manuel, Szymon Nakoneczny, Junier Oliva, Barnab\'as P\'oczos, Siamak Ravanbakhsh, Dezs{\"o} Ribli, Alexey Vikhlinin, and Javier Zazo for their helpful feedback on this project.}\\ \\
|
\section{Introduction}
In recent years, the non-equilibrium dynamics of quantum many-body systems has drawn a lot of attention. As interesting progress, inspired by gravitational calculations, it is understood that for isolated quantum systems, there is an upper bound for relaxation rate $\Gamma\leq O(1/\beta)$ \cite{Hqm,thermal}. For strongly interacting systems, this bound is approximately saturated, and the relaxation rate corresponds to the typical decay rate of quasi-normal modes in the gravity description for holographic models \cite{gra}.
While most of these studies for the quantum dynamics of strongly interacting systems focus on isolated systems, the relaxation of quantum systems coupled to a bath should also be an interesting problem. On the one hand, in real materials, the system is inevitably open due to the coupling to phonons \cite{kittel,simons}. On the other hand, the coupling to quantum fields would give rise to interesting physics. As an example, coupling a black hole to quantum fields give would rise to the celebrated Hawking radiation \cite{Hawking,carroll}. A further coupling to the thermal bath shows a possible resolution of the black-hole information paradox \cite{para1,para2,para3}. Motivated by these results, in this paper, we would like to study such quantum dynamics of strongly correlated many-body systems coupled to an external quantum bath.
Generally, the real-time evolution of quantum systems can be formulated in terms of a path integral on Keldysh contour \cite{Kamenev,book}, where the two-point functions are determined by Kadanoff-Baym equations \cite{book}. However, for a strongly interacting system with possible holographic interpretation, these set of equations are usually hard to be solved with controlled accuracy, due to the lack of small parameters.
Fortunately, the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (SYK) model proposed by Kitaev \cite{Kitaev2} in recent years based on early works by Sachdev and Ye \cite{Ye}, turns out to be an ideal platform for the study of both field theoretical \cite{Kitaev2,Comments,spectrum1,spectrum2,spectrum3,Liouville,Liouville2,SYK new,SYK new2,SYK new3,SYK new4,quench1} and gravitational physics\cite{Comments,bulk Yang,bulk spectrum Polchinski,bulk2,bulk3,bulk4,bulk5,syk-bh,SYK g new1,SYK g new2,SYK g new3,new g,new g2}. The SYK$_q$ model describes $N$ Majorana modes in 0+1-$d$ interacting randomly via $q$-fermion interactions \cite{Comments}. For simplicity, we focus on $q=4$ case and the Hamiltonian is then given by:
\begin{align}
H_{\text{SYK}}[J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4},\chi]=\sum_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}\frac{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}}{4!}\chi_{i_1}\chi_{i_2}\chi_{i_3}\chi_{i_4}. \label{1}
\end{align}
Here $i_1,i_2...i_4=1, 2...N$ labels different modes of Majorana fermions. $J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}$ are independent random Gaussian variables with $\overline{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}}=0$ and $\overline{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}^2}=3!J^2/N^3$. The model can be solved in the $1/N$ expansion and the two point correlation function is determined consistently by the Schwinger-Dyson equation with melon diagrams \cite{Comments}. In the low-temperature limit $\beta J \gg 1$, the system is found to be a strongly correlated non-Fermi liquid with low-energy holographic description \cite{bulk Yang}. In this system, without a spatial dimension, the Kadanoff-Baym equation can be solved efficiently in numerics, leading to exact quantum dynamics \cite{Sachdev,num2,num3}.
In this paper, we would like to study the dynamics of SYK model when coupled to an external bath with lower initial temperature. However, a general evolving bath requires a large amount of computational resource, which may make the problem intractable. To simplify the problem, following the idea of \cite{Yiming}, we model the bath also by an SYK model with a larger number of modes. We analyze the physical consequence of different coupling terms between two systems, including marginal coupling, irrelevant coupling, and relevant coupling \cite{yyz condensation,Balents,our,Altman}. We find in all cases, the energy firstly increases in time before decreasing, as expected from perturbative calculation \cite{Swingle}. For the marginal and the irrelevant coupling, the energy and the effective temperature of the system then relax to the thermal equilibrium monotonically with a different rate. While for the relevant case, both energy and effective temperature show oscillations. We also study the coupling and temperature dependence of different processes.
The paper is organized as follows: In section II, we describe our model and analyze its behavior for different couplings in thermal equilibrium. We describe the Keldysh path-integral used for calculating the quantum dynamics of our model in In section III. We then show numerical results in section IV for the marginal coupling case and section V for the irrelevant or relevant coupling case.
\section{The Model in Thermal Equilibrium}
As explained in the introduction, the model we considered in this paper is written as:
\begin{align}
&H=H_{\text{SYK}}[J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4},\chi]+H_{\text{SYK}}[\tilde{J}_{i_1i_2i_3i_4},\psi]\notag\\&\ \ \ +\sum_{ai_1i_2...i_n}\frac{V_{ai_1i_2...i_n}}{n!}\chi_a\psi_{i_1}\psi_{i_2}...\psi_{i_n}.\label{H}
\end{align}
where $H_{\text{SYK}}[J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4},\chi/\psi]$ is the standard SYK$_4$ Hamiltonian Eq. \eqref{1}. We choose the anti-commutation relation $\{\chi_i,\chi_j\}=\delta_{ij}$ and $\{\psi_i,\psi_j\}=\delta_{ij}$. $\chi$ is a small system with $N$ Majorana fermions and $\psi$ is a large system with $N^2$ fermions, which would be considered as a thermal bath of the small system. For each system there is an SYK$_4$ random interaction $J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}$ or $\tilde{J}_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}$. We then randomly couple two systems by $V_{ai_1i_2...i_n}$ where $n$ is an odd number. All random interaction strength is assumed to be independent Gaussian variables with expectation and variance given by:
\begin{align}
&\overline{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}}=0,\ \ \ \ \ \ \overline{\tilde{J}_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}}=0,\ \ \ \ \ \ \overline{V_{ai_1i_2...i_n}}=0,\\
&\overline{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}^2}=\frac{3!J^2}{N^3},\ \ \ \overline{\tilde{J}_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}^2}=\frac{3!J^2}{N^3},\ \ \ \overline{V_{ai_1i_2...i_n}^2}=\frac{n!V^2}{N^{2n}}.
\end{align}
Here the numerical coefficient is chosen to cancel additional factors in melon diagrams. The power of $N$ is tuned to result in a well-defined non-trivial large-N theory, which is easiest to see by considering the self-energy of two-point correlators. We have shown the self-energy melon diagrams in Figure \ref{fig} for the $n=3$ case as an example. By straightforward counting, we could show that both diagrams in (a) and the first diagram in (b) is of the order $N^0$, while the last diagram in Figure \ref{fig} is proportional to $1/N$ \cite{Yiming}. As a result, although the small system $\chi$ is affected by the coupling $V$, the large system $\psi$ can still be approximated as isolated. This supports our identification of the large system by a thermal bath.
\begin{figure}[t]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{diagram.pdf}
\caption{The self-energy melon diagrams of the small SYK$_\chi$ coupled to SYK$_\psi$ bath for $n=3$. The solid line represents the Green's function of the $\chi$ fermion and the wavy line represents the Green's function of the $\psi$ fermion. The first three diagrams are of the order $N^0$ and the last diagram is proportional to $1/N$.} \label{fig}
\end{figure}
Similar analysis also works for general $n$. As a result, the self-consistent equation for the two-point function is given by
\begin{align}
G^{-1}_\chi(\omega_n)&=-i\omega_n-\Sigma_\chi(\omega_n),\\ \Sigma_\chi(\tau)&=J^2G_\chi(\tau)^3+V^2G_\psi(\tau)^n,\label{Gchi}
\end{align}
for the $\chi$ fermions and
\begin{align}
G^{-1}_\psi(\omega_n)&=-i\omega_n-\Sigma_\psi(\omega_n),\\ \Sigma_\psi(\tau)&=J^2G_\psi(\tau)^3. \label{Gpsi}
\end{align}
for $\psi$ fermions. Here we have defined $G_\chi(\tau)=\left<T_\tau\chi_i(\tau)\chi_i(0)\right>$ and $G_\psi(\tau)=\left<T_\tau\psi_i(\tau)\psi_i(0)\right>$, with $T_\tau$ being the time-ordering operator in imaginary time.
From Eq.\eqref{Gpsi}, the Green's function of the large system is the same as a single SYK$_4$ model: the scaling dimension of $\psi$ is $\left[\psi\right]=1/4$. At the zero-temperature limit, this leads to:
\begin{align}
G_\psi(\tau)=b_\psi\frac{\text{sgn}(\tau)}{|\tau|^{1/2}}, \ \ \ \ \ \ 4\pi J^2b_\psi^4=1，
\end{align}
and the Green's function at finite temperature is then given by conformal mapping $\tau=\tan\frac{\pi\tau'}{\beta}$\cite{Comments}. On the other hand, due to the competition of the two terms in \eqref{Gchi}, the physics of small system $\chi$ is very different for $n=1$, $n=3$ and $n> 3$.
(1). For the $n=3$ case, the coupling term $V_{ai_1i_2i_3}$ shares the same scaling dimension with the on-site SYK$_4$ interaction. As a result, the scaling dimension of $\chi$ is also $1/4$. Nevertheless, the interaction would renormalize the coefficient of the Green's function:
\begin{align}
G_\chi(\tau)=b_\chi\frac{\text{sgn}(\tau)}{|\tau|^{1/2}}, \ \ \ \ \ \ 4\pi J^2b_\chi^4+4\pi V^2b_\chi b_\psi^3=1.
\end{align}
We could define $b_\chi=\eta b_\psi$, and then we have $\eta^4+\frac{V^2}{J^2}\eta=1$.
The thermalization of a quantum system is closely related to the information scrambling \cite{upper Hartnoll,lower Hartnoll,upper Lucas,lower Blake}. As a result, it is useful to compute the Lyapunov exponent for this sytem. The out-of-time order correlation function at inverse temperature $\beta$ is defined as $$F_\chi(t_1,t_2)=\left<\chi_i(t_1-i\beta/2)\chi_j(-i\beta/2)\chi_i(t_2)\chi_j(0)\right>.$$ To the leading order of $1/N$, the self-consistent equation for $F_\chi(t_1,t_2)$ in long-time limit can be written as:
\begin{align}
F_\chi(t_1,t_2)&=\int dt_3dt_4 K_R(t_1,t_2;t_3,t_4)F_\chi(t_3,t_4),\\
K_R(t_1,t_2;t_3,t_4)&=-3J^2G_{R,\chi}(t_{13})G_{R,\chi}(t_{24})G_{W,\chi}(t_{34})^2.
\end{align}
Where $G_{R,\chi}(t)=-i\theta(t)\left<\{\chi_i(t),\chi_i(0)\}\right>$ is the standard retarded Green's function and $G_{W,\chi}(t)\equiv\left<\chi(t-i\beta/2)\chi(0)\right>$. For simplicity, we take $\beta=2\pi$. Using the assumption:
\begin{align}
F_\chi(t_1,t_2)=\frac{e^{-h\frac{t_1+t_2}{2}}}{\left(\cosh\frac{\pi(t_1-t_2)}{\beta}\right)^{1/2-h}},
\end{align}
it can be shown that the self-consistent equation is satisfied if $3\eta^4=1-2h$. This gives a Lyapunov exponent
\begin{align}
\lambda_L=\frac{3\eta^4-1}{2}\approx1-\frac{3V^2}{8J^2}+O\left(\left(\frac{V^2}{J^2}\right)^2\right).
\end{align}
Physically, due to the marginal coupling, information leaks from the $\chi$ system into the thermal bath $\psi$. As a result, the scrambling of information in the small system becomes slower \cite{Yiming}.
(2). For the $n=1$ case, the inter-site coupling is relevant near the original SYK$_4$ fixed point and the in the zero-temperature limit, the $\chi$ system is driven into a new phase with scaling dimension $[\chi]=1-[\psi]$:
\begin{align}
G_\chi(\tau)=b_\chi\frac{\text{sgn}(\tau)}{|\tau|^{3/2}}, \ \ \ \ \ \ 4\pi V^2b_\chi b_\psi=1.
\end{align}
Here we neglected the contribution from $J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}$ since it is irrelevant near this new fixed point. After Fourier transformation, this shows the spectral function vanishes as $\sqrt{\omega}$ for small $\omega$, indicating the system is non-chaotic. One could take into account the contribution of $\partial_\tau$ term, and the Green's function then has the form of $G_\chi^{-1}(\omega)\sim \omega+V^2/\sqrt{J \omega}$, which gives a minimal at $\omega_0 \sim J(V^2/J^2)^{2/3}$. This gives an approximation for the peak of the spectral function.
For the out-of-time order correlation function $F_\chi(t_1,t_2)$, by counting the $N$ factor, one could find the random coupling $V_{ai_1}$ gives no contribution to $F_\chi(t)$ to the $1/N$ order in the conformal limit (which is also true for general $n$ \cite{Yiming}), as a result we have $\lambda_L \beta\rightarrow 0$ as $\beta \rightarrow \infty$. This system is non-chaotic in the low-energy limit.
(3). Finally, for the $n>3$ case, the coupling term is irrelevant near the decoupled SYK$_4$ fixed point. As a result, we have:
\begin{align}
G_\chi(\tau)=G_\psi(\tau).
\end{align}
In the low-temperature $\beta J \rightarrow \infty$ we could still have a non-Fermi liquid $\chi$ with maximal chaos $\beta \lambda_L\rightarrow 2\pi$.
\section{Evaporation Dynamics on Keldysh Contour}
Different thermal behaviors for systems with different $n$ indicates they should also have different quench dynamics. In this work we focus on such evaporation process by preparing an initial thermal ensemble with $V_{ai_1i_2...i_n}=0$ at $t<0$, and turn on the interaction $V_{ai_1i_2...i_n}$ at $t=0$. This quench problem can be analyzed on the Keldysh contour \cite{Kamenev}, where fields $\chi_+$, $\psi_+$ live on the upper ($+$) contour while $\chi_-$, $\psi_-$ live on the lower ($-$) contour. The partition function on Keldysh contour then is given by:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{Z}&=\int d J d\tilde{J}dVP(J,\tilde{J},V)\mathcal{D}\chi_+\mathcal{D}\psi_+\mathcal{D}\chi_-\mathcal{D}\psi_-e^{i\int dt L},\\
L&=\sum_i\frac{1}{2}\chi_{i,\alpha}(\hat{G}^0)^{-1}_{\alpha\beta}\chi_{i,\beta}+\sum_i\frac{1}{2}\psi_{i,\alpha}(\hat{G}^0)^{-1}_{\alpha\beta}\psi_{i,\beta}\notag\\&\ \ -H[\chi_+,\psi_+]+H[\chi_-,\psi_-]. \label{L}
\end{align}
Here $\alpha$, $\beta=\pm$ and $P(J,\tilde{J},V)$ is Gaussian the distribution function for random variables. On such contour, the Green's function $\hat{G}$ is defined as
\begin{align}
\hat{G}_{\chi,\alpha\beta}(t,t')=-i\left<\chi_\alpha(t)\chi_\beta(t')\right>=\begin{pmatrix}
G^{T}_\chi(t,t')&G^{<}_\chi(t,t')\\
G^{>}_\chi(t,t')&G^{\tilde{T}}_\chi(t,t')
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align}
And similar definition works for $\hat{G}_\psi$. We have $(\hat{G}^0)=(\hat{G})_{J,V=0}$ is the non-interacting limit of the Green's function \cite{Kamenev}. For Majorana fermions, we have the relation $G^>(t,t')=(G^<(t,t'))^*$. Green's functions in this $\pm$ basis are related to the retarded, advanced, Keldysh components of the Green's function by Keldysh rotation:
\begin{align}
G_{R}(t,t')&=\theta(t-t')(G^>(t,t')-G^<(t,t')),\label{GR}\\
G_{A}(t,t')&=\theta(t'-t)(G^<(t,t')-G^>(t,t')),\\
G_{K}(t,t')&=G^<(t,t')+G^>(t,t').\label{GK}
\end{align}
$H[\chi_\pm,\psi_\pm]$ is defined by replacing the operator $\chi_i$ by corresponding field $\chi_{i,\pm}$, with an additional $\theta(t)$ factor in the inter-site coupling:
\begin{align}
H[\chi_\pm,\psi_\pm]=&\sum_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}\frac{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}}{4!}\chi_{i_1,\pm}\chi_{i_2,\pm}\chi_{i_3,\pm}\chi_{i_4,\pm}\notag\\&+\sum_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}\frac{\tilde{J}_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}}{4!}\psi_{i_1,\pm}\psi_{i_2,\pm}\psi_{i_3,\pm}\psi_{i_4,\pm}\notag\\&+\theta(t)\sum_{ai_1...i_n}\frac{V_{ai_1i_2...i_n}}{n!}\chi_{a,\pm}\psi_{i_1,\pm}...\psi_{i_n,\pm}.
\end{align}
The Schwinger-Dyson equation for two-point correlators contains the same melon diagrams with the imaginary time calculation shown in Figure. \ref{fig}. This gives the self-energy:
\begin{align}
\hat\Sigma_{\chi,\alpha\beta}(t,t')&\equiv\begin{pmatrix}
\Sigma_\chi^{T}(t,t')&-\Sigma_\chi^{<}(t,t')\\
-\Sigma_\chi^{>}(t,t')&\Sigma_\chi^{\tilde{T}}(t,t')
\end{pmatrix}_{\alpha\beta}\notag\\&=-J^2\alpha \beta G^3_{\chi,\alpha\beta}(t,t')\notag \\ &\ \ \ -V^2\alpha \beta (-1)^{\frac{n+1}{2}}\theta(t)\theta(t')G^{n}_{\psi,\alpha\beta}(t,t'),\\
\hat\Sigma_{\psi,\alpha\beta}(t,t')&\equiv\begin{pmatrix}
\Sigma_\psi^{T}(t,t')&-\Sigma_\psi^{<}(t,t')\\
-\Sigma_\psi^{>}(t,t')&\Sigma_\psi^{\tilde{T}}(t,t')
\end{pmatrix}_{\alpha\beta}\notag \\ &=-J^2\alpha \beta G^3_{\psi,\alpha\beta}(t,t').
\end{align}
Similarly to the Green's function, we could also define the retarded, advanced, Keldysh components of the self-energy for both $\chi$ and $\psi$ as:
\begin{align}
\Sigma_{R}(t,t')&=\theta(t-t')(\Sigma^>(t,t')-\Sigma^<(t,t')),\\
\Sigma_{A}(t,t')&=\theta(t'-t)(\Sigma^<(t,t')-\Sigma^>(t,t')),\\
\Sigma_{K}(t,t')&=\Sigma^<(t,t')+\Sigma^>(t,t').
\end{align}
As in the imaginary-time calculation, the bath $\psi$ is not affected by the small system. As a result, we know $G_\psi$ is always given by the equilibrium result. The spectral function $A_\psi(\omega)=-\frac{1}{\pi}\text{Im}G_{R,\psi}(\omega)$ in thermal equilibrium with temperature $T_\psi$ can be determined numerically by the self-consistent equation of retarded Green's function:
\begin{align}
G_{R,\psi}(\omega)^{-1}&=\omega-\Sigma_{R,\psi}(\omega), \label{GR1}\\
\Sigma_{R,\psi}(\omega)&=-iJ^2\int_0^\infty dt e^{i\omega t}(n_\psi(t)^3+(n_\psi(t)^*)^3), \label{GR2}\\
n_\psi(t)&=\int d\omega e^{-i\omega t} A_\psi(\omega)n_F(\omega, T_\psi), \label{GR3}
\end{align}
where $n_F(\omega, T_\psi)$ is the Fermi-Dirac distribution function at temperature $T_\psi$ and we have used the relation \cite{Kamenev}:
\begin{align}
G^>(\omega)=-in_F(-\omega,T)A(\omega),
\end{align}
valid for Majorana fermions on thermal equilibrium.
In contrast, the small $\chi$ system is driven by its coupling to the large system and becomes time-dependent. For such an evolution problem, it is better to write the self-consistent equation in the form of Kadanoff-Baym equations in real-time for $t>0$ using the Langreth rules \cite{book}, this gives:
\begin{align}
i\partial_{t_1}G^>_\chi(t_1,t_2)=\int d t_3 (&\Sigma^R_\chi(t_1,t_3)G^>_\chi(t_3,t_2)\notag \\ &+\Sigma^>_\chi(t_1,t_3)G^A_\chi(t_3,t_2)), \label{eq1}\\
-i\partial_{t_2}G^>_\chi(t_1,t_2)=\int d t_3 (&G^R_\chi(t_1,t_3)\Sigma^>_\chi(t_3,t_2)\notag \\ &+G^>_\chi(t_1,t_3)\Sigma^A_\chi(t_3,t_2)).\label{eq2}
\end{align}
In these equations, the evolution of $G_\chi^>(t,t')$ only depends on information of $G_\chi^>(t_1,t_2)$ with $t_1<t$ and $t_2<t'$, which make the causal structure explicit. The initial condition of $G_\chi^>(t,t')$ is given by the thermal solution:
\begin{align}
G_\chi^>(t,t')=G_\chi^>(t-t'),\ \ \ \ \text{for}\ \ t,t'<0. \label{ini}
\end{align}
where $G_\chi^>(t-t')$ is determined similar to \eqref{GR1}, \eqref{GR2} and \eqref{GR3}, with $T_\psi$ replaced by $T_\chi$. Solving \eqref{eq1} and \eqref{eq2} with initial condition \eqref{ini} leads to exact (for large $N\gg1$) quench dynamics of the small SYK model when coupled to a large SYK bath. We have checked that if $V=0$, the numerical evolution preserve the translation symmetry $G_\chi^>(t,t')=G_\chi^>(t-t')$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{quench1.pdf}
\caption{The result of quench dynamics for $n=3$ with $V/J=0.6$, $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. (a). The real part of $G^>_\chi(t+\frac{t_r}{2},t-\frac{t_r}{2})$ as a function of $t_r$ for different $t$. (b). $F(\omega,t)=G_{\chi,K}(\omega,t)/\left(G_{\chi,R}(\omega,t)-G_{\chi,A}(\omega,t)\right)$ for different time $t$. (c). The evolution of effective temperature $T(t)$. The red line shows the result of exponential fitting of the late-time behavior. The green line represents the distance between $F(\omega)$ and $1-2n_F(\omega,T(t))$ defined by \eqref{Delta}, we take the cutoff $\Lambda$ by requiring $F(\Lambda)=0.8$. (d). The evolution of energy $E(t)$ determined by \eqref{ene}. The green line is a fit for the short-time linear increase of energy and the red line is a late-time exponential fit for the relaxation of energy.} \label{fig2}
\end{figure}
After numerical evolution, we define the effective temperature at time $t$:
\begin{align}
1/T(t)&=2\frac{d}{d\omega}\left(\frac{G_{\chi,K}(\omega,t)}{G_{\chi,R}(\omega,t)-G_{\chi,A}(\omega,t)}\right)_{\omega=0}\notag\\&\equiv2\frac{d}{d\omega}\left(F(\omega,t)\right)_{\omega=0}.
\end{align}
Here we have performed the Wigner transformation of Green's functions:
\begin{align}
G(\omega,t)=\int dt' e^{i\omega t'}G(t+\frac{t'}{2},t-\frac{t'}{2}).
\end{align}
We also define
\begin{align}
\Delta=\int_{|\omega|<\Lambda} d\omega \left(\frac{G_{\chi,K}(\omega,t)}{G_{\chi,R}(\omega,t)-G_{\chi,A}(\omega,t)}-(1-2n_F(T))\right)^2,\label{Delta}
\end{align}
which characterize the difference between the numerical result and a thermal distribution function in low-energy limit with cutoff $\Lambda$. We could also define instantaneous energy of the $\chi$ system by
\begin{align}
E(t_0)=\sum_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}\frac{1}{4!}\overline{\left<J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}\chi_{i_1}(t_0)\chi_{i_2}(t_0)\chi_{i_3}(t_0)\chi_{i_4}(t_0)\right>}\label{ene}
\end{align}
To express this formula in terms of $G^>_\chi$, we add an source term to the Lagrangian in Eq. \eqref{L}:
\begin{align}
\Delta L(t_0)=\sum_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}\frac{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}a\delta(t-t_0)}{4!}\chi_{i_1,+}\chi_{i_2,+}\chi_{i_3,+}\chi_{i_4,+}
\end{align}
Then by taking derivative to the standard $G-\Sigma$ action \cite{Comments}, it is straightforward to prove the relation:
\begin{align}
E(t_0)&=\left(\frac{d \ln \mathcal{Z}(a)}{da}\right)_{a\rightarrow0}\notag\\&=i\frac{J^2}{4}\int^{t_0} dt \left(G^>_\chi(t_0,t)^4-G^<_\chi(t_0,t)^4\right).\label{E0for}
\end{align}
\section{Marginal Coupling: Energy Increase and Relaxation}
We first consider the $n=3$ case where both on-site interaction $J$ and coupling to bath $V$ contribute to the low-energy physics. We take $J/T_\chi=5$ throughout the numerics.
In Figure \ref{fig2}, we have shown a typical numerical result. We choose the parameter to be $V/J=0.6$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. In (a), we plot $G^>_\chi(t+\frac{t_r}{2},t-\frac{t_r}{2})$ for different time $t=0,\ \pm 10 \beta_\chi/\pi$. Based on this results, we could compute the distribution $F(\omega,t)$ at different time, as shown in (b). From the result of $F(\omega,t)$, we could determine the effective temperature $T(t)=1/\beta(t)$ in (c). We also check the distance between $F(\omega)$ and $1-2n_F(\omega,T(t))$ (the green curve), where we take the cutoff $\Lambda$ satisfies $F(\Lambda)=0.8$. This result suggests the low-energy behavior of the system can be approximated by an thermal ensemble for almost any $t$. In Figure (d), we show the energy $E(t)$ of the $\chi$ system. For short time limit, the system absorbs energy from the coupling linearly (fitted by the green line) and in long-time limit the energy flows into the bath.
\begin{figure}[t]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{quench2.pdf}
\caption{(a). The energy absorption rate $E'(0)/J^2$ as a function of $V/J$ for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. The red line is a linear fit for the first four points. (b). The energy absorption rate $E'(0)/J^2$ as a function of $T_\psi/J$ for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $V/J=0.6$. There is almost no temperature dependence. (c). Relaxation rate $\lambda_\beta$ and $\lambda_E$ as a function of $V/J$ for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. The red and the green line is a linear fit for the first three points. (d). Relaxation rate $\lambda_\beta$ as a function of $T_\psi/J$ for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $V/J=0.6$. The red line is a linear fit for the first four points.} \label{fig3}
\end{figure}
Since the system is a many-body chaotic non-Fermi liquid, we expect the effective temperature should show fast relaxation to the thermal equilibrium with $T(\infty)=T_\psi$. However, interestingly we find the effective temperature will increase first before it starts to decrease, which is clear from Figure \ref{fig2} (c) and (d). Physically, this is because when we quench the system by adding new interaction term, we create some excitations in the system first. Only then the energy of the small system begins to dissipate into the thermal bath, and the system is cooled down. This phenomenon is firstly discussed by Swingle in talk \cite{Swingle} for general quantum systems, where a perturbative calculation for the system-bath coupling, as well as exact diagonalization for SYK models coupled to a wire bath, have already been worked out. It is also found to be related to the averaged null energy condition in holographic systems \cite{holo}. Here we find that such effect also holds for finite coupling strength in our system.
We quantify this temperature increase by studying the behavior of $E'(0^+),$ as a function of $V/J$ and $T_\psi/J$. For simplicity, we would drop the $+$ sign later. Physically, increasing $V/J$ would excite more excitations and as a result, $E'(0)$ should become larger. For small $V$, perturbatively we have
\begin{align}
\frac{dE}{dt}&=\sum\left<\left[\frac{J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}}{4!}\chi_{i_1}\chi_{i_2}\chi_{i_3}\chi_{i_4},\frac{V_{ai_1i_2i_3}}{3!}\chi_a\psi_{i_1}\psi_{i_2}\psi_{i_3} \right]\right>\notag \\
&\propto \sum\left<J_{i_1i_2i_3i_4}\chi_{i_1}\chi_{i_2}\chi_{i_3}V_{i_4j_1j_2j_3}\psi_{j_1}\psi_{j_2}\psi_{j_3}\right>\notag \\ &\sim J^2V^2 \int dt_1dt_2G_\chi^3(t_1)G_\chi(t_1-t_2)G_\psi^3(t_2+\epsilon)\notag\\
&\sim V^2 G_\psi^3(\epsilon)\propto V^2 \label{Vs}
\end{align}
Where we have split the operators by cutoff $\epsilon\sim 1/J$ to avoid possible divergences in the third line. The Green's function represents either advanced or other components of the Green's function, whose specific choice is not important but could be determined using Eq. \eqref{eq1}, \eqref{eq2} and \eqref{E0for}.
We indeed find such behavior in numerical results shown in Figure \ref{fig3} (a) and (b). In (a), we set $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. For small $V^2/J^2$, We find approximately $E'(0)\propto V^{2}$. On the other hand, the $E'(0)$ is also found to be almostly independent of $T_\psi/J$.
Then we consider the long-time limit where the energy of the small system $\chi$ finally decays into the bath. We could define two different relaxation rate:
1. the relaxation of $\beta(t)$ defines $\lambda_\beta$ by $$\beta(t)\sim\beta_\psi-c_0\exp(-\lambda_\beta t),$$ which is similar to the thermalization rate $\Gamma$ for an isolated system \cite{Sachdev}.
2. The relaxation of energy $E(t)$, given by $$E(t)\sim E(\infty)-c_0'\exp(-\lambda_E t).$$
From Figure. \ref{fig3} (c), we see $\lambda_E<\lambda_\beta$, which is reasonable since the relaxation of energy is a necessary condition for thermal equilibrium.
\begin{figure}[t]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{quench3.pdf}
\caption{The quench dynamics for $n=5$. (a-b). The result of quench dynamics with $V/J=2$, $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. In (a), we plot evolution of effective temperature $\beta(t)$ and the distance $\Delta$ (Again, we take $F(\Lambda)=0.8$.). The red line shows the result of the exponential fitting of the late-time behavior. (b). The evolution of energy $E(t)$. The green line is a fit for the short-time linear increase of energy and the red line is a late-time exponential fit for the relaxation of energy. (c). Relaxation rate $\lambda_\beta$ and $\lambda_E$ as a function of $V/J$ for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. The red and the green line is a linear fit for the first three points. (d). The energy absorption rate $E'(0)/J^2$ as a function of $V/J$ for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. The red line is a linear fit for the first four points.} \label{fig4}
\end{figure}
For small $V/J$, perturbatively, we expect the energy relaxation rate to be proportional to $V^2$, which is consistent with the time-scale that this system becomes thermal, as shown in Figure \ref{fig3} (c). Physically, here the process is dominated by the energy relaxation from the $\chi$ system into the bath $\lambda_\beta \sim \lambda_E$. However, if we further increase the inter-site coupling or go to the low-temperature limit, the relaxation rate would saturate to $\lambda \propto T_\psi$. This is because the energy flows into the bath quicker than the system itself becomes thermalized. As a result, we expect $\lambda_\beta \sim \Gamma\ll \lambda_E$, where $\Gamma$ is known to be bounded by temperature $ T_\psi$ \cite{Hqm}.
\section{Irrelevant and Relevant Coupling}
In this section we consider different coupling terms with $n=5$ and $n=1$. As discussed in previous sections, they correspond to the irrelevant and relevant coupling case.
We firstly consider the irrelevant case $n=5$. Since the coupling is irrelevant, it should have a neglectable effect in the zero-temperature limit. While for the finite temperature case, we expect the influence of the coupling on the system is much smaller than the $n=3$ case and the system should evolve adiabatically even for large $V/J>1$, as shown in Figure \ref{fig4} (a) where $V/J=2$. Nevertheless, we find qualitatively similar behavior compared to the $n=3$ case, where the system ultimately relax to a thermal ensemble with $T(\infty)=T_\psi$. The figure (b) shows the system also absorb energy first with almost constant rate and then the energy flow back to the bath.
\begin{figure}[t]
\center
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{quench4.pdf}
\caption{The quench dynamics for $n=1$. (a-c). The result of quench dynamics with $V/J=0.5$ $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. (a). The real part of $G^>_\chi(t+\frac{t_r}{2},t-\frac{t_r}{2})$ as a function of $t_r$ for different $t$. In (b), we plot evolution of effective temperature $\beta(t)$ and the distance $\Delta$ (Again, we take $F(\Lambda)=0.8$.). The red line shows the result for fitting of the late-time behavior. (c). The evolution of energy $E(t)$. The green line is a fit for the short-time linear increase of energy and the red line is a late-time exponential fit for the relaxation of energy. (d). Oscillation frequency $\omega$ as a function of $V^2/J^2$ for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$ in the $log$-$log$ plot. The red line is a linear fit suggesting $\log(\omega)\sim 0.63\log(V^2/J^2)+\text{cons.}$} \label{fig5}
\end{figure}
In figure (c), we further study the relaxation rate $\lambda_E$ and $\lambda_\beta$ of the system as a function of $V/J$. For the relaxation rate, we need a larger $V/J$ to make the energy absorption much quicker than the thermalization rate of the effective temperature. Nevertheless, when this occurs, we find the $\lambda_\beta$ is of the same order as the $n=3$ case as expected. We also check that this saturation value is proportional to $T_\psi$.
In figure (d), we plot the energy absorption rate $\lambda_E'(0)$ as a function of $V/J$. Naturally, for small $V^2/J^2$, $\lambda_E'(0)\propto V^2/J^2$, which is determined from the perturbation theory. Similar to Eq. \eqref{Vs}, we should also expect $E'(0)$ would not have significant temperature dependence for small $V/J\ll 1$.
On the contrary, the low energy behavior is different with or without coupling $V$ for the relevant case $n=1$. Consequently, the quench dynamics, in this case, is very different from previous results, as shown in Figure \ref{fig5}. Firstly, since the spectral function for $V\neq 0$ has a peak around $\pm \omega_0 \neq 0$, the Green's function in real-time $G^>_\chi$ show an oscillation in real-time for $t>0$, as shown in Figure \ref{fig5} (a).
The fact that the collective mode has specific frequency is also reflected in the evolution of effective temperature $\beta(t)$, as shown in (b). To extract the oscillation frequency, we fit the late time behavior as:
\begin{align}
\beta(t)=c_0+d_0\exp(-\lambda t)\sin(\omega t+f_0).
\end{align}
The result of $\omega$ as a function of $V^2/J^2$ is shown in (d) for $T_\chi=0.2 J$ and $T_\chi=1.5 T_\psi$. The linear fit suggests $\log(\omega)\sim 0.63\log(V^2/J^2)+\text{cons.}$, which is close to the analytical approximation $\log(\omega_0)\sim0.67\log(V^2/J^2)+\text{cons.}$ We also find the energy of the system shows oscillations in (c).
\section{Summary and Outlook}
In this paper, we couple the small SYK system $\chi$ to a large SYK bath $\psi$ with lower temperature. In thermal equilibrium, depending on the number of $\psi$ operator $n$ in the coupling term, we find the system shows different behaviors:
(1). For $n=3$, the coupling is marginal and the $\chi$ system is dressed by $\psi$, and the Lyapunov exponent deviates from maximal chaotic by a constant factor in the low-energy limit.
(2). For $n=1$, the coupling is relevant. The single-particle spectra show a peak at a finite frequency and the system is not chaotic in the low-temperature limit.
(3). For $n=5$, the coupling is irrelevant and does not contribute to the low-energy limit.
Based on this knowledge, we further consider their quench dynamics. In all cases, the system firstly absorbs energy with almost constant energy absorption rate $E'(0)$ before the energy relaxes into the large bath. We find $E'(0)$ is determined by UV physics with almost no temperature dependence.
(1). For both $n=3$ and $n=5$, the energy and the temperature decay monotonically for the relaxation process. For small system bath coupling $V$, we find both the temperature decay rate $\lambda_\beta$ and the energy decay rate $\lambda_E$ are proportional to $V^2/J^2$. While for $V^2/J^2 \gg 1$, the energy relaxes quickly and after that, the system gradually approaches the thermal equilibrium with $\lambda_\beta$ bounded by $1/\beta$.
For finite temperature, the main difference for the $n=3$ and $n=5$ case is that for $n=5$ we need much larger coupling $V$ to get a moderate relaxation rate.
(2). The situation is very different for $n=1$. In this case, since the single-particle spectra show a peak at a finite frequency in the thermal ensemble, the relaxation is non-monotonically with oscillations in both temperature and energy. The oscillation frequency of the temperature is found to be the same as the quasi-particle energy.
It is interesting to generalize the set-up in this work to further study the evaporation dynamics. As an example, it would be interesting if one could study the evaporation of the coupled SYK model \cite{Xiaoliang}, where negative specific heat regime exists for intermediate temperature. This case would mimic the Hawking radiation of a black hole. It is also interesting to study the evaporation across a continuous phase transition or crossover \cite{Altman,Balents,our,sk jian,yyz condensation}. Another interesting direction is to study the envolution of entanglement entropy in such systems \cite{para1,para2,para3}.
\textit{Acknowledgements} We thank Xiao-Liang Qi for bringing our attention to the evaporation problem of SYK models and many inspiring discussions. We also want to thank Chao-Ming Jian and Shunyu Yao for helpful discussion. We acknowledge support
from the Walter Burke
Institute for Theoretical Physics at Caltech.
After finishing this work, we became aware that Almheiri, Milekhin, and Swingle have also studied the thermalization of two coupled SYK clusters using Schwinger-Keldysh and exact diagonalization.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec1}
In the recent years, several of cosmic ray (CR) detectors in the space have presented a wide range of the new data ($1~\rm GeV$-$10~\rm TeV$) in the electron-positron spectra; the Fermi Large Area Telescope (Fermi-LAT) has reported a measurement of the CR electron-positron spectrum from $7~\rm GeV$ to $2~\rm TeV$\cite{Fermi-Lat}. The PAMELA satellite
experiment\cite{PAMELA} observed an abundance of the positron in the CR energy range of $15-100~\rm GeV$, also a positron fraction in primary CRs of $0.5-500~\rm GeV$ \cite{Accardo:2014lma} and the measurement of electron plus positron flux in the primary CRs from $0.5~\rm GeV$ to $1~\rm TeV$ have been reported by the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS-02)\cite{AMS}. Also the results of a CR electron-positron spectrum, between $10~\rm GeV$ and $\rm 3 TeV$, have been presented based upon observations with the CALorimetric Electron Telescope instrument(CALET)\cite{CALET}. The recent report of the DAMPE collaboration \cite{TheDAMPE:2017dtc} released measurements of the electron-positron spectrum in the energy range $25~\rm GeV$ to $4.6 ~\rm TeV$ with high energy resolution and low particle background. Although DAMPE data confirm the measurements of the AMS-02 \cite{AMS} and Fermi-LAT \cite{Fermi-Lat} on the low energy side (below $\rm 1 ~TeV$), the spectrum seems to have a tentative sharp peak above the background at around $1.4 ~\rm TeV$ \cite{TheDAMPE:2017dtc}. It is notable that in the energy region below $300~ \rm GeV$, CALET's spectrum is consistent with the AMS-02, Fermi-LAT, and DAMPE, while in the energy ranges $300$ to $1~ \rm TeV$ the CALET’s results exhibit a lower flux than the spectra from the latter two experiments\cite{Adriani:2018ktz}. While DAMPE excess could be a statistical fluctuation \cite{Fowlie:2017fya}, the extensive discussion on the possible theoretical and experimental explanation of the DAMPE excess” with both astrophysical origin \cite{pulsar} or DM origin \cite{DM}
have been proposed. The monoenergetic electron in the energy $1.4 \rm ~TeV$ implies local sources of electrons-positrons, because $\rm TeV$ electrons can only travel by a small distance $(\rm kpc)$ in the Milky Way due to strong radiative cooling process of high energy
CR electrons. Therefore, if this excess emanates from DM, the source of such high energy and monoenergetic electrons is located at the vicinity of the solar system\cite{Yuan:2017ysv}. One possible way to describe electron-positron excess is that the DM particles annihilate into leptons and the mass of DM particles are about $1.5 \rm ~TeV$ if the nearby DM subhalo of $\sim 10^7\,M_\odot$ locates $0.1-0.3 \rm~kpc$ away from solar system and the
DM annihilation cross section is $ \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle \sim 3 \times 10^{-26} \, cm^{3}/s $\cite{Yuan:2017ysv}.
Here, we explain the DAMPE electron excess by attributing to the VDM annihilation in the near of the solar system.
We have extended the study performed in \cite{Athron:2017drj} to cover VDM candidate. In this reference only the scalar and fermionic DM candidates was considered.
The VDM and some of its theoretical and phenomenological impacts has been extensively studied in literatures\cite{VDM}. In this regard, we classify all renormalizable VDM models with leptophilic interactions in which a massive particle with spin 0, 1/2, or 1 plays the role of mediator between dark side and the SM leptons.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: In the next section, we extend SM with the set of simplified leptophilic vector dark mater models that couple with scalar, spinor or vector mediators. In
Sec.~\ref{sec3}, we introduce the conditions for explaining the DAMPE electron excess in the models. In this section, we also discuss phenomenological constraints such as anomalous magnetic moments of leptons, direct detection, indirect detection and collider constraints on the parameter space of the models. The combined analysis for DAMPE excess and phenomenological constraints in parameters space are given in Sec.~\ref{sec4}. Finally, we make a conclusion in Sec.~\ref{sec5}.
\section{Vector dark matter models} \label{sec2}
In this paper, we consider a model-independent
approach in which we study all renormalizable interactions via a massive spin 0, 1/2, or 1 mediator between
VDM particles and the SM leptons.
In our study a single species of VDM is responsible for both DAMPE excess and the DM relic density.
We study the following six possible interactions between VDM and SM leptons which satisfy Hermiticity, Lorentz invariance, and renormalizablity,
\begin{align}
{\text{model 1:}} \quad {\cal{L}}_{1} &\supset \mu \phi X_{\mu} X^{\mu} + \sum_{\ell=e,\mu,\tau} \lambda_{s} \phi \overline{\ell} \ell , \\
{\text{model 2:}} \quad {\cal{L}}_{2} &\supset \mu \phi X_{\mu} X^{\mu} + \sum_{\ell=e,\mu,\tau} \lambda_{p} \phi \overline{\ell} i \gamma^{5} \ell , \\
{\text{model 3:}} \quad {\cal{L}}_{3} &\supset g_{v} V_{\mu} (X^{\nu} \partial\nu X^{\mu} + {\text{h.c.}}) + \sum_{\ell=e,\mu,\tau} g_{s} V_{\mu} \overline{\ell} \gamma^{\mu} \ell , \label{lagrangian3}\\
{\text{model 4:}} \quad {\cal{L}}_{4} &\supset g_{v} V_{\mu} (X^{\nu} \partial\nu X^{\mu} + {\text{h.c.}}) + \sum_{\ell=e,\mu,\tau} g_{p} V_{\mu} \overline{\ell} \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^{5} \ell , \label{lagrangian4}\\
{\text{model 5:}} \quad {\cal{L}}_{5} &\supset \sum_{\ell=e,\mu,\tau} y_{s} X_{\mu} \overline{\psi} \gamma^{\mu} \ell + {\text{h.c.}} , \quad M_{\psi} > M_{X} , \\
{\text{model 6:}} \quad {\cal{L}}_{6} &\supset \sum_{\ell=e,\mu,\tau} y_{p} X_{\mu} \overline{\psi} \gamma^{\mu} \gamma^{5} \ell + {\text{h.c.}} , \quad M_{\psi} > M_{X} ,
\end{align}\label{lagrangian}
where $ X_{\mu} $ is the VDM candidate, and, $ \phi $, $ V_{\mu} $, and $ \psi $ are scalar, vector, and (Dirac) spinor mediators, respectively. In our analysis, we have assumed universal couplings between the mediators and the SM leptons. To keep it simple, we have avoided mixing between generations.
We also define the dimensionless
coupling $ g_{\phi} = \frac{\mu}{M_{X}} $, so that all parameters be dimensionless.
In the case of spin 0 mediators (model 1 and 2), couplings between the scalar field and only left-handed neutrinos are zero. For the right-handed neutrinos, considering see-saw mechanism, Yukawa couplings
between light mass eigenstates and the scalar mediator would be suppressed by lightness of neutrino masses or equivalently the seesaw scale. Since $ X_{\mu} $ is neutral with no electric charge, for spin 1/2 mediators (model 5 and 6), the spinor $ \psi $ has positive electric charge (and couples to photon), that is, equal but opposite to the charged leptons. Therefore, $ X_{\mu} $ and neutrinos can not couple together via charged spin 1/2 mediators. These models are also considered in \cite{Feng:2019rgm} to explain the positron and electron flux from
AMS-02 and DAMPE data. Unlike our work, they have considered both DM annihilation and decay into light leptons at the same time.
Since in any SU(2) invariant theory, the coupling between neutrinos and the vector mediator is generally non-zero in the case of spin 1 mediators (model 3 and 4), the vector mediator, $ V_{\mu} $, can couple to the both charged leptons and left-handed neutrinos
by a vector or axial-vector interactions. However, considering \eqref{lagrangian3} and \eqref{lagrangian4}, models 3 and 4 will lead to a $p$-wave suppressed annihilation cross section and they can not explain DAMPE excess, therefore, there is no need to consider Yukawa interactions between the vector mediators and neutrinos in these models.
In each one of models 1 to 6, we only consider a single mediator and a single species of VDM in which the lepton-mediator interactions is either completely scalar (vector) or completely pseudoscalar (axial-vector), but not a mixture. As we mentioned before, we assume universal couplings only between charged leptons and the mediators.
Furthermore, no tree-level mixing between the SM Z-boson and VDM has been assumed. We have also ignored tree-level mixing between $ \phi $ and the SM Higgs boson. Also note that for models 5 and 6, in order to avoid DM decay, we should have $ M_{\psi} > M_{X} $. Regarding this constraint $ X_{\mu} $ will be stable and can serve as DM.
\section{Phenomenological constraints} \label{sec3}
In this section, we study various constraints on parameters space of the model so that it predicts the correct relic abundance of DM and the DAMPE excess. These constraints coming from experimental observables at LEP and LHC and DM direct/indirect detection. These are furnished in the following.
\subsection{DAMPE electron-positron excess}
DAMPE measurements of the cosmic electron-positron flux exhibit a sharp resonance near 1.4 TeV which hints DM annihilation (or decays) in a DM subhalo located close to the solar system with an enhanced DM density.
Because this sharp resonance in the DAMPE data
occurs around 1.4 TeV, we take the VDM mass to be 1.5 TeV. In order to produce DAMPE peak, one requires DM subhalo with a density about 17-35 times greater than the local density of DM at a distance of $ \sim $ 0.1 kpc \cite{Yuan:2017ysv}. Moreover, DM annihilation cross section should not be suppressed by velocity ($ \sigma v \sim v^{2} $). In models 1 to 6, we take $ \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle \simeq
[2.2-3.8] \times 10^{-26} \, cm^{3}/s $ as a constraint required to explain DAMPE excess.
\subsection{Relic density}
Here,
we compute the relic density for VDM candidate. According to Planck collaboration DM relic density is $ \Omega h^{2} = 0.120 \pm 0.001 $ \cite{Aghanim:2018eyx} which translates
into a strict relation between the couplings and mediator masses. In Figs.~\ref{ann} and \ref{ann2}, we depict DM annihilation cross section against the mediator mass for the parameters satisfying DM relic density. We have obtained DM relic density and annihilation cross section using {\tt{micrOMEGAs}} public code \cite{Barducci:2016pcb}. For models 3 and 4, DM annihilation cross section will be suppressed by velocity and we obtain $ \sigma v \simeq 10^{-31} \, cm^{3}/s $, which excludes the whole parameter space. In these models, the s-wave DM annihilation to leptons is absent. Hence, as the p-wave term is suppressed by a factor of the DM velocity squared, the annihilation cross section is not large enough to produce DAMPE signal. Note that only the parameter space for which the contribution of DM annihilation to leptons is more than 30 percent is depicted. However, for models 1, 2, 5, and 6 only a small region of the parameter space will be excluded.
In Fig.~\ref{ann}, for models 1 and 2 there are two noticeable dips at $ M_{\phi} \sim M_{X} $ (at which annihilation proceeds through a t-channel resonance into $\phi\phi$) and at
$ M_{\phi} \sim 2 M_{X} $ (at which annihilation proceeds through an s-channel resonance into $l\bar l$.). In these cases
reduced couplings are required to get the relic density constrained by Planck data. As it is seen in Fig.~\ref{ann} and \ref{ann2}, for s-channel resonance, there is an increase around $M_{\phi}\sim 3~ \rm TeV$ and after that there is a decrease in cross section of DM in present Universe. In these models, for DM annihilation into leptons through s-channel, we have:
\begin{equation}
\sigma v \approx \frac{a}{(M_{\phi}^{2}-4 M_{X}^{2})^2} +
\frac{b}{(M_{\phi}^{2}-4 M_{X}^{2})^3} v^{2} ,\label{cross-section}
\end{equation}
here $ v $ is the speed of the DM and $ a $ and $ b $ depend on the parameters of the model (for explicit form of $ a $ and $ b $ see Eq.~(B33) in \cite{Berlin:2014tja}).
Regarding $ M_{X} = 1.5 $ TeV, $ a $ and $ b $ take positive values.
In non-resonance regions, the first term in \eqref{cross-section} dominates and
\begin{equation}
\left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle_{freeze-out} \approx \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle_{today} \approx \frac{a}{(M_{\phi}^{2}-4 M_{X}^{2})^2} .\label{today}
\end{equation}
However, one cannot ignore the second term in
\eqref{cross-section} near the resonance. Therefor, in this region we have Eq. \eqref{cross-section} at freeze-out and Eq. \eqref{today} at the present Universe (with $ v=0 $). Consequently, if $ M_{\phi} < 2 M_{X} $, then $ \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle_{today} > \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle_{freeze-out} $, and if $ M_{\phi} > 2 M_{X}, $ then $ \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle_{today} < \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle_{freeze-out} $.
This feature can be seen clearly in Fig.~\ref{ann}. (In \eqref{cross-section} widths of the scalar mediator is not included. Considering this the cross section will not be infinite at the resonance point. However, this does not affect our argument here.) Note that, in ref \cite{Athron:2017drj} there is only one dip where annihilation proceeds through an s-channel resonance.
Indeed, it seems in ref \cite{Athron:2017drj} only DM annihilation into leptons through s-channel is considered and they did not examine the other channel, i.e., t-channel annihilation into scalars. Both of this annihilation channels contribute in DM annihilation and are relevant in calculation of DM relic density. In ref \cite{Athron:2017drj} the authors considered the multiplication of the couplings between mediator-DM and mediator-leptons as the only relevant parameter, which makes sense in the case of DM annihilation into leptons through s-channel.
However, both DM annihilation into leptons and scalar mediators should be considered simultaneously. In the t-channel annihilation only the coupling between mediator-DM would be relevant.
Since we have included the t-channel annihilation in calculating DM relic density, these two couplings will be disentangled, and the annihilation cross-sections depend on both of them separately.
Furthermore, in this reference, mediator masses around s-channel resonance are excluded, while in our calculations this region is consistent with $ \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle \simeq
[2.2-3.8] \times 10^{-26} \, cm^{3}/s $ and could explain the DAMPE excess.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model11.eps,width=7.5cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model12.eps,width=7.5cm}}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model21.eps,width=7.5cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model22.eps,width=7.5cm}}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model5.eps,width=7.5cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model6.eps,width=7.5cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{-0.7cm}}
\caption{Total cross section of DM annihilation at the present Universe versus the mediator mass for the parameters space of the models 1, 2 , 5 and 6 which are consistent with DM relic density. In this figure the DM mass is 1.5 TeV.} \label{ann}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model31.eps,width=7.5cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model32.eps,width=7.5cm}}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model41.eps,width=7.5cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=Model42.eps,width=7.5cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{-0.7cm}}
\caption{Same as Fig.~\ref{ann} for models 3 and 4} \label{ann2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Anomalous magnetic moments of leptons}
In this section, we investigate constraints on the parameter space of the models which are imposed by the measurement of anomalous magnetic moments (AMM)s of leptons. Since in our models, VDM particles interact with the SM leptons via a massive mediator, a significant effect on the anomalous magnetic moments of the leptons is expected.
As it was mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec2}, we suppose a lepton universal coupling for all interactions. Therefore, we consider only the magnetic moment of the muon and ignore weaker constraints on the (AMM)s of tau and electron.
The prediction for the value of the muon AMM in SM includes the contributions from virtual QED, electroweak, and hadronic processes. While the QED and electroweak processes account for most of the anomaly, the hadronic uncertainty cannot be calculated accurately from theory alone. It is estimated from experimental measurements of the ratio of hadronic to muonic cross sections in electron-positron collisions\cite{Xiao:2017dqv}. In \cite{Giusti:2017jof}, it is shown that the measurement can be interpreted as an inconsistency with the SM and suggesting physics beyond the SM may be having an effect.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=landas.eps,width=7cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=landap.eps,width=7cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{0.5cm}\hspace{0.5cm}(a)\hspace{6cm}(b)}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=gs.eps,width=7cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=gp,width=7cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{0.5cm}\hspace{0.5cm}(c)\hspace{6cm}(d)}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=ys.eps,width=7cm}\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=yp,width=7cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{0.5cm}\hspace{0.5cm}(e)\hspace{6cm}(f)}
\centerline{\vspace{-0.7cm}}
\caption{Shadow areas depict allowed range in masses of mediators and couplings for different vector DM models which are consistent with magnetic dipole moment of muon. The models~1-6, respectively correspond to Figs.~a-f.}\label{magnetic}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the following, we consider the discrepancy between experiment and the SM prediction for the magnetic moment of the muon which have been calculated in \cite{Bennett:2006fi}-\cite{Davier:2003pw}
\begin{equation}
\Delta a_\mu = (7.8\pm 10.48 ~{\rm to} ~22.1\pm 11.31)\times 10^{-10}, \label{deltamagnetic}
\end{equation}
where the error was combined of statistical, systematic and theoretical uncertainty. In this work, we consider above SM deviation and analyze the models contributions to the magnetic moment of the muon. The one-loop contribution of VDMs to the magnetic moment of muon can be classified by\cite{Leveille:1977rc}-\cite{Queiroz:2014zfa}:
\begin{align}
{\text{model 1:}} \quad &\Delta a_{\mu}^s = \left(\frac{m_{\mu}} {2\pi M_{\phi}}\right)^2\left\lbrace
-\left[\frac{7}{12}+ \ln\frac{m_\mu}{M_{\phi}}\right] (\lambda_s)^2\right\rbrace, \\
{\text{model 2:}} \quad &\Delta a_{\mu}^{ps} = \left(\frac{m_{\mu}} {2\pi M_{\phi}}\right)^2
\left\lbrace\left[\frac{11}{12} - \ln\frac{m_\mu}{M_{\phi}}\right] (\lambda_p)^2\right\rbrace,\\
{\text{model 3:}} \quad &\Delta a_{\mu}^V = \left(\frac{m_{\mu}} {2\pi M_{V}}\right)^2
\left\lbrace\frac{1}{3} (g_s)^2\right\rbrace,\\
{\text{model 4:}} \quad &\Delta a_{\mu}^{aV} = \left(\frac{m_{\mu}} {2\pi M_{V}}\right)^2
\left\lbrace-\frac{5}{3}(g_p)^2\right\rbrace,\\
{\text{model 5:}} \quad &\Delta a_{\mu}^{\psi} =\left(\frac{m_{\mu}} {2\pi M_{X}}\right)^2\left\lbrace \left[\frac{ M_{\psi} }{m_{\mu}} -\frac{2}{3}\right]y_{s}^2\right \rbrace,\label{magnetic-f1}\\
{\text{model 6:}} \quad &\Delta a_{\mu}^{a\psi} =\left(\frac{m_{\mu}} {2\pi M_{X}}\right)^2\left\lbrace \left[ -\frac{ M_{\psi}}{m_{\mu}} -\frac{2}{3}\right] y_{p}^2\right\rbrace,\label{magnetic-f2}
\end{align}\label{formula magnetic}
where $m_{\mu}$ is the muon mass, $M_{\phi}$, $M_{V}$, $M_{\psi}$ are the scalar, vector and spinor mediator and $M_{X}$ is DM mass. $g_s$, $g_p$, $\lambda_s$, $\lambda_p$, $y_s$ and $y_p$ are couplings of the SM leptons with new fields in accordance with interaction terms of Eq.~\eqref{lagrangian}. Fig.~\ref{magnetic} depicts allowed range for each case in masses of mediators and couplings which are consistent with magnetic dipole moment of muon. Comparing Figs.~\ref{ann} and \ref{magnetic} shows even for loose hadronic uncertainty on anomalous magnetic moment of muon, models 5 and 6 are excluded. This is due to the fact that models~5 and 6 have fewer free parameters than models~1-4 and the conditions for satisfying the relic density bound is more complicated. In \cite{Feng:2019rgm}, it has been shown that without chiral violation, the contribution to magnetic moments of muon is not significant. Since in our model, we consider separately vector and axial interactions for the fermion exchange, the results seem to be different. In Fig.~3-e and 3-f, we depicted allowed range of parameters space for $\Delta a_\mu$ and they include part of parameters space in which $\Delta a_\mu$ is smaller than the bounds of Eq.~\ref{deltamagnetic}. In these figures, excluded region include parts of parameters space in which the contribution of new physics is negative ( see Eq~\ref{magnetic-f1} and \ref{magnetic-f2}). If we combine vector and axial interactions, the contribution of new interaction to magnetic moment of muon will be negative and it does not depend on mass of fermion.
\subsection{Collider Constraints} \label{sec3-2}
Constraints on leptophilic DM interaction come from several experiments at LEP, LHC and neutrino beam facilities. Some of the strongest bounds on leptophilic models thus stem from such searches:
1. Four-lepton processes $e^+ e^- \rightarrow l^+ l^-$ and di-lepton resonance searches
in $e^+ e^- \rightarrow l^+ l^- \gamma$ which are strongly constrained by LEP measurements. Searches in the framework of these process lead to following bounds on couplings of the models\cite{Freitas:2014pua}:
\begin{align}
{\text{model 1:}} \quad & \lambda_s /M_{\phi} < 2.7 \times 10^{-4} {\rm~ GeV}^{−1}~~(M_{\phi} >200~{\rm~ GeV}), \nonumber\\
& \lambda_s /M_{\phi} < 7.3 \times 10^{-4}~ \rm~ GeV^{-1}~~(100~{\rm~ GeV} < M_{\phi} < 200~{\rm~ GeV}), \\
{\text{model 2:}} \quad & \lambda_p /M_{\phi} < 2.7 \times 10^{-4} {\rm~ GeV}^{−1}~~(M_{\phi} >200~{\rm~ GeV}), \nonumber\\
& \lambda_p /M_{\phi} < 7.3 \times 10^{-4}~ \rm~ GeV^{-1}~~(100~{\rm~ GeV} < M_{\phi} < 200~{\rm~ GeV}), \\
{\text{model 3:}} \quad & g_s /M_V < 2.0 \times 10^{-4} {\rm~ GeV}^{−1}~~(M_V >200~{\rm~ GeV}) , \nonumber\\
& g_s /M_V < 6.9 \times 10^{-4}~ \rm~ GeV^{-1}~~(100~{\rm~ GeV} < M_V < 200~{\rm~ GeV}) , \\
{\text{model 4:}} \quad & g_p /M_V < 2.4 \times 10^{-4} {\rm~ GeV}^{-1}~~(M_V >200~{\rm~ {\rm~ GeV}}) , \nonumber\\
& g_p /M_V < 6.9 \times 10^{-4}~ {\rm~ GeV}^{-1}~~(100~{\rm~ GeV} < M_V < 200~{\rm~ GeV}).
\end{align}
The contributions of models 5 and 6 to process $e^+ e^- \rightarrow l^+ l^-$ arise from a box diagram which is depicted in Fig.~\ref{box}. Since this contribution for model 5 (6) is proportional to $y_s^4(y_p^4)$, $M_{X}^{-4}$, and also DM mass ($M_{X}=1.4~\rm TeV$) is larger than the maximum LEP center-of-mass energy, LEP constraints on the model couplings will be irrelevant.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=box.eps,width=10cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{-2.5cm}}
\caption{Box diagram contribution to processes $e^+ e^− \rightarrow l^+ l^−$ for models 5 and 6}\label{box}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
2. The production of a $\mu^-\mu^+$ from the scattering of a muon-neutrino with heavy nuclei (neutrino trident production: $\nu_{\mu}N \rightarrow \nu_{\mu} \mu \mu N$).
Neutrino beam facilities, such as CHARM II collaboration \cite{Geiregat:1990gz} and the CCFR collaboration \cite{Mishra:1991bv} have been reported detection of trident events and quoted cross-sections in good
agreement with the SM predictions. These results strongly limit vector mediator $V$ coupling to muons in model 3 if the $V$ couples to neutrinos $g_s\leqslant \frac{M_V}{1~\rm TeV}$\cite{trident}.
3. Searches for mono-photon events at $e^+ e^-$ colliders. This signature is characteristic for the process $e^+ e^- \rightarrow X \, X \, \gamma$. Since the LEP experiments did not observe an excess of mono-photon events beyond the expected background, a limit may be translated on leptophilic models\cite{mono-photonLEP}.
It was shown in Ref.~\cite{mono-photonLEP} that the bounds on four-lepton processes $e^+ e^- \rightarrow l^+ l^−$ exceed the limits from mono-photon searches at LEP by about one order of magnitude.
4. Drell-Yan production via an intermediate vector boson $V$ (in model 3 and 4) or scalar mediator produced (in model 1 and 2) as bremsstrahlung from a lepton at LHC. The mediator could subsequently decay
to combinations of lepton pairs and missing energy transverse (MET). In Ref.~\cite{LHC}, it was shown that the bounds on couplings are large when $M_V < M_Z$ and
cross section falls rapidly with increasing mass of $V$. This means the constraints on couplings will be negligible for $M_{V}>100~\rm GeV$.
\subsection{Direct Detection (DD) experiments} \label{sec3-3}
In this section, we will discuss the discovery potential of the models via direct DM searches. As it is mentioned, we consider the hypothesis that the vector DM particle $X$ couples directly only to leptons in particular the electrons but not to quarks.
Now we consider two types of interactions that arise when a “leptophilic” vector DM particle interacts in a detector:
1. Vector DM-electron scattering: In \cite{electrondirect} it was shown that a new class of of superconducting detectors which are sensitive to ${\cal{O}}(\rm MeV)$
electron recoils from DM-electron scattering. Such devices could detect DM as light as the warm DM limit, $M_{X} >∼ 1~ \rm keV$. In such experiment the whole recoil is absorbed by the electron that is then kicked out of the atom to which it was bound. In our model electron recoil can occur correspond to following Feynman diagrams (see Fig.~\ref{Direct Detection electron}).
2. Loop induced Vector DM-nucleus scattering: Although in our assumption DM couples only to leptons at tree level, an interaction with quarks is induced at 1 and 2-loop level, by coupling a photon to virtual leptons. This will lead to scattering of the
DM particle off nuclei.
In all cases that we assume, the interaction is induced by the exchange of an intermediate particle whose mass is much larger than the recoil momenta that is of
order a few MeV. Thus in non-relativistic limit the elastic scattering cross section of the VDM with electron has following form\cite{DD}:
\begin{align}
{\text{model 1:}} \quad \sigma_{DM-e}& \approx\frac{g_{\phi}^2\lambda_s^2\mu_{eX}^2}{2\pi M_{\phi}^4} , \nonumber\\
{\text{model 2:}} \quad \sigma_{DM-e} & \approx\frac{g_{\phi}^2\lambda_p^2\mu_{eX}^2}{2\pi M_{\phi}^4} , \nonumber\\\
{\text{model 5:}} \quad \sigma_{DM-e} & \approx\frac{y_{s}^4\mu_{eX}^2}{2\pi M_{X}^2M_{\psi}^2} , \nonumber\\
{\text{model 6:}} \quad \sigma_{DM-e} & =0 , \label{Direct Detection electron1}
\end{align}
where $\mu_{eX}$ is the VDM-electron reduced mass. Since the models 3 and 4 can not explain DAMPE electron excess, we ignore them in this study. The last cross section is zero due to the odd number of $\gamma^ 5$ in the trace. We consider upper bound from the XENON100 experiment to search for DM interacting with electrons\cite{electron}.
With no evidence for a signal above the low
background of such experiment, we can constrain parameters space of the models. For axial-vector interaction, it has been shown\cite{electron} that the cross-sections above $6 \times 10^{-35}~ cm^2$ for particle masses of $m_{X} = 2 ~\rm GeV$ is excluded. Eqs.~\eqref{Direct Detection electron1} predict that
\begin{align}
\sigma_{DM-e}\approx\frac{g^4 m_{e}^2}{2\pi M_{mediator}^4} \approx g^4(\frac{M_{mediator}}{ 100~ {\rm GeV}})^{-4}\times 3\times 10^{-38} .
\end{align}
Therefore, even for a mediator mass of $1~ \rm GeV$ and general couplings $g=1$, the electron-DM cross section would be very smaller than the XENON100 \cite{electron} bounds. This feature depicts in Fig.~\ref{DDen}. Note that DM-electron cross section is too small (e.g., $ \sigma_{DM-e} \lesssim 10^{-43} \, cm^2 $ for models 1 and 2) to constrain the models. However, these processes are more
important for DM masses below ${\cal{O}}(\rm GeV)$, where the DM has insufficient kinetic energy to give detectable $(\rm keV)$ nuclear recoil energies.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=electron.eps,width=12cm}}
\caption{DM-electron vertexes for spinor, scalar and vector exchange.}\label{Direct Detection electron}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=1loop.eps,width=15cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{-1.2cm}}
\caption{DM-nucleus interactions by charged lepton induced and photon changed at 1-loop level for vector, scalar and spinor exchange. }\label{Direct Detection nucleus1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=2loop.eps,width=12cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{-1.2cm}}
\caption{DM-nucleus interactions by charged lepton induced and photon changed at 2-loop level for scalar exchange.}\label{Direct Detection nucleus2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
As it was mentioned, leptophilic DM can scatter with quarks in DD experiments through lepton
loops. The leading DM-nucleus interactions
arise by charged lepton induced and photon changed at 1-loop level for spinor, scalar and vector exchange through diagrams of the form Fig.~\ref{Direct Detection nucleus1}. As it was discussed in \cite{DD}, for the models with scalar lepton current (model 1 and 2) in which low-velocity annihilation cross section requirement is satisfied, the one loop contribution involves the integral over loop momenta of the form: \begin{align}
\int\frac{d^4q }{(4\pi)^4}{\rm Tr}[\Gamma\frac{q'\gamma^{\mu}+m_l}{q'^{2}-m^2_l}\gamma^{\nu}\frac{q\gamma^{\rho}+m_l}{q^{2}-m^2_l}] ,
\end{align}
where $\Gamma=1$ and $\gamma^5$ for model 1 and 2, respectively. The loop integral vanishes for these models, reflecting the fact that one cannot couple a scalar current to a vector current.
Since the models 3 and 4 (5 and 6) can not explain DAMPE electron excess (have been excluded by anomalous magnetic moment of muon), we ignore direct detection constraints for them.
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=DDen.eps,width=12cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{-1.2cm}}
\caption{DM-n and DM-e scattering cross sections versus scaler mediator mass.}\label{DDen}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
DM-nucleus interactions by charged lepton induced and photon changed at 2-loop level for scalar mediator are depicted in Fig.~\ref{Direct Detection nucleus2}. We calculate this contribution for model 1 which is given in following form:
\begin{align}
\sigma_{DM-n}=\frac{\alpha_{em}^2Z^2\mu_{N}^2}{\pi^3A^2M^4_{\phi}}\sum_{\ell=e,\mu,\tau}(\frac{\pi\alpha_{em}Z\mu_{N}v}{6\sqrt{2}})^2(\frac{2g_{\phi}M_{X}\lambda_s}{m_lM_{\phi}})^2 ,
\end{align}
where $\alpha_{em}$ is the fine structure constant, $M_{\phi}$ is the mediator mass, $\mu_{N}\equiv m_{N} m_{X} /(m_N +m_{X})$
is the reduced mass of the DM-nucleus two particle system, $v = 0.001c$ is the velocity of the
DM near the Earth, $m_N$ , Z and A are the target nucleus mass, charge and mass number respectively. For model 2 (similar to 1-loop contribution), DM-n cross section is zero due to the odd number of $\gamma^ 5$ in the trace.
The best direct detection limits arise from the LUX \cite{LUX}, XENON1T \cite{XENON}, and
PandaX-II \cite{PandaX-II} collaborations. The PandaX-II collaboration published the most stringent upper limit for a WIMP with mass larger than $100~\rm GeV$:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{constraints}
\rm{PandaX-II}: \sigma_{SI}\leq 8.6\times10^{-47}~cm^2\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
However, this limit is true for a DM local density of $ 0.3 \, \, \text{GeV}/cm^3 $. Since in DM explanation of DAMPE data, a nearby massive subhalo is assumed, therefore, it may influence the DM local density. For example,
consider the NFW profile \cite{Navarro:1996gj} for the DM mass density in the subhalo,
\begin{equation}
\rho (r) = \rho_s \frac{(r/r_s)^{-\gamma}}{(1 + r/r_s)^{3-\gamma}} ,
\label{4-2}
\end{equation}
with $ \rho_s = 90 $ GeV/$ {\text{cm}^3} $, $ r_s = 0.1 $ kpc, and $ \gamma=1 $ .
If this subhalo is located at $ r = 0.17 $ kpc from the Earth, then, the induced local DM density in the solar system, will be $ 7.26 \, \, \text{GeV}/cm^3 $, which is $\sim 24$ times larger than local DM density inducd by Galaxy DM profile at solar system, i.e., $ 0.3 \, \, \text{GeV}/cm^3 $. This means we should consider direct detection limit 24 times more stringent. Regarding this new stronger bound, in Fig.~\ref{DDen} we have depicted allowed range in parameters space which are consistent with PandaX-II
direct detection experiment (for model 1).
As it has been seen, for $ M_{\phi} \lesssim 240 $ GeV the model 1 is excluded by PandaX-II direct detection experiment with DM subhalo contribution.
\subsection{Indirect detection} \label{sec3-4}
In addition to DAMPE, there are other constraints on the DM annihilation from other indirect detection experiments {\color{red}\cite{Belotsky:2019xti}} such as H.E.S.S. \cite{Abdallah:2016ygi}, FermiLAT \cite{Ackermann:2015zua} and IceCube \cite{Aartsen:2017ulx}.
For models 1 and 2, DM annihilation cross section which can explain DAMPE excess can simultaneously overcome all indirect detection constraint which are fairly weak for a DM mass of a TeV.
\section{Combined analysis} \label{sec4}
In this section, we present a combined analysis of all experimental constraints which were studied in previous section.
As it was mentioned before, model 3 and 4 are not considered because their DM annihilation cross section is too small and can not explain DAMPE excess. Model 5 and 6 are also excluded because the parameter space which can satisfy DM relic density can not simultaneously satisfy constraints from anomalous magnetic moment of muon. However, model 1 and 2 can survive all constraints. In Fig.~\ref{mod1}, we show regions which are consistent with relic density measurement,
DAMPE excess, direct and indirect detection experiments for different values of coupling in
model 1. For direct detection constraint, we consider PandaX-II direct detection experiment with DM subhalo contribution. Note that for anomolous magnetic moment (AMM), we consider stronger upper bound in Ref\cite{Davier:2003pw}. However (as it is seen), LEP constraint is stronger than AMM. Parameter space of the model satisfying $ \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle \simeq
[2.2-3.8] \times 10^{-26} \, cm^{3}/s $ is also depicted. It satisfies all other constraints including DM relic density, AMM, LEP, direct and indirect detection.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\centerline{\hspace{0cm}\epsfig{figure=M.eps,width=11cm}}
\centerline{\vspace{-0.7cm}}
\caption{The blue and green hatched areas depict regions for parameter space of the model~1 which are consistent with muon AMM and LEP constraints, respectively. The scatter points also satisfy relic density measurement, DAMPE excess condition ($ \left\langle \sigma v \right\rangle \simeq
[2.2-3.8] \times 10^{-26} \, cm^{3}/s $), direct and indirect detection experiments.}\label{mod1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
According to Fig.~\ref{mod1}, LEP and DM annihilation cross section are the strong constraints that determine the parameter space of the model 1. Since, LEP constraint and DM annihilation cross section formulas for models 1 and 2 are similar, we only consider the model 1 in this section. Note that according to our study, there is not any direct detection experimental constraints on model 2. Therefore, the same result is true for this model.
\section{Conclusions} \label{sec5}
We have studied model independent leptophilic VDM candidates to determine which one of them can explain
the high energy electron-positron excess event recently observed by DAMPE experiment as well as other constraints from other DM searches.
The peak in the DAMPE electron-positron spectrum hints a nearby source for the
high energy electron-positron coming from the DM annihilation.
The peak is around 1.4 TeV, however, to account for the inevitable energy loss, we assumed a DM mass of about 1.5 TeV.
We have investigated all renormalizable interactions via a massive spin 0, 1/2, and 1 mediator between VDM and SM leptons.
We found that only two of six possible models can explain DAMPE excess, and, at the same time, survive all constraints including anomalous magnetic moment of muon, LEP, direct and indirect detection. In models 1 and 2, DM interacts with SM leptons via a scalar mediator. For $ M_{\phi} < 5000 $ GeV, we have scanned over parameter space, and found that if $ M_{\phi} \in [1500,3000] $ these models may explain DAMPE and simultaneously satisfy all experimental constraints.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank Dr. Karim Ghorbani for helping in micrOMEGAs code issues.
|
\section*{Introduction}
\subsection*{History}
The indecomposable, finite-dimensional representations of type $A$ quivers and were classified by Gabriel in \cite{Gabriel1972}.
In particular this yielded an understanding of all finite-dimensional representations of type $A$ quivers.
Representations of quivers, and in particular type $A$ quivers, have been used extensively in persistent homology.
Persistent homology has recently been used to study fractal dimension \cite{PersistentDimension1, PersistentDimension2} and has been shown to be effective in recovering some signals in noise \cite{PersistentDimension3}.
Persistent homology has been applied to 3D shape classifications \cite{3Dshapes}, the study of plant root systems \cite{plantroots}, identification of breast cancer subtypes \cite{breastcancer}, and many other real world applications.
Representations of ${\mathbb{R}}$ and of the infinite zigzag are generalizations of type $A_n$ quiver representations
The first decomposition theorem for representations of ${\mathbb{R}}$ was proved by Crawley-Boevey in \cite{Crawley-Boevey2015}.
It states that every pointwise finite representation of ${\mathbb{R}}$ is a sum of indecomposable representations which are supported on intervals in ${\mathbb{R}}$.
For general representations of ${\mathbb{R}}$ the support intervals can be any interval: $(a,b),(a,b],[a,b)$ or $[a,b]$.
Carlsson, de Silva, and Mozorov introduced zigzag persistent homology in \cite{CarlssondeSilvaMorozov2009} and Botnan proved a similar decomposition theorem to Crawley-Boevey's for infinite zigzag persistence in \cite{Botnan}.
Representations of quivers have also been used to understand cluster algebras via the construction of cluster categories.
Cluster algebras were introduced by Fomin and Zelevinsky in order to better understand scattering diagrams in particle physics \cite{ClusterAlgebrasI}.
Cluster algebras come equipped with a set of \emph{cluster variables}, sets of cluster variables called \emph{clusters}, and a \emph{mutation} process to move from one cluster to another.
Buan, Marsh, Reineke, Rietein, and the third author constructed a cluster category whose indecomposable objects correspond to cluster variables, maximally rigid sums of indecomposables correspond to clusters, and mutation of clusters was given by homological approximations.
In particular, a type $A_n$ cluster algebra can be studied via the cluster category built from finite-dimensional type $A_n$ representations.
The first and third author generalized this construction to a continuous version in \cite{IgusaTodorov2015}.
\subsection*{Contributions}
We generalize type $A_n$ quivers to continuous quivers of type $A$ and study their representations. These generalize representations of the real line which are the basis for the continuous cluster category of \cite{IgusaTodorov2015}.
The present paper is a self-contained foundational paper with a focus on representation theoretic techniques.
Our goal is to study continuous quivers of type $A$, representations of such quivers, a generalization of the continuous cluster category, and what these continuous constructions tell us about the corresponding constructions for $A_n$.
We first consider an alternating orientation on ${\mathbb{R}}$ given by a discrete subset $S=\{\cdots <s_k<s_{k+1}<\cdots\}\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ and a partial ordering $\preceq$ on $\mathbb R$ given by $x\prec y$ if $s_{2k}\le x<y\le s_{2k+1}$ for some $k$ or if $s_{2k-1}\leq y<x\leq s_{2k}$. The elements $x,y\in{\mathbb{R}}$ are not related if there is an element of $S$ in the open interval $(x,y)$. This is the continuous version of the zig-zag which is the quiver with vertex set $\mathbb Z$ with one arrow either $i\to i+1$ or $i+1\to i$ between successive integers (see \cite{ZomorodianCarlsson}).
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ denote the real line with alternating orientation given by a subset $S$. For any interval, i.e. connected subset, $I\subseteq\mathbb R$, we will construct a pointwise one dimensional representation $M_I$ with support equal to $I$, called interval indecomposable representations.~(See Definition \ref{def: MI}.)
The first theorem takes two representations of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ known to be indecomposable (Proposition \ref{prop:sufficientProp}) and tells us when they are isomorphic.
We allow for any alternating orientation so long as $S$ does not have accumulation points and provide a theorem about indecomposable pwf representations and the decomposition of pwf representations: Theormes \ref{thm:intro interval} and \ref{thm:intro decomposition}, respectively.
In Section \ref{sec:relation to BC-B} we discus the relationship between Theorem \ref{thm:intro decomposition}, decomposition results in \cite{Botnan, BotnanCrawley-Boevey, Crawley-Boevey2015}, and the choice of method of proof in the present paper.
\begin{thm}[Theorem \ref{thm:iso-indecomps}]\label{thm:intro interval}
The representations $M_I$ are indecomposable and any pointwise one-dimensional indecomposable representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ is isomorphic to $M_I$ for some interval $I\subseteq{\mathbb{R}}$.
Let $V$ and $V'$ be indecomposable representations of a continuous type $A$ quiver.
Then $V\cong V'$ if and only if $\mathop{\text{supp}} V=\mathop{\text{supp}} V'$.
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}[Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables}]\label{thm:intro decomposition}
Let $V$ be a pointwise finite-dimensional representation of a continuous type $A$ quiver.
Then $V$ is a direct sum of interval indecomposables.
\end{thm}
The proofs of Theorems \ref{thm:intro interval} and \ref{thm:intro decomposition} use Theorems \ref{thm:point projective} and \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives}, which classify the interval projective representations in the category of pointwise finite-dimesional representations, denoted $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
In particular we provide this characterization before we prove our decomposition theorem.
Combined with Theorem \ref{thm:intro decomposition}, one obtains a complete description of indecomposable projective objects in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ as Theorem \ref{thm:intro projectives}.
\begin{thm}[Theorems \ref{thm:point projective}, \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives}, and \ref{thm:GeneralizedBarCode} and Remark \ref{rem:indecomposableprojectives}]\label{thm:intro projectives}
Any indecomposable projective object in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ is isomorphic to one of the following, where $a$ may be $\pm\infty$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $P_a$ (for $-\infty < a <+\infty$) given by
\begin{align*}
P_a(x) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} k & x\preceq a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
P_a(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & y\preceq x \preceq a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}. \end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
\item $P_{a)}$ given by
\begin{align*} P_{a)} &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}k & x\preceq a, x<a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
P_{a)}(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & y\preceq x \preceq a, y\leq x < a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}. \end{array}\right. \end{align*}
\item $P_{(a}$ given by
\begin{align*} P_{(a} &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}k & x\preceq a, a<x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
P_{(a}(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & y\preceq x \preceq a, a<x\leq y \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}. \end{array}\right.\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
In Section \ref{sec:little rep} we prove properties about the category of finitely generated representations (Definition \ref{def:finitelygeneratedreps}) over any continuous quiver of type $A$, denoted $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
In the $A_n$ case, finitely generated and finite-dimensional representations coincide.
Since only finite sums of simple representations of a continuous quiver are finite-dimensional, we instead consider finitely generated representations in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
Theorem \ref{thm:intro little rep} highlights some similarities and differences between $\mathop{\text{rep}}(A_n)$ and $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
Some of the properties extended to pointwise finite-dimensional representations and bounded-dimensional representations (Definition \ref{def:smallerreps}), denoted $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
\begin{thm}[Theorem \ref{thm:little rep}]\label{thm:intro little rep}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous quiver of type $A$.
Then the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For indecomposable representations $M_I$ and $M_J$ in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, or $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$, we have ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_I,M_J)\cong k$ or ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_I,M_J)=0$ (Proposition \ref{prop:homiskor0}).
\item Every morphism $f:V\to W$ in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, or $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ has a kernel, a cokernel, and coinciding image and coimage in that category. (Lemma \ref{lem:abelian}
\item The category $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ Krull-Schmidt, \emph{but not} artinian (Lemma \ref{lem:krull-schmidt}, Proposition \ref{prop:not artinian}).
\item The global dimension of $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is 1 (Proposition \ref{prop:projectiveresolution}).
\item The $\mathop{\text{Ext}}$ space of two indecomposables $M_I$ and $M_J$ in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, or $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is either isomorphic to $k$ or is 0 (Proposition \ref{prop:smallext}).
\item While some Auslander--Reiten sequences exist (Proposition \ref{prop:ARexistence}), some indecomposables have \emph{neither} a left \emph{nor} a right Auslander--Reiten sequence (Proposition \ref{prop:no AR sequences}).
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank Ralf Schiffler for organizing the Cluster Algebra School at the University of Connecticut and Shijie Zhu for helpful discussions.
They would also like to thank Magnus B.~Botnan, Bill Crawley-Boevey, Bernhard Keller, and Francesco Sala for references to related work.
The second author would also like to thank Eric Hanson for helpful discussions.
\section{Continuous Quivers of Type $A$}
\noindent We let $k$ denote a field for the entirety of this paper.
\subsection{Quiver of Continuous Type $A$: $A_{\mathbb{R}}$}
The goal of this section is to generalize the definition of type $A$ quivers to a continuous setting.
The set ${\mathbb{R}}$ will serve as the vertices in our quiver.
We will choose a set of sinks and sources, which will induce the orientation on the continuous quiver by indicating which vertices have paths to which others.
The picture below gives an intuitive idea of the result of choosing a continuous type $A$ quiver and the definition follows.
\begin{displaymath}\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.5]
\draw[thick, dotted] (-3.5,0.4) -- (-3,-0.1);
\draw[thick, dotted] (3,1.7) -- (3.5,1.2);
\draw[thick] (-3,-0.1) -- (-2.4,-0.7) -- (-1,0.7) -- (-0.3,0) -- (0.7,1) -- (1.2,0.5) -- (2.7,2) -- (3,1.7);
\draw[fill=black] (-2.4,-0.7) circle[radius=0.4mm];
\draw[fill=black] (-1,0.7) circle[radius=0.4mm];
\draw[fill=black] (-0.3,0) circle[radius=0.4mm];
\draw[fill=black] (0.7,1) circle[radius=0.4mm];
\draw[fill=black] (1.2,0.5) circle[radius=0.4mm];
\draw[fill=black] (2.7,2) circle[radius=0.4mm];
\draw[thick, ->] (-3,-0.1) -- (-2.7,-0.4);
\draw[thick, ->] (-1,0.7) -- (-1.75,-0.05);
\draw[thick, ->] (-1,0.7) -- (-0.6,0.3);
\draw[thick, ->] (0.7,1) -- (0.15,0.45);
\draw[thick, ->] (0.7,1) -- (1,0.7);
\draw[thick, ->] (2.7,2) -- (1.9,1.2);
\draw[thick, ->] (2.7,2) -- (2.9,1.8);
\draw(-0.3,0) node[anchor=north] {$s_{2n}$};
\draw(0.7,1) node[anchor=south] {$s_{2n+1}$};
\end{tikzpicture}\end{displaymath}
\begin{definition}\label{def:AR}A \underline{quiver of continuous type $A$}, denoted by $A_{\mathbb{R}}$, is a triple $({\mathbb{R}},S,\preceq)$, where:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
\begin{enumerate}
\item$S\subset {\mathbb{R}}$ is a discrete subset, possibly empty, with no accumulation points.
\item Order on $S\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ is induced by the order of ${\mathbb{R}}$, and $-\infty<s<+\infty$ for $\forall s\in S$.
\item Elements of $S\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ are indexed by a subset of ${\mathbb{Z}}\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ so that $s_n$ denotes the element of
$S\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ with index $n$. The indexing must adhere to the following two conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[i1] There exists $s_0\in S\cup\{\pm\infty\}$.
\item[i2] If $m\leq n\in{\mathbb{Z}}\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ and $s_m,s_n\in S\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ then for all $p\in{\mathbb{Z}}\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ such that $m\leq p \leq n$ the element $s_p$ is in $S\cup\{\pm\infty\}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
\item New partial order $\preceq$ on ${\mathbb{R}}$, which we call the \underline{orientation} of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$, is defined as:
\begin{itemize}
\item[p1\ ] The $\preceq$ order between consecutive elements of $S\cup\{\pm\infty\}$ does not change.
\item[p2\ ] Order reverses at each element of $S$.
\item[p3\ ] If $n$ is even $s_n$ is a sink.
\item[p3'] If $n$ is odd $s_n$ is a source.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}\label{def:ARalgebra}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}=({\mathbb{R}},S, \preceq)$ be a quiver of continuous type $A$. Then
the associated \underline{continuous path algebra} $kA_{\mathbb{R}}$ is the associative algebra over $k$ (without unity) whose basis consists of pairs $(x,y)$, where $y\preceq x$.
Multiplication on the pairs is given by
\begin{displaymath} (w,x)(y,z) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}(w,z) & x=y \\ 0 & x\neq y. \end{array} \right.\end{displaymath}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
The indexing requirements on $S$ have the following immediate consequences.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $S$ is empty then either (i) $s_{-1}=-\infty$ and $s_0=+\infty$ or (ii) $s_0=-\infty$ and $s_1=+\infty$.
\item If $S$ is unbounded above (below) then $+\infty=s_{+\infty}$ ($-\infty=s_{-\infty}$).
\item If $S$ is bounded above (below) then there is no $s_{+\infty}$ ($s_{-\infty}$) in $\bar{S}$.
\end{itemize}
The rules for the partial order have the following consequences.
If $x<y\in{\mathbb{R}}$ and there is some $s_n\in S$ such that $x<s_n<y$ then $x \npreceq y$ and $y\npreceq x$.
If $x\leq y\in{\mathbb{R}}$ and there exists $s_n,s_{n+1}\in \bar{S}$ such that $s_n\leq x\leq y\leq s_{n+1}$ then:
\begin{align*}
x\preceq y & \text{ if } n \text{ is even} \\
y \preceq x & \text{ if } n \text{ is odd}.
\end{align*}
\end{remark}
\begin{example}\label{xmp:basicorientations}
We provide four examples of $S$ and the induced partial order $\preceq$ on ${\mathbb{R}}$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item A finite example: $S=\{\frac{1}{2},\pi\}$, $\bar{S}=\{-\infty,\frac{1}{2},\pi,+\infty\}$, $s_{-2}=-\infty$, $s_{-1}=\frac{1}{2}$, $s_0=\pi$, and $s_1=+\infty$.
\begin{displaymath}\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=2]
\draw[black, dotted, thick] (-2,0) -- (-1.5,0);
\draw[black, dotted, thick] (1.5,0) -- (2,0);
\draw[black,thick] (-1.5,0) -- (1.5,0);
\draw[black,thick,->] (-.5,0) -- (0,0);
\draw[black,thick,->] (-.5,0) -- (-1,0);
\draw[black,thick,->] (1.5,0) -- (1,0);
\filldraw[fill=black,draw=black] (-.5,0) circle[radius=.3mm];
\filldraw[fill=black,draw=black] (.5,0) circle[radius=.3mm];
\draw (-.5,0) node[anchor=north] {${\frac{1}{2}}$};
\draw (.5,0) node[anchor=north] {${\pi}$};
\end{tikzpicture}\end{displaymath}
\item A ``half'' unbounded example: $S=\{2n: n\in{\mathbb{N}}\}$, $s_{-1}=-\infty$, $s_n=2n$ when $n\geq 0$, and $s_{+\infty}=+\infty$.
\begin{displaymath}\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[black, dotted, thick] (-5,0) -- (-4,0);
\draw[black, dotted, thick] (6,0) -- (7,0);
\draw[black, thick] (-4,0) -- (6,0);
\draw[black, thick,->] (-4,0) -- (-2,0);
\foreach \x in {0,1,2}
{
\draw[black, thick, ->] (2*\x+1,0) -- (2*\x+0.5,0);
\draw[black,thick, ->] (2*\x+1,0) -- (2*\x + 1.5,0);
\filldraw[fill=black,draw=black] (2*\x,0) circle [radius=.6mm];
\filldraw[fill=black,draw=black] (2*\x+1,0) circle [radius=.6mm];
}
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=north] {{0}};
\draw (1,0) node[anchor=north] {{2}};
\draw (2,0) node[anchor=north] {{4}};
\draw (3,0) node[anchor=north] {{6}};
\draw (4,0) node[anchor=north] {{8}};
\draw (5,0) node[anchor=north] {{10}};
\end{tikzpicture}\end{displaymath}
\item An unbounded example: $S=\{\frac{n}{2}: n\in{\mathbb{Z}}\}$, $s_{-\infty}=-\infty$, $s_n=\frac{n}{2}$, and $s_{+\infty}=+\infty$.
\begin{displaymath}\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[black, dotted, thick] (-7,0) -- (-6,0);
\draw[black, dotted, thick] (6,0) -- (7,0);
\draw[black, thick] (-6,0) -- (6,0);
\draw[black, thick, ->] (-5,0) -- (-5.5,0);
\draw[black,thick, ->] (-5,0) -- (-4.5,0);
\filldraw[fill=black,draw=black] (-5,0) circle [radius=.6mm];
\foreach \x in {-2,...,2}
{
\draw[black, thick, ->] (2*\x+1,0) -- (2*\x+0.5,0);
\draw[black,thick, ->] (2*\x+1,0) -- (2*\x + 1.5,0);
\filldraw[fill=black,draw=black] (2*\x,0) circle [radius=.6mm];
\filldraw[fill=black,draw=black] (2*\x+1,0) circle [radius=.6mm];
}
\draw (-5,0) node[anchor=north] {{$\frac{-5}{2}$}};
\draw (-4,0) node[anchor=north] {{-2}};
\draw (-3,0) node[anchor=north] {{$\frac{-3}{2}$}};
\draw (-2,0) node[anchor=north] {{-1}};
\draw (-1,0) node[anchor=north] {{$\frac{-1}{2}$}};
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=north] {{0}};
\draw (1,0) node[anchor=north] {{$\frac{1}{2}$}};
\draw (2,0) node[anchor=north] {{1}};
\draw (3,0) node[anchor=north] {{$\frac{3}{2}$}};
\draw (4,0) node[anchor=north] {{2}};
\draw (5,0) node[anchor=north] {{$\frac{5}{2}$}};
\end{tikzpicture}\end{displaymath}
\item One of the two $S=\emptyset$ possibilities: $S=\emptyset$, $s_0=-\infty$, and $s_1=+\infty$. This causes $\preceq$ to coincide with $\leq$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{example}
\begin{remark}
It is important to note that the choice which element of $S$ becomes $s_0$ determines the entire indexing of $S$ and thus the entire partial order $\preceq$.
Additionally, given a set $\bar{S}$ there are exactly two partial orders $\preceq$ possible no matter which element of $S$ is chosen to be $s_0$.
The two partial orders are opposites of each other.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:ARconvention}
From now on, whenever we refer to $A_{\mathbb{R}}$, we are implicitly assuming some $S$ with indexing and $\preceq$ have been set.
By `the straight descending orientation' we mean the one where $S=\emptyset$, $s_0=-\infty$, and $s_1=+\infty$ as in Example \ref{xmp:basicorientations}. This is the case where $\preceq$ coincides with $\leq$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Representations of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$: $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$}
\begin{deff}\label{def:representation}
A \underline{representation} $V$ of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ is a module over the path algebra $kA_{\mathbb{R}}$.
Explicitly, one assigns to each real number $x$ a vector space $V(x)$ and to each pair $(x,y)$, where $y\preceq x$, a linear transformation $V(x,y):V(x)\to V(y)$ such that $V(y,z)\circ V(x,y)=V(x,z)$ whenever such a composition is defined.
The \underline{support} of a representation $V$ is the set of all $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $V(x)\neq 0$.
We denote the support of a representation $V$ by $\mathop{\text{supp}} V$.
A \underline{simple representation at $x$} is a representation $V$ such that $V(x)\cong k$ and if $y\neq x$ then $V(y)=0$.
The linear map $V(x,x)$ is the identity and $V(y,z)=0$ if $y\neq x$ or $z\neq x$.
\end{deff}
\begin{deff}\label{def:morphism}
A \underline{morphism} $f:V\to W$ of representations of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ is a morphism of $kA_{\mathbb{R}}$ modules.
Explicitly, it is a collection of linear maps $f(x):V(x)\to W(x)$, for all $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$, making the following squares commute for each pair $x,y\in{\mathbb{R}}$ where $y\preceq x$:
\begin{displaymath}
\xymatrix{ V(x) \ar[r]^-{V(x,y)} \ar[d]_-{f(x)} & V(y) \ar[d]^-{f(y)} \\ W(x) \ar[r]_-{W(x,y)} & W(y). }
\end{displaymath}
\end{deff}
Since we're working with modules over an associative algebra, and associative algebras are in particular rings, the category of $k$-representations of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$, denoted $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$, is abelian.
Propositions \ref{prop:isomorphisms} and \ref{prop:isomorphic implies same support} can be proved almost the exact same way as they would for discrete quivers of type $A$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:isomorphisms}
A morphism of representations $f:V\to W$ in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$ is an isomorphism if and only if $f(x)$ is an isomorphism for each $x\in {\mathbb{R}}$.\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:isomorphic implies same support}
Let $V$ and $V'$ be representations of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $V\cong V'$.
Then $\mathop{\text{supp}} V=\mathop{\text{supp}} V'$.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{The Subcategories $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$}
In this subsection we define the pointwise finite and bounded subcategories of $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$.
We provide examples of representations in each subcategory and highlight the differences between them.
\begin{definition}\label{def:smallerreps}
The category of \underline{pointwise finite representations}, denoted $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, is the full subcategory of $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$ consisting of representations $V$ such that for all $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$, $\mathop{\text{dim}} V(x)<\infty$.
The category of \underline{bounded representations}, denoted $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, is the full subcategory of $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ whose objects are representations $V$ such that there exists $n\in{\mathbb{N}}$ and for all $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$, $\mathop{\text{dim}} V(x)<n$.
\end{definition}
It is important to note that the conditions in Definition \ref{def:smallerreps} are not related to the \emph{support} of any representation. I.e. there exist representations in both $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$ with unbounded support.
Such examples are provided below.
\begin{example}\label{xmp:boundedreps}
We now give some examples of representations in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
Each representation will be over $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ with the straight descending orientation (see Remark \ref{rem:ARconvention}).
\begin{enumerate}
\item We give an example of a representation in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$ with unbounded support.
A representation in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$ is $V$:
\begin{align*}
V(x) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} k & x\geq 0\\ 0 & x<0 \end{array}\right. & V(x,y) & =\left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & 0\leq y\leq x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}\end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
Notice that the \emph{support} of $V$ is unbounded.
This is fine. The \emph{dimension} of all the $V(x)$ vector spaces is bounded above by 1.
\item We now give an example of an infinite coproduct that is still in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$. Let $M=\bigoplus M_{\{z\}}$ where for each $z\in {\mathbb{R}}$, $M_{\{z\}}$ be the following representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$:
\begin{align*}
M_{\{z\}}(x) & = \left\{\begin{array}{ll} k & x=z\\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. & M_{\{z\}}(x,y) &
=\left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & x=y=z \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}\end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
That is, $M_{\{z\}}$ is the simple representation at $z$, which is in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
However, $M=\bigoplus_{z\in{\mathbb{R}}} M_{\{z\}}$ is also in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$ since $\mathop{\text{dim}} M(x)=1$ for all $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$.
\item We now give an example of a representation in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ \emph{but not} in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
Let $W$ be the representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ where $W(x)$ is $k^n$ where $n=0$ if $x<1$ and $n$ is the largest integer less than or equal to $x$ otherwise. I.e., $W(10.4)=k^{10}$.
Let $W(x,y)$ be 0 if $y<1$ or $x<1$.
Otherwise, $W(x,y)$ is the projection of the first $\mathop{\text{dim}} W(y)$ coordinates of $k^{\mathop{\text{dim}} W(x)}$ using the standard basis.
For example, $W(10,4)$ is the projection of $k^{10}$ onto the first 4 coordinates.
While $W(x)$ is finite-dimensional for all $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$, there is no $n$ such that $\mathop{\text{dim}} W(x)\leq n$ for all $x\in{\mathbb{R}} $.
\end{enumerate}
\end{example}
Originally, the authors only attempted to prove a version of Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables} for $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
However, it was noted that nearly all the proof techniques relied on finite-dimensional vector spaces, not on the dimension of the vector spaces being bounded.
In the category $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$ the authors discovered projective indecomposable objects that are not projective in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$.
Further study revealed these objects to also be projective in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
See Section \ref{sec:projectives} for details on these new projective objects.
These new projectives in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ are necessary to obtain a category of finitely generated representations (Definition \ref{def:finitelygeneratedreps}, denoted $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$) which has all the reasonable properties one could expect from a continuous version of finitely generated representations.
In contrast to the apparent superiority of $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, the category is simply too big to even have all projective covers.
While pathological examples of representations without projective covers can be constructed in both $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, the more well-behaved examples of representations without projective covers exist only in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
See Example \ref{xmp:no projective cover} in Section \ref{sec:projectives}.
Such a representation does not exist in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$ and so this can be considered the first step towards finitely generated representations.
\section{Classification of Indecomposable Pwf Representations}
In this section we provide a complete classification of indecomposable pointwise finite-dimensional represntations of a continuous quiver of type $A$ (Theorem \ref{thm:GeneralizedBarCode}).
We focus on representation theoretic techniques and provide a self-contained approach.
In particular, we characterize projective indecomposables (Theorems \ref{thm:point projective} and \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives}) before our decomposition theorem and obtain the completeness of the classification (Remark \ref{rem:indecomposableprojectives}) as a result.
Additionally, our proof of the decomposition theorem is algorithmic.
We discuss related results by Botnan and Crawley-Boevey in Section \ref{sec:relation to BC-B}.
\subsection{Projectives}\label{sec:projectives}
We will construct all pointwise finite-dimensional projective representations in the category $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
There are two types of indecomposable projectives: projectives $P_c$ generated at one point as in Definition \ref{def:projective generated}, which are quite similar to the projectives for finite quivers. These kinds of projectives are actually projective in both $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$.
The new kind of projectives $P_{c)}$ and $P_{(c}$ will be projectives which have half open intervals as supports as in Definition \ref{def:one sided projectives}. These representations are projective in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ but are not projective in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$ (see Example \ref{prop:not projective in big category}).
We start with the case of a projective generated at one point.
\begin{definition}
Given any point $c\in \mathbb R$ and any vector space $X$ over $k$, let $(PX)_c$ be the representation defined as follows.
\[
(PX)_c(x)=\begin{cases} X & \text{if }x\preceq c\\
0& \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\]
and $(PX)_c(x,y)=id_X$ if $y\preceq x\preceq c$.
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: PXc is adjoint to restriction to c}
For any representation $V$ in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$ (not necessarily pointwise finite) and any $k$-vector space $X$ we have:
\[
{\mathop{\text{Hom}}}((PX)_c,V)={\mathop{\text{Hom}}}_k(X,V(c)),
\]
i.e., the functor which takes $X$ to $(PX)_c$ is left adjoint to the evaluation functor $V\mapsto V(c)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Given any morphism $f:(PX)_c\to V$, let $f_c:(PX)_c(c)=X\to V(c)$ be the restriction of $f$ to the point $c$. Then, for any $x\preceq c$, the commutativity of the diagram:
\[
\xymatrix
(PX)_c(c)=X\ar[d]_{f_c}\ar[r]^{id_X} &
X=(PX)_c(x)\ar[d]^{f_x}\\
V(c) \ar[r]^{V(c,x)}&
V(x)
\]
forces the map $f_x:(PX)_c(x)\to X(x)$ to be equal to $V(c,x)\circ f_c$. Conversely, any linear map $g:X\to V(c)$ extends to a morphism $\overline g:(PX)_c\to V$ by the same formula ($\overline g(x)=V(c,x)\circ g:(PX)_c(x)=X\to X(x)$).
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:point projective}
For any vector space $X$ and any $c\in \mathbb R$, the representation $(PX)_c$ is projective in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $p:V\to W$ be an epimorphism and let $f:(PX)_c\to W$ be any morphism. Then $p_c:V(c)\to W(c)$ is an epimorphism. So, the linear map $f_c:X\to W(c)$ lifts to a map $g:X\to V(c)$ which, by Lemma \ref{lem: PXc is adjoint to restriction to c}, extends to a morphism $\overline g:(PX)_c\to V$. Since $p\circ \overline g$ and $f:(PX)_c\to W$ agree at $c$, they are equal by Lemma \ref{lem: PXc is adjoint to restriction to c}. So, $(PX)_c$ is projective.
\end{proof}
Note that $(PX)_c$ is indecomposable if and only if $X$ is one-dimensional as it is in the following definition. In this case the indecomposable projective is denoted simply by $P_c$.
\begin{definition}\label{def:projective generated}
Let $c\in \mathbb R$. Define the representation $P_c$ in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$ as:
\[\begin{array}{ccc}
P_c(x)=\begin{cases} k & \text{if }x\preceq c\\
0& \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}&,\qquad \qquad&P_c(x,y)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & \text{if } y\preceq x\preceq c \\ 0 &\text{otherwise} \end{array}\right.
\end{array}
\]
\end{definition}
The rest of this subsection is devoted to the construction of all pointwise finite-dimensional projective representation, including objects $P_{(a}$ and $P_{b)}$ for $s_{2n-1}<a<s_{2n}<b<s_{2n+1}$ with supports $(a,s_{2n}]$ and $[s_{2n},b)$ respectively.
In order to describe these new types of
projective representations in the category of pointwise finite-dimensional representations of $A_{\mathbb R}$ we need to set up notation of ``image filtration'' (Definition \ref{def:image filtration}) and ``support intervals'' (Definition \ref{def:support intervals}).
Recall $s_n$ is a sink if $n$ is even and a source if $n$ is odd.
\begin{deff}\label{def:image filtration}
Let $V$ be a pointwise finite-dimensional representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $\mathop{\text{supp}} V\subset [s_0,s_1]$.
(If $s_0=-\infty$ or $s_1=+\infty$ then $\mathop{\text{supp}} V$ is a subset of $(s_0, s_1]$, $[s_0,s_1)$, or $(s_0,s_1)$, whichever applies.)
Let $b=s_0$ or $b\in (s_0,s_1)$.
Let $b$ be the greatest lower bound of $\mathop{\text{supp}} V$. When $b\in\mathop{\text{supp}} V$ we set $V^{\bullet}(b)=V(b)$.
The \underline{image filtration} of $V^{\bullet}(b)$ is the set of distinct subspaces of the form $V(x,b)(V(x))$.
Let $V^{\circ}(b)$ be the colimit of the vector spaces $V(x)$, for $b<x<s_1$, with the linear maps $V(x,y)$, for $b<y\leq x<s_1$. Since each $V(x)$ is finite-dimensional, $V^{\circ}(b)$ is at most countably infinite dimensional.
Denote by $V^{\circ}(x,b)$ the colimit linear map from $V(x)$ to $V^{\circ}(b)$.
The \underline{image filtration} of $V^{\circ}(b)$ is the set of distinct (finite-dimensional) subspaces of the form $V^{\circ}(x,b)(V(x))$.
When $b\in \mathop{\text{supp}} V$ we take $I$ to be $[b,c]$ or $[b,c)$.
When $b\notin \mathop{\text{supp}} V$ we take $I$ to be $(b,c]$ or $(b,c)$.
For all such $I$ and when $b\in\mathop{\text{supp}} V$, let
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:def of VI(b)}
V^{\bullet}_I(b): = \bigcap_{x\in I} V(x,b)(V(x)) \subset V^{\bullet}(b)
\end{equation}
Whether or not $b\in\mathop{\text{supp}} V$, we let
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:def of FVI(b)}
V^{\circ}_{I\setminus \{b\}}(b) := \bigcap_{x\in I\setminus \{b\}} V^{\circ}(x,b)(V(x))\subset V^{\circ}(b).
\end{equation}
Then $V^{\bullet}_I(b)$ and $V^{\circ}_I(b)$ are members of the image filtrations of $V^{\bullet}(b)$ and $V^{\circ}(b)$, respectively.
In particular, there exists $x_0$ in $I$ such that $V^{\bullet}_I(b)=V(x_0,b)(V(x_0))$ or $x_0\in I\setminus b$ such that $V^{\circ}_I(b)=V^{\circ}(x_0,b)(V(x_0))$.
Whenever $b\in\mathop{\text{supp}} V$, $V^{\bullet}(b)$ is finite-dimensional and so the image filtration is finite.
Since $V^{\circ}(b)$ may not be finite-dimensional and the dimension of the vector spaces $V(x)$ are not bounded the filtration on $V^{\circ}(b)$ may be infinite but still countable with a minimal term.
In fact, $V(s_1,b)(b)$ and $V^{\circ}(s_1,b)$ are the minimal objects in the filtrations of $V^{\bullet}(b)$ and $V^{\circ}(b)$, repsectively.~
\end{deff}
\begin{remark} \label{rem:V_I(b)}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)\ ] If $I=[b,c]$ ($c\in I$) then
\begin{align*}
V^{\bullet}_I(b)=V^{\bullet}_{[b,c]}(b)&= V(c,b)(V(c)) \\
V^{\circ}_{I\setminus \{b\}}(b) =V^{\circ}_{[b,c]}(b) &=V^{\circ}(c,b)(V(c)).
\end{align*}
\item[(b)\ ] If $I=[b,c)$ ($c\notin I$) then whenever $c\in {\mathbb{R}}$ we have
\begin{align*}
V^{\bullet}_I(b)=V^{\bullet}_{[b,c)}(b) & \supset V(c,b)(V(c)) \text{ and} \\
V^{\circ}_{I\setminus\{b\}}(b) = V^{\circ}_{(b,c)}(b) & \supset V^{\circ}(c,b)(V(c))
\end{align*}
but in both cases the subspaces may be different.\\
\item[(c)\ ] For any $x<z$ in $I$, the term $V(x,b)(V(x))$ is redundant in the intersection \eqref{eqn:def of VI(b)} since $V(x,b)(V(x))\supset V(z,b)(V(z))$. Thus,
\[
V^{\bullet}_I(b)=\bigcap_{x\in I} V(x,b)(V(x)) =\bigcap_{y\in I,y\ge z} V(z,b)V(y,z)(V(y))=V(z,b)V^{\bullet}_{I\cap [z,s_1]}(z)
\]
\item[(c')] For any $x<z$ in $I$, the term $V^{\circ}(x,b)(V(x))$ is redundant in the intersection \eqref{eqn:def of FVI(b)} since $V^{\circ}(x,b)(V(x))\supset V^{\circ}(z,b)(V(z))$. Thus,
\[
V^{\circ}_I(b)=\bigcap_{x\in I} V^{\circ}(x,b)(V(x)) =\bigcap_{y\in I,y\ge z} V^{\circ}(z,b)V^{\circ}(y,z)(V(y))=V^{\circ}(z,b)V^{\bullet}_{I\cap [z,s_1]}(z)
\]
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{deff} \label{def:support intervals} Let $W\subset V^{\bullet}(b)$ be a subspace. Define $I_W$ as:
$$I_W=\{x\geq b\in \mathop{\text{supp}} V \ |\ W\subset V(x,b)(V(x))\}$$
Such $\{I_W\}$ are called \underline{support intervals for} $V^{\bullet}(b)$.
Let $W\subset V^{\circ}(b)$ be a finite-dimensional subspace.
Then we define $I_W$ similarly for $b\notin I$:
$$I_W=\{x> b\in \mathop{\text{supp}} V \ |\ W\subset V^{\circ}(x,b)(V(x))\}$$
These $\{I_W\}$ are also called \underline{support intervals for} $V^{\circ}(b)$.
\end{deff}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:I_W}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)\ ] There is a 1-1 correspondence between support intervals for $V^{\bullet}(b)$ and the terms in the image filtration of $V^{\bullet}(b)$ given by $I\mapsto V^{\bullet}_I\subset V^{\bullet}(b)$ and $W\mapsto I_W$.
\item[(a')] There is also a 1-1 correspondence beween the support intervals for $V^{\circ}(b)$ and the terms in the image filtration of $V^{\circ}(b)$ given by $I\mapsto V^{\circ}_I\subset V^{\circ}(b)$ and $W\mapsto I_W$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We first prove (a).
If $W=V(x_0,b)(V(x_0))$ then $I_W$ contains $x_0$ and $V^{\bullet}_{I_W}$ is the intersection of $V(x_0,b)(V(x_0))=W$ and the subspaces $V(x,b)(V(x))$ which all contains $W$ by definition. So, $V^{\bullet}_{I_W}=W$.
If $I=I_W$ then $W\subset V^{\bullet}_I(b)$ by definition. If $V(x,b)(V(x))$ contains $V^{\bullet}_I(b)$, it contains $W$. So, $I_{V^{\bullet}_I(b)}\subset I_W=I$. But $I\subset I_{V^{\bullet}_I(b)}$. So, $I= I_{V^{\bullet}_I(b)}$ for any support interval $I$.
The proof of (a) as stated works for (a') if we replace $V^{\bullet}_I$ with $V^{\circ}_I$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The image filtration of $V^{\bullet}(b)$ can be written:
\begin{displaymath}V^{\bullet}(b)\supsetneq V(x_n,b)(V(x_n)) \supsetneq V(x_{n-1},b)(V(x_{n-1})) \supsetneq\cdots\supsetneq V(x_1,b)(V(x_1)).\end{displaymath}
By Proposition Proposition \ref{prop:I_W}, we see this is actually a filtration
\begin{displaymath} V^{\bullet}(b)\supsetneq V^{\bullet}_{I_n}\supsetneq V^{\bullet}_{I_{n-1}}\supsetneq\cdots\supsetneq V^{\bullet}_{I_1} . \tag{$\bullet *$}\end{displaymath}
where each $x_i$ in the first form is an element of $I_i$ in the second form.
For the image filtration of $V^{\circ}(b)$, we have the following equivalent forms, where each $x_i$ in the first form is an element of $I_i$ in the second form:
\begin{displaymath}V^{\circ}(b)\ \cdots\supsetneq V^{\circ}(x_n,b)(V(x_n)) \supsetneq V^{\circ}(x_{n-1},b)(V(x_{n-1})) \supsetneq\cdots\supsetneq V^{\circ}(x_1,b)(V(x_1)).\end{displaymath}
By Proposition \ref{prop:I_W}, we see this is actually a filtration
\begin{displaymath} V^{\circ}(b)\ \cdots\supsetneq V^{\circ}_{I_n}\supsetneq V^{\circ}_{I_{n-1}}\supsetneq\cdots\supsetneq V^{\circ}_{I_1} . \tag{$\circ*$}\end{displaymath}
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:support of image is support}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)\ ] Let $W'\subsetneq W$ be consecutive terms in the image filtration ($\bullet *$) of $V^{\bullet}(b)$. Then $I_W\subsetneq I_{W'}$ and, for any element $x\in (I_{W'}-I_W)$, we have $V(x,b)(V(x))=W'$ in $V^{\bullet}(b)$.
\item[(a')] Let $W'\subsetneq W$ be consecutive terms in the image filtration ($\circ *$) of $V^{\circ}(b)$. Then $I_W\subsetneq I_{W'}$ and, for any element $x\in (I_{W'}-I_W)$, we have $V^{\circ}(x,b)(V(x))=W'$ in $V^{\circ}(b)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove (a) first.
Since $x\notin I_W$ it follows from Remark \ref{rem:V_I(b)}(c) that $W$ is not a subset of $V(x,b)(V(x))$ in $V^{\bullet}(b)$.
Since $x\in I_{W'}$ it follows that $W'\subset V(x,b)(V(x))$. Thus $W'\subset V(x,b)(V(x))\subsetneq W$. Since $W,W'$ are consecutive in the image filtration, $V(x,b)(V(x))=W'$ as claimed.
The proof of (a) as stated works for (a') by replacing $V^{\bullet}_I$ with $V^{\circ}_I$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:one step lifting lemma}
Let $W\subset V^{\bullet}(b)$ (resp.~$W\subset V^{\circ}(b)$) be a finite-dimensional subspace and let $x_1<x_2\in I_W$.
Let $I_1=I_W\cap [x_1,s_1]$ and $I_2=I_W\cap [x_2,s_1]$.
(If $s_1=+\infty$ then, for each $i$, $I_i=I_W\cap [x_i,s_1)$).
Then $V^{\bullet}_{I_1}(x_1)\subset V(x_2,x_1)(V^{\bullet}_{I_2}(x_2))$ (resp.~$V^{\circ}_{I_1}(x_1)\subset V(x_2,x_1)(V^{\circ}_{I_2}(x_2))$).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} This is a special case of Remarks \ref{rem:V_I(b)}(c) and \ref{rem:V_I(b)}(c'). \end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:compatible system of elements
\item [(a)\ ] For any interval $I$ of the form $[b,c]$ or $[b,c)$ and any element $v\in V^{\bullet}_I(b)$, there is a collection of elements $\{V^{\bullet}_x\in V(x)\}_{x\in I}$ so that $V^{\bullet}_b=v$ and $V(y,x)(V^{\bullet}_y)=V^{\bullet}_x$ for all $b\le x\le y\in I$.
\item[(a')] For any interval $I$ of the form $(b,c]$ or $(b,c)$ and any element $v\in V^{\circ}_I(b)$, there is a collection of elements $\{v_x\in V(x)\}_{x\in I}$ so that $v_b=v$ and $V(y,x)(v_y)=v_x$ and $V^{\circ}(x,b)(v_x)=v_b$ for all $b< x\le y\in I$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $I=[b,c]$ then $V^{\bullet}_I(b)=V(c,b)(V(c))$ and we can choose one element $w\in V^\bullet(c)$ so that $V(c,b)(w)=v$ and let $v_x=V(c,x)(w)$ for all $x\in [b,c]$.
Similarly, if $I=(b,c]$ then $V^{\circ}_I(b) =V^{\circ}(c,b)(V(c))$ and we make a similar choice.
Otherwise, $I=[b,c)$ or $I=(b,c)$ for some $c>b$.
In this case, choose an increasing sequence of real numbers $b<x_1<x_2<x_3<\cdots$ in $(b,c)$ converging to $c$.
Let $J_0=I$, for each $l>0$, let $J_l=I\cap [x_l,c)$ and dditionally, let $v_l\in V^{\bullet}_{J_l}(x_l)$ (resp.~$v_l\in V^\circ_{J_l}(x_l)$) be chosen recursively as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Set $v_0=v\in V^{\bullet}_I(b)$, (resp.~$v_0=v\in V^{\circ}_I(b)$).
\item Given $v_k$ in $V^{\bullet}_{J_l}(x_l)$ (resp.~in $V^{\circ}_{J_l}(x_l)$), by Lemma \ref{lem:one step lifting lemma}, there exists $v_{l+1}$ in $V^{\bullet}_{J_{l+1}}(x_{l+1})$ (resp.~$V^{\circ}_{J_{l+1}}(x_{l+1})$) so that $V(x_{k+1},x_k)(v_{k+1})=v_k$ (resp.~$V^{\circ}(x_{l+1},x_l)(v_{l+1})=v_k$).
\end{enumerate}
After this sequence of elements $v_k$ is chosen, the vector $v_x$ for any $x\in I$ is given by $v_x=V(x_l,x)(v_k)$ for any $x_l>x$. This is well defined by condition (2) in the case of $V^{\bullet}(b)$ and by condition (2) combined with the universal property of $V^{\circ}(b)$ in that case.
\end{proof}
\begin{deff}\label{def:one sided projectives}
Let $s_0$ be a sink or $-\infty$ and let $s_1>s_0$ be the next source or $+\infty$.
Let $s_0<a<s_1$.
For $I=[s_0,a]$ or $[s_0,a)$ let $P_I$, also written $P_a=P_{[s_0,a]}$ or $P_{a)}=P_{[s_0,a)}$, denote the representation with support $I$ so that $P_I(x)$ is one-dimensional with generator $v_x$ for all $x\in I$ and $P(y,x)(v_y)=v_x$ for all $x<y\in I$.
For $a=s_1$, define $P_{a)}$ as before.
However, when $a=s_1$, $P_a$ is not defined this way.
If $s_0=-\infty$ then $P_a$ and $P_{a)}$ are instead $P_{(s_0,a]}$ and $P_{(s_0,a)}$, respectively.
\end{deff}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:one sided at a}
$P_a$ and $P_{a)}$ as in Definition \ref{def:one sided projectives} are projective in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We first assume that $s_0\in{\mathbb{R}}$.
To show that $P_I$ is projective it suffices to show that any epimorphism $p:E\to P_I$ has a section. Let $W\subset E^\bullet(s_0)$ be the smallest term in the image filtration of $E^\bullet(s_0)$ which maps onto $P_I^
\bullet(s_0)$.
Claim: $I_W$ contains $I$ and thus $W\subset E_I^\bullet(s_0)$.
Proof: For each $x\in I$, there is a $w\in E(x)$ so that $p_x(w)=v_x\in P_I(x)$. But then $p_{s_0}E^\bullet(x,s_0)(w)=P_I^\bullet(x,s_0)(v_x)=v_{s_0}\neq 0$. So, $W\subset E^\bullet(x,s_0)(E(x))$ which implies $x\in I_W$. Since this holds for all $x\in I$ we get that $I\subset I_W$.
By construction of $W$, there is a $w\in W\subset E_I^\bullet(s_0)$ so that $p(w)=v_{s_0}$. By Lemma \ref{lem:compatible system of elements} there are elements $w_x\in E(x)$ for all $x\in I$ so that $E(x,y)(w_x)=w_y$ for all $y\le x\in I$. Then, a section $s:P\to E$ is given by $s(v_x)=w_x$ for all $x\in I$.
If we instead assume $s_0=-\infty$ then above we replace $E^\bullet$ with $E^{\circ}$ and $P^\bullet$ with $P^{\circ}$ where appropriate.
By the universal property of colimits, the map on representations induces a map $E^{\circ}(-\infty)\to P^{\circ}_I(-\infty)$.
Then the rest of the proof holds as stated.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:infinite limit is kinfty}
Suppose $s_0=-\infty$ and $P$ is a pointwise finite-dimensional representation with support $(s_0,a)$, for $a\leq s_1$, or $(s_0,a]$, for $a< s_1$.
Either $P^{\circ}(s_0)$ is finite-dimensional or $P^{\circ}(s_0)\cong k^\infty$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $P$ is pointwise finite-dimensional, if the dimension of $P(x)$ is bounded by some $n$ for all $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$ then $P^{\circ}(s_0)$ is also bounded by $n$.
Now suppose $P^{\circ}(s_0)$ is not finite-dimensional.
For each $i>0$, let $n_i=\mathop{\text{dim}} P^{\circ}_{I_i}$.
Let $e_i\in k^\infty$ denote the unit vector with a 1 in the $i$th coordinate.
For a choice of basis of $P^{\circ}(s_0)$, we note that since each morphism is a monomorphism and the image filtration ($\circ *$) of $P^{\circ}(s_0)$ has a minimal element, we may inductively choose a basis on $P^{\circ}(s_0)$.
We do this by first choosing a basis of $P^\circ_{I_1}$, then completing it to a a basis of $P^\circ_{I_2}$ and so on.
Since each $P^\circ_{I_i}$ is finite-dimensional this is well defined.
Since we have a consistent choice of bases, map the chosen basis of each $P^{\circ}_{I_i}$ to the collection $\{e_i \}\subset k^\infty$ in a consistent way.
Since each $P^{\circ}_{I_i}\cong P(x_i)$ this induces a map $P^{\circ}(s_0)\to k^\infty$.
To see the map is surjective take any element $w$ of $k^\infty$; $w$ has finitely many nonzero coordinates.
Thus it is some linear combination of finitely many $e_j$'s.
Then there is a $P^{\circ}_{I_i}$ whose basis contains enough elements to surject on to the $e_j$'s.
Thus there is an element $v$ in $P_{I_i}$ such that $v\mapsto w$ and so there is an element $\tilde{v}\in P^{\circ}(s_0)$ that maps to $w$.
The map is injective since if $\tilde{v}\neq \tilde{v}'$ in $P^{\circ}(s_0)$ then there is a pair $v\neq v'$ in a $P^{\circ}_{I_i}$ such that $v\mapsto \tilde{v}$ and $v'\mapsto \tilde{v'}$.
We know $v$ and $v'$ map to different elements in $k^\infty$ so $\tilde{v}$ and $\tilde{v}'$ must also.
Therefore, $P^{\circ}(s_0)\cong k^\infty$.
\end{proof}
The following theorem will give a characterization of one sided projective objects in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:characterization of one sided projectives}
Let $s_0 \leq a< s_1$ with $s_0$ a sink and $s_1$ the next sourse.
Let $P$ be a pointwise finite-dimensional representation of $A_{\mathbb R}$ with $\mathop{\text{supp}} P \subset [s_0,a]$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)\ ] Then $P$ is projective in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ if and only if all maps $P(x,s_0):P(x)\to P(s_0)$ are injective for all $x\in supp P$.
\item[(2)\ ] Every projective representation in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ with support in $[s_0,a]$ is a finite direct sum of representations of the forms $P_b$ and $P_{b)}$ for $s_0\le b\le a$.
\item[(2')] Every projective representation in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ with support in $(s_0,a]$ (i.e., $s_0=-\infty$)\ is a possibly infinite direct sum of representations of the forms $P_b$ and $P_{b)}$ for $s_0< b\le a$.
\end{itemize} \end{theorem}
\begin{proof
When $a=s_0$, statements (1) are (2) are trivially true and statement (2') does not apply.
(1) Suppose
that there is some $x_0\in
[b,a]\subset[s_0,a]$
so that $P(x_0,s_0):P(x_0)\to P(s_0)$ is not injective. Then we will show that $P$ is not projective. Indeed consider the quotient object $Q$ given $Q(x)=P(x)$ for all $x\ge x_0$ and $Q(x)=0$ for all $x<x_0$. We have an epimorphism $\pi: P\to Q$. Let $\widetilde Q$ be the representation given by $\widetilde Q(x)=P(x)$ for $x\ge x_0$ and $\widetilde Q(x)=P(x_0)$ for all $x\le x_0$ with $\widetilde Q(y,x)=Id$,
the identity,
when $x,y\le x_0$ and $\widetilde Q(y,x)=P(y,x_0)$ when $x\le x_0<y$. Let $p:\widetilde Q\to Q$ be the projection map.
Claim: the quotient map $\pi: P\to Q$ does not lift to $\widetilde Q$, i.e. there is no $\gamma: P\to \widetilde Q$ such that $p\circ\gamma=\pi$.
Proof of claim: Since $\pi_{x_0}=Id: P(x_0)=Q(x_0)$ and $p_{x_0}=Id: \widetilde Q(x_0)\to Q(x_0)$ we would have $\gamma_{x_0}=Id$. But that gives a contradiction to the basic property of maps between representations: $\gamma_{s_0}\circ P(x_0,s_0)=\widetilde Q(x_0,s_0)\circ\gamma_{x_0}=Id$, but $\gamma_{s_0}\circ P(x_0,s_0)$ is not injective by assumption.
Therefore, $P$ is not projective.
Conversely, suppose that all morphisms $P(x,s_0)$ are monomorphisms. Choose a basis $B$ for $P(s_0)$ compatible with the image filtration. Thus, a subset $B_i$ of $B$ is a basis for each subspace $P_{J_i}(s_0)$ in the image filtration of $P(s_0)$ where
$J_i=I_{P_{J_i}(s_0)}$
are ordered by inclusion: $J_1\subsetneq J_2\subsetneq \cdots\subsetneq J_n$. Then $P_{J_1}(s_0)\supsetneq P_{J_2}(s_0)\supsetneq \cdots \supsetneq P_{J_n}(s_0)$.
(2) By Lemma \ref{lem:compatible system of elements}, every $v\in B_i-B_{i+1}$ lifts to a compatible system of elements $v_x\in P(x)$ for all $x\in J_i$. By Lemma \ref{lem:support of image is support}, $P(x,s_0)(P(x))= P_{J_i}(s_0)$ for all $x\in J_i-J_{i-1}$ (where $J_0=\emptyset$). Since $P(x,s_0)$ is a monomorphism, the liftings $v_x\in P(x)$ for all $v\in B_i$ form a basis for $P(x)$ for all $x\in J_i-J_{i-1}$. For each $v\in B_i$, the lifting $v_x$ of $v$ generate a pointwise one-dimensional subrepresentation $Q_v$ of $P$ with support in $J_i$, i.e. $P_v$ has the form $P_{b}$ or $P_{b)}$ depending on whether $J_i=[s_0,b]$ or $[s_0,b)$. The $Q_v$, for $v\in B$, are disjoint and generate all of $P(x)$ for every $x\in [s_0,a]$. Thus $P$ is a direct sum of the $Q_v$ as claimed.
Below is an example of such a decomposition for (2).
\begin{displaymath}\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (0,2) -- (0.4,2);
\draw[thick] (0,1.5) -- (1.2,1.5);
\draw[thick] (0,1) -- (3.5,1);
\draw[thick] (0,.5) -- (4,.5);
\draw[thick] (0,0) -- (5,0);
\foreach \x in {0,...,4}
\filldraw (0, \x / 2) circle[radius=.5mm];
\filldraw[fill=white] (0.4,2) circle[radius=.6mm];
\filldraw (1.2,1.5) circle[radius=.5mm];
\filldraw (3.5,1) circle[radius=.5mm];
\filldraw[fill=white] (4,0.5) circle[radius=.6mm];
\filldraw (5,0) circle[radius=.5mm];
\draw (0,2) node[anchor=east] {$[s_0,b_1)=\mathop{\text{supp}} Q_{v_1}$};
\draw (0,1.5) node[anchor=east] {$[s_0,b_2]=\mathop{\text{supp}} Q_{v_2}$};
\draw (0,1) node[anchor=east] {$[s_0,b_3]=\mathop{\text{supp}} Q_{v_3}$};
\draw (0,0.5) node[anchor=east] {$[s_0,b_4)=\mathop{\text{supp}} Q_{v_4}$};
\draw (0,0) node[anchor=east] {$[s_0,b_5] = \mathop{\text{supp}} Q_{v_5}$};
\end{tikzpicture}\end{displaymath}
With the exception of choosing a basis, we may apply all of the argument for statement (2) to statement (2').
If $P^{\circ}(s_0)$ is finite-dimensional we get a basis and apply the argument for (2).
By Lemma \ref{lem:infinite limit is kinfty}, if $P^{\circ}(s_0)$ is infinite-dimensional then it is isomorphic to $k^\infty$ and by the proof of the same lemma we have a basis that respects the filtration.
We then apply the argument for (2).
\end{proof}
\begin{example}\label{xmp:no projective cover}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ have the straight descending orientation and for each positive integer $n$ let $V_n$ be the following representation:
\begin{align*}
V_n(x) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} k & n\leq x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array} \right.&
V_n(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & n\leq y\leq x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array} \right.
\end{align*}
Using Theorem \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives} we see that the projective cover of each $V_n$ is the projective indecomposable with support ${\mathbb{R}} = (-\infty,+\infty)$.
Note that $V=\bigoplus V_n$ is still pointwise finite.
One can check it is isomorphic to the representation $W$ (item (3) in Example \ref{xmp:boundedreps}).
However, the projective cover is infinitely many copies of the indecomposable projective with support $(-\infty,+\infty)$, which is not pointwise finite-dimensional.
Therefore, this rather tame example does not have a projective cover in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
However, the dually constructed representation $V'$ (each $V'_n$ has support $(-\infty,n]$) is its own projective cover by Theorem \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives} and so does have a projective cover.
While $V$ and $V'$ exist in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, neither exists in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
So, this type of asymmetry does not happen in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
\end{example}
\subsection{Sufficient Conditions for Indecomposables}
Here we give sufficient conditions for
pointwise finite-dimensional representations to be indecomposable. In Section \ref{sec:thetheorem} we will show that these conditions are also necessary.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:sufficientProp} Let $V$ be a representation of $A_{\mathbb R}$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $dimV(x)\leq 1$ for all $x\in \mathbb R$,
\item if $V(x)\neq 0\neq V(z)$ and $x\leq y\leq z$ in $\mathbb R$ then $V(y)\neq 0$, and
\item if $V(x)\neq 0\neq V(y)$ and $x\preceq y$ then $V(y,x)$ is an isomorphism.
\end{enumerate}
Then $V$ is indecomposable.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $V$ is not indecomposable for contradiction. Then $V\cong W_1\oplus W_2$ with $W_1\neq 0\neq W_2$.
Then $supp \,W_1\cap supp \,W_2 = \emptyset$ and $supp \,W_1\cup supp \,W_2 = supp\,V.$
Since $W_1,W_2\neq 0$ there exist $x_1\in supp\, W_1$ and $x_2\in supp\,W_2$.
By symmetry we may assume $x_1<x_2$.
\smallskip
Claim 1: There are only finitely many elements of $S$ in the open interval $(x_1,x_2)$.\\
Pf: This follows from the fact that $(x_1,x_2)$ is a bounded interval, i.e., $[x_1,x_2]$ is compact. If $S\cap [x_1,x_2]$ were infinite, it would contain a converging sequence (any infinite subset of a compact set contains a converging sequence). By definition, $S$ does not contain a converging sequence. So, $S\cap [x_1,x_2]$ is finite. A fortiori, $S\cap (x_1,x_2)$ is finite.
\smallskip
Claim 2: There exist $x_1\in supp\, W_1$ and $x_2\in supp\,W_2$ such that $S\cap (x_1,x_2)=\emptyset.$\\
Pf: Let $n=\#\{S\cap (x_1,x_2)\}$. If $n\ge1$ we will find another pair $x_1'<x_2'$ in the respective supports of $W_1,W_2$ so that $\#\{S\cap (x_1',x_2')\}<\#\{S\cap (x_1,x_2)\}=n$. This will imply that $n=0$.
To find this second pair $x_1',x_2'$ choose any element $s_k$ in $S\cap (x_1,x_2)$ which is nonempty by assumption that $n\ge1$. Then $s_k$ is in the support of $W_1$ or $W_2$. In the first case, $x_1'=s_k,x_2'=x_2$ gives the desired pair. Indeed, in this case, $S\cap (x_1',x_2')\subset S\cap (x_1,x_2)$ since $s_k\in S\cap (x_1,x_2)$ but $s_k\notin S\cap (x_1',x_2')$. Also, $x_1'=s_k$ is in the support of $W_1$ by assumption and $x_2'=x_2$ is in the support of $W_2$. The second case is similar. In both cases, the value of $n$ can be reduced if it is positive. So, the minimal value of $n$ is 0.
\smallskip
By Claim 2 we may assume there are no elements of $S$ between $x_1$ and $x_2$, i.e. the $\prec$ orientation of $\mathbb R$ is constant in the closed interval $[x_1,x_2]$ and either $V(x_2,x_1)$ or $V(x_1,x_2)$ is an isomorphism. In the first case, we consider the projection $V\to W_1$ and in the second case we consider the other projection $f:V\to W_2$. By symmetry, we may take the first case, i.e. $V(x_2,x_1)$ is an isomorphism. Then we have the following commuting diagram:
\[
\xymatrix
V(x_1)\ar[d]^{f_{x_1}}_{\cong}&
V(x_2)\neq 0\ar[d]^{f_{x_2}}\ar[l]_{V(x_2,x_1)}^{\cong}\\
W_1(x_1) &
W_1(x_2)=0 \ar[l]
\]
Since $x_1\in supp\,W_1$, it follows that $f_{x_1}:V(x_1) \to W_1(x_1)$ is an isomorphism.
But $W_1(x_2)=0$ since $x_2 \in supp\, W_2$ and $x_2 \notin supp\, W_1$. The commutativity of the diagram then gives a contradiction. Thus $V$ is indecomposable.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition}\label{def: MI}
For any interval $I$ in ${\mathbb{R}}$ let $M_I$ be the representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ given as follows.
\begin{align*}
M_I(x) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} k & x\in I
\\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}
\right.
&
M_I(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & y\preceq x \text{ and }x,y\in I \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
The conditions of Proposition \ref{prop:sufficientProp} are satisfied immediately. So, $M_I$ is indecomposable.
If a representation $V\cong M_I$ we call $V$ an \underline{interval indecomposable} or \underline{interval indecomposable representation}.
\end{definition}
\begin{cor} Let $V$ be an indecomposable representation which is pointwise one-dimensional (satisfies the conditions of Proposition \ref{prop:sufficientProp}). Let $J\subseteq supp V$ be a connected subset and let $V_J$ be the restriction of $V$ to $J$, i.e. $V_J(x)=V(x) =k$ for all $x\in J$ and $V_J(x)=0$ for all $x\notin J$, and $V_J(y,x)=V(y,x)$ for all $x,y\in J$. Then $V_J$ is an indecomposable representation.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} We will show that conditions (1), (2) and (3) of Proposition \ref{prop:sufficientProp} are satisfied by the representation $V_J$.
(1) By definition of $V_J$ it follows that $\mathop{\text{dim}}_kV_J(x)\leq 1$.
(2) This follows since $J$ is connected subset of $supp\,V$.
(3) Suppose there is $x \preceq y$ with $x,y\in J$ such that $V_J(y,x)=V(y,x)$ not an isomprhism. Since $\mathop{\text{dim}}_kV_J(x)\leq 1$, this is equivalent to $V_J(y,x)=0$.\\
Let $I=\{t\ |\ x\prec t\preceq y \text{ such that } V(y,t)\neq 0\}$. Then $x\in (supp V)\backslash I=J_1\cup J_2$ where $J_1\cap J_2=\emptyset$ and we may assume $x\in J_1$. Then $V_{J_1}$ is a subrepresentation of $V$ but is also a quotient of $V$ since the map $\pi: V\to V_{J_1}$ defined as $\pi_x=I\!d_{V_J(x)}$ for $x\in J_1$ and $\pi_x=0$ for $x\notin J_1$ is a representation homomorphism using the fact that $V(t_2,t_1)=0$ for all $t_2\in (supp V)\backslash J_1$ and all $t_1\in J_1$. Actually $\pi$ is a splitting for the inclusion $V_{J_1}\to V$, contradicting the assumption that $V$ is indecomposable. Therefore (3) holds for $V_J$.
So by Proposition \ref{prop:sufficientProp} it follows that $V_J$ is indecomposable.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Filtrations}\label{sec:filtrations}
In this section will provide some lemmas necessary for Section \ref{sec:thetheorem}.
In both this section and in Section \ref{sec:thetheorem} we will be using notation ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(\_\,,\_)$ for ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}_{\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)}(\_\,,\_)$ and ${\mathop{\text{End}}}(\_)$ for ${\mathop{\text{End}}}_{\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)}(\_)$ where $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ is the full subcategory of $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$ whose objects are all pointwise finite representations of $A_{\mathbb R}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:V is schurian}
Let $V$ be an indecomposable pointwise one-dimensional representation.
Then the endomorphism ring of $V$ is the field $k$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $x_0\in \mathop{\text{supp}} V$.
By definition, $V(x_0)\cong k$.
Choose a morphism $f(x_0):V(x_0)\to V(x_0)$.
\underline{Claim}: if $f(x_0)\neq 0$ this determines an isomorphism $V\stackrel{\cong}{\to} V$.
Since $V(x_0)\cong k$, $f(x_0)$ is an isomorphism.
If $y\in \mathop{\text{supp}} V$ such that $y\preceq x_0$ then $V(x_0,y)$ is an isomorphism.
So, for all $y\preceq x_0$ in $\mathop{\text{supp}} V$, define \begin{displaymath} f(y):=V(x_0,y)\circ f(x_0) \circ (V(x_0,y))^{-1}.\end{displaymath}
Dually, for all $y\in\mathop{\text{supp}} V$ such that $x_0\preceq y$ define \begin{displaymath} f(y):=(V(y,x_0))^{-1}\circ f(x_0) \circ V(y,x_0).\end{displaymath}
If there are no sinks and sources in $\mathop{\text{supp}} V$, except possibly the endpoints, we have an induced morphism $V\to V$ such that $f(x)$ is an isomorphism for all $x\in {\mathbb{R}}$ (by setting $f(x)=0$ when $x\notin \mathop{\text{supp}} V$).
By Proposition \ref{prop:isomorphisms} $f$ is an isomorphism.
Now, suppose there is a sink or source in the interior of $\mathop{\text{supp}} V$.
Let $s_n$ be a source such that $x_0\preceq s_n$.
By the paragraph above we already have $f(s_n)$.
For each $y\preceq s_n$ for which we do not yet have an $f(y)$ we can use the technique above and define it without making choices.
By a dual argument if $s_n\preceq x_0$ we can define $f(y)$ for all $y$ such that $s_n\preceq y$.
Note that between any real number $x$ and $x_0$ there are only finitely many sinks and sources between $x$ and $x_0$ in the total oder of ${\mathbb{R}}$.
By repeated use of this technique, we have an induced isomorphism $f(x):V(x)\stackrel{\cong}{\to}V(x)$ for all $x\in {\mathbb{R}}$.
Thus, we have an induced isomorphism $f:V\stackrel{\cong}{\to} V$.
If $g:V\to V$ is a nonzero morphism then $g(x)$ is nonzero as before is an isomorphism that determines the rest of $g$.
Then $g(x)$ and $f(x)$ are multiplication by nonzero scalars and there exists $t\in k$ such that $t g(x)=f(x)$.
Therefore, ${\mathop{\text{End}}}(V)\cong k$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:iso-indecomps}Let $V$ and $V'$ be two indecomposable pointwise one-dimensional representations of $A_{\mathbb R}$.
Then $\mathop{\text{supp}} V=\mathop{\text{supp}} V'$ if and only if $V\cong V'$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We first assume $\mathop{\text{supp}} V=\mathop{\text{supp}} V'$.
Let $x_0\in \mathop{\text{supp}} V=\mathop{\text{supp}} V'$.
By definition, $V(x_0)\cong k \cong V'(x_0)$.
Choose an isomorphism $f(x_0):V(x_0)\stackrel{\cong}{\to} V'(x_0)$ and apply the argument from Lemma \ref{lem:V is schurian}.
The reverse direction is a special case of Proposition \ref{prop:isomorphic implies same support}.
\end{proof}
\begin{deff}
Let $X_1\subset X_2\subset \cdots\subset X_n$ be a filtration of a vector space $X=X_n$. A basis $B$ for $X$ is said to \underline{respect the filtration} if $B\cap X_j$ is a basis for $X_j$ for each $j$. A direct sum decomposition $X=\bigoplus Y_i$ of $X$ is said to \underline{respect the filtration} if each $X_j$ is a direct sum of some of the $Y_i$.
\end{deff}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:Lemma X}
For any $b\in \mathbb R$, let $\mathcal V_b$ be the full subcategory of $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ whose objects are
interval indecompsables $V$ with $b\in supp(V)\subset[b,\infty)$. Let $\mathcal W_b:= add\, \mathcal V_b$. Then:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The restriction map, $res: \mathcal V_b\to \text{Rep}_k(\{b\})$ given by $res(V)=V(b)$ and $res(f)= f(b)$ defines a monomorphism
${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}_{\mathcal V_b}(V,V')\to {\mathop{\text{Hom}}}_k(V(b),V'(b))$
for all $V,V'\in \mathcal V_b$, i.e. restriction to $b$ is a faithful functor on $\mathcal V_b$.
\item The restriction map, $res: \mathcal W_b\to \text{Rep}_k(\{b\})$ is also a faithful functor on $\mathcal W_b$.
\item There is a unique total ordering on the set of isomorphism classes of objects of $\mathcal V_b$ so that:
(a) ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}_{\mathcal V_b}(V',V)=0$ and $\mathop{\text{dim}}_k{\mathop{\text{Hom}}}_{\mathcal V_b}(V,V')=1$ whenever $V>V'$ and \\
(b) composition of nonzero maps $V\to V'\to V''$ is always nonzero.
\item Any $W\in \mathcal W_b$ has a unique filtration $0=W_0\subset W_1\subset \cdots \subset W_m$ so that each $W_k/W_{k-1}$ lies in $add\,V_k$ where $V_1<V_2<\cdots<V_m$.
Evaluating at vertex $b$ we get a filtration $W_1(b)\subset W_2(b)\subset\cdots\subset W_m(b)=W(b)$ which we call the \underline{filtration of} $W(b)$ \underline{induced by the filtration of} $W$.
\item For any $W\in \mathcal W_b$, any direct sum decomposition $W(b)=\bigoplus X_{l}$ of $W(b)$ into one-dimensional subspaces which respects the filtration of $W(b)$ induced from the
filtration of $W$ extends to a direct sum decomposition of $W$, i.e. $W=\bigoplus Y_{l}$ so that $Y_{l}(b)=X_{l}$ for all $l$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} (1) Given $V,V'$ in $\mathcal V_b$, the support of one of them contains the support of the other.
Let $J=supp\,V\cap supp\,V'\subset [b,\infty)$.
Then either $J=supp\,V$ or $J=supp\,V'$. Suppose $J=supp\,V$. Since $V$ is indecomposable $J$ is connected and $J\subseteq supp V'$.
Any morphism $f:V\to V'$ induces a morphism $f_J:V_J\to V_J'$ by restricting to $J$. By Theorem \ref{thm:iso-indecomps}, $V_J\cong V_J'$ is either $V$ or $V'$.
Then we have, by Lemma \ref{lem:V is schurian}, that $f_J$ is a scalar times a fixed isomorphism $V_J\cong V_J'$. In particular $f=0$ if and only if $f$ is zero at $b$. So, evaluation at $b$ is faithful. (2) follows immediately from (1).
(3) Given $V,V'$ in $\mathcal V_b$, suppose by symmetry that the support of $V$ is properly contained in the support of $V'$. Then, there is some $m>b$ so that the support of $V$ is contained in $[b,m]$. There are only finitely many elements of $S$ inside this compact set. Without loss of generality we may assume that $b\in S$.
Let $l$ be maximal so that $s_{l}$ is in the support of $V$. If $s_{l}$ is a sink, then $V$ is a sub-representation of $V'$. If $s_{l}$ is a source, then $V$ is a quotient representation of $V'$. In the first case, ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(V,V')=k$ and ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(V',V)=0$. In the second case, $Hom(V,V')=0$ and $Hom(V',V)=k$.
If there are nonzero morphisms $V\to V'\to V''$ then, by (1), evaluation at $b$ gives isomorphisms $V(b)\cong V'(b)\cong V''(b)$. So, the relation of having a nonzero morphism $V\to V'$ is transitive, reflexive, antisymmetric and any two elements are related. So, this is a total ordering.
(4) Given $W\in \mathcal W_b$ we have by definition a direct sum decomposition $W=\bigoplus_{1\le i\le m} (V_i)^{n_i}$ where we order the summands according to the total order given in (3). So, there exists a filtration $0=W_0\subset W_1\subset W_2\subset \cdots\subset W_m=W$ so that $W_i/W_{i-1}=n_iV_i$. Since $Hom(V_i,V_j)=0$ for $i<j$, the sub-representation $W_i$ is uniquely characterized as the trace of $V_1\oplus V_2\oplus \cdots\oplus V_i$ in $W$. So, the HN-filtration is unique.
(5) Let $n=\mathop{\text{dim}} W(b)$ and let $G$ be the subgroup of $GL(n,k)$ which preserves the filtration $W_1(b)\subset W_2(b)\subset\cdots\subset W_m(b)$. This is a block upper triangular matrix group which acts transitively on the set of all bases which respect this filtration of $W(b)$. Since $Hom(V_i,V_j)=K$ for $i\le j$ and $Hom(V_i,V_j)=0$ for $i>j$, we have by (3) that the restriction map $Aut(W)\to Aut(W(b))=G$ is an isomorphism. Therefore, $Aut(W)$ acts transitively on the set of all bases for the vector space $W(b)$ which respect the given filtration of $W(b)$.
Recall we are given a direct sum decomposition $W(b)=\bigoplus X_l$ into one-dimensional subspaces that respects the induced filtration and $W=\bigoplus Y_l$ a direct sum decomposition of $W$ into pointwise one-dimensional indecomposable representations.
One such basis is given by choosing a generator $x_{l}\in X_{l}$ for each summand $X_{l}$ of $W(b)=\bigoplus X_{l}$. A second basis is given by choosing a generator $y_{l}\in Y_{l}(b)$ where $W=\bigoplus (V_i)^{n_i}=\bigoplus Y_{l}$, where each $Y_l$ is equal to some $V_i$, is the given decomposition of $W$ into indecomposable representations which are one-dimensional at $b$. Take $\varphi\in G$ which takes $(y_{l})$ to $(x_{l})$. Then $W=\bigoplus\varphi(Y_{l})$ is the required decomposition of $W$ extending the chosen decomposition of $W(b)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:Y}
Given any two finite filtrations of a finite-dimensional vector space $X$, there exists a direct sum decomposition of $X$ into one-dimensional subspaces which respects both filtrations.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Given any two filtrations $V_1\subset V_2\subset \cdots\subset V_n=X$ and $W_1\subset W_2\subset\cdots \subset W_m=X$ of $X$ we have the following representation of a quiver of type $A_{n+m-1}$:
\[
\xymatrixrowsep{10pt}\xymatrixcolsep{20pt}
\xymatrix
M:& V_1 \ar[r]^\subset&
V_2 \ar[r]^\subset& \cdots\ar[r]^\subset & V_{n-1}\ar[r]^\subset & X & W_{m-1}\ar[l]_{\supset}& \cdots\ar[l]_\supset & W_2\ar[l]_\supset & W_1\ar[l]_\supset.
\]
We have a direct sum decomposition $M=\bigoplus M_i$ where each $M_i$ is one-dimensional at the middle vertex. This gives a direct sum decomposition of $X$ into one-dimensional subspaces. Then it suffices to prove the following.
Claim: This decomposition $X=M(n)=\bigoplus M_i(n)$ respects both filtrations.
Proof: Since the maps in the representation $M$ are all monomorphisms, the same holds for each indecomposable component $M_i$. So, each component is nonzero at vertex $n$ (where $M(n)=X$). For any $1\le j< n$, consider the set $I_j$ of all indices $i$ so that $M_i(j)\neq 0$. Then the sum of all $M_i(n)$ for all $i\in I_j$ is equal to $V_j$. Thus $\bigoplus M_i(n)$ respects the first filtration $V_i$ of $X$. Similarly, $\bigoplus M_i(n)$ respects the second filtration $W_j$. So, it respects both filtrations. This proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Necessary Conditions and Decomposition Theorem}\label{sec:thetheorem}
In this section we prove that the sufficient conditions in Proposition \ref{prop:sufficientProp} are also necessary conditions.
We then work up to Lemmas \ref{lem:decomposition extension} and \ref{lem:split subrepresentation}.
Lemma \ref{lem:decomposition extension} shows that the decomposition of certain subrepresentations may be extended to infinity.
Lemma \ref{lem:split subrepresentation} then states that these subrepresentations are indeed summands.
Because we may have infinitely many sinks and sources in our continuous quiver, these lemmas are an essential component of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:GeneralizedBarCode}, the decomposition theorem.
We save our discussion relating our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:GeneralizedBarCode} to the decomposition theorems in \cite{Botnan,BotnanCrawley-Boevey,Crawley-Boevey2015} for Section \ref{sec:relation to BC-B}.
\begin{deff}\label{def:dualdef}
Choose $A_{\mathbb{R}}$, a continuous quiver of type $A$.
The \underline{opposite quiver} of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$, denoted $A_{\mathbb{R}}^{\text{op}}$, is the continuous quiver of type $A$ where $x\preceq y$ in $A_{\mathbb{R}}^{\text{op}}$ if and only if $y\preceq x$ in $A_{\mathbb{R}}$.
Let $V$ be a pointwise finite representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$.
The \underline{dual representation} of $V$, denoted $DV$, is the pointwise finite representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}^{\text{op}}$ given by
\begin{align*}
DV(x) :& = D(V(x)) &
DV(y,x) :& = D(V(x,y))
\end{align*}
\end{deff}
\begin{remark}
In Definition \ref{def:dualdef}, note that since $V$ is pointwise finite we have $DDV\cong V$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:lem A}
Let $V$ be any object of $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$. Then the restriction $V_J$ of $V$ to any closed interval $J=[a,b]$ where $s_n\leq a<b\leq s_{n+1}$ for some $n\in\mathbb Z$, decomposes as $V_J=A\oplus B$ where $A$ has support in the open interval $(a,b)$ and $B$ is a finite direct sum of indecomposable one-dimensional representations which are nonzero at either $a$, $b$ or both.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality we may assume that $s_n$ is a sink and $s_{n+1}$ is a source. Let $K$ be the subrepresentation of $V_J$ given by $K(x)=\ker(V(x,n):V(x)\to V(s_n))$ for all $x\in J=[s_n,s_{n+1}]$.
Then $P=V_J/K$ is a projective representation of $J$ since all morphisms $P(x)\to P(s_n)$ are monomorphisms by construction of $K$. So $V_J\cong K\oplus P$. It is straightforward to decompose $P$ as a direct sum of finitely many pointwise one-dimensional representations, each nonzero at $n$.
It remains to show that $K$ is a direct sum of a representation with support on the open interval $(s_n,s_{n+1})$ and a finite number of pointwise one-dimensional representations all nonzero at $s_{n+1}$. This is accomplished using the dual representation $DK$. Since $DK$ is a representation of the opposite quiver, the interval $J$ with $n$ as source and $s_{n+1}$ as sink, using exactly the same argument as above we see that $DK=A\oplus B$ where $A_{n+1}=0$ and $B$ is a projective representation of $J^{op}$. Thus $K\cong DA\oplus DB$ where $DA$ has support in the open interval $(s_n,s_{n+1})$ and $DB$ is a finite direct sum of one-dimensional representations which are all nonzero at $s_{n+1}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:lem B} If $V$ is an indecomposable object of $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ with support in an interval $[s_n,s_{n+1}]$ for some $n\in \mathbb Z$, then $V$ is pointwise one-dimensional.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The support of $V$ must be an interval $J\subseteq[s_n,s_{n+1}]$. If $J$ contains either of its endpoints then the previous lemma applies. It remains to consider the case when $J=(a,b)$ is open. Let $c\in (a,b)$. Then applying the previous lemma to the intervals $[a,c]$ and $[c,b]$ we decompose $V_{[a,c]}$ and $V_{[c,b]}$ into a direct sum of finitely many pointwise one-dimensional representations each of which is nonzero at $c$. The other components of $V_{[a,c]}$ and $V_{[c,b]}$ given by the lemma must be zero since they would be components of $V$. This is equivalent to a representation of a finite quiver of type $A_m$ with straight orientation. So, we can choose the decompositions of $V_{[a,c]}$ and $V_{[c,b]}$ so that they give the same decomposition of $V_c$. This decomposes $V=V_{[a.b]}$ into a direct sum of pointwise one-dimensional representations. Since $V$ is indecomposable there is only one component.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:lem C} Let $V$ be an indecomposable object of $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$. For any two integers $n<m$, the restriction of $V$ to the closed interval $[s_n,s_m]$ is a direct sum of finitely many indecomposable pointwise one-dimensional representations.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is by induction on $m-n$. Suppose first that $m-n=1$ and let $J=[s_n,s_m]=[s_n,s_{n+1}]$. If $supp V\subseteq J$ then $V$ is pointwise one-dimensional by Lemma \ref{lem:lem B}. If $supp V\nsubseteq J$ then, by Lemma \ref{lem:lem A}, the restriction of $V$ to $J$ is a direct sum of pointwise one-dimensional objects plus a summand $A$ with support on $(s_n,s_{n+1})$. But such a summand would also be a summand of $V$ by Lemma \ref{lem:W(b)=0 implies W is summand}. Therefore, $A=0$ and the Lemma holds for $m=n+1$.
Now suppose $m\ge n+2$ and take any integer $k$ so that $n<l<m$. By induction on $m-n$, $V_{[s_n,s_{l}]}$ and $V_{[s_{l},s_m]}$ decompose into pointwise one-dimensional components. By Lemma \ref{lem:Lemma X}, this gives two filtrations of $V_k$. By Lemma \ref{lem:Y}, there is a direct sum decomposition of $V_n$ compatible with both filtrations. This extends to compatible direct sum decompositions of $V_{[s_n,s_{l}]}$ and $V_{[s_{l},s_m]}$ which paste together to give a decomposition of $V_{[s_n,s_m]}$ into one-dimensional representations.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:W(b)=0 implies W is summand}
Let $V$ be a representation in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and let $V_{(-\infty,b]}$ be the restriction of $V$ to the interval $(-\infty,b]$. Then any summand $W$ of $V_{(-\infty,b]}$ which is zero at $b$ is a summand of $V$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\pi:V_{(-\infty,b]}\to V_{(-\infty,b]}$ be the projection to $W$. Then $\pi_b:V(b)\to V(b)$ is zero. So, $\pi$ and the zero morphism on $V_{[b,\infty)}$ agree on the overlap of their domains. So, their union is an endomorphism of $V$. This endomorphism is evidently the projection to $W$ showing that $W$ is a summand of $V$.
\end{proof}
\begin{construction}\label{con:V0infinity}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous quiver of type $A$ whose sinks and sources are unbounded above.
I.e., for each sink or source $s_n$ there is an $s_{n+1}$.
Let $V$ be a pointwise finite-dimensional representation of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ such that, for all $n\in{\mathbb{Z}}$, the restriction $V_{[s_n,s_{n+1}]}$ contains no direct summands whose support is contained entirely in $(s_n,s_{n+1})$ (i.e., $A=0$ in the $A\oplus B$ decomposition in Lemma \ref{lem:lem A}).
Consider the restriction $V_{[s_{l-1},s_l]}$.
By assumption $V_{[s_{l-1},s_l]}$ is a finite direct sum of indecomposables, all of whose support includes $s_l$ or $s_{l-1}$.
Let $V^l_{0,0}$ be the direct sum of all those summands that include \emph{only} $s_l$, \emph{not} $s_{l-1}$.
Now consider $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+1}]}$.
By assumption $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+1}]}$ is a finite direct sum of indecomposables, each of whose support contains $s_{l-1}$, $s_l$ or $s_{l+1}$.
Let $V^l_{0,1}$ be the direct sum of all such indecomposables whose support contains \emph{both} $s_l$ \emph{and} $s_{l+1}$, but \emph{not} $s_{l-1}$.
Let $V^l_{1,1}$ be the direct sum of such indecomposables whose support contains $s_l$ \emph{but not} $s_{l+1}$ or $s_{l-1}$.
We ignore those indecomposables whose support does not contain $s_l$.
We can continue this process for all $n\geq 0$.
For each $n\geq 0$ and $0\leq i \leq n$ we define $V^l_{i,n}$ in the following way.
It is the direct sum of those summands of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]}$ whose support contains exactly sinks and sources $s_{l+j}$ for $0\leq j \leq n-i$.
Note that this never includes $s_{l-1}$.
In particular, $V^l_{0,n}$ is the direct sum of those interval indecomposable summands of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]}$ whose support contains $s_l$ and $s_{l+n}$.
We have three examples below, two from the previous paragraph and also the summands we consider from $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+2}]}$.
\begin{displaymath}\begin{tikzpicture}
\foreach \y in {0,...,4}
\filldraw[fill=black] (0,\y/2) circle[radius=.5mm];
\foreach \y in {0,1,2}
{
\draw[thick] (3, \y/2) -- (4,\y/2);
\foreach \x in {3,4}
\filldraw[fill=black] (\x,\y/2) circle[radius=.5mm];
}
\foreach \y in {0,1}
{
\draw[thick] (7,\y/2) -- (9,\y/2);
\foreach \x in {7,8,9}
\filldraw[fill=black] (\x,\y/2) circle[radius=.5mm];
}
\draw[thick] (7,1) -- (8.4,1);
\filldraw[fill=white] (8.4,1) circle[radius=.6mm];
\filldraw[fill=black] (7,1) circle[radius=.5mm];
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,1) circle[radius=.5mm];
\foreach \x in {3,7}
{
\foreach \y in {3,4}
\filldraw[fill=black] (\x,\y / 2) circle[radius=.5mm];
\draw[thick] (\x, 1.5) -- (\x+0.7, 1.5);
\draw[thick] (\x, 2) -- (\x+0.5, 2);
\filldraw[fill=white] (\x+0.7,1.5) circle [radius=.6mm];
\filldraw[fill=black] (\x+0.5,2) circle [radius=.5mm];
}
\draw (-0.4,-1) node[anchor=north] {$V^l_{0,0}$};
\draw (3.1,-1) node[anchor=north] {$V^l_{0,1}\oplus V^l_{1,1}$};
\draw (7.6,-1) node[anchor=north] {$V^l_{0,2}\oplus V^l_{1,2}\oplus V^l_{2,2}$};
\foreach \x in {0, 3 ,7}
\draw (\x,0) node[anchor=north] {$s_l$};
\foreach \x in {4,8}
\draw (\x,0) node[anchor=north] {$s_{l+1}$};
\draw (9,0) node[anchor=north] {$s_{l+2}$};
\draw(-.8,-.15) -- (-1,-.15) -- (-1,2.15) -- (-.8,2.15);
\draw(2.2, -.15) -- (2, -.15) -- (2, 1.15) -- (2.2, 1.15);
\draw(2.2, 1.35) -- (2, 1.35) -- (2,2.15) -- (2.2,2.15);
\draw(6.2, -.15) -- (6, -.16) -- (6, .65) -- (6.2, .65);
\draw(6.2, .85) -- (6, .85) -- (6, 1.15) -- (6.2, 1.15);
\draw(6.2, 1.35) -- (6, 1.35) -- (6, 2.15) -- (6.2, 2.15);
\foreach \x in {0, 3, 7}
{
\draw[thick] (\x - 0.8, 0) -- (\x,0);
\filldraw[fill=white] (\x-.8,0) circle [radius=.6mm];
\draw[thick] (\x - 0.7, 1) -- (\x,1);
\filldraw[fill=black] (\x-.7,1) circle [radius=.5mm];
\draw[thick] (\x - 0.5, 1.5) -- (\x,1.5);
\filldraw[fill=white] (\x-.5,1.5) circle [radius=.6mm];
\draw[thick] (\x - 0.2, .5) -- (\x,.5);
\filldraw[fill=black] (\x-.2,.5) circle [radius=.5mm];
}
\end{tikzpicture}\end{displaymath}
We note that if $1\leq i \leq n$ then $V^l_{i,n} = V^l_{i+1,n+1}$.
Note also that the constructions can be made on $(-\infty, s_{l+1}]$ instead and those representations are denoted $V^{i,n}_l$.
\hfill $\diamond$
\end{construction}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:V1n is split}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ and $V$ be as in Construction \ref{con:V0infinity} for some $s_l$.
Then, for all $n\geq 1$ and $1\leq i \leq n$, $V_{i,n}^l$ and $V^{i,n}_l$ are split subrepresentations of $V$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We know the representation $V_{1,n}$ is a split subrepresentation of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n+1}]}$ as a consequence of Lemma \ref{lem:lem C}.
We know that $V_{1,n}(s_{l-1})=0$ and $V_{1,n}(s_{l+n+1})=0$.
By two uses of Lemma \ref{lem:W(b)=0 implies W is summand} we see that $V_{1,n}$ is a split subrepresntation of $V$.
Finally, recall that $V^l_{i,n} = V^l_{i+1,n+1}$ when $i\geq 1$.
By a similar argument $V^{i,n}_l$ is a split subrepresntation of $V$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:decomposition extension}
Let $l\in {\mathbb{Z}}$ and $V$ be a representation with support contained in $[s_{l-1},+\infty)$.
Assume that for all $n\geq 0$, any indecomposable summand of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]}$ has support at $s_{l+n}$.
Then a decomposition of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]}$ into interval indecomposables extends to a decomposition of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n+1}]}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]}\cong \bigoplus_i M_{I_i}$ is a decomposition.
Then each $I_i$ includes $s_{l+n}$.
If $s_{l+n}$ is a sink then $V(s_{l+n},s_{l+n+1})$ is a monomorphism.
Any interval indecomposable summands of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n+1}]}$ that do not have support at $s_{l+n}$ are projective.
In particular, they are split subrepresentations of the same restriction (combine Lemmas \ref{lem:lem A} and \ref{lem:W(b)=0 implies W is summand}).
Let $U_{n+1}$ be the quotient of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n+1}]}$ by the these projective interval indecomposables.
Since $(U_{n+1})_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]} = V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]}$ and $U_{n+1}(s_{l+n},s_{l+n+1})$ is an isomorphism we can extend the decomposition to $U_{n+1}$.
Since $U_{n+1}$ is a decomposable summand of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n+1}]}$ and the other summand is decomposable by Theorem \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives} we have extended our decomposition.
If $s_{l+n}$ is a source then $V(s_{l+n},s_{l+n+1})$ is an epimorphism.
Any interval indecomposable summands of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n+1}]}$ that do not have support at $s_{l+n}$ are injective.
They are split subrepresentations as before.
We can now apply the same argument in the previous paragraph and extend the decomposition.
\end{proof}
The assumptions in the following lemma are justified by Proposition \ref{prop:V1n is split}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:split subrepresentation}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ and $V$ be as in Construction \ref{con:V0infinity}.
For all $l\in {\mathbb{Z}}$, $n\geq 1$, and $1\leq i \leq n$, assume $V_{i,n}^l=0=V^{i,n}_l$.
Then $V$ contains a summand as in Lemma \ref{lem:decomposition extension} but whose support does not contain $s_{l-1}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For each $n\geq 1$ and a decomposition of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]}$ let $K_n$ be the sum of interval summands whose support is nonzero at $s_{l-1}$.
By assumption, if $s_{l-1} \leq x \leq y \leq s_{l+n}$ then $\mathop{\text{dim}} K_n(x) \geq \mathop{\text{dim}} K_n(y)$.
Note that $\mathop{\text{dim}} K_n(x) = \mathop{\text{dim}} K_{n+1}(x)$ on $[s_{l-1},s_{l+n}]$, though the decomposition of $K_n$ is not assumed to extend exactly.
Therefore we have a function $[s_{l-1},+\infty)\to {\mathbb{N}}$ that is weakly decreasing and whose initial value is finite.
Therefore, the function must stabilize to some particular value.
Let $m$ be sufficiently large that $\mathop{\text{dim}} K_n(s_{l+n}) = \mathop{\text{dim}} K_{n+1}(s_{l+n+1})$ for all $n\geq m$.
Then, by assumption, every map $V(s_{l+n},s_{l+n+1})$ for $n\geq m$ is mono or epi.
So we can use the same technique in Lemma \ref{lem:decomposition extension} to extend a decomposition of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+m+1}]}$ to all of $V_{[s_{l-1},+\infty)}$.
Then any summands of $V_{[s_{l-1},+\infty)}$ with bounded support that is nonzero at $s_{l-1}$ are split subrepresentations of $V_{[s_{l-1},+\infty)}$ (Lemma \ref{lem:W(b)=0 implies W is summand}).
Denote those summands by $U$ and the rest by $W$.
Then $W$ satisfies the hypothesis of Lemma \ref{lem:decomposition extension} and we have a decomposition of $W$ already.
In particular, we can write $W\cong W_1\oplus W_2$ where the summands of $W_1$ are nonzero at $s_{l-1}$ and the summands at $W_2$ are 0 at $s_{l-1}$.
Then by a further use of Lemma \ref{lem:W(b)=0 implies W is summand} we see $W_2$ is actually the summand of $V$ that we desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{notation}\label{note:V0infinity}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ and $V$ be as in Construction \ref{con:V0infinity}.
For some $l$, let $W_2$ be as in the end of the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:split subrepresentation}.
As seen in the proof, $W_2$ is a direct sum of interval indecomposables.
Let $V^l_{0,\infty}$ be the direct sum of those summands of $W_2$ who have support at $s_l$.
\end{notation}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:V0infinity dual}
Construction \ref{con:V0infinity}, Proposition \ref{prop:V1n is split}, Lemma \ref{lem:decomposition extension}, Lemma \ref{lem:split subrepresentation}, and Notation \ref{note:V0infinity} can all be performed on $(-\infty,s_{l+1}]$ instead of $[s_{l-1},+\infty)$.
These representations will be denoted $V^{i,n}_l$ and $V^{0,\infty}_l$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:step one of straight}
Let $V$ be a pwf representation with support on an open interval which has no sinks or sources. Let $c$ be any point in the open interval. Then $V=V_0\oplus V_1\oplus V_2$ where $V_0$ is a direct sum of finitely many interval representations having $c$ in its support and $V_1$, $V_2$ are representations having support strictly below $c$, strictly above $c$, respectively.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This follows from a combination of Lemmas \ref{lem:Y} and \ref{lem:lem A}.
\end{proof}
In order to prove Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables} we prove the following lemma, which recovers the specific case of the real line in Crawley-Boevey's theorem in \cite{Crawley-Boevey2015}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:straight}
Let $V$ be as in Lemma \ref{lem:step one of straight}. Then $V$ is a direct sum of interval representations.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $(a,b)$ be an open subinterval of ${\mathbb{R}}$ containing the support of $V$ where $a$ and $b$ are allowed to be $-\infty$ and $+\infty$, respectively.
Let $C$ be the set of all points in $(a,b)$ of the form $c(k,n):=\tan(\tan^{-1}a+k(\tan^{-1}b-\tan^{-1}a)/2^n)$ for positive integers $k,n$ where $k$ is odd, which is a dense subset of $(a,b)$.
By induction on $n$ using Lemma \ref{lem:step one of straight}, we get a decomposition of $V$ in the form $V= V_\infty\oplus \bigoplus V_{k,n}$ where each $V_{k,n}$ is a direct sum of finitely many interval indecomposables having $c(k,n)$ in its support and no point in the form $c(j,m)$ in its support where $m<n$ and $V_\infty$ has no elements of the form $c(k,n)$ in its support.
In that case, $V_\infty$ is a direct sum of simple representations since for any $a\le c<d\le b$, there is a number of the form $c(k,n)$ in the open interval $(c,d)$.
So, the morphism $V_\infty(c,d):V_\infty(c)\to V_\infty(d)$ must be zero since it factors though $V_\infty(c(k,n))=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:indecomposables}\label{thm:GeneralizedBarCode}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous quiver of type $A$ and $V$ be a representation in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
Then $V$ is the direct sum of interval indecomposables (Definition \ref{def: MI}).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\textbf{Outline}: We complete this proof in four parts.
In Part 1, we consider the indecomposable summands whose support is contained entirely between a sink and source.
In Part 2, we consider the indecomposable summands whose support contains at least one but only finitely many sinks and sources.
In Part 3, we consider the indecomposable summands whose support may contain infinitely many sinks and sources, but is bounded on exactly one side.
Finally, in Part 4, we concern ourselves with indecomposable summands whose support is ${\mathbb{R}}$.
Since the case where $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ has no sinks or sources in ${\mathbb{R}}$ has been covered by Lemma \ref{lem:straight}, we assume that $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ has at least one sink or source in ${\mathbb{R}}$.
\textbf{Part 1}:
Let $s_n$ and $s_{n+1}$ be an adjacent pair of sink, source or $\pm\infty$; however, only one may be $\pm \infty$ by assumption.
We use the notation $[s_n,s_{n+1}]$ even if one of the endpoints is actually $\pm \infty$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:lem A}, $V_{[s_n,s_{n+1}]}$ decomposes to $A_n\oplus B_n$ where the support of $A_n$ is contained in $(s_n,s_{n+1})$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:W(b)=0 implies W is summand}, $A_n$ is a direct summand of $V$.
Thus, for all $n$ where $s_n$ or $s_{n+1}$ is in ${\mathbb{R}}$, we have such an $A_n$.
So we have that $V\cong (\bigoplus A_n)\oplus U$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:straight} each $A_n$ decomposes into a direct sum of indecomposable representations.
\textbf{Part 2}: We now assume $V\cong U$ as in the end of Part 1.
If $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ has finitely many sinks and sources then, by the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:lem C}, $V$ is a finite direct sum of indecomposable representations.
So we shall now assume $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ has infinitely many sinks and sources.
Choose a sink or source $s_l$ in ${\mathbb{R}}$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:V1n is split} we know $V^l_{i,n}$ is a split subrepresntation with bounded support for all $1\leq i \leq n$.~
Thus, for all $l$ such that $s_l\in {\mathbb{R}}$ we obtain such direct summands, none of which are counted twice.
Thus we have $V\cong ( \bigoplus_{l,n} V^l_{1,n})\oplus U$.
\textbf{Part 3}: Now we assume $V\cong U$ as in the end of Part 2.
Then for each $l\in{\mathbb{Z}}$ we apply Lemma \ref{lem:split subrepresentation} and obtain $V^l_{0,\infty}$ as in Notation \ref{note:V0infinity}.
By Remark \ref{rem:V0infinity dual} we also obtain $V_l^{0,\infty}$ for each $l$.
Each $V_{0,\infty}^l$ and $V_l^{0,\infty}$ decompose into interval indecomposables and so we have
$V\cong (\bigoplus (V_{0,\infty}^l\oplus V_l^{0,\infty}))\oplus U$.
\textbf{Part 4}: We assume $V\cong U$ as in the end of Part 3.
For any $s_l \in {\mathbb{R}}$, we know $V^l_{0,\infty}=0$ and $V_l^{0,\infty}=0$.
Choose some sink or source $s_l$ in ${\mathbb{R}}$ and let $X=V_{[s_l,+\infty)}$ and $Y= V_{(-\infty,s_l]}$.
We can then construct $X^l_{0,\infty}$ and $Y_l^{0,\infty}$.
Since $V^l_{0,\infty}=0$ and $V_l^{0,\infty}=0$, we see $\mathop{\text{dim}} X^l_{0,\infty}(s_l) = \mathop{\text{dim}} Y_l^{0,\infty}(s_l)$.
In particular, they are both finite.
Furthermore, $V(x,y)$ is an isomorphism for all $y\preceq x$ in ${\mathbb{R}}$.
Choose a decomposition of $V_{[s_{l-1},s_{l+1}]}$ and use the technique in Lemma \ref{lem:decomposition extension} to extend this decomposition to all of $X$ and all of $Y$.
But together this yields a decomposition of $V$.~
This will give us a bijection $V\cong \bigoplus_{\mathop{\text{dim}} V(s_l)} M_{(-\infty,+\infty)}$.
Thus, $V$ is a direct sum of indecomposable representations.
\textbf{Conclusion}: In Parts 1--3 we decomposed $V$ into $Z\oplus U$ and in Parts 2--4 we decomposed the previous Part's $U$.
In Parts 1--3 we showed that the $Z$ summand was a direct sum of indecomposables and in Part 4 we showed the final $U$ is a direct sum of indecomposables.
Therefore, given any pointwise finite-dimensional representation $V$ of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$, it is the direct sum of indecomposable representations.
If $V$ itself is indecomposable it appears as one of described indecomposable summands, depending on its support.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:indecomposableprojectives}
The theorem above, with the aid of Theorem \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives}, completely classifies indecomposable projective objects in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
They come in three forms, up to isomorphism.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $P_a$ as in Definition \ref{def:projective generated}:
\begin{align*}
P_a(x) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} k & x\preceq a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
P_a(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & y\preceq x \preceq a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}. \end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
\item $P_{a)}$ given by
\begin{align*} P_{a)} &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}k & x\preceq a, x<a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
P_{a)}(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & y\preceq x \preceq a, y\leq x < a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}. \end{array}\right. \end{align*}
\item $P_{(a}$ given by
\begin{align*} P_{(a} &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}k & x\preceq a, a<x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
P_{(a}(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & y\preceq x \preceq a, a<x\leq y \\ 0 & \text{otherwise}. \end{array}\right.\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
Note that unless $a$ is a source at least one of (2) or (3) will define the 0 representation.
If $a$ is a sink then both (2) and (3) will be the 0 representation.
Additionally, it is worth noting that if $V$ is a subrepresentation of any sum of projectve indecomposables then $V$ is also projective.
This follows from Theorem \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives} (1).
Therefore, $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ is hereditary.~
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
Let the set of sinks and sources $S=\{0,1\}$, where $s_0=0$ is a sink and $s_1=1$ is a source.
We provide a complete list of indecomposable projectives in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ with this orientation.
The values $a,b,c\in{\mathbb{R}}$ below are such that $a<0<b<1<c$. {\begin{center} \begin{tabular}{ccccccccccc} \{ $\{0\}$, & $(-\infty,0]$, & $(a,0]$, & $[a,0]$, & $[0,b)$, & $[0,b]$, & $[0,1)$, & $[0,+\infty)$, & $(1,+\infty)$, & $(c,+\infty)$, & $[c,+\infty)$ \} \\
$P_0$ & $P_{-\infty}$ & $P_{(a}$ & $P_a$ & $P_{b)}$ & $P_b$ & $P_{1)}$ & $P_1$ & $P_{(1}$ & $P_{(c}$ & $P_c$ \end{tabular} \end{center}}
\end{example
\begin{remark}\label{rem:indecomposableinjectives}
We also have the indecomposable injective objects in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $I_a$ given by:
\begin{align*}
I_a(x) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} k & a\preceq x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
I_a(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & a\preceq y\preceq x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
\item $I_{a)}$ given by
\begin{align*} I_{a)} &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}k & a\preceq x, x<a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
I_{a)}(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & a \preceq y\preceq x, x\leq y< a \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. \end{align*}
\item $I_{(a}$ given by
\begin{align*} I_{(a} &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}k & a\preceq x, a<x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right. &
I_{(a}(x,y) &= \left\{\begin{array}{ll} 1_k & a\preceq y\preceq x, a<y\leq x \\ 0 & \text{otherwise} \end{array}\right.\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\subsection{More on $P_{(a}$, $P_{a)}$, and the Pointwise Finite Requirement}\label{sec:pwf requirement}
As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:projectives}, the indecomposable projectives $P_{(a}$ and $P_{a)}$, whichever are nonzero, are not projective in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$. They are only projective in the smaller subcategory $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
We will prove this using a specific representation, denoted $\mathfrak P$, that exists only in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$.
I.e., it is not pointwise finite-dimensional.
We will use that same representation to show why Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables} can fail without the pointwise finite assumption.
\begin{construction}\label{con:bad representation}
We will denote the problematic representation by $\mathfrak P$.
First, let $a\in {\mathbb{R}}$ such that $a$ is not a sink.
Let $p\in {\mathbb{R}}$ such that $p\preceq a$ and $p\neq a$.
By symmetry, suppose $p<a$.
Let $\{x_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ be a strictly increasing sequence converging to $a$ such that $x_0> p$.
Let $M = \bigoplus_{\{x_i\}} M_{[p,x_i]}$.
Then the support of $M$ is $[p,a)$.
Let $\pi : M(p) \to k$ be a surjection given by sending each $1$ in $M_{[p,x_i]}(p)=k$ to $1\in k$.
Let $\mathfrak P$ be given by
\begin{align*}
\mathfrak P(x) &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} k & x=p \\ M(x) & x\neq p\end{array} \right. &
\mathfrak P(x,y) &= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1_k & x=y=p \\ \pi\circ M(x,y) &x\neq y=p \\ M(x,y) & \text{otherwise}. \end{array}\right.
\end{align*}
We see that $\mathfrak P$ also has support $[p,a)$.
\hfill $\diamond$
\end{construction}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:no bad maps}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous quiver of type $A$.
Let $p,a\in {\mathbb{R}}$ such that $a$ is not a sink, $p\preceq a$, and $p< a$.
Then there is no nontrivial morphism $P_{a)}\to \mathfrak P$, where $\mathfrak P$ is from Construction \ref{con:bad representation}.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Choose $x_m$ in the sequence from Construction \ref{con:bad representation}.
Let $f(x_m):P_{a)}\to \mathfrak P(x)$ be a linear map.
Since $P_{a)}=k$, $f(x_m)$ is determined by $f(x_m)(1)$.
Since $\mathfrak P(x) = M(x)$ for $x\neq p$, we see
\begin{displaymath} f(1) = (\underbrace{0,\ldots ,0}_{m-1}, r_m, r_{m+1},\ldots, r_n,0,0,\ldots)\end{displaymath}
Then for any linear map $f(x_{n+1}):P_{a)}(x_{n+1})\to \mathfrak P(x_{n+1})$ we know that
\begin{displaymath}
f(x_m)\circ P_{a)}(x_{n+1},x_m) \neq \mathfrak P(x_{n+1},x_m) \circ f(x_{n+1})
\end{displaymath}
Therefore, there is no morphism of representations $P_{a)}\to \mathfrak P$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:not projective in big category}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous quiver of type $A$ and $a\in {\mathbb{R}}$ such that $a$ is not a sink.
Then each nonzero $P_{(a}$ and $P_{a)}$ is not projective in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $p\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $p< a$ and $p\preceq a$.
The other case, where $p>a$ and $p\preceq a$, is similar.
Then, there is a nontrivial morphism of indecomposable representations $f:P_{a)}\to M_{[p,a)}$.
Let $\mathfrak P$ be as in Construction \ref{con:bad representation}.
For each $x\in [p,a)$, let $f(x): \mathfrak P(x) \to M_{[p,a)}(x)$ be given by $\mathfrak P(x,p)$.
Since $\mathfrak P(p) = M_{[p,a)}(x)$ for all $x\in[p,a)$, this is a well-defined morphism of representations.
In particular, it is an epimorphism.
So now we have an epimosphism $P_{a)}\twoheadrightarrow M_{[p,a)}$ and an epimorphism $\mathfrak P\twoheadrightarrow M_{[p,a)}$.
However, there is no nontrivial morphism $P_{a)}\to \mathfrak P$ in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$, by Proposition \ref{prop:no bad maps}.
Therefore, $P_{a)}$ is not projective.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:bad representation is bad}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous quiver of type $A$ and $\mathfrak P$ as in Construction \ref{con:bad representation}.
Then $\mathfrak P$ is not the direct sum of pointwise one-dimensional indecomposables.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We saw in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:not projective in big category} that there is an epimorphism $\mathfrak P\twoheadrightarrow M_{[p,a)}$.
However, just as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:no bad maps} there are no nontrivial morphisms $M_{[p,a)}\to \mathfrak P$.
Thus, $M_{[p,a)}$ is not a direct summand of $\mathfrak P$.
But if $\mathfrak P$ had a direct sum decomposition, one of the components must have support $[p,a)$.
But that would mean the indecomposable is $M_{[p,a)}$.
Therefore, $\mathfrak P$ does not decompose into a direct sum of one-dimensional indecomposables.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Relation to Decomposition Theorems in Persistent Homology}\label{sec:relation to BC-B}
Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables} is, in some sense, a combination of the Crawley-Boevey's BarCode theorem from \cite{Crawley-Boevey2015} and Botnan's decomposition theorem in \cite{Botnan}.
Part of our argument actually follows the latter paper.
The BarCode theorem handles representations on the continuum but only a straight orientation.
By contrast, Botnan's decomposition handles the infinite zigzag orientation but only in the discrete setting.
One might think to use Botnan's paper explicitly with Crawley-Boevey's result.
However, this cannot be done directly.
In order to make use of the combination of theorems, several technical lemmas would still be required.
In particular, one would have to argue which pwf representations can be ``lifted'' to a discrete quiver and then prove that the decomposition can be ``pushed back down.''
While intuitive, the technical details in such an argument (see \cite{HansonRock} for a similar argument) are still involved.
We avoided such a proof in order to provide a self-contained foundation of continuous type $A$ quivers as well as an algorithmic proof of Theorem \ref{thm:GeneralizedBarCode}.
While Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables} recovers a result by Botnan and Crawley-Boevey in \cite{BotnanCrawley-Boevey}, the method of proof is different.
One might consider the proof presented in Section \ref{sec:thetheorem} as a ``direct'' proof while the proof in \cite{BotnanCrawley-Boevey} uses representations of products of posets.
Both of \cite{Crawley-Boevey2015, Botnan} worked with pointwise finite-dimensional representations and each displayed a non-example for a representation that is not pointwise finite-dimensional.
Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables} adheres to exactly the same restrictions and a relevant non-example appears in Section \ref{sec:pwf requirement} as Construction \ref{con:bad representation} and Proposition \ref{prop:bad representation is bad}.
\section{Finitely Generated Representations: $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$}\label{sec:little rep}
In this section we will prove results about the category of finitely generated representations, denoted $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
Many of the properties one could reasonably expect to hold in a continuous version of $\text{rep}_k(A_n)$ do, in fact, hold for $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
The properties that change due to the nature of the continuum are Auslander--Reiten sequences and descending chains of subrepresentations.
We provide an incomplete list of the properties that hold or do not hold in the form of a theorem and dedicate the rest of this section to proving each of the items in the theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:little rep}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ be a continuous quiver of type $A$ and denote by $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ the category of finitely generated representations (Definition \ref{def:finitelygeneratedreps}).
Then the following hold.
\begin{enumerate}
\item For indecomposable representations $M_I$ and $M_J$ in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, or $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$, we have ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_I,M_J)\cong k$ or ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_I,M_J)=0$ (Proposition \ref{prop:homiskor0}).
\item Every morphism $f:V\to W$ in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, or $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ has a kernel, a cokernel, and coinciding image and coimage in that category. (Lemma \ref{lem:abelian}
\item The category $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ Krull-Schmidt, \emph{but not} artinian (Lemma \ref{lem:krull-schmidt}, Proposition \ref{prop:not artinian}).
\item The global dimension of $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is 1 (Proposition \ref{prop:projectiveresolution}).
\item The $\mathop{\text{Ext}}$ space of two indecomposables $M_I$ and $M_J$ in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, or $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is either isomorphic to $k$ or is 0 (Proposition \ref{prop:smallext}).
\item While some Auslander--Reiten sequences exist (Proposition \ref{prop:ARexistence}), some indecomposables have \emph{neither} a left \emph{nor} a right Auslander--Reiten sequence (Proposition \ref{prop:no AR sequences}).
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Requisites and Definition}
In this subsection we define the category of finitely generated representations of a continuous type $A$ and prove Theorem \ref{thm:little rep} (1) -- (3).
\begin{notation}
We may use $|$ instead of $($, $)$, $[$, or $]$ to write an interval.
When this happens, we mean that the endpoint may or may not be included; either we are making no assumptions about endpoints or it is clear what choice is possible from context.
I.e., for all $a,b\in{\mathbb{R}}$, $|a,b|$ can be one of four possibilities.
However, when we write our intervals, we allow $a=-\infty$ and $b=+\infty$ so long as we obtain a subset of ${\mathbb{R}}$.
So, the notation $|a,b|$ will never mean $[-\infty,b|$, $|a,+\infty]$, or $[-\infty,+\infty]$.
\end{notation}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:homiskor0}
Let $V$ and $W$ be indecomposable representations in $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$.
Then either ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(V,W)\cong k$ or ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(V,W)=0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(V,W)\neq 0$ and choose a nontrivial $f:V\to W$.
Then there is $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $f(x):V(x)\to W(x)$ is not 0.
Since $V(x)\cong k\cong W(x)$ we see $f(x)$ is an isomorphism.
For all $y\preceq x$, $W(x,y)\circ f(x)=f(y)\circ V(x,y)$.
If $V(y)\neq 0$ and $W(y)\neq 0$ then $f(y)= W(x,y)\circ f(x)\circ V(x,y)^{-1}$.
For all $z$ such that $x\preceq z$, $W(z,x)\circ f(z)=f(x)\circ V(z,x)$.
Then again if the vector spaces are nontrivial we have $f(z)=W(z,x)^{-1}\circ f(x)\circ V(z,x)$.
So for the sink and source $s\preceq x\preceq s'$ we see each of $f(s)$ and $f(s')$ are either 0 or determined by $x$.
Since the set of sinks and sources is discrete with no accumulation points we can use our arguments in the previous paragraph repeatedly and see that each nontrivial $f(y)$ is determined by $f(x)$.
Since ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(V(x),W(x))\cong k$ and every nontrivial $f(y)$ is determined by $f(x)$, we see ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}} (V,W)\cong k$.
\end{proof}
\begin{deff}\label{def:finitelygeneratedreps}
We define $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ as the full subcategory of $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ whose objects are representations $V$ that are finitely generated by indecomposable projectives (listed in Remark \ref{rem:indecomposableprojectives}).
\end{deff}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:abelian} Let $f:V\to W$ be a morphism in $\mathcal C$ where $\mathcal C=\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$, $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$, or $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
\begin{itemize}
\item $f$ has a kernel in $\mathcal C$
\item $f$ has a cokernel in $\mathcal C$, an
\item the image and coimage of $f$ coincide and lie in $\mathcal C$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First note that $f$ is a morphism in $\text{Rep}_k(A_\R)$.
By a dimension argument for $V(x)$, $W(x)$, $\ker f(x)$, and $\mathop{\text{coker}} f(x)$ at each $x\in {\mathbb{R}}$ the statement must be true for $\mathcal C=\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ and $\mathcal C=\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
Now suppose $\mathcal C=\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
Since $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ is abelian the image and coimage of $f$ coincide.
Since $V\twoheadrightarrow \mathop{\text{im}} f$ and $V$ is finitely generated, so is $\mathop{\text{im}} f$.
Similarly, since $W$ is finitely generated by some $\bigoplus_{i=1}^n P_i$ there is a surjection $\bigoplus_{i=1}^n P_i\twoheadrightarrow \mathop{\text{coker}} f$.
Suppose $g:\bigoplus Q_i\twoheadrightarrow V$ generates $V$.
Then $\ker(f\circ g)$ is a subrepresentation of a projective; since $\Rep_k^{\rm{pwf}}(A_\R)$ is hereditary this means $\ker(f\circ g)$ is projective.
Also $\ker(f\circ g)$ maps to $\ker f$.
For any $0\neq \hat{v}\in \ker f(x)$ there is $v\in V(x)$ from the inclusion.
Then there is $\tilde{v}\in \bigoplus Q_i(x)$ that maps to $v$.
Let $\bigoplus Q_i'=\ker (f\circ g)$.
Any projective subrepresentation of a finitely generated projective is finitely generated, so $\bigoplus Q_i'$ is finitely generated.
We also know that since $\tilde{v}\mapsto v\mapsto 0$, there exists $\bar{v}\in \bigoplus Q_i'(x)$ that maps to $v$ and so maps to $\hat{v}$.
Thus, $\bigoplus Q_i'\twoheadrightarrow \ker f$ so $\ker f$ is also finitely generated.
Therefore, $\ker f$, $\mathop{\text{im}} f$, and $\mathop{\text{coker}} f$ are all generated by finitely generated and so in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:krull-schmidt}
Let $V$ be a representation in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
Then $V$ is isomorphic to a finite direct sum of interval indecomposables.
Furthermore, $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is Krull-Schmidt.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $V$ is in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ and $\bigoplus_{i=1}^n Q_i\to V$ be a surjective morphism required by Definition \ref{def:finitelygeneratedreps}.
Since $\mathop{\text{dim}} Q_i(x) \leq 1$ for all $x\in {\mathbb{R}}$, $\mathop{\text{dim}} V(x) \leq n$ for all $x\in {\mathbb{R}}$.
That is, both $Q$ and $V$ are in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$.
By Theorem \ref{thm:indecomposables}, $V$ is a direct sum of (\emph{a priori} possibly infinitely many) interval indecomposables.
Since each $Q_i$ is projective, the support of each $Q_i$ contains at most 3 sinks and sources (1 source and 2 sinks).
Then, since $Q$ is a finite direct sum, the support of $Q$ itself contains finitely many sinks and sources.
Since $Q$ surjects onto $V$, the support of $V$ must also contain only finitely many sinks and sources.
For contradiction, suppose $V$ is an infinite direct sum of indecomposables.
Since $V$ is pointwise finite-dimensional and its support contains finitely many sinks and sources, infinitely many summands must have support that does not contain a sink or a source; i.e.~each of these indecomposable's support is bounded by an adjacent sink and source.
Since there are only finitely many sinks and sources in the support of $V$, infinitely many must have support between the same adjacent sink and source.
For each $Q_i = P_a$ for some $a$ (classification in Remark \ref{rem:indecomposableprojectives}), any indecomposable hit by $Q_i$ must contain $a$ in its support.
Since $V$ is pointwise finite dimensional there can only be finitely many such indecomposables.
Thus there must be some $Q_i = P_{(a}$ or $P_{a)}$.
If $Q_i=P_{(a}$ then any indecomposable $V_\alpha$ hit by $Q_i$ has the property that $glb\mathop{\text{supp}} V_\alpha \leq a$.
If $Q_i$ hit infinitely many indecomposables there must be infinitely many with support of the form $(a,b_\alpha)$ and the $b_\alpha$ must converge on $a$.
However, $V$ is also in $\mathop{Rep}_k^{\text{b}}(A_\R)$ and so this is a contradiction as $\lim \mathop{\text{dim}} V(x)$ as $x\to a$ from above would $\infty$.
The same argument holds if $Q_i=P_{a)}$.~
Therefore, $V$ is the direct sum of finitely many indecomposables.
Combined with Theorem \ref{thm:iso-indecomps} and Lemma \ref{lem:V is schurian} this shows $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is Krull-Schmidt.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In \cite{SalaSchiffmann2019}, Sala and Schiffmann prove their category of coherent representations (which they call coherent persistence modules) has similar properties to Theorem \ref{thm:little rep}.
In their paper, \emph{tame} representations have finitely-many places where non-isomorphisms occur in the representation. \emph{Coherent} representations are tame with bounded support and with right continuous dimension functions. Our category $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is the category of tame representations of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:not artinian}
The category $\text{rep}_k(A_{{\mathbb{R}}})$ is not Artinian.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $P_a$ be a projective indecomposable (Remark \ref{rem:indecomposableprojectives}) such that $a$ is not in $S$.
Let $b\in\bar{S}$ such that $b\preceq a$; note $b\neq a$.
Then, for every $b \preceq z \preceq a$ such that $b\neq z \neq a$, $P_z\subsetneq P_a$.
Furthermore, for any two such $z,z'$ such that $z\preceq z'$, we have $P_z\subsetneq P_{z'}\subsetneq P_a$.
Thus, we have an infinite (uncountable!) descending chain and so $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is not Artinian.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}\label{xmp:notfinitelygeneratedrep}
Let us return to the representation $M$ in Example \ref{xmp:boundedreps}.
It is an uncountable sum and so not in the category $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
In particular, any surjection onto $M$ by a sum of interval indecomposables would require the source representation to be an uncountable sum as well.
\end{example}
\subsection{Properites of $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$}\label{sec:properties of rep}
We now prove Theorem \ref{thm:little rep} (4) and (5).
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:doubleinfiniteisthesame}
Let $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ and $A'_{\mathbb{R}}$ be different orientations such that the sinks and sources are unbounded above and below in both $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ and $A'_{\mathbb{R}}$.
Then $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)\cong \text{rep}_k(A'_{\mathbb{R}})$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We'll define a bijection $F:{\mathbb{R}}\to{\mathbb{R}}$ that induces a bijection on (isomorphism classes of) indecomposables and thus an equivalence of categories.
Recall $S$ is the set of sinks and sources of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ and $S'$ is the set of sinks and sources of $A'_{\mathbb{R}}$.
First define the bijection on $S\to S'$ to be $s_n\mapsto s'_n$.
Let $x\in{\mathbb{R}}$ and $n\in{\mathbb{Z}}$ such that $s_n<x<s_{n+1}$.
Then $x=t\cdot s_n + (1-t) s_{n+1}$ for some $t\in(0,1)$.
Let $F(x)= t\cdot F(s_n)+(1-t) F(s_{n+1})$.
This induces a bijection on indecomposables as it is a bijection on ${\mathbb{R}}$.
In particular, if $x\preceq y$ then $F(x)\preceq F(y)$.
If ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_{|a,b|},M_{|c,d|})\cong k$ in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ then $a\preceq c$ and $b\preceq d$.
Since $F(a)\preceq F(c)$ and $F(b)\preceq F(d)$, the ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}$-set from $M_{|F(a), F(b)|}$ to $M_{|F(c), F(d)|}$ is also isomorphic to $k$.
Thus we have an equivalence on the indecomposables.
Since both categories are Krull-Schmidt we have an equivalence of categories.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:projectivesmaps}\label{prop:injectivesmaps}
Let $P$ and $Q$ be projective indecomposables in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ and $I$ and $J$ be injective indecomposables in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
\begin{itemize}
\item Any morphism $f:P\to Q$ is either 0 or mono.
\item Any morphism $g:I\to J$ is either 0 or epi.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We will prove the first statement; the second is dual.
Let $f:P\to Q$ be a map of indecomposable projectives.
By Theorem \ref{thm:characterization of one sided projectives} and Remark \ref{rem:indecomposableprojectives} the image $\mathop{\text{im}} f$ in $Q$ is a subrepresentation and so projective.
Since $P$ surjects on to $\mathop{\text{im}} f$ it is a split subrpresentation of $P$.
However, $P$ is indecomposable so $\mathop{\text{im}} f = 0$ or $\mathop{\text{im}} f \cong P$.
\end{proof}
Below, for each indecomposable representation $V$ in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ we create two projective representations $P_0(V)$ and $P_1(V)$.
In Proposition \ref{prop:projectiveresolution} we prove that $P_1(V)\to P_0(V)\to V$ is the minimal projective presentation of $V$.
\begin{construction}\label{con:soVsiV}
Let $V$ be an indecomposable in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ with support $|a,b|$.
If $V$ is projective let $P_0(V)=V$ and $P_1(V)=0$.
Now suppose $V$ is not projective.
Recall $S$ is the set of sinks and sources of $A_{\mathbb{R}}$ in ${\mathbb{R}}$.
Since $V$ is finitely generated $|a,b|\cap S$ is finite.
We let $P_0(V)$ be the direct sum of the following indecomposable projectives.
\begin{itemize}
\item $P_s$ for all sources $s$ in $(a,b)$.
\item $P_{(a}$ if $a\notin |a,b|$ and there exists $x\preceq a$ in $|a,b|$.
\item $P_a$ if $a\in |a,b|$ and there exists $x\preceq a$, $x\neq a$ in $|a,b|$.
\item $P_{b)}$ if $b\notin |a,b|$ and there exists $x\preceq b$ in $|a,b|$.
\item $P_b$ if $b\in |a,b|$ and there exists $x\preceq b$, $x\neq b$ in $|a,b|$.
\end{itemize}
We let $P_1(V)$ be the direct sum of the following indecomposable projectives.
\begin{itemize}
\item $P_s$ for all sources $s$ in $(a,b)$.
\item $P_a$ if $a\notin |a,b|$ and there exists $a\preceq x$ in $|a,b|$.
\item $P_{a)}$ if $a\in |a,b|$.
\item $P_b$ if $b\notin |a,b|$ and there exists $b\preceq x$ in $|a,b|$.
\item $P_{(b}$ if $b\in |a,b|$.
\end{itemize}
If $a$ or $b$ is a sink and in $|a,b|$ then the summand $P_{a)}$ or $P_{(b}$ is 0, respectively.
We see that both $P_0(V)$ and $P_1(V)$ are nontrivial and finitely generated, so in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
\hfill $\diamond$
\end{construction}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:injectivemorphismonprojectives}
Let $V$, $P_1(V)$, and $P_0(V)$ be as in Construction \ref{con:soVsiV}.
Then there is an injective morphism $P_1(V)\hookrightarrow P_0(V)$ whose cokernel is $V$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $V$ is projective the statement is trivially true.
Now suppose $V$ is not projective.
There are finitely many sinks and sources, totally ordered.
So on those summands we let the maps be defined in the following way where $\pm$ means scalar multiplication by $\pm 1$:\begin{displaymath}\xymatrix@C=1ex{
& \cdots \ar[dr]^-{-} & & P_{s_{2n}} \ar[dl]_-{+} \ar[dr]^-{-} & & P_{s_{2n+2}} \ar[dl]_-{+} \ar[dr]^-{-}& & {\cdots} \ar[dl]_-{+} \ar[dr]^-{-}& & P_{s_{2n+2m}} \ar[dl]_-{+} \ar[dr]^-{-}& & \cdots \ar[dl]_-{+} \\
\cdots & & P_{a*}\text{ or }P_{s_{2n-1}} & & P_{s_{2n+1}} & & P_{s_{2n+3}} & & \cdots & & P_{s_{2n+2m+1}} & & \cdots
}\end{displaymath}
Since there is no accumulation of elements of $S$ in ${\mathbb{R}}$, a projective indecomposable at $a$ can only appear as a summand of $P_0(V)$ or $P_1(V)$, but not both.
The similar statement is true for $b$.
Thus, only one type of projective summand of each $a$ or $b$ may appear in $P_0(V)$ and $P_1(V)$.
Denote whichever summands appear, if any, by $P_{a*}$ and $P_{b*}$.
If $P_{a*}$ appears in $P_1(V)$ then there is a nontrivial map from $P_{a*}$ to $P_{s_{2n+1}}$ or $P_{b*}$, depending on whether or not $(a,b)$ contains any sources.
If this is the case, use scalar multiplication by $-1$.
In the similar case for $b$, use scalar multiplication by $+1$.
If $P_{a*}$ appears in $P_0(V)$ then there is a nontrivial map from $P_{s_{2n}}$ or $P_{b*}$ to $P_{a*}$, depending on whether or not $(a,b)$ contains any sinks.
If this is the case, use scalar multiplication by $+1$.
In the similar case for $b$, use scalar multiplication by $-1$.
Instead of proving that this map is injective with cokernel $V$, we instead note that the kernel of the surjection $P_0(V)\twoheadrightarrow V$ is $P_1(V)$.
This is equivalent.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:projectiveresolution}
The following hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item For any indecomposable $V$ in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$, $P_1(V)\hookrightarrow P_0(V)\twoheadrightarrow V$ is the minimal projective resolution and presentation of $V$.
\item All representations in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ are finitely presented.
\item The global dimension of $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is 1.
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We see $P_1(V)$ is superflous in $P_0(V)$ and $P_1(V)\hookrightarrow P_0(V)\twoheadrightarrow V$ is exact by Proposition \ref{prop:injectivemorphismonprojectives}.
Thus the sequence is the minimal projective resolution and presentation of $V$.
Furthermore, noting that the reversal of orientation $\preceq$ on ${\mathbb{R}}$ gives the opposite category, we see the global dimension of $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ is 1.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:smallext}
Let $V$ and $W$ be indecomposables in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
If $\mathop{\text{Ext}}^1(W,V)\neq 0$ then $\mathop{\text{Ext}}^1(W,V)\cong k$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $V$ and $W$ be indecomposables in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:projectiveresolution} the projective resolution of $V$ is $P_1(V)\hookrightarrow P_0(V)\twoheadrightarrow V$.
By definition $\mathop{\text{Ext}}^i(V,W)$ is the $i$th homology group in the chain
\begin{displaymath}\xymatrix{
0 \ar[r] & {\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(P_0(V),W) \ar[r] & {\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(P_1(V),W) \ar[r] & 0.
} \end{displaymath}
Suppose $\mathop{\text{Ext}}^1(W,V)\neq 0$.
Index the projectives in $P_0(V)$ that nontrivially map to $W$ from 1 to $m$, denoted $P_1,\ldots,P_m$, such that if $P_a=P_i$ and $P_b=P_{i+1}$ for $a,b\in{\mathbb{R}}$ then $a<b$.
Then ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(P_0(V),W)\cong k^m$.
Let $f:(x_1,\ldots,x_m)$ be a nontrivial map $P_0(V)\to W$ and $\iota:P_1(V)\to P_0(V)$ the inclusion.
Index the projectives in $P_1(V)$ that nontrivially map to $W$ from 1 to $n$, similarly to the projectives in $P_0(V)$, denoted $Q_1,\ldots, Q_n$.
Then $Q_1$ maps to $P_1$ and $P_2$ or just $P_1$.
If $Q_1$ only maps to $P_1$ then the projective $Q_2$ maps to both $P_1$ and $P_2$.
If $Q_1$ maps to both $P_1$ and $P_2$ then $Q_2$ maps to $P_2$ and $P_3$.
Thus, the composition $f\circ\iota$ will be one of four forms:
\begin{itemize} \item $(x_1,x_1\oplus x_2,\ldots,x_{i-1}\oplus x_i)$, \item $(x_1\oplus x_2,\ldots,x_{i-1}\oplus x_i,x_i)$,
\item $(x_1,x_1\oplus x_2,\ldots,x_{i-1}\oplus x_i,x_i)$, or \item $(x_1\oplus x_2,\ldots,x_{i-1}\oplus x_i)$. \end{itemize}
In any case, basic linear algebra shows us that ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(P_0(V),W)\to {\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(P_1(V),W)$ is surjective or injective and the difference in dimensions is either 0 or 1.
Therefore $\mathop{\text{dim}} \mathop{\text{Ext}}^1(W,V)$ is 0 or 1.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Existence of Some Auslander--Reiten Sequences}\label{sec:ARsequences}
In this subsection we will show that for any orientation of a continuous type $A$ quiver, the category $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ contains some Auslander--Reiten sequences but not all Auslander--Reiten sequences (Theorem \ref{thm:little rep} (6)).
However, we will not provide a complete classification of Auslander--Reiten sequences in this paper.
Such a classification will be provided in the sequel to this paper.
In \cite{GabrielRoiter}, Gabriel and Ro\u{\i}ter provide a general description of Auslander--Reiten sequences of representations of linear posets. However, a specific description to this context in the contemporary language and notation of representation theory is new.
We recall the definition of an almost-split sequence, commonly called an Auslander--Reiten sequence.
Such short exact sequences were originally defined by Auslander and Reiten in \cite{ARSequences}.
\begin{definition}\label{def:ARsequence}
Let $\mathcal A$ be an abelian category and $0\to U \stackrel{f}{\to} V \stackrel{g}{\to} W\to 0$ a short exact sequence in $\mathcal A$.
The short exact sequence is an \underline{almost split sequence}, or \underline{Auslander--Reiten sequence} if the following conditions hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item $f$ is not a section and $g$ is not a retraction.
\item $U$ and $W$ are indecomposable.
\item If $h:U\to X$ is a nontrivial morphism of indecomposables and $U\not\cong X$ then $h$ factors through $f$.
\item If $h:X\to W$ is a nontrivial morphism of indecomposables and $X\not\cong W$ then $h$ factors through $g$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
In the following proposition, recall that $S$ is the set of sinks and sources in a continuous quiver of type $A$ and that $\bar{S}$ includes $\pm \infty$.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:ARexistence}
Let $s_n, s_{n+1}\in \bar{S}$ and $a,b\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that $s_n<a<b<s_{n+1}$.
One of the following is a short exact sequence and in particular an Auslander--Reiten sequence.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $s_n$ is a sink then the Auslander--Reiten sequence is
\begin{displaymath} \xymatrix{0\ar[r] & M_{[a,b)} \ar[rr]^-{\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\1\end{array}\right]} && M_{[a,b]}\oplus M_{(a,b)} \ar[rr]^-{\left[\begin{array}{cc} 1 & -1 \end{array}\right]} && M_{(a,b]} \ar[r] & 0 } \end{displaymath
\item If $s_n$ is a source then the Auslander--Reiten sequence is
\begin{displaymath} \xymatrix{0\ar[r] & M_{(a,b]} \ar[rr]^-{\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\1\end{array}\right]} && M_{(a,b)}\oplus M_{[a,b]} \ar[rr]^-{\left[\begin{array}{cc} 1 & -1 \end{array}\right]} && M_{[a,b)} \ar[r] & 0 }\end{displaymath}
\end{itemize}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We note the two cases are symmetric and prove the first.
We see the first map is injective, the second is surjective, and that the sequence is exact at $[a,b]\oplus(a,b)$.
Thus, the sequence is a short exact sequence.
Denote the map $M_{[a,b)}\to M_{[a,b]}\oplus M_{(a,b)}$ in the sequence by $h_1\oplus h_2$.
By Proposition \ref{prop:sufficientProp} we know both $M_{[a,b)}$ and $M_{(a,b]}$ are indecomposable.
Let $V$ be another indecomposable representation in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$.
By definition the support of $V$ is an interval $|c,d|$.
If there exists $x\in |c,d|$ such that $x<a$ then any morphism $f:M_{[a,b)}\to V$ must be 0.
Additionally, if there exists $x\in [a,b)$ such that $x\geq d$ and $x\notin|c,d|$ then any $f:M_{[a,b)}\to V$ must be 0.
Thus, any morphism $M_{[a,b]}\oplus M_{(a,b)}\to M_{[a,b)}$ must $0$ and morphism $M_{(a,b]}\to M_{[a,b]}\oplus M_{(a,b)}$ must be 0.
Claim: If $V\not\cong M_{[a,b)}$ and $f:M_{[a,b)}\to V$ is a nonzero morphism then there exists either a nonzero morphism $g_1: M_{[a,b]}\to V$ or $g_2:M_{(a,b)}\to V$ such that $g_i\circ h_i = f$.
Proof of claim: If $V\not\cong M_{[a,b)}$ then, by the conditions in the previous paragraph combined with Theorem \ref{thm:iso-indecomps}, either $b\in|c,d|$ or $a\notin |c,d|$.
If $b\in|c,d|$ Then $g_1$ is a nonzero morphism and so $g_1\circ h_1=f$.
If $a\notin |c,d|$ then $g_2$ is a nonzero morphism and so $g_2\circ h_2=f$.
In either case, $f$ factors through $M_{[a,b]}\oplus M_{(a,b)}$.
Finally, if $|c,d|=[a,b)$ then by Theorem \ref{thm:iso-indecomps} $f$ is an isomorphism.
By a dual argument, a morphism from an indecomposable $W$ to $M_{(a,b]}$ that is not an isomorphism factors through $M_{[a,b]}\oplus M_{(a,b)}$.
Therefore, the given sequence is an Auslander--Reiten sequence.
\end{proof}
We give an example of a representation with no left or right Auslander--Reiten sequences in the form of a proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:no AR sequences}
Let $M_{\{a\}}$ be the indecomposable representation with support $\{a\}$ where $a$ is neither a sink nor a source.
Then there is are no Auslander--Reiten sequences of either of the following forms:
\begin{displaymath}\xymatrix@R=2ex{ 0\ar[r] & M_{\{a\}} \ar[r] & B\ar[r] & C\ar[r] & 0 \\ 0 \ar[r] & A \ar[r] & B\ar[r] & M_{\{a\}} \ar[r] & 0.}\end{displaymath}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $s_{2n}<a<s_{2n+1}$, where $s_{2n}$ is a sink and $s_{2n+1}$ is a source.
The other case is similar.
For any indecomposable $M_I$, if ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_I,M_{\{a\}})\cong k$ then $I=|c,a]$.
We note that, for each $x\in(s_0,a)$, ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_{[x,a]},M_{\{a\}})\cong k$ for all $i\geq 0$.
Let $M_I$ be some indecomposable such that ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_I,M_{\{a\}})\cong k$.
For any $x\in(s_0,a)$ such that $c<x$ we have ${\mathop{\text{Hom}}}(M_I,M_{J_x})\cong k$.
Since the Hom space between any two indecomposables is either $k$ or 0 (Proposition \ref{prop:homiskor0}), all nontrivial maps $M_I\to M_{\{a\}}$ factor through every indecomposable $M_{[x,a]}$ for $x\in (s_0,a)$ and $x>c$.
Thus, it is not possible to have an Auslander--Reiten sequence in $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ of the form $0\to A\to B\to M_{\{a\}}\to 0$.
By a dual argument, the other form is not possible, either.
\end{proof}
\section{Other Papers in this Series}
In Continuous Quivers of Type $A$ (II), the second author
defines a continuous analog of the Auslander--Reiten quiver, called the Auslander--Reiten Space, for both $\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R)$ and its bounded derived category $\mathcal D^b(\mathop{\text{rep}}_k(A_\R))$ \cite{Rock1}.
They show that the Auslander--Reiten space exhibits many of the same properties as an Auslander--Reiten quiver, such as how to find extensions of indecomposables and Auslander--Reiten sequences.
Similar results are shown about the derived category.
The authors define the new continuous cluster category in Continuous Quivers of Type $A$ (III) and generalize cluster structures to cluster theories \cite{IgusaRockTodorov2}.
In particular, they define the $\mathbf{E}$-cluster theory.
They then show many existing type $A$ cluster structures are cluster theories and embed into this new theory in a way that preserves mutation.
In Continuous Quivers of Type $A$ (IV), the second author generalizes mutation to continuous mutation \cite{Rock2}, further generalizing transfinite mutation in \cite{BaurGratz2018}.
The embeddings from Part (III) are shown to be part of a chain of embeddings and the notion of an abstract cluster structure is introduced in order to understand which cluster theories are more strongly related.
Part (IV) concludes with a geometric model of $\mathbf E$-clusters which generalizes the triangulations of polygons and laminations of hyperbolic plane in \cite{CCS} and \cite{IgusaTodorov2015}, respectively.
|
\section{Introduction}
Topological Data Analysis (TDA) is now an emerging area for
analyzing complex data. TDA refers to a class of methods that garner information from topological structures in data that belong to a topological space, i.e., a mathematical space that allows for continuity, connectedness, and convergence \citep{CarlssonBulletin,harer2010}. Output from TDA may then be used for effective statistical learning about the data.
TDA combines algebraic topology and other tools from pure mathematics to allow a useful study of \textit{shape} of the data. The most widely discussed topologies of data include connected components, tunnels, voids, etc., of a topological space. Computational (or algorithmic) topology, is an overlap between the mathematical underpinnings of topology with computer science, and consists of two parts, i.e., measuring the topology of a space and persistent homology \citep{2017Chazalintroduction}.
Using computational topology, TDA aims at analyzing topological features of data and representing these features using low dimensional representations \citep{CarlssonBulletin}.
In particular, the space must first be represented as simplicial complexes, the Vietoris-Rips complex and the \v{C}ech complex being the most common pathways to obtaining output to characterize the topology.
Persistent homology refers to a class of methods for measuring topological features of shapes and functions. It converts the data into simplicial complexes and describes the topological structure of a space at different spatial resolutions.
Topologies that are more persistent are detected over a wide range of spatial scales and are deemed more likely to represent true features of the underlying space rather than sampling variations, noise, etc. Persistent homology therefore elicits persistence of essential topologies in the data and outputs the birth and death of such topologies via a persistence diagram, which is a popular summary statistic in TDA.
Data inputs for persistent homology are usually represented as point clouds or as functions, while the outputs depend on the nature of the analysis and commonly consist of either a persistence diagram, or a persistence landscape.
A point cloud of data represents a sample of points from an underlying manifold and its persistent homology approximates the topological information of the manifold.
If data is represented as a Morse function (i.e., a smooth function on the manifold such that all critical points are non-degenerate), the persistent homology of the function is mathematically equivalent to analyzing the topological information of the manifold.
For rigorous expositions on algebraic topology and computational homology, see
\cite{Munkres93a}
and \cite{harer2010}.
TDA has been used in cosmic web \citep{ 2013Weygaert}, shape analysis
\citep{Carlsson2004,Chazal2009shapestable, DiFabio2011,DIFABIO20121445, Chazal2012shape,li2014chazal, Carriere2015, Bonis2016chazal}, biological data analysis \citep{DEWOSKIN2010157, Nicolau2011TopologyBD,heo2012topological, Kovacev2016,bendich2016persistent,wang2018topological}, sensor networks \citep{Silva07homologicalsensor, Silva07homologicalsensorconver, 2013Adams}, as well as other fields.
Development of TDA for time series is a relatively new and fast growing area, with many interesting applications in several different domains.
\cite{berwald2013automatic} discussed the use of TDA in climate analysis. \cite{Khasawneh2015} used notions of persistence of $1$-th homology groups of point clouds (obtained via Takens's embedding) within multiple windows of time series to track the stability of dynamical systems, while \cite{Seversky2016} explored stability of various single-source and multi-source signals.
\cite{Perea2015SW1PerSSW} used the notion of maximum persistence of homology groups to quantify periodicity of time series.
\cite{Pereira2015} used features derived from persistent homology to cluster populations of Tribolium flour beetles.
\cite{YuheiUmeda2017D} used topological features of one and two dimensional homology groups as inputs into
convolutional neural networks for classification of time series in three different domains, showing that their approach outperformed the baseline algorithm in each case.
One illustration consisted of motion sensor data of daily and sports activities,
an area also investigated using TDA by \cite{stolz2017persistent}.
\cite{truong2017exploration} as well as \cite{gidea2017topological,
gidea2018topological} and \cite{gidea2018topologicalcry} explored the use of TDA on financial time series. We discuss some of these applications in detail later in this paper.
It is well known that time series do not naturally have point cloud representations. Transformation from a time series to a point cloud is implemented through Takens's embedding
\citep{takens1981detecting}, guaranteeing the preservation of topological properties of the time series.
The approach consists of transforming a time series $\{x_t, t=1,2,\ldots,T\}$, into its phase space, i.e., a point cloud or a set of points $\mathbf{v}_i = \{x_{i}, x_{i+\tau}, \ldots, x_{i+d \tau}\}, i=1,2,\ldots,T-d\tau$, where $\tau$ is a delay parameter and $d$ specifies the dimension of the point cloud. We discuss Taken's embedding in Section \ref{tstdapc} and the selection of $d$ and $\tau$ in Section \ref{takens}.
TDA of time series through suitable functions is much less explored.
\cite{wang2018topological} proposed TDA on weighted Fourier series representations (Morse functions) of electroencephalogram (EEG) data. They used a randomness test approach to examine properties of the proposed method and show its robustness to different transformations of the data.
TDA of time series through sublevel set filtration of functions
is discussed in Section \ref{FunctionTS}.
The format of this paper follows. Section \ref{PointCloudTS} provides a review of TDA from point clouds and then describes TDA for time series via the Takens's embedding method. Section \ref{FunctionTS} provides a review of persistent homology on functions and then describes TDA for time series analysis starting from second-order spectra or Walsh Fourier transforms. Section \ref{FeaturesTDA} discusses constructing TDA based features which are then used in learning about time series, with applications on classification, clustering and detecting changes in patterns. Section \ref{summary} gives a discussion and summary.
\section{Persistent Homology Based on Point Clouds} \label{PointCloudTS}
In the section, we first describe persistent homology of a manifold starting from point cloud data, followed by its construction and use in time series analysis using Takens's embedding.
\subsection{Point Clouds to Persistence Diagrams - A Basic Review} \label{tda_pc}
Starting from a point cloud, we show the procedure to elicit topological features of data.
Denote the point cloud as $\mathcal{P} = \{\mathbf{v}_i: i=1,2,\ldots, N\}$, where $\mathbf{v}_i \in \mathcal{R}^d$. When $d=2$, the points lie on the plane.
Let
$\mathbf{D}_E =\{D_{E}(\mathbf{v}_{i},\mathbf{v}_{j} )\}$ be the $N\times N$ matrix of Euclidean distances, for $i,j=1,\ldots,N$.
For each $\mathbf{v}_{i} \in \mathcal{P}$, let $\mathbf{B}_\lambda (\mathbf{v}_i) = \{\mathbf{x}: D_{E}(\mathbf{x}, \mathbf{v}_i)\leq \lambda/2, \mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{R}^d\}$ denote a closed ball with radius $\lambda/2$; here,
$0 \le \lambda \le U$, where the upper-bound $U$ is usually pre-determined as the maximum of the distances in
$\mathbf{D}_E$.
A Vietoris-Rips simplex \citep{harer2010} corresponding to a given $\lambda$ is defined as the
set of points $\mathcal{P}_{V}(\lambda) \subset \mathcal{P}$
such that any points $\mathbf{v}_{i_1}, \mathbf{v}_{i_2}$ in $\mathcal{P}_{V}(\lambda)$ satisfy
$D_{E}(\mathbf{v}_{i_1}, \mathbf{v}_{i_2}) \leq \lambda$, $1\leq i_1, i_2 \leq N$.
For a given $\lambda$ value, a simplicial complex $\tilde{\kappa} (\lambda)$ denotes the set of Vietoris-Rips simplexes such that for any two Vietoris-Rips simplexes $\mathcal{P}_{V}^{(1)}(\lambda), \mathcal{P}_{V}^{(2)}(\lambda) \in \tilde{\kappa} (\lambda)$,
we have (i) $\mathcal{P}_{V}^{(1)}(\lambda) \cap \mathcal{P}_{V}^{(2)}(\lambda) \in \tilde{\kappa} (\lambda)$ and (ii)
if $\mathcal{P}' \subset \mathcal{P}_V^{(1)}$,
then $\mathcal{P}' \in \tilde{\kappa} (\lambda)$.
A simplicial complex consisting of $(\tilde{p} + 1)$ points (from different Vietoris-Rips simplexes) is a $\tilde{p}$-dimensional simplicial complex.
In algebraic topology, $\tilde{p}$ is at most $N-1$ when the point cloud had $N$ points.
The topology of the point cloud is studied through the topology of the simplicial complexes, denoted by
$\{\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k}: k=1,2,\ldots,k_{\tilde{p}}\}$, and
$\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k}$ is a homology group, consisting of a set of $\tilde{p}$-dimensional simplicial complexes which
are homomorphic.
For the theory and computation of homomorphisms, refer to
\cite{Munkres93a, carlsson2014topological} and
\cite{harer2010}.
As the parameter $\lambda$ gradually increases,
the birth and death of homology groups $\{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}=(\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}, \lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}): k=1,2,\ldots,k_{\tilde{p}}\}$ are recorded in the persistence diagram.
A $\tilde{p}$-th Betti number of $\lambda$ is the number of $\tilde{p}$-th homology groups at $\lambda$, denoted as $k_{\tilde{p}}^{(\lambda)}$.
Computation of the topological features are summarized in the following steps.
\begin{description}
\item [Step 1.] Compute the Euclidean distance matrix $\mathbf{D}_E = \{D_{E}(\mathbf{v}_{i_1}, \mathbf{v}_{i_2})\}$ for $i_1, i_2\in\{1,\ldots, N\}$; this is the default distance for a point cloud in \texttt{R-TDA}.
\item [Step 2.] Construct birth and death of homology groups for increasing values of $\lambda$. For each $\lambda$, compute $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k}$ from $\tilde{\kappa} (\lambda)$ using closed balls $\mathbf{B}_\lambda (\mathbf{v}_i)$ of $\mathbf{v}_i$ with radius $\lambda/2$.
If an elder topology $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_1}$ and a younger one $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_2}$ merge into a single $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k}$ at some $\lambda$, $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_1}$ would become $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k}$ and $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_2}$ would die.
\item [Step 3.] The persistence diagram is an output of the set of points representing birth-death of homology groups from the point cloud and is denoted as $\tilde{\Omega} = \{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}=(\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}, \lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}): \tilde{p}=0,1, \ldots;k=1,2,\ldots,k_{\tilde{p}}\}$. We plot $\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}$ on the $x$-axis and $\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}$ on the $y$-axis \citep{harer2010}.
\end{description}
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 2.1. Point Cloud to Persistence Diagram.} We illustrate construction of the persistence diagram for a point cloud with $N=60$ points sampled from the unit circle $x_1^2+x_2^2=1$:
\begin{verbatim}
set.seed(1); PC <- circleUnif(n = 60, r = 1)
plot(PC, main = "(a)")
\end{verbatim}
The point cloud is shown in Figure \ref{pointcloudpersist}(a). We expect to see a total of $k_0=60$ values of $\tilde{\alpha}_{0,k}$ and $k_1 =1$ value of $\tilde{\alpha}_{1,k}$.
We use the function \texttt{ripsDiag} from the \texttt{R-TDA} package for constructing the persistence diagram
\citep{Fasy2014IntroductionTT}.
In the R code chunk shown below, \texttt{PC} denotes the input point cloud, \texttt{maxdimension} is the maximum dimension $\tilde{p}$ of points $\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}$ to be calculated, and \texttt{maxscale} is the maximum value that the filtration parameter $\lambda$ can assume. We set \texttt{maxdimension} to be 1.
The default \texttt{dist} is the Euclidean distance. The output \texttt{pers.diag.1} returns the persistence diagram, as a matrix with three columns which summarize topological features of the point cloud.
\begin{verbatim}
(pers.diag.1 <- ripsDiag(X=PC, maxdimension = 1, maxscale = max(dist(PC))) )
$diagram
dimension Birth Death
[1,] 0 0.0000000 1.999999902
[2,] 0 0.0000000 0.306978455
[3,] 0 0.0000000 0.245260715
.....
[60,] 0 0.0000000 0.027923092
[61,] 1 0.3190835 1.737696840
\end{verbatim}
The first row with $\tilde{\tau}_{0,1} = (0, 2.00)$
in the output records that there is a $0$-th homology group (connected component) whose birth happens at $\lambda=0$ and whose death happens at about $\lambda=2.00$.
The second row with $\tilde{\tau}_{0,1} = (0, 0.31)$ records that the second connected component is born at $\lambda=0$ and is dead at $\lambda=0.31$, etc. We see that all $0$-th homology groups have birth time $0$,
and all $N=60$ points start as connected components.
These 60 connected components are shown in decreasing order of persistence (slower death).
Row 61 with $\tilde{\tau}_{1,1} = (0.32, 1.74)$ describes the birth and death of a $1$-th homology group (tunnel) at $\lambda=0.32$ and $\lambda=1.74$ respectively.
Figure \ref{pointcloudpersist}(b) corresponds to the filtration parameter $\lambda = 0$ and is obtained using this code:
\begin{verbatim}
plot(x=1,y=1,type="n",ylim=c(0,2),xlim=c(0,2),ylab="death",xlab="birth",main="(b)")
abline(v = 0, lty = 2)
\end{verbatim}
The dashed vertical line
indicates the birth time of connected components; the plot has no points because none of the connected components has died.
Figure \ref{pointcloudpersist}(c) corresponds to the point cloud when $\lambda = 0.1$:
\begin{verbatim}
plot(PC, pch = 16, cex = 5, col = "blue", main = "(c)")
\end{verbatim}
The blue
balls $\mathbf{B}_\lambda (\mathbf{v}_i)$ around each point enlarge and connect with others, resulting in fewer connected components.
The black
dots in Figure \ref{pointcloudpersist}(d) denote the birth-death times of the merged connected components which have died before $\lambda=0.1$:
\begin{verbatim}
death.time = sort(pers.diag.1$diagram[pers.diag.1$diagram[, 1]==0, 3])
plot(x = rep(0, sum(death.time<=0.1)), y = death.time[which(death.time<=0.1)],
ylim = c(0, 2), xlim = c(0, 2), ylab = "death", xlab = "birth", main = "(d)")
abline(v = 0, lty = 2); abline(h = 0.1, lty = 2)
\end{verbatim}
When $\lambda = 0.32$ in Figure \ref{pointcloudpersist}(e), all points connect together and a tunnel emerges, which is the white area surrounded by the blue
circle:
\begin{verbatim}
plot(PC, pch = 16, cex = 12, col = "blue", main = "(e)")
\end{verbatim}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/pointcloudpersist.pdf}
\caption{Persistence diagram corresponding to a point cloud. (a) shows the raw point cloud and (h) shows the persistence diagram. (c), (e) and (g) are intermediate steps for the filtration by varying $\lambda$, while (b), (d) and (f) are intermediate steps for constructing the persistence diagram.}
\label{pointcloudpersist}
\end{figure}
The birth time of this tunnel is recorded as $\lambda = 0.32$, which is shown as the red dashed line
in Figure \ref{pointcloudpersist}(f). Further, there are more black
dots in this figure since there are more connected components that have died before $\lambda=0.32$:
\begin{verbatim}
plot(x = rep(0, sum(death.time<=0.32)), y = death.time[which(death.time<=0.32)],
ylim = c(0, 2), xlim = c(0, 2), ylab = "death", xlab = "birth", main = "(f)")
abline(h = pers.diag.1$diagram[pers.diag.1$diagram[, 1]==1, 2], lty = 2)
abline(v = 0, lty = 2); abline(v = 0.32, col = "red", lty = 1)
\end{verbatim}
When $\lambda$ reaches its maximum value of $2$ (which is the largest value
in $D_{E}(\mathbf{v}_{i_1}, \mathbf{v}_{i_2})$), the algorithm stops and outputs the persistence diagram (see Figure \ref{pointcloudpersist}(h))
which finally shows the birth-death times for all connected components (the dots)
and the tunnel (the red triangle):
\begin{verbatim}
plot(PC, pch = 16, cex = 40, col = "blue", main = "(g)")
plot(pers.diag.1$diagram, main = "(h)")
\end{verbatim}
\vskip1em
\texttt{R-TDA} also supports construction of a persistence diagram given an arbitrary distance matrix as input, as shown in the example below.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 2.2. Distance Matrix to Persistence Diagram.}
The input to \texttt{ripsDiag} can be
a distance matrix computed from the point cloud generated in Example 2.1. Here, we use the default \texttt{dist="euclidean"}. Other options are
\texttt{"manhattan"}, \texttt{"maximum"}, etc.
\begin{verbatim}
dist.PC <- dist(PC)
(pers.diag.2=ripsDiag(X=dist.PC,dist="arbitrary",maxdimension=1,maxscale=max(dist.PC)))
$diagram
dimension Birth Death
[1,] 0 0.0000000 1.999999902
[2,] 0 0.0000000 0.306978455
[3,] 0 0.0000000 0.245260715
.....
[60,] 0 0.0000000 0.027923092
[61,] 1 0.3190835 1.737696840
\end{verbatim}
\subsection{Distances Between Persistence Diagrams} \label{TDAdist}
Two distance metrics are commonly used to quantify the dissimilarity between two persistence diagrams $\tilde{\Omega}_{1}$ and $\tilde{\Omega}_{2}$ , the Wasserstein distance and the bottleneck distance
\citep{Mileyko2011}. We define these distances and describe their computation using the R-TDA package.
The $q$-Wasserstein distance between two persistence diagrams is defined by
\begin{equation} \label{wasserstein}
\mathbf{W}_{q, \tilde{p}} (\tilde{\Omega}_1, \tilde{\Omega}_2) = \big[\inf_{\eta:\tilde{\Omega}_1\rightarrow \tilde{\Omega}_2} \sum_{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}\in \tilde{\Omega}_1} |\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}-\eta(\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k})|_\infty^q \big]^{1/q}, q = 1,2,\ldots,
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{p}$ is referred to as its dimension and $q$ is its degree.
When $q=\infty$, (\ref{wasserstein}) is the bottleneck distance of dimension $\tilde{p}$ defined by
\begin{equation} \label{bottleneck}
\mathbf{W}_{\infty, \tilde{p}} (\tilde{\Omega}_1, \tilde{\Omega}_2) = \inf_{\eta:\tilde{\Omega}_1\rightarrow \tilde{\Omega}_2} \sup_{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}\in \tilde{\Omega}_1} |\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}-\eta(\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k})|_\infty.
\end{equation}
The bottleneck distance is obtained by minimizing the largest distance of any two corresponding points of diagrams, over all bijections between $\tilde{\Omega}_{1}$ and $\tilde{\Omega}_{2}$
and is less sensitive to details in the diagrams.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 2.3. Wasserstein and Bottleneck Distances.}
Let $\tilde{\Omega}_1$ be \texttt{pers.diag.2}, the persistence diagram obtained in Example 2.2. Let $\tilde{\Omega}_2$ be \texttt{pers.diag.3}, the persistent diagram we construct from a different point cloud from the same unit circle.
We use \texttt{R-TDA} to compute the Wasserstein distance with $q=1$ (denoted by the argument \texttt{p=1} below):
\begin{verbatim}
set.seed(2); PC2 <- circleUnif(n = 60, r = 1)
pers.diag.3 <- ripsDiag(X=PC2, maxdimension = 1,maxscale = max(dist(X))$diagram
wasserstein(pers.diag.2, pers.diag.3, p=1, dimension = 0)
1.034579
\end{verbatim}
The function \texttt{bottleneck} enables us to compute the bottleneck distance between the two persistence diagrams.
The Wasserstein distance is larger than the bottleneck distance since the former measures more detailed difference between the diagrams.
\begin{verbatim}
bottleneck(pers.diag.2, pers.diag.3, dimension = 0)
0.06954618
\end{verbatim}
It is important to construct persistence diagrams using the same distance functions
\citep{JMLRChazal2018}, as we show below.
For instance, we can construct a persistence diagram \texttt{pers.diag.4} for the point cloud in Example 2.1 using the Manhattan distance
($D_M (\mathbf{v}_i, \mathbf{v}_j)=\sum_{\ell=1}^{d} |v_{i,\ell}-v_{j,\ell}|, 1\leq i,j\leq N$) instead of the Euclidean distance.
\begin{verbatim}
dist.PC.man <- dist(PC, method = "manhattan"); max.dist=max(dist.PC.man)
pers.diag.4=ripsDiag(X=dist.PC.man,dist="arbitrary",maxdimension=1,
maxscale=max.dist)$diagram
wasserstein(pers.diag.2, pers.diag.4, p=1, dimension = 0)
2.145083
bottleneck(pers.diag.2, pers.diag.4, dimension = 0)
0.8279462
\end{verbatim}
\subsection{TDA of Time Series via Point Clouds} \label{tstdapc}
Time series do not naturally have point cloud representations, and are transformed to point clouds using
Takens's Embedding Theorem \citep{takens1981detecting}
before we can do TDA as discussed in Section \ref{tda_pc}.
This approach has been used in the literature mostly for quantifying periodicity in time series \citep{Perea2015SW1PerSSW}, clustering time series \citep{Seversky2016}, classifying time series \citep{YuheiUmeda2017D}, or finding early signals for critical transitions \citep{gidea2017topological,gidea2018topological}. Takens’s embedding guarantees the preservation of topological properties of a time series but not its geometrical properties.
\subsubsection{Takens's Delay Embedding for Time Series} \label{takens}
Let $\{x_t, t=1,2,\ldots,T\}$ denote an observed time series. We use Takens's embedding to convert the time series into a point cloud with points
$\mathbf{v}_i = (x_i, x_{i+\tau}, \ldots, x_{i+(d-1)\tau})^{\prime}$, where $d$ specifies the dimension of the points and $\tau$ denotes a delay parameter.
For example, if $d=2$ and $\tau=1$, then, $\mathbf{v}_i = (x_i, x_{i+1})^{\prime}$, whereas if
$d=15$ and $\tau=2$, $\mathbf{v}_i = (x_i, x_{i+2},\ldots, x_{i+28})^{\prime}$.
Both $d$ and $\tau$ are unknown and must be determined in practice.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Choice of $\tau$.}
Researchers have used different approaches for choosing
the delay parameter $\tau$. It may be selected as the smallest time lag $h$ where the sample
autocorrelation function (ACF) $\hat{\rho}_h$ becomes insignificant, i.e., smaller in absolute value than the critical bound $\frac{2}{\sqrt{T}}$ \citep{Khasawneh2015}.
\cite{truong2017exploration} also used the ACF, but in a slightly different way. He chose $\tau$ as the
smallest lag for which $(\hat{\rho}_{\tau}-\hat{\rho}_{\tau-1})/\hat{\rho}_{\tau}>1/e$ and $\hat{\rho}_{\tau}<\frac{2}{\sqrt{T}}$.
\cite{Pereira2015} determined $\tau$ using the first minimum of the auto mutual information (the mutual information between the signal and its time delayed version).
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Choice of $d$.}
\cite{truong2017exploration} and \cite{Khasawneh2015} used the false nearest neighbor method
\citep {kennel1992determining} to determine the embedding dimension $d$ as the integer such that
the nearest neighbors of each point
in dimension $d$ remain nearest neighbors in dimension $d+1$, and the distances between them also remain about the same. Alternately, an \texttt{R} function \texttt{false.nearest} in the package \texttt{tseriesChaos} which implements an approach due to \cite{hegger1999practical} may be used. Some authors \citep{Pereira2015,Seversky2016}, simply assume $d$ to be $2$ or $3$, while Perea has suggested the use of
$d=15$ on time series after a cubic spline interpolation (see Section \ref{SW1PerS}).
\vskip1em
The choice of $d$ and $\tau$ then determine the number of points $N$ in the point cloud. In Example 2.4, we illustrate one approach for constructing a point cloud from pure periodic signals with no noise and then obtaining a persistence diagram. In Example 2.5, we discuss another approach described in \cite{Perea2015} for noisy time series, when the focus is on finding series with the same periodicity.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 2.4. Pure Signals to Persistence Diagrams.}
We generate point clouds from three periodic cosine signals of length $T=480$ with periods 12, 48, and 96 respectively, and then construct their persistent diagrams. We set $d=2$, and use the ACF method discussed above to choose $\tau$.
We show R code for the time series \texttt{ts1}:
\begin{verbatim}
per1=12;ts1 = cos(1:T*2*pi/per1);d=2;
tau <- which(abs(acf(ts.ex, plot = F)$acf) < 2/sqrt(T))[1]-1
PC=t(purrr::map_dfc(1:(T-(d-1)*tau+1),~ts.ex[seq(from=.x, by=tau, length.out=d)]))
diag=ripsDiag(PC, maxdimension=1, maxscale=max(dist(PC)))
ts.plot(ts.ex);plot(PC,xlab ="x1",ylab="x2",main="PC");plot(diag$diagram)
\end{verbatim}
In Figure \ref{tsexSimple24}, the top row shows the signals, the middle row shows the point clouds and the bottom row shows the persistence diagrams.
The black dots represent the birth-death of $0$-th homology groups and their persistence shows the dispersion of the points in the point cloud. When there are more black dots close to the diagonal, the point cloud is more dispersed. Particularly, the point cloud PC.3 from the time series with period 96 have points close to each other compared with PC.1, so that it has more black dots in the persistence diagram closer to the diagonal.
The red triangles represent the birth-death of $1$-th homology groups, indicating circles in the point cloud.
The red triangle from the time series with period 96 is further away from the diagonal compared to the series with period 12, and thus has longer persistence in the $1$-th homology group. Seeing a circle indicates that the time series is periodic.
This is in contrast to the persistence diagram for the same time series based on sublevel set flitration of a function, as discussed in Example 3.2.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{./figures/tsexSimple24.pdf}
\caption{Pure Periodic Signals to Persistence Diagrams.}
\label{tsexSimple24}
\end{figure}
Pairwise bottleneck distances between the three persistence diagrams are shown in Table \ref{BnDistPDTF}, computed using code as shown below:
\begin{verbatim}
round(bottleneck(diag1$diagram, diag2$diagram, dimension = 0), digits = 2)
\end{verbatim}
To study the effect of $d$, we repeat the computations for $d=3$ and $d=15$ and also show all pairwise bottleneck distances in the table. While the values of the distances between the diagrams change as $d$ changes, the relative behavior is
preserved, independent of $d$.
Specifically, the bottleneck distances between
$\tilde{\Omega}_1$ and
$\tilde{\Omega}_2$ and between $\tilde{\Omega}_1$ and
$\tilde{\Omega}_3$ are larger than the distance between $\tilde{\Omega}_2$ and
$\tilde{\Omega}_3$ in the 0-th and 1-th homology groups.
\begin{table}[H]\centering
\caption{Pairwise Bottleneck Distances Between Persistence Diagrams for Different $d$.}\label{BnDistPDTF}
\begin{tabular}{|c|rrr|rrr|rrr|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$d=2$} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$d=3$}& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{$d=15$}\\\hline
& (1,2) & (1,3) & (2,3)&
(1,2) & (1,3) & (2,3) &
(1,2) & (1,3) & (2,3) \\\hline
0th & 0.26 & 0.26 & 0.07&
0.36 & 0.36 & 0.09 &
0.73 & 0.73 & 0.18
\\\hline
1th & 0.39 & 0.45 & 0.06 &
0.53 & 0.63 & 0.09 &
1.09 & 1.28 & 0.19
\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Point Cloud Construction using SW1PerS}\label{SW1PerS}
The SW1PerS (Sliding Windows and 1-Persistence Scoring) method is an alternate, more comprehensive approach
proposed by \cite{Perea2015} to detect periodicity from noisy time courses whose underlying signals may have different shapes.
The approach addresses the following items.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Denoising.}
The approach considers two types of denoising that are left as options to the user. The first type smooths the raw time series by a moving average in order to make it easier to detect the signal.
The second type is a moving average on the point cloud.
As an alternative to moving averaging,
\cite{Pereira2015} used the Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD) \citep{huang1998empirical} on the raw time series.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Spline Interpolation.}
The spline interpolation allows handling unevenly spaced time series, or time series with low temporal resolution.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Point Cloud Standardization.}
Standardization helps with
signal dampening and to make the procedure amplitude blind.
\vskip1em
\noindent The pipeline for this approach is described in the following steps.
\begin{description} \label{ntsprocedure}
\item [Step 0.] Optionally \citep{Perea2015SW1PerSSW}, denoise the observed time series $\{x_t, t=1,2,\ldots,T\}$
using a simple moving average
whose window size is no higher than one third of the selected dimension $d$.
They recommended an embedding dimension of $d=15$ and $N=201$ as the size of the point cloud; then $T_1 = N+d= 216$.
\item [Step 1.] For selected values of $d$ and $\tau$ (see below), create a point cloud from the (possibly denoised) time series using Steps 1.1 and 1.2.
\begin{itemize}
\item [Step 1.1.] Recover a continuous function $g: [0, 2\pi] \rightarrow \mathcal{R}$ by
fitting a cubic spline to the denoised time series $\{x_t, t=1,2,\ldots,T\}$.
\item [Step 1.2.] Using values $g(t_1), g(t_2), \ldots, g(t_{T_1})$ from the continuous spline fit $g(.)$ at evenly spaced time points $0= t_1\leq t_2\leq \ldots\leq t_{T_1}=(T_1 -1)\tau=2\pi$, construct
a point cloud with
$N = T_1 -d$ points $\mathbf{v}^{(0)}_t=(g(t), g(t+\tau), \ldots, g(t+(d-1)\tau))' \in \mathcal{R}^d, t=0, \tau,\ldots,2\pi-(d-1)\tau$ and so $\tau=\frac{2\pi}{N+d-1}$.
\end{itemize}
\item [Step 2.] Pointwise Point cloud standardization:
\begin{gather}
\mathbf{v}_t = \frac{\mathbf{v}^{(0)}_t-\bar{v}^{(0)}_t \mathbf{1}}{||\mathbf{v}^{(0)}_t-\bar{v}^{(0)}_t \mathbf{1}||};\quad \bar{v}^{(0)}_t = \sum_{i=1}^{d}v^{(0)}_{t,i}/d,\quad
||\mathbf{v}^{(0)}_t-\bar{v}^{(0)}_t \mathbf{1}|| = \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^d (v^{(0)}_{t,i}-\bar{v}^{(0)}_{t})^2},
\end{gather}
where $\mathbf{v}^{(0)}_t=(v^{(0)}_{t,1},v^{(0)}_{t,2},\ldots, v^{(0)}_{t,d})'$ and $\mathbf{1}$ is the $d$-dimensional vector of 1's.
\item [Step 3.] Construct the persistence diagram from the point cloud as shown in Section \ref{tda_pc}.
\end{description}
\noindent
This method is powerful for detecting periodicity in time series.
To develop a score for quantifying the periodicity, \cite{Perea2015} first found the longest persistence of
the birth-death of the $1$-th homology groups $(\lambda_{1,k_M,1}, \lambda_{1,k_M,2})$, where $k_M =\mbox{arg}\max_{k}(\lambda_{1,k,2}-\lambda_{1,k,1})$ is chosen to indicate maximum persistence, and used it to compute
$$\mathcal{S} = 1- \frac{\lambda_{1,k_M,2}^2-\lambda_{1,k_M,1}^2}{3}.$$
Since $0 \leq \lambda_{1,k_M,1} \leq \lambda_{1,k_M,2} \leq \sqrt{3}$, for periodic (nonperiodic) time series, the score is close to zero (one).
The \texttt{R} code for implementing Step 1-Step 3 for Case 1 is shown below (the code for other cases is similar):
\begin{verbatim}
x.ts = ts1; d=15; N=201; T1 = 216;
x.ts <- pracma::movavg(x.ts, 5, type = "s") #step 0
sp.ts <- stats::spline(1:T*2*pi/T, x.ts, n=T1)$y #step 1.1
PC <- plyr::ldply(map(1:N, ~sp.ts[.x:(.x+d-1)]))#step 1.2
X.PC=t(apply(PC,1,FUN=function(x){(x-mean(x))/sqrt(sum((x-mean(x))^2))})) #step2
diag <- ripsDiag(X=x.PC, maxdimension = 1, maxscale = sqrt(3))#step 3
\end{verbatim}
The main contributions of \cite{Perea2015} are the use of extensive simulation studies to show
that topological features of time series are largely the same under various non-sinusoidal shapes
as well as under differences in amplitude, phase, mean, frequency, or trend.
The results may be affected by a differences in noise variances, as well as by the shapes of the noise and signal distributions.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 2.5. Using SW1PerS for Periodicity Quantification.}
We generate white noise
$\epsilon_t$ with variance $\sigma^2_\epsilon=0.64$, and then generate
periodic time series signals each of length $T$ ($=480$), denoted by \texttt{ts1, ts2, ts3, ts4}, and shown in the top row of Figure \ref{UseSW1PerStrendNoisePDsept12}.
\begin{itemize}
\item Case 1: $x_t=\cos(2\pi t/12)+\epsilon_t$,
\item Case 2: $x_t=0.05t+10(\cos(2\pi (t-\varphi)/48)+\epsilon_t)$,
\item Case 3: $x_t=10(\cos(2\pi t/12)+\epsilon_t)\exp{(-0.01t)}$,
\item Case 4: $x_t =\epsilon_t$
\end{itemize}
The series \texttt{ts2} differs from \texttt{ts1} in frequency, phase, and linear trend, whereas \texttt{ts3} only differs from \texttt{ts1} in shape and amplitude; \texttt{ts4} is the white noise series.
Figure \ref{UseSW1PerStrendNoisePDsept12} shows that the method in \cite{Perea2015} is insensitive to different periodicities. The top row shows the simulated time series under the four cases. The middle row presents a two dimensional view of the point clouds constructed with $d=15$ and $\tau=1$, via the first two principal components.
The bottom row shows the persistence diagrams, along with the periodicity score $S$.
For periodic (nonperiodic) time series, the score is close to zero (one), so that the scores for Case 1 to Case 3 are close to 0, while Case 4 has a score close to 1.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[height = 0.7\textheight,width=0.85\textwidth]{./figures/UseSW1PerStrendNoisePDsept12.pdf}
\caption{Persistence Diagrams of Periodic Time Series with Different Shapes}
\label{UseSW1PerStrendNoisePDsept12}
\end{figure}
\vskip1em
\section{Persistent Homology Based on Functions}\label{FunctionTS}
We first give a basic review of TDA based on functions, followed by the use of frequency domain representations of time series as starting points for TDA.
\subsection{Function to Persistence Diagram - A Basic Review}\label{tda_fun}
When data is in the form of a continuous function
$f:\mathcal{R}^d \rightarrow \mathcal{R}$,
or can be converted to such a function, TDA using sublevel set filtration is carried out
by discretizing the function into grids and then implementing computational homology on the discretized function.
Suppose the components of the function are $\mathbf{z}=(\ell_1\delta,\ell_2\delta,\ldots,\ell_d \delta)$, for $\ell_1, \ell_2, \ldots, \ell_d=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\ldots$, where $d >0$ and $\delta >0$. The sublevel set of the function is
defined as
\begin{equation} \label{sublevelset}
L_\lambda (f) = \{\mathbf{z}: f(\mathbf{z})\leq \lambda, \mathbf{z}\in \mathcal{R}^d\},
\end{equation}
where
$0\leq \lambda\leq \max_{\mathbf{z}} f(\mathbf{z})$.
Define a simplex as a set of components in $L_\lambda (f)$ which are ``neighbors'', i.e., $\mathbf{z}_1, \mathbf{z}_2\in L_\lambda (f)$, and
$|z_{1, j}-z_{2,j}| \leq\delta, j=1,2,\ldots, d$.
Recall from Section \ref{tda_pc} that a simplex with $(\tilde{p}+1)$ components is called a $\tilde{p}$-simplex.
Since only adjacent points on the grid can be neighbors, the function $f(\mathbf{z})$ can admit at most a $d$-simplex, so that
$\tilde{p}\leq d-1$ \citep{harer2010}.
When $d=1$, there are only connected components,
whose births and deaths are given by
$\tilde{\tau}_{0,k}=(\lambda_{0,k,1}, \lambda_{0,k,2}),k=1,2,\ldots,k_0$.
The computations in the steps that are summarized below are done using the R function \texttt{gridDiag} \citep{Fasy2014IntroductionTT}.
\begin{description} \label{TDAonfun}
\item [Step 1.] Assume a filtration parameter starting at $\lambda=\min_{\mathbf{z}} f(\mathbf{z})$ and let $L_\lambda(f) = \{\mathbf{z}: f(\mathbf{z})=\min_{\mathbf{z}} f(\mathbf{z})\}$.
\item [Step 2.]
Construct topological features for increasing values of $\lambda$. For each $\lambda$, simplicial complexes can be constructed from the sublevel set $L_\lambda(f)$, and $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p}, k}$ can be computed using computation homology, where $0\leq\tilde{p}\leq d-1$.
If an elder topology $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_1}$ and a younger topology $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_2}$ merge into a single $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k}$ at some $\lambda$ value, then $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_1}$ becomes $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k}$ and $\tilde{\alpha}_{\tilde{p},k_2}$ dies at $\lambda$, using the \textit{Elder Rule} \citep{harer2010}.
\item [Step 3.] The persistence diagram is the output of the set of points representing birth-death of homology groups $\{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}=(\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}, \lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}): \tilde{p}=0,1, \ldots;k=1,2,\ldots,k_{\tilde{p}}\}$.
\end{description}
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 3.1. Discretized Function to Persistence Diagram.}
We present an example of using TDA on a one-dimensional discretized real function generated using the code chunk below, where \texttt{funval} contains values of the function taken over a grid:
\begin{verbatim}
funval = c(1, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 0.5, 0, 1, 1, 0.5, 1)
(pers.diag.4 <- gridDiag(FUNvalues = funval, sublevel = TRUE) )
$diagram
dimension Birth Death
[1,] 0 0.0 1.5
[2,] 0 0.5 1.5
[3,] 0 0.5 1.0
\end{verbatim}
The persistence diagram contains three connected components born at $\lambda=0$ and $\lambda=0.5$, corresponding to the function having three local minima at these two distinct $\lambda$ values.
In Figure \ref{functionpersis}(a), a connected component emerges when $\lambda = 0$ and is marked as a blue
dot (it is the earliest/oldest connected component).
\begin{verbatim}
plot(funval, x=1:10, type = "l",yaxt='n',ylim = c(0,2), cex.axis=1.4, xlab = "z",
ylab= "y", cex.lab= 1.3, cex=1.2, lwd=1.5, lty=1, pch=1, bty='n', main="(a)")
points(x=6, y=0, pch=16, col="blue", type = "p")
ticks<-c(0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2); axis(2,at=ticks,labels=ticks)
abline(a=0, b=0, lty=2, lwd=1,pch=1)
\end{verbatim}
The vertical dashed line in Figure \ref{functionpersis}(b) corresponds to the birth time $\lambda= 0$, while the horizontal dashed line tracks the current filtration parameter $\lambda$. There is no point on the birth/death plot yet, as no connected components have died at $\lambda=0$.
\begin{verbatim}
plot(rep(0,11),x=0:10/5,type = "l",cex.axis=1.4,xaxt='n',xlab= "birth",yaxt='n',
ylim=c(0,2),ylab="death",cex.lab=1.3,cex=1.2,lwd=1.5,lty=2,pch=1,bty='n',main="(b)")
axis(1,at=ticks,labels=ticks); axis(2,at=ticks,labels=ticks); abline(v=0, lty=2)
\end{verbatim}
Figure \ref{functionpersis}(c) corresponds to $\lambda = 0.5$. There are two more connected components
indicated by the blue dots at $(2,0.5)$ and $(9,0.5)$. The blue dot $(6,0)$ in the middle with a blue
line connecting it to the
dot $(5,0.5)$
indicates that the oldest connected component enlarges.
\begin{verbatim}
plot(funval, x=1:10, type = "l",yaxt='n',ylim = c(0,2),cex.axis=1.4,xlab = "z",
ylab = "y",cex.lab= 1.3, cex=1.2,lwd=1.5, lty=1, pch=1, bty='n', main = "(c)")
axis(2,at=ticks,labels=ticks); abline(a=0.5, b=0, lty=2, lwd=1,pch=1)
points(x=6, y=0, pch=16, col="green4", type = "p",xlab = "z", ylab= "y")
points(x=c(2,5,9), y=rep(0.5,3), pch=16, col="blue", type = "p",xlab="z",ylab="y")
segments(x0=6, y0=0, x1=5, y1=0.5, lty = 1, pch=1, lwd=2.5, col = "blue")
\end{verbatim}
Figure \ref{functionpersis}(d) has one more vertical dashed line, which gives the birth time for the other two new connected components. There is no connected component dead yet, and so no points are shown on the second plot either. The code chunks for plotting these are similar and are not shown due to space limitations.
When $\lambda = 1$, in Figure \ref{functionpersis}(e), all components enlarge and one newer component is killed by the elder one because they are merged.
There is a black dot at $(0.5,1)$ in Figure \ref{functionpersis}(f), which indicates the newer connected component that is born at $\lambda=0.5$ and is dead at $\lambda=1$.
When $\lambda = 1.5$ reaching the maximum of the function in Figure \ref{functionpersis}(g), the last component is killed.
The black dot at the location $(0,1.5)$ in Figure \ref{functionpersis}(h) is for the last component. The other black dots corresponding to $(0.5, 1.5)$ and $(0.5, 1)$ show the birth and death of other connected components.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/functionpersis.pdf}
\caption{Construction of a persistence diagram corresponding to a one-dimensional continuous real function. (a) is the function and (h) is the persistence diagram. (c), (e) and (g) show the sublevel set filtration procedure, while (b), (d) and (f) are the intermediate steps for constructing the persistence diagram.}
\label{functionpersis}
\end{figure}
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 3.2. Morse Function to Persistence Diagram.}
An alternate technique for persistent homology which is robust to noisy point cloud data uses the R function \texttt{gridDiag} \citep{JMLRChazal2018}.
As mentioned in the introduction, a point cloud is assumed as a sample from an underlying manifold.
To learn the topology of the manifold, \texttt{gridDiag} enables us to construct a Morse function such as the distance-to-measure (DTM) function from the point cloud using the sublevel set filtration.
Suppose the point cloud is $\{\mathbf{x}_i \in \mathcal{R}^d, i=1,2,\ldots,N\}$. Represent the DTM function
from $\mathcal{R}^d \rightarrow \mathcal{R}$ as
$$
f^{(DTM)}(\mathbf{x}) = \sqrt{\sum_{\mathbf{x}_i \in \mathcal{N}_k(\mathbf{x})} ||\mathbf{x}_i-\mathbf{x}||^2/k},
$$
where $k=[mN]$ ($m$ is the parameter \texttt{m0}) and $\mathcal{N}_k(\mathbf{x})$ is the set containing the $k$ nearest neighbors of $\mathbf{x}$ in the point cloud.
A higher value of $f^{(DTM)} (\mathbf{x})$ means that $\mathbf{x}$ is further away from most of the points. DTM is also robust to outliers \citep{JMLRChazal2018}.
We illustrate using the same point cloud data from Example 2.1:
\begin{verbatim}
m0=0.05; by <- 0.065; Xlim <- range(PC[,1]); Ylim <- range(PC[,2])
(pers.diag.5 = gridDiag(X=PC, FUN=dtm, lim=cbind(Xlim, Ylim), by=by, m0=m0) )
$diagram
dimension Birth Death
[1,] 0 0.02414385 0.96912324
[2,] 0 0.02623549 0.15885911
[3,] 0 0.03489488 0.15662338
...
[20,] 0 0.14527336 0.15092905
[21,] 1 0.20234735 0.96912324
\end{verbatim}
Here, \texttt{lim} specifies the range of the point cloud in different dimensions, \texttt{by} is the step size for increasing $\lambda$, and \texttt{m0} (which lies in $(0,1)$ with 0.05 as the default value) is the smoothing parameter of the DTM method.
The code for constructing Figure \ref{PCDTM} is shown below:
\begin{verbatim}
par(mfrow = c(1,2))
Xseq <- seq(from = Xlim[1], to = Xlim[2], by = by)
Yseq <- seq(from = Ylim[1], to = Ylim[2], by = by)
Grid <- expand.grid(Xseq, Yseq); DTM = dtm(X = PC, Grid = Grid, m0 = m0)
persp(x = Xseq, y = Yseq,z = matrix(DTM, nrow = length(Xseq), ncol = length(Yseq)),
xlab = "", ylab = "", zlab = "", theta = -20, phi = 35, scale = FALSE,
expand = 2, col = "red", border = NA, ltheta = 50, shade = 0.5,main = "(a)")
plot(pers.diag.5[["diagram"]], main = "(b)")
\end{verbatim}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/PCDTM.pdf}
\caption{Distance-to-Measure (DTM) function and the persistence diagram.}
\label{PCDTM}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{PCDTM}(a) shows
the DTM function of the point cloud.
The function has a
peak in the middle of the plot,
surrounded by a rough circle of local minima (since the original point cloud is from the unit circle and DTM is a smoothed distance function)
Figure \ref{PCDTM}(b) shows the persistence diagram. The dots in the persistence diagram are the birth-death points of $0$-th homology groups and the triangle denotes the birth-death point of $1$-th homology group.
There are only 20 birth-death points of $0$-th homology groups instead of 60 as we saw in Example 2.1, because
the DTM smooths the distance function, as mentioned earlier, resulting in a different output from those in Examples 2.1 and 2.2.
The point at $(0.2, 0.97)$ indicates a big circle in the data (representing the topology of the underlying unit circle).
\subsection{TDA of Time Series via Frequency Domain Functions} \label{tstdaspec}
Section 3.2.1 discusses TDA starting from variations of the Fourier transform for continuous-valued time series, while Section 3.2.2 shows how to build persistence diagrams based on Walsh Fourier transforms for categorical time series.
\subsubsection{Discrete Fourier Transforms to Persistence Diagrams}
In this section, we look at topological properties of time series through their frequency domain representations such as second-order spectra.
We construct a persistence diagram using sublevel set filtration on the smoothed tapered estimate of the second-order spectrum of the time series $\{x_t, t=1,\ldots,T\}$.
The modified DFT \citep{Stoffer1991} and corresponding periodogram with tapering are defined as
\begin{eqnarray*}
d_{h}(\omega_j) &=& T^{-1/2} \sum_{t=1}^T h_t x_t e^{-2\pi i \omega_j t} \mbox{ and }\\
I_{h} (\omega_j) &=& |d_{h} (\omega_j)|^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
for $t=1,2,\ldots, T$, where $h_t$ is a taper function.
In Example 3.3, we show the use of the R function \texttt{gridDiag} to construct the persistence diagram starting from a smoothed version of $I_{h} (\omega_j)$, using the Daniel window for smoothing.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 3.3. Smoothed Tapered Second-order Spectrum to Persistence Diagram.}
We use the R function \texttt{gridDiag} to construct the persistence diagrams for the same three periodic time series signals shown in Example 2.4.
For Case 1, \texttt{spc.t1} denotes the smoothed tapered periodogram (taper$=0.1$ as default in the R function \texttt{spec.pgram}, and smoothing via the modified Daniel window $(0.25, 0.5, 0.25)$) of the time series \texttt{ts1}.
\begin{verbatim}
x.1 = 1:length(ts1); ts1 = lm(ts1~x.1)$residuals; ts1 = ts1/sd(ts1) #Step 1
spc.t1=spec.pgram(ts1, kernel=kernel("modified.daniell", c(1)), plot = F)#Step 2
#Step 3
PD.t1=gridDiag(FUNvalues=spc.t1$spec,location = FALSE, sublevel=TRUE)$diagram
\end{verbatim}
\begin{figure} [H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/specUsePCEx.pdf}
\caption{Persistence diagrams using second-order spectrum.}
\label{specUsePCEx}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{specUsePCEx}, the top row shows the time series signals, the middle row shows the second-order spectra and the bottom row shows the persistence diagrams. The peaks in the spectra occur at different frequencies and correspond to the contributions at these frequencies to the total variance of $x_t$.
The three persistence diagrams in the bottom row are similar to each other, since this method is insensitive to
differences in the periodicity of the time series.
In contrast with the persistence diagrams in Figure 3 for the same signals, we no longer see red triangles for $1$-th homology groups, indicating that there is a difference between constructing persistence diagrams from point clouds versus the spectrum.
We compute the bottleneck distances between the three persistence diagrams.
The distance between Case 1 and Case 2 is 0.01, which is much smaller than the distance between Case 1 and Case 3 which is 2.77, or the one between Case 2 and Case 3 which is 2.76. The code for computing the distances is similar to the one shown in Example 2.4.
\subsubsection{Walsh-Fourier Transforms to Persistence Diagrams}
\cite{Stoffer1991} suggested that Walsh spectral analysis is suited to the analysis of discrete-valued and categorical-valued time series, and of time series that contain sharp discontinuities.
The fast Walsh-Fourier Transform construction uses the method of \cite{Shanks1969} to decompose a time series
$\{x_t, t=1,\ldots, T\}$ into a sequence of Walsh functions, each representing a distinctive binary sequency pattern. If the time series length $T$ is not a power of $2$, let $T_2$ denote the next power of $2$. For example, if $T=1440$, then $T_2 = 2^{11} =2048$.
We use zero-padding to obtain a time series of length $T_2$ by setting set $x_{T+1}, x_{T+2}, \ldots, x_{T_2} = 0$.
For $j=0,\ldots, T_2-1$, let $\lambda_j = j/T_{2}$ denote the $j$th sequency.
Let $W(t, j)$ denote the $t$-th Walsh function value in sequency $\lambda_j$. Walsh functions are iteratively generated as follows \citep{Shanks1969}:
\begin{eqnarray}
W(0,j) &=& 1, j=0, 1, \ldots, T_2-1, \notag \\
W(1, j)&=&
\begin{cases}
1 & j=0, 1,\ldots, (T_2)/2-1 \\
-1 & j=(T_2)/2, (T_2)/2+1, \ldots, T_2-1
\end{cases} \notag \\
W(t, j) &=& W([t/2],2j) \times W(t-2[t/2], j), \\
t&=&2, \ldots, T_2-1, \hspace{0.1in} j=0, 1, \ldots, T_2-1, \notag
\end{eqnarray}
where $[a]$ denotes the integer part of $a$. For more details on Walsh functions, refer to \cite{Stoffer1991}.
The Walsh-Fourier Transform (WFT) of the time series is computed as
\begin{equation}
d_T(\lambda_j) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{T_2}} \sum_{t=1}^{T_2} x_{t} \ W(t, j)), \hspace{0.1in} 0\leq j \leq T_2 -1.
\end{equation}
The computational complexity is $O(T \log (T))$ \citep{Shanks1969}.
In Example 3.4,
we illustrate the construction of a persistence diagram for a categorical time series with two levels.
\vskip1em
\begin{figure} [H]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.35\textheight,width=0.9\textwidth]{./figures/surWFT.pdf}
\caption{Persistence diagrams using Walsh-Fourier Transforms.}
\label{surWFT}
\end{figure}
\noindent \textbf{Example 3.4. Walsh-Fourier Transform to Persistence Diagram.}
In Figure \ref{surWFT}, a simulated categorical time series of length $T=120$ with two levels, 0 or 1, is shown in the first column. Level 1 only occurs in the period between $t=21$ and $t=100$. The middle column shows the WFT of the time series, while the third column shows its persistence diagram. There is one point in the diagram away from the diagonal line, which is a significant birth-death point of the $0$-th homology groups.
The R code for simulating the time series and converting the WFT into a persistence diagram is shown below.
\begin{verbatim}
x.ts = c(rep(0, 20), rep(1, 80), rep(0, 20))
# create WFT using C++ code
x.diag=gridDiag(FUNvalues = x.WFTs, location = FALSE, sublevel = TRUE)$diagram
\end{verbatim}
\section{Feature Construction Using TDA}
\label{FeaturesTDA}
Unlike a vector space, the space of persistence diagrams is not easy to work with. For instance, a set of persistence diagrams may not have a unique mean \citep{Mileyko2011}.
The bottleneck or Wasserstein distances are also more complicated than the Euclidean distance in practice. This section discusses an
alternative.
\subsection{Persistence Landscapes - A Basic Review}
\label{PersistenceL}
\cite{bubenik2015statistical} introduced persistence landscapes as useful statistical summaries which build topological features and are easy to combine with tools from statistics and machine learning.
This section reviews persistence landscapes while Section \ref{PLTS} describes their construction for time series, with examples.
The $\nu$th order persistence landscape of $\tilde{p}$-th homology groups is defined as
\begin{equation}
\mbox{\textit{PL}}_{\tilde{p}, \nu}(\ell) = \{\min(\ell-\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}, \lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}-\ell)_+: k=1,2,\ldots\}_{(\nu)} \label{PL1}
\end{equation}
where
$\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}$ and $\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}$ were introduced under Step 3 of Section \ref{tda_pc},
$\ell \in \mathcal{R}$,
$\min(a, b)_+$ denotes the smaller value if both $a$ and $b$ are positive, or zero if neither value is positive,
and $\{A\}_{(\nu)}$ is the
$\nu$-th order statistic of the set $A$.
\cite{bubenik2015statistical} proved that a set of persistence landscapes admits a unique mean and preserves statistical stability of the data distribution.
If we assume
that the observed data $\mathbf{X}$ is a random draw from an underlying space $\mathcal{X}$ equipped with a probability measure, and assume multiple copies $\mathbf{X}_1, \mathbf{X}_2,\ldots, \mathbf{X}_N$, then the mean of their persistence landscapes $\overline{\textit{PL}}^{(N)}_{\tilde{p}, \nu}(\ell)=\sum_{i=1}^N \textit{PL}^{(i)}_{\tilde{p}, \nu}(\ell)/N$ would converge almost surely (as $N\rightarrow\infty$) to the expectation of the persistence landscapes $E(\textit{PL}^{\mathcal{X}}_{\tilde{p},\nu}(\ell))$
if and only if
$$
E||\textit{PL}^{\mathcal{X}}_{\tilde{p},\nu}(\ell)|| = \int_\ell |\textit{PL}^{\mathcal{X}}_{\tilde{p},\nu}(\ell)|d\ell<\infty,
$$
i.e., $\int_\ell |\textit{PL}^{\mathcal{X}}_{\tilde{p},1}(\ell)|d\ell<\infty$ for all $\tilde{p}$.
This means that the set of persistence landscapes from the observed data is a good representative for the underlying distribution of true persistence landscapes and it is possible to do statistical inference for these using the sample persistence landscapes.
Another important statistical property is the stability in terms of using persistence landscapes versus using persistence diagrams. Suppose there are two persistence diagrams $\tilde{\Omega}_1$ and $\tilde{\Omega}_2$ together with the corresponding persistence landscapes $\textit{PL}^{(1)}_{\tilde{p}, \nu}(\ell)$ and $\textit{PL}^{(2)}_{\tilde{p}, \nu}(\ell)$. Then, $||\textit{PL}^{(1)}_{\tilde{p}, \nu}(\ell)-\textit{PL}^{(2)}_{\tilde{p}, \nu}(\ell)||_q= \big[\int_\nu|\textit{PL}^{(1)}_{\tilde{p}}-\textit{PL}^{(2)}_{\tilde{p}}|^q \big]^{1/q}$ is no larger than a function of the $q$-Wasserstein distance $\mathbf{W}_{q, \tilde{p}}(\tilde{\Omega}_1,\tilde{\Omega}_2)$. Intuitively, it means that using persistence landscapes could preserve differences in the persistence diagrams.
The following steps describe the construction of persistence landscapes of $\tilde{p}$-th homology groups in increasing order starting from the first-order landscape.
\begin{description}
\item [Step 1.] Extract the $1$-th homology groups $\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p}, k}$ ($k=1,2,\ldots,k_{\tilde{p}}$) from the persistence diagram $\tilde{\Omega}$ and create a set of computation grids, $\ell=M_1, M_1+\delta, M_1+2\delta, \ldots, M_2$, where the lower and upper bounds $M_1$ and $M_2$ are usually set as $\min_k \lambda_{\tilde{p}, k,1}$ and $\max_k \lambda_{\tilde{p}, k,2}$ respectively.
Here, $\delta$ depends on the degree of resolutions.
The \texttt{R} function \texttt{landscape} uses 500 grid points by default so that $\delta=(M_2-M_1)/500$.
\item [Step 2.] Use each $\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p}, k}$ to compute $\textit{PL}_{\tilde{p},k}(\ell) = \min(\ell-\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}, \lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}-\ell)_+$ for all values of $\ell$.
\item [Step 3.] Fixing $\ell$, sort $\textit{pl}_{\tilde{p},k}(\ell)$ in decreasing order, calling them $\textit{pl}^{(1)}_{\tilde{p}}(\ell), \textit{pl}^{(2)}_{\tilde{p}}(\ell),\ldots, \textit{pl}^{(k_{\tilde{p}})}_{\tilde{p}}(\ell)$.
\item [Step 4.] Output the $\nu$th order persistence landscape of the $\tilde{p}$-th homology groups, $\textit{PL}_{\tilde{p},\nu}(\ell) = (\textit{pl}^{(\nu)}_{\tilde{p}}(\ell))_+$, where $\nu=1,2,\ldots$ and set $\textit{pl}^{(\nu)}_{\tilde{p}}(\ell)=0$ when $\nu > k_{\tilde{p}}$.
\end{description}
Step 3 primarily determines the computational cost of constructing persistence landscapes.
Higher order persistence landscapes require more values sorted
for each $\ell$, which could be costly when $k_{\tilde{p}}$ (number of $\tilde{p}$-th homology groups) is large.
\vskip1em
\noindent \textbf{Example 4.1. Persistence Landscapes from Persistence Diagrams.}
The R function \texttt{landscape} can be used to compute persistence landscapes. We illustrate on the the persistence diagram from Example 2.3.
\begin{verbatim}
Diag = pers.diag.3$diagram; Land <- c(); k=1; threshold=1
while(threshold>0){
Land <- cbind(Land, landscape(Diag = Diag, dimension = 0, KK = k,
tseq = seq(min(Diag[,2:3]), max(Diag[,2:3]), length=500)))
threshold = sum(abs(Land[, ncol(Land)]))
}
[,1] [,2] [,3] [,4]
[1,] 0.000000000 0 0 0
[2,] 0.003006012 0 0 0
[3,] 0.006012024 0 0 0
.....
[499,] 0.003006012 0.003006012 0 0
[500,] 0.000000000 0.000000000 0 0
\end{verbatim}
In the code above, the function \texttt{landscape} takes several arguments. When \texttt{dimension=0}, it takes $0$-th homology groups of the persistence diagram \texttt{pers.diag.3} to compute landscape functions. The \texttt{KK} argument specifies the order of landscapes to be computed. The \texttt{tseq} argument specifies the range of the landscape functions. It uses a while-loop to compute persistence landscapes of all orders (here, four) over $500$ grids ranging from the minimum of the birth time to the maximum of the death time.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./figures/sec22funvalPL.pdf}
\caption{Persistence landscapes of the persistence diagram \texttt{pers.diag.3}.}
\label{sec22funvalPL}
\end{figure}
Persistence landscapes of any order
can be used as features.
Lower order persistence landscapes contain information about important topological features than higher order persistence landscapes which are closer to zero and handle topological noise. Therefore, selecting the order of the persistence landscapes to serve as features requires a delicate balance between missing important signals and introducing too much noise.
\subsection{TDA of Time Series via Persistence Landscapes}\label{PLTS}
TDA on functions can be used to construct feature representations for time series analysis, and
persistence landscapes
are useful as topological representations for similarity/dissimilarity analysis on time series. In the literature, different
representations of time series have been used, such as the weighted Fourier transform in \cite{wang2018topological} or the Walsh-Fourier transform in \cite{chen2019clustering}. We describe these situations in the following sections.
\subsubsection{Persistence Landscapes for Continuous Time Series}\label{WangEEG}
\cite{wang2018topological} proposed TDA
to measure structural changes in electroencephalogram (EEG) time series.
They first constructed Fourier transforms of the time series, then applied an exponential weighting scheme on the Fourier transforms to focus on the more important low frequency components of EEG. They further smoothed the weighted Fourier transform in order to make it a Morse function \citep{palais1963morse}.
The smoothed weighted Fourier series of a time series $\{x_t, t=1,\ldots,T\}$ has the form
$$
\hat{\mu}_{T_u}^k (t)=\sum_{j\in \mathbf{I}_1} e^{-(2j \pi /T)^2 \sigma} a_j \cos(2j\pi t/T) + \sum_{j\in \mathbf{I}_2} e^{-(2j\pi/T)^2\sigma}b_j \sin(2j\pi t/T),
$$
where $\mathbf{I}_1=\{j=0,1,2,\ldots, k: |a_j|>T_u\}$, $\mathbf{I}_2=\{j=1,2,\ldots, k: |b_j|>T_u\}$, $T_u=s \sqrt{2\log(n)}$, $a_j = \frac{2}{T}\sum_{t=1}^T x_t \cos(2j\pi t/T)$, $b_j = \frac{2}{T}\sum_{t=1}^T x_t \sin(2j\pi t/T)$ and $a_0=\sum_{t=1}^T x_t /T$.
Here, $k$ is the degree deciding the highest frequency $[k/T]$ to be included in the representation (for $T=500$, they used $k=99$), $n$ is the number of data points in each phase and $s$ is the median of
the absolute deviation (MAD) of the Fourier coefficients:
\begin{eqnarray}
a^{(m)} = \mbox{median}\{|a_i|, i=1,2,\ldots, k\}
\notag \\
b^{(m)} = \mbox{median}\{|b_i|, i=1,2,\ldots, k\}
\notag \\
s = \mbox{median}\{|a_i-a^{(m)}|, |b_j-b^{(m)}|, i,j=1,2,\ldots, k\}
\end{eqnarray}
\iffalse
$$
s = \mbox{median}\{j=1,2,\ldots, k: |a_j-\mbox{median}\{i=1,2,\ldots, k: |a_i|\}|, |b_j-\mbox{median}\{i=1,2,\ldots, k: |b_i|\}|\}
$$
\fi
Using this finite sum of weighted sinusoidal functions, they argued that $\hat{\mu}_{T_u}^k (t)$ becomes a Morse function.
They used this Morse function representation to construct persistence landscapes of all orders as features to detect possible structural changes.
A main contribution of this paper is to show via simulation studies that the proposed TDA framework is robust to topology-preserving transformations such as translation and amplitude and frequency scaling, while being sensitive to topology-destroying transformations.
They argued the topological change happens only if there is a structural change in the time series.
\subsubsection{Persistence Landscapes for Categorical Time Series} \label{ChenTrans}
\cite{chen2019clustering} described TDA of categorical time series via their Walsh-Fourier transforms (which are not Morse functions).
They constructed first order persistence landscapes based on Walsh-Fourier transforms of categorical time series, which they then used as features for clustering. They applied this analysis to a large travel-activity data set, carrying out computations in parallel.
They showed that construction of the first order persistence landscape only involves a linear transformation of the Walsh Fourier transform.
Given a sequence of WFT $d_T(n,\lambda_j), j=0, 1, \ldots, T_2-1$ of the time series $x_{n,t}, n=1,2,\ldots, N$,
denote the minimum and maximum of the WFT values of the time series $x_{n,t}$ by
$$
d_{n, \min} = \min_{j} d_T (n,\lambda_j) \mbox{ and } d_{n, \max}= \max_{j} d_T (n,\lambda_j).
$$
Let
$$
D_{\min} = \min_{n} d_{n, \min} \mbox{ and } D_{\max} = \max_{n} d_{n, \max}
$$
denote the minimum and maximum values of the WFTs across all $N$ time series.
The first-order persistence landscape of $x_{n,t}$ is obtained for $\ell = 1, 2,\ldots, L$ as
\begin{equation}
\mbox{\textit{PL}}(n,\ell) = \min (V_1(n,\ell), V_2(n,\ell))_{+}
\label{PL1}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_1(n,\ell) = D_{\min} + \frac{(\ell-1) (D_{\max}-D_{\min})}{L-1} - d_{n, \min}, \nonumber\\
V_2(n,\ell) = d_{n,\max} - D_{\min} - \frac{(\ell-1) (D_{\max} - D_{\min})}{L-1},
\end{eqnarray*}
and $(a)_+$ denotes the positive part of a real number $a$.
For $\ell = 1, 2,\ldots, L$ and $n=1,\ldots,N$, the $\mbox{\textit{PL}}(n, \ell)$ are piecewise linear functions that constitute features constructed for each of the $N$ time series and useful for clustering. Our \texttt{C++} code is available here: \url{https://github.com/bluemarlon/TDA-of-K-means-on-1st-PL}.
\begin{figure} [H]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=0.45\textheight, width=\textwidth]{./figures/rawWFTDA.pdf}
\caption{Persistence diagrams using Walsh-Fourier Transforms.}
\label{WFTCatePD3}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{WFTCatePD3}, the first column shows categorical time series on activity-travel behavior of two randomly chosen adults from the National Household Travel Survey \citep{chen2019clustering}. The length of each time series is $T=1440$, corresponding to the number of minutes in a day. The response has three levels for each adult: 0 for staying at home, 1 for travel and 2 for being out of the home.
The middle column shows the WFT of the time series, each of length $T_2=2048$.
The last column shows first order persistence landscapes which are quite distinct for the two series.
After the first order persistence landscapes are constructed, \cite{chen2019clustering} used a divide and combine K-means approach for clustering a large number of subjects and
identified three distinct temporal patterns among them. The main contribution of this paper was to implement clustering of a large set of activity-travel time series through TDA of non-Morse functions.
\subsection{Other TDA Based Approaches}\label{OthersFeatures}
Numerical summaries other than persistence landscapes have been used for clustering \citep{berwald2013automatic,Pereira2015,Seversky2016}, classification \citep{YuheiUmeda2017D}, and break detection \citep{gidea2017topological,gidea2018topological} of time series. We give a brief review in the following sections.
\subsubsection{Clustering} \label{TDAonClustering}
TDA based feature construction may be used with classical clustering methods, like K-means clustering for time series.
For instance, \cite{Pereira2015}
considered the model analyzed by \cite{costantino1995experimentally} for evaluating two regimes of adult Tribolium flour population growth (numerical measures) under stable equilibrium and aperiodic oscillations. They simulated
a total of 400 time series from the model for a period of 240 weeks (2 weeks per unit), consisting of 200 time series for the stable equilibrium regime and the other 200 for the aperiodic oscillations.
A brief description of their approach follows.
\begin{description}
\item [Step 1.] They pre-processed the data using the Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD) \citep{huang1998empirical} to denoise the data.
\item [Step 2.] They constructed point clouds using Takens' embedding with $d=2$ and $\tau=3$, taking the
time series $\{x_t, t=1,2,\ldots,T\}$ to $\{\mathbf{v}_i=(x_i, x_{i+3})| i=1,2,\ldots, T-3\}$.
The point cloud, therefore, contains a total of $N=T-3$ number of points.
\item [Step 3.] They used the Witness complex \citep{de2004topological} for doing persistent homology.
Witness complex is essentially a different simplicial complex, which is most useful when dealing with large data sets.
\item [Step 4.] After acquiring the persistence diagram $\tilde{\Omega}=\{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p}, k}| k=1,2,\ldots,k_{\tilde{p}},\quad \tilde{p}=0,1\}$ ($\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p}, k} = (\lambda_{\tilde{p}, k,1}, \lambda_{\tilde{p}, k,2})$), they constructed the following set of features:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] The number of points on each dimension $\tilde{p}$, i.e., $(k_{0}, k_1, k_2,\ldots, k_{\tilde{p}})$;
\item[(ii)] The maximum lifetime of each $\tilde{p}$, i.e, $\max_{k}(\lambda_{\tilde{p}, k,2}-\lambda_{\tilde{p}, k,1})$;
\item[(iii)] The number of relevant points for each $\tilde{p}$, namely $\#\{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p}, k}| \lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}-\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}\geq 0.5 \max_k(\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}-\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1})\}$, where $\#$ denotes the cardinality of the set;
\item[(iv)] The average lifetime of all homology groups on each $\tilde{p}$, $\sum_{k=1}^{k_{\tilde{p}}} (\lambda_{\tilde{p}, k, 2}-\lambda_{\tilde{p}, k, 1})/k_{\tilde{p}}$;
\item[(v)] The sum of the lifetimes of all homology groups on each $\tilde{p}$, $\sum_{k=1}^{k_{\tilde{p}}} (\lambda_{\tilde{p}, k, 2}-\lambda_{\tilde{p}, k, 1})$.
\end{itemize}
\item [Step 5.] Apply all features from Step 4 to do K-means clustering.
\end{description}
The implementation was done in \texttt{Java}.
They compared results with true labels using different metrics from the confusion matrix, and
showed that their method achieved a high F1-score of $94\%$.
In sum, they used EMD to filter out data noise, constructed point cloud using Takens' embedding method and used persistent homology to construct features for unsupervised learning.
This logic is applicable to all other research papers.
\subsubsection{Classification} \label{ClassifcationTS}
Features constructed using TDA can be applied for classification of time series as well.
\cite{YuheiUmeda2017D} described an example with motion sensor data of daily and sports activities used in \cite{altun2010human,altun2010comparative}, including both chaotic and non-chaotic time series data.
Each of 19 activities was performed by 8 subjects and 60 signals were obtained for each activity and each subject, yielding
$9120$ time series. The sensor frequency was 512Hz and each signal was collected for 5 minutes.
The pipeline of their method which was implemented in \texttt{MATLAB} is shown below.
\begin{description}
\item [Step 1.] Construct a point cloud via Takens' embedding, $\{x_t, t=1,2,\ldots,T\} \rightarrow \{\mathbf{v}_i\} \subset \mathcal{R}^3,$ for $i=1,2,\ldots, T-2$ and $\mathbf{v}_i = (x_i, x_{i+1}, x_{i+2})$.
\item [Step 2.] Convert the point cloud to the persistence diagram $\tilde{\Omega}=\{\tilde{\tau}_{\tilde{p},k}| k=1,2,\ldots, \tilde{p}, \quad \tilde{p}=0,1,2\}$ using Rips complex and persistent homology.
\item [Step 3.] Compute features using Betti sequences of $\tilde{p}$-th homology groups $\tilde{\Delta}_{\tilde{p}}(\lambda) = \#\{\lambda_{\tilde{p},k,1}\leq\lambda\leq \lambda_{\tilde{p},k,2}| k=1,2,\ldots, k_{\tilde{p}}\}$ from the persistence diagram,
discretized into $300$ points for each $\tilde{p}$, and connected into one feature vector of length $900$.
\item [Step 4.] Apply a one-dimensional convolutional neural network (CNN) \citep{krizhevsky2012imagenet} on the feature vector from Step 3 to do the classification.
\end{description}
They concluded that their approach performed better than an approach using support vector machine (SVM) \citep{hastie01statisticallearning}.
\subsubsection{Structural Break Detection} \label{changepointTS}
TDA based features for structural break detection has been discussed in bioinformatics \citep{wang2018topological}, financial data analysis \citep{gidea2017topological,truong2017exploration,gidea2018topological,gidea2018topologicalcry}, etc. Here we describe the approach in \cite{gidea2018topologicalcry}, who
used four major daily log-price cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, and Ripple) between 2016-01-01 to 2018-02-28 independently for break detection of critical transitions:
\begin{description}
\item [Step 1.] They constructed point clouds each with $50$ points from each log-price time series $x_{t}, t=1,2,\ldots, T$. Each of the $T-52=448$ point clouds had a total of 50 points, the first point cloud being
$(v_1, v_2, \ldots, v_50)$ and the last point cloud being $(v_448, v_449, \ldots, v_497)$, with
$\mathbf{v}_i = (x_{i}, x_{i+1}, x_{i+2}, x_{i+3})\in \mathcal{R}^4\}$.
\item [Step 2.] On each windowing point cloud $\mathcal{P}^{(w)}$, they constructed
a persistence diagram $\tilde{\Omega}^{(w)}$ using Rips complex. Since they only focused on the $1$-th homology groups, $\tilde{\Omega}^{(w)}=\{\tilde{\tau}^{(w)}_{1, k},k=1,2,\ldots, k_1\}$.
\item [Step 3.] They constructed all persistence landscapes $\textit{PL}^{(w)}_{ 1, \nu}(\ell)$ from each $\tilde{\Omega}^{(w)}$,
$\nu=1,2,\ldots$, and then converted the persistence landscapes $\textit{PL}^{(w)}_{ 1, \nu}(\ell)$ to its L$_1$ norm, which is defined as $|| \textit{PL}^{(w)}_{1} ||_1 = \sum_{\nu=1}^\infty ||\textit{PL}^{(w)}_{ 1, \nu} ||_1$, where $||\textit{PL}^{(w)}_{ 1, \nu} ||_1=\int_{\mathcal{R}}\textit{PL}^{(w)}_{ 1, \nu}(\ell) d\ell$.
\item [Step 4.] On each window, they combined the log-price time series $x_w$, first difference of the log-price values $x_{w+1}-x_{w}$ and the L$_1$ norm $|| \textit{PL}^{(w)}_{1} ||_1$ as the feature vector $(x_w, x_{w+1}-x_{w}, || \textit{PL}^{(w)}_{1} ||_1)$ and used it to do K-means clustering with number of cluster $K=18$.
\end{description}
They applied the method independently to each daily log-price cryptocurrency time series, and then used the clusters to identify topologically distinct regimes before the crash of each asset. They argued that this method has the potential to automatically recognize approaching critical transitions in the cryptocurrency markets, even when the relevant time series exhibit a highly non-stationary, erratic behavior.
\section{Discussion and Summary} \label{summary}
This paper gives a comprehensive overview of TDA which consists of a set of powerful tools for measuring topological features of time series and using it for pattern detection, clustering, classification, and structural break detection. Research extensions in several directions are possible.
First, TDA for
multivariate time series analysis has been studied very recently
\citep{gidea2018topological,gidea2017topological,stolz2017persistent}.
A second extension consists of using summary statistics and dissimilarity measures for TDA. A review of summary statistics and dissimilarity measures refer to \cite{Nanopoulos2001,Fulcher2017FeaturebasedTA,Aghabozorgi2015}.
Third,
research into improved computation tools in computational topology and further exploration of statistical properties while using TDA is a rich research area. Ongoing research can be separated into these different scenarios: computational homology \citep{phillips2013geometric,de2004topological,liu2012fast,carlsson2009theory, 2018arXiv180910231C,ren2018weighted}, study of topological summaries \citep{bendich2016persistent, Christophe2019, Reininghaus2015ASM, kusano2016persistence, Carriere2017}, and statistical inference \citep{fasy2014, phillips2013geometric, JMLRChazal2018, ALAA2017406,robinson2017hypothesis,brecheteau2019}.
|
\section{Introduction}
Shear flows in magnetically confined plasmas have long been a subject of extensive research due to their ability to regulate turbulence and transport \cite{Terry2000}. \textcolor{black}{In the presence of a background shear flow}, linear modes may transiently grow but ultimately decay, so the plasma is formally stable to small perturbations. Nonetheless, perturbations with sufficiently large amplitudes can develop nonlinearly into what is called \textcolor{black}{subcritical turbulence}. Interestingly, radially propagating coherent structures are often observed in gyrokinetic simulations of \textcolor{black}{subcritical drift-wave (DW) turbulence}. Examples include the so-called avalanches \cite{Candy2003,McMillan2009} and the recently reported solitary zonal structures \cite{VanWyk2016,VanWyk2017,McMillan2018}. [Here, ``solitary'' means propagating at a (roughly) constant speed while maintaining a (roughly) constant shape; \textcolor{black}{``zonal structures'' contain DWs with radial envelopes and zonal flows (ZFs), but not zonal currents, etc.}] These structures are important in that they can induce transport that is not diffusive but rather ballistic; yet, their nature has not been fully understood. This calls for development of reduced models that can elucidate the underlying basic physics.
A reduced model for solitary zonal structures in subcritical turbulence has been proposed based on a plasma interchange model \cite{Pringle2017}. However, its direct relevance to DW turbulence is unclear, because its modes do not have a real diamagnetic frequency, which is an essential feature of DWs \cite{Horton1999}.
One might expect that a more relevant model could be based on the modified Hasegawa--Mima equation (mHME) \cite{Chandre2014,Dewar2007}, which is usually considered to be the simplest DW model.
This is endorsed by the fact that the mHME can indeed support solitary zonal structures, which are approximately nonlinear Schr\"odinger (NLS) solitons \cite{Guo2009,Jovanovic2010,Zhou2019}. \textcolor{black}{Nevertheless, these ``NLS solitons'' deteriorate when a background shear flow is imposed, since the mHME does not have a primary instability to counteract the effect of the shear. Hence, the mHME needs further adaptation in order to describe subcritical DWs and the solitary zonal structures therein.}
In this paper, we propose a reduced model for subcritical DWs by complementing the mHME with a generic primary instability and a background shear flow. Within this model, we readily obtain solitary zonal structures resembling those identified in gyrokinetic simulations \cite{McMillan2018}. While these subcritical solitons have smaller widths and larger amplitudes than the aforementioned NLS solitons, they approximately satisfy the same ``equation of state'', which is a local relation connecting the DW envelope with the ZF velocity. In addition, we find that these results can be qualitatively reproduced in the modified Hasegawa--Wakatani equation (mHWE) \cite{Numata2007}, which subsumes our reduced model as a limit. Therefore, our reduced model can be considered as a minimum model for studying solitary zonal structures in subcritical DWs.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec.\,\ref{soliton}, we briefly review the NLS solitons in the mHME. In Sec.\,\ref{degradation}, we discuss how these solitons deteriorate in the presence of background shear flows. In Sec.\,\ref{restoration}, we introduce our minimum model and describe the features of the subcritical solitons that it supports. These are the main results of our paper. In Sec.\,\ref{HWS}, we show that these results can be qualitatively reproduced in the mHWE. Our results are summarized and discussed in Sec.\,\ref{discussion}.
\section{NLS solitons in the mHME}\label{soliton}
\subsection{mHME and quasilinear approximation}
First, let us consider DWs within the mHME \cite{Chandre2014,Dewar2007}, which is the simplest yet useful two-dimensional slab model that captures many basic effects of interest. In a dimensionless form, the mHME can be written as
\begin{subequations}\label{mHME}
\begin{gather}
\partial_t w + \mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla w - \beta\partial_y\phi =0,\label{HME}\\
w \doteq \nabla^2\phi -\tilde{\phi},\label{vorticity}
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
where the functions $w$ and $\phi$ (and $\tilde{\phi}$ too; see below) are considered on the plane with coordinates $\mathbf{x}\equiv(x,y)$. (The symbol $\doteq$ denotes definitions.) A uniform magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$ is applied perpendicularly to this plane. The gradient of the plasma density $n_0$ is in the radial ($x$) direction, and is parameterized by a (positive) constant $\beta\doteq a/L_{n}$, where $a$ is some system size (e.g., the minor radius of a tokamak) and $L_{n}\doteq (- \mathrm{d}\ln n_0/\mathrm{d}x)^{-1}$ is the local scale length of the density gradient. The ZF velocity is in the poloidal ($y$) direction. Time $t$ is normalized by the transit time $a/c_\text{s}$, where $c_\text{s}$ is the sound speed. Space is normalized by the ion sound radius $\rho_\text{s}\doteq c_\text{s}/\Omega_\text{ci}$, where $\Omega_\text{ci}$ is the ion gyro-frequency. The electrostatic potential $\phi(t,\mathbf{x})$ is normalized by $T_\text{e}\rho_\text{s}/(ea)$, where $e$ is the unit charge and $T_\text{e}$ is the electron temperature.
Accordingly, $\mathbf{v}\doteq(-\partial_y\phi,\partial_x\phi)$ is the $\mathbf{E}\times\mathbf{B}$ velocity.
In the mHME, the definition of the generalized vorticity $w$ \eqref{vorticity} involves separating the total $\phi$ into the zonal component $\langle{\phi}\rangle$ and non-zonal component $\tilde{\phi}$. The former is the ``zonal average'' of $\phi$, $\langle{\phi}\rangle\doteq\int\mathrm{d}y\,\phi/L_y$ (where $L_y$ is the system length in $y$), and corresponds to the ZF. The latter is the fluctuating component, $\tilde{\phi}\doteq\phi-\langle{\phi}\rangle$, and corresponds to DWs. The same notations apply to $w$ and $\mathbf{v}$ as well. The mHME differs from the original Hasegawa--Mima equation \cite{Hasegawa1978} in that the adiabatic electron response in $w$ contains only the non-zonal potential $\tilde{\phi}$ rather than the total potential $\phi$. The need for this modification was first identified in Refs.\,\cite{Dorland1993,Hammett1993}.
\textcolor{black}{In studies of DW--ZF interactions, it is common to invoke the so-called quasilinear approximation \cite{Chen2000,Rogers2000,Champeaux2001,Jenko2006,Gallagher2012,Srinivasan2012,Parker2013,Connaughton2015,St-Onge2017,Dewar2007,Guo2009,Jovanovic2010,Zhou2019,Zhu2019} for simplicity. This approximation amounts to neglecting the direct couplings between DWs such as those described in Ref.\,\cite{Gurcan2010} while keeping their indirect couplings via ZFs. On various occasions, quasilinear modelings of ZF dynamics have been shown to reproduce many of the basic features of nonlinear modelings \cite{Zhou2019,Srinivasan2012,Zhu2019}, which makes them preferable for studying certain aspects of DW--ZF interactions.} The non-zonal and zonal components of the quasilinear mHME are given by, respectively,
\begin{subequations}\label{QL}
\begin{gather}
\partial_t\tilde{w}+U\partial_y\tilde{w}-(\beta+U'')\partial_y\tilde{\phi}=0,\label{QLNZ}\\
\partial_t U -\partial_x\langle{\partial_x\tilde{\phi} \partial_y\tilde{\phi}}\rangle=0.\label{QLZ}
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
For convenience, we introduce the ZF velocity $U(t,x)\doteq \langle v_y\rangle = \partial_x\langle\phi\rangle$ here, with $U''\doteq\partial^2_xU$.
The poloidal wavenumber $k_y$ of a DW $\tilde{w}=\text{Re}[\varpi(t,x)e^{i{k_y}y}]$ is a constant of motion in the quasilinear mHME \eqref{QL}. Hence, we can further restrict our scope to such DWs that are monochromatic in $y$. By denoting $\tilde{\phi}=\text{Re}[\varphi(t,x)e^{i{k_y}y}]$ such that $\varpi = (\partial_x^2-k_y^2-1)\varphi$, we obtain the one-dimensional (1D) quasilinear mHME:
\begin{subequations}\label{QL1}
\begin{gather}
\partial_t\varpi+ik_yU\varpi-ik_y(\beta+U''){\varphi}=0,\label{QL1NZ}\\
\partial_t U -k_y\textrm{Im}({\varphi}^*{\partial_x^2{\varphi} })/2=0.\label{QL1Z}
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
Here, ${\varphi}^*$ is the complex conjugate of ${\varphi}$, and the factor $1/2$ is due to zonal averaging. Equation \eqref{QL1} represents the basic model that our study builds upon.
\subsection{NLS equation and solitons}
Equations \eqref{mHME}, \eqref{QL}, and \eqref{QL1} allow monochromatic DWs $\varpi=\psi_0e^{i{k_x}{x}-i\Omega t}$ as exact nonlinear solutions, where $\psi_0$ is a constant, $k_x$ is the radial wavenumber, and $\Omega\doteq\beta k_y/\bar{k}^2$ is the DW frequency, with $\bar{k}^2\doteq 1+k_x^2+k_y^2$.
Now, let us consider a quasi-monochromatic DW with slow radial modulation only, i.e., $\varpi=\psi(t,x)e^{i{k_x}{x}-i\Omega t}$ with $|\partial_x\ln\psi|\ll |k_x|$. Assuming also that $|\psi|$ is small, one can show that $U$ and $|\psi|$ are connected by a simple ``equation of state" \cite{Zhou2019}
\begin{align}
U \approx|\psi|^2/(4\beta)=\langle\tilde{w}^2\rangle/(2\beta), \label{EOS}
\end{align}
and furthermore, the governing equation for $\psi$ is \cite{Champeaux2001,Dewar2007}
\begin{align}
i(\partial_t +v_\text{g} \partial_x)\psi \approx -(\chi/2)\partial_x^2\psi+k_y|\psi|^2 \psi/(4\beta).\label{NLSE}
\end{align}
Here, $v_\text{g}\doteq\partial\Omega/\partial k_x$ is the radial group velocity and $\chi\doteq\partial^2\Omega/\partial k_x^2$. More explicitly, $v_\text{g}= -2\beta k_xk_y/\bar{k}^4$ and $\chi= (2\beta k_y/\bar{k}^6)(4k_x^2-\bar{k}^2)$. Detailed derivations of Eqs.\,\eqref{EOS} and \eqref{NLSE} can be found in Ref.\,\cite{Zhou2019} and the references therein.
Since Eq.\,\eqref{NLSE} has the form of a NLS equation, a DW packet can be considered as an effective quantum particle (``drifton''), for which $\psi$ serves as a state function. Also, as a NLS equation, Eq.\,\eqref{NLSE} has the usual soliton solution
\begin{align}
\psi(t,x)=2\eta\sqrt{-\frac{\beta\chi}{k_y}}\frac{\exp{(i\chi\eta^2t/2)}}{\cosh[\eta(x-v_\text{g}t)]}.\label{psiS}
\end{align}
Here, the soliton inverse width $\eta$ is a free parameter that also determines the soliton amplitude. The corresponding approximate solution to the mHME is then given by $\tilde{w}=\text{Re}(\psi e^{i{k_x}{x}+ik_y y-i\Omega t})$, together with Eq.\,\eqref{EOS}. Below, we use the term ``NLS solitons'' to denote such solitary solutions to the mHME specifically, rather than those to the NLS equation \eqref{NLSE} in general.
In Ref.\,\cite{Zhou2019}, it is shown numerically that NLS solitons can be generated via the modulational instability of (quasi-) monochromatic DWs.
Although $\eta\ll |k_x|$ is assumed in the derivation of the NLS soliton \eqref{psiS}, in practice, structures of this form remain solitary even when $\eta\sim |k_x|$. This can be seen in the quasilinear mHME simulation shown in Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}(1-a), which is initialized with a NLS soliton with $k_x=\eta=0.5$. [A snapshot of the envelope of this soliton can be found in Fig.\,\ref{ZF}, which verifies the equation of state \eqref{EOS}.] Still, when $\eta$ is sufficiently larger than $k_x$, the solitary behavior of the zonal structure eventually breaks down \cite{Zhou2019}.
Within the quantum analogy, NLS solitons can be regarded as quasi-monochromatic drifton condensates. A particularly transparent way to illustrate this is by using the Wigner function \cite{Wigner1932}
\begin{align}
W(t,x,{p_x})\doteq\int\mathrm{d}s\,e^{-i{p_x}{s}}\varpi\left(t,{x}+\frac{{s}}{2}\right)\varpi^*\left(t,{x}-\frac{{s}}{2}\right),\label{WF}
\end{align}
where $p_x$ is the coordinate in the DW radial momentum (wavenumber) space. The Wigner function $W$ can be considered as a quasi-probability distribution of driftons (DW quanta) in phase space. (The prefix ``quasi'' denotes the fact that as a quantumlike particle, a drifton has well-defined phase-space coordinates only in the geometrical-optics limit, while the definition of $W$ extends also beyond this limit.) In Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}(2-a), a snapshot of the Wigner function is shown, and it can be seen that the DW quanta are localized in both the coordinate space and the momentum space (specifically, at $p_x\sim k_x$). In this paper, we use the Wigner function only as a visualization tool. However, it can also be directly used to model the (statistical) dynamics of DWs within the so-called Wigner--Moyal formulation \cite{Ruiz2016}, as done in Refs.\,\cite{Zhu2018,Zhou2019,Zhu2019}. \textcolor{black}{Notably, this formulation captures essential ``full-wave'' effects such as diffraction, which are neglected in wave-kinetic approaches based on the ray approximation \cite{Smolyakov1999,Kaw2002,Trines2005,Parker2016,Zhu2018b,Ruiz2019}. Hence, the former can model NLS solitons whereas the latter cannot \cite{Zhou2019,Diamond2005}.}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{mHMEhistory.png}
\caption{Quasilinear mHME simulations initialized with a NLS soliton \eqref{psiS} ($\beta=5$, $k_x=0.5$, $k_y=-1$, $\eta=0.5$). The columns correspond to various values of the background flow shear: (a) $S= 0$, (b) $S= 0.02$, and (c) $S= 0.04$. Row~1 shows the spatial-temporal evolution of the DW envelope $\sqrt{\langle\tilde{w}^2\rangle}$. Row 2 shows the Wigner function $W(x,p_x)$ at $t = 30$.}\label{mHMEhistory}
\end{figure}
\section{Degradation of DW packets due to shear flow}\label{degradation}
In this section, we illustrate the effect of background shear flows on NLS solitons. \textcolor{black}{Following Refs.\,\cite{McMillan2018,Pringle2017}, let us introduce a background flow $U_0=Sx$ with some constant shear $S$.} The non-zonal component \eqref{QL1NZ} of the 1D quasilinear mHME then becomes
\begin{gather}
\partial_t\varpi+ik_y(U+Sx)\varpi-ik_y(\beta+U''){\varphi}=0,\label{QLNZS}
\end{gather}
\textcolor{black}{while the zonal component \eqref{QL1Z} still determines the ZF velocity $U$ self-consistently}. It is easy to find that the exact monochromatic DW solution now takes the form
\begin{gather}
\varpi=\psi_0\exp\left[{i{k_x}(t){x}-i\int\Omega(t)\,\mathrm{d}t}\right],
\end{gather}
where
\begin{subequations}\label{kOmega}
\begin{gather}
k_x(t)=K_x-Stk_{y}, \\
\Omega(t)=\beta k_y/[1+{k_x}(t)^2+k_y^2],
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
and $K_x$ is the initial radial wavenumber. The fact that the radial wavenumber $k_{x}(t)$ changes linearly with time while the poloidal wavenumber $k_y$ stays constant is a typical effect of the background shear flow. (It exactly applies to many other systems such as the nonlinear mHME \eqref{mHME}; see Appendix\,\ref{shearingbox}.)
It turns out that this effect on monochromatic DWs also qualitatively extends to weakly nonlinear quasi-monochromatic DW packets, including NLS solitons. In Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}, we show results from quasilinear mHME simulations initialized with a NLS soliton \eqref{psiS} for different values of the flow shear $S$. (The implementation of these simulations is described in Appendix\,\ref{shearingbox}.)
The snapshots of the Wigner function in row 2, which are taken at the same $t$ for various $S$, demonstrate that the background shear flow does change the characteristic radial wavenumber $k_x$ of the DW packet, and the change increases with $S$. As $t$ increases, the group velocity $v_g=\partial\Omega/\partial k_x$ decreases, and hence the propagation slows down. While the background shear flow itself does not dissipate the DW quanta \textcolor{black}{(i.e., does not affect the conservation of the DW enstrophy $Z_\mathrm{DW}\doteq \int\mathrm{d}x\,\langle\tilde{w}^2\rangle/2$)}, it keeps increasing $|k_x|$ such that the dissipation excluded in Eq.\,\eqref{QL} eventually becomes non-negligible. (A small amount of hyper-viscosity is included in the simulations shown in Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}.) Meanwhile, there is no source in the mHME to replenish the DW quanta, so the DW packet inevitably deteriorates [Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}(b-c)]. That is, NLS solitons cannot survive when a background shear flow is imposed in the mHME.
\section{Subcritical solitons sustained by primary instability}\label{restoration}
Following Ref.\,\cite{Guo2009}, we introduce a source (and a sink) to the 1D quasilinear mHME \eqref{QL1} by complementing the latter with a generic primary instability (including explicit dissipation). Also keeping the background shear flow in Eq.\,\eqref{QLNZS}, we obtain a reduced model for subcritical DWs:
\begin{subequations}\label{QLP}
\begin{gather}
\partial_t\varpi+ik_y(U+Sx)\varpi-ik_y(\beta+U''){\varphi}=\hat\gamma\varpi,\label{QLNZP}\\
\partial_t U -k_y\textrm{Im}({\varphi}^*{\partial_x^2{\varphi} })/2=\hat\gamma U.\label{QLZP}
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
Here, the operator $\hat\gamma$ is given by $\hat\gamma=\gamma(\hat{k}_x,k_y)$, with $\hat{k}_x\doteq-i\partial_x$ being the radial momentum (wavenumber) operator and $\gamma({k}_x,k_y)$ the linear growth rate of a monochromatic DW. \textcolor{black}{Unlike the background shear flow, this source term changes the DW enstrophy (quanta) but not the wavenumber}. In general, $\gamma$ should be positive at small $|k_x|$ and negative at large $|k_x|$, such that a linear perturbation may grow transiently but ultimately decays as $|k_x|$ increases. The system is therefore linearly stable, but perturbations with sufficient amplitudes can still develop nonlinearly into turbulence.
In practice, we adopt the following simple \textit{ad hoc} model of $\gamma$ (in this section only):
\begin{gather}\label{gammaPI}
\gamma({{k}_x,k_y})=\sigma| k_y| - Dk^2,
\end{gather}
where $\sigma$ and $D$ are positive constants and $k^2\doteq k_x^2+k_y^2$. We do not expect the specific form of $\gamma$ to qualitatively impact our results. In Sec.\,\ref{HWS}, we show that the mHWE, which has a growth rate different from Eq.\,\eqref{gammaPI}, produces qualitatively similar results to those here.
We perform series of simulations of the reduced model \eqref{QLP} with various $\sigma$ and $S$, while fixing $D$ and the initial condition for $\varpi$ ($\psi$). The results of the simulations are summarized in Fig.\,\ref{sigmaS}. Note that if $S=0$, the initial condition we use would correspond to a stationary zonal structure with $k_x=0$. However, the background shear flow changes $k_x$ such that the zonal structure starts propagating. For a given $S$, when the primary instability is moderate ($\sigma_{\text{min}}\le\sigma\le\sigma_{\text{max}}$), the zonal structure becomes and remains solitary for the duration of the simulations (up to $t=1000$). When the primary instability is too strong ($\sigma>\sigma_{\text{max}}$), the zonal structure keeps growing and starts avalanching, and eventually the system becomes turbulent. When the primary instability is too weak ($\sigma<\sigma_{\text{min}}$), the zonal structure cannot be sustained and ultimately deteriorates, similarly to the cases in Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}(b-c). Both $\sigma_{\text{min}}$ and $\sigma_{\text{max}}$ scale roughly linearly with $S$, as shown in Fig.\,\ref{sigmaS}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{sigmaS.pdf}
\caption{Results from simulations of the reduced model \eqref{QLP} ($\beta=5$, $D=0.02$) with various $\sigma$ and $S$. The initial condition is given by Eq.\,\eqref{psiS} ($k_x=0$, $k_y=-1$, $\eta=0.5$). The maximum (dotted) and minimum (dashed) values of $\sigma$ for the solutions to be solitary are plotted vs.~$S$. The points (a)-(c) correspond to the three columns in Fig.\,\ref{Edge}, respectively.}\label{sigmaS}
\end{figure}
Initial conditions, their amplitudes in particular, typically play an important role in subcritical systems. Nevertheless, the qualitative features of Fig.\,\ref{sigmaS} depends only weakly on the specific initial condition used therein. This is shown in Fig.\,\ref{Edge}, where we choose three representative points from Fig.\,\ref{sigmaS} and then vary the amplitude of the initial condition $\eta$. In Fig.\,\ref{Edge}(a), for a sizable range of $\eta$, the system settles into (almost) the same final stage with a solitary DW; only when $\eta$ is sufficiently large (small) does the system become turbulent (laminar). In Fig.\,\ref{Edge}(b), the system tends to become turbulent unless $\eta$ is really small, in which case the system turns laminar. Here, no robust solitary solution could be found, except maybe transient ones near the fine edge between the turbulent and laminar states, similar to the ``edge of chaos" scenarios discussed in Refs.\,\cite{Pringle2017,McMillan2018}. In Fig.\,\ref{Edge}(c), even for initial conditions with reasonably large $\eta$, the DW packets still decay, and the system ends up laminar.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Edge.pdf}
\caption{The time history of the DW enstrophy $Z_\mathrm{DW}$ for different pairs of $(\sigma, S)$: (a) $(0.07, 0.08)$, (b) $(0.07, 0.04)$, and (c) $(0.05, 0.08)$. The simulations have the same setup as those in Fig.\,\ref{sigmaS}, except that the amplitude of the initial condition $\eta$ is varied in each column. Consequently, not all structures in (a) are solitary and not all structures in (b) are unstable.}\label{Edge}
\end{figure}
In Fig.\,\ref{shearhistory}, we present examples of solitary zonal structures obtained with different pairs of $(\sigma, S)$. By comparing the spatial-temporal evolution of the DW envelope and the snapshots of the Wigner function, we can see that these structures are quite similar among themselves. For clarity, we refer to these structures as ``subcritical solitons'' in this paper, \textcolor{black}{since they are visibly different from the NLS soliton in Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}(a). That is, subcritical solitons have smaller widths, and in turn, larger amplitudes than NLS solitons. Accordingly, the Wigner function of a subcritical soliton is more localized in the coordinate space while more spread out in the momentum space. Note that
without primary instabilities and background shear flows, the mHME cannot support NLS solitons with such large inverse widths, because it is not approximated well by the NLS equation \eqref{NLSE} in this case \cite{Zhou2019}}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{shearhistory.png}
\caption{Examples of solitary zonal structures obtained from selected simulations in Fig.\,\ref{sigmaS}. The columns correspond to different pairs of $(\sigma, S)$: (a) $(0.05, 0.04)$, (b) $(0.06, 0.06)$, and (c) $(0.07, 0.08)$. Row 1 shows the spatial-temporal evolution of the DW envelope $\sqrt{\langle\tilde{w}^2\rangle}$. Row 2 shows the Wigner function $W(x,p_x)$ at $t = 200$.}\label{shearhistory}
\end{figure}
Meanwhile, subcritical solitons and NLS solitons still share the similarity in that they are both nonlinearly sustained by DW--ZF interactions, in which the ZF acts as a self-trapping potential. Also, perhaps surprisingly and remarkably, subcritical solitons satisfy the equation of state \eqref{EOS} of NLS solitons, as found numerically. This can be seen in Fig.\,\ref{ZF}, where snapshots of the ZF velocity are shown to agree well with those calculated from Eq.\,\eqref{EOS}, even though subcritical solitons have smaller widths and larger amplitudes. In this sense, both NLS solitons and subcritical solitons can be categorized as DW--ZF solitons.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{UmHME.pdf}
\caption{Snapshots of the actual ZF velocity $U$ (solid) and the ZF velocity calculated from the equation of state \eqref{EOS} [$U_\mathrm{EOS}\doteq \langle\tilde{w}^2\rangle/(2\beta)$, dashed] at the end of various simulations, specifically, a NLS soliton [Fig.\,\ref{mHMEhistory}(a)], and the subcritical solitons in the reduced model [Fig.\,\ref{shearhistory}(b)-(c)] and the mHWE [Fig.\,\ref{mHWEhistory}(b)-(c)].}\label{ZF}
\end{figure}
\textcolor{black}{In summary, subcritical solitons are sustained by an intricate balance of the following effects combined: the generation and dissipation of DW quanta at small and large $|k_x|$ by the source and the sink, respectively; the channeling of DW quanta from small to large $|k_x|$ by the background shear flow; the self-trapping via DW--ZF interactions; and the diffraction of the DW envelope. Subcritical solitons are not possible if any of these effects is absent. The reduced model \eqref{QLP} contains all these effects and hence can be considered as a minimum model for solitary zonal structures in subcritical DWs. }
\section{Subcritical solitons in the mHWE}\label{HWS}
In order to show the physical relevance of the reduced model \eqref{QLP}, let us examine whether its results can be reproduced with more complex models that subsume it as a limit. One such model is the mHWE \cite{Numata2007}, in which a modification similar to the one in the mHME (see Sec.\,\ref{soliton}) is applied to the original Hasegawa--Wakatani equation \cite{Hasegawa1983}. The mHWE reads
\begin{subequations}\label{mHWE}
\begin{gather}
\partial_t w+\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla{w}-\beta\partial_y\phi=D\nabla^2w,\\
\partial_t n+\mathbf{v}\cdot\nabla{n}+\beta\partial_y\phi=\alpha(\tilde{\phi}-\tilde{n})+D\nabla^2 n.
\end{gather}
\end{subequations}
Here, $n$ is the perturbed density normalized by $n_0\rho_s /a$, $w \doteq \nabla^2\phi-{n}$ is the generalized vorticity, $\alpha$ is the adiabaticity parameter, and the form of dissipation is chosen to be the same as that in Sec.\,\ref{restoration}. In the so-called adiabatic limit, where $D\rightarrow 0 $ and $\alpha\rightarrow\infty$, we should have $\tilde{n}\rightarrow\tilde{\phi}$. Accordingly, one can deduce that $\partial_t\langle n\rangle\rightarrow 0$ and hence adopt $\langle n\rangle\rightarrow 0$. Then, with $w \rightarrow \nabla^2\phi-\tilde{\phi}$, the mHWE \eqref{mHWE} formally converges to the mHME \eqref{mHME}. Notably, while the results presented in this section corroborate this correspondence between the mHWE and the mHME, the robustness of such convergence in general is a subtle issue and may not be guaranteed \cite{Majda2018}.
Close to the adiabatic limit, one branch of the dispersion relation of the mHWE reads $\Omega\approx\beta k_y/\bar{k}^2+i\gamma$, with its real part converging to the mHME case. The imaginary part reads
\begin{gather}\label{gammaHW}
\gamma({{k_x},k_y})= {\beta^2k_y^2k^2}/({\alpha\bar{k}^6}) - Dk^2,
\end{gather}
which differs from the simple model \eqref{gammaPI} used in Sec.\,\ref{restoration}. However, as we impose background shear flows in simulations of the mHWE \eqref{mHWE} (the implementation is described in Appendix \ref{shearingbox}), \textcolor{black}{we can still obtain qualitatively similar results. In Fig.\,\ref{alphaS}, we summarize the results of series of simulations with various $\alpha$ and $S$, where $\alpha^{-1}$ plays the same role as $\sigma$ in Fig.\,\ref{sigmaS}, i.e., indicating the strength of the primary instability. For a given $S$, solitary zonal structures can be obtained only when the primary instability is moderate. When the primary instability is too strong or too weak, the system becomes turbulent or laminar, respectively. Examples of the solitary zonal structures obtained are shown in Fig.\,\ref{mHWEhistory}, which resemble those obtained with the reduced model (Fig.\,\ref{shearhistory}). Due to this similarity, we refer to these structures also as subcritical solitons.}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{alphaS.pdf}
\caption{\textcolor{black}{Results from mHWE simulations ($\beta=5$, $D=0.02$) with background shear flows and various $\alpha$ and $S$. The initial condition is given by Eq.\,\eqref{psiS} ($k_x=0$, $k_y=-1$, $\eta=0.6$, $n=\tilde\phi$). The inverse of the maximum (dashed) and minimum (dotted) values of $\alpha$ for the solutions to be solitary are plotted vs.~$S$. The points (a)-(c) correspond to the three columns in Fig.\,\ref{mHWEhistory}, respectively.} }\label{alphaS}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{mHWEhistory.png}
\caption{Examples of solitary zonal structures obtained from selected simulations in Fig.\,\ref{alphaS}. The columns correspond to different pairs of $(\alpha, S)$: (a) $(55, 0.06)$, (b) $(50, 0.08)$, and (c) $(45, 0.1)$. Row 1 shows the spatial-temporal evolution of the DW envelope $\sqrt{\langle\tilde{w}^2\rangle}$. Row 2 shows the non-zonal potential $\tilde\phi(x,y)$ at $t = 250$.}\label{mHWEhistory}
\end{figure}
\textcolor{black}{We emphasize that these mHWE simulations are nonlinear (with self-consistent spectra in $k_y$) rather than quasilinear as in the reduced model (with a single $k_y$). Nonetheless, the snapshots in Fig.\,\ref{mHWEhistory} (row 2) clearly show that the structures remain quasi-monochromatic in $y$, which in turn justifies the quasilinear approximation.} In fact, the same feature is also displayed by some solitary zonal structures identified in gyrokinetic simulations \cite{McMillan2018} [Fig.\,3(b) therein]. Deviations of the mHWE from its quasilinear approximation does affect the applicability of the equation of state \eqref{EOS} slightly. In Fig.\,\ref{ZF}, the agreement between the ZF velocity and that calculated from Eq.\,\eqref{EOS} is not as good in the mHWE simulations as those with the reduced model. [In quasilinear mHWE simulations (not shown), by contrast, the agreement \textit{is} as good.] Still, the equation of state roughly captures the local relation between the DW envelope and the ZF velocity, qualifying these structures also as DW--ZF solitons. \textcolor{black}{The fact that the results obtained with the reduced model \eqref{QLP} can be qualitatively reproduced with the more complex mHWE supports that the former can be considered as a minimum model for solitary zonal structures in subcritical DWs.}
One might wonder whether subcritical solitons can naturally emerge from random perturbations rather than the carefully chosen initial conditions that we used so far. The answer appears to be affirmative. In Fig.\,\ref{MIhistory}(a), we show an example of spontaneous subcritical solitons obtained in mHWE simulations. Here, the initial perturbation needs to be of sufficiently large amplitude, because the system is subcritical. This is different from Ref.\,\cite{Zhou2019}, where small perturbations are applied on primary DWs to form NLS solitons in mHME simulations.
While the snapshot of the solitary structure in Fig.\,\ref{MIhistory}(2-a) exhibits some weak poloidal modulation as well, its clear resemblances to those in Fig.\,\ref{mHWEhistory} (row 2), such as having a dominant poloidal wavenumber, suggest that they are all essentially the same structures.
\textcolor{black}{For comparison, in Fig.\,\ref{MIhistory}(b), we present results from a simulation with a smaller $\alpha$ than in Fig.\,\ref{MIhistory}(a). Since the primary instability is stronger in this case, the propagating structures that are formed do not saturate into solitons, but keep growing and eventually develop into turbulence. Still, features similar to those of subcritical solitons (e.g., nonzero radial wavenumbers) can be seen in Fig.\,\ref{MIhistory}(2-b). These transient structures might be related to the avalanche-like bursts observed in gyrokinetic simulations with background shear flows \cite{Candy2003,McMillan2009}.
}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{MIhistory.png}
\caption{\textcolor{black}{Two mHWE simulations with background shear flows ($\beta=5$, $D=0.02$, $S=0.08$) initialized with identical random perturbations of sufficiently large amplitude: (a) $\alpha=50$, and (b) $\alpha=25$. Row 1 shows the spatial-temporal evolution of the DW envelope $\sqrt{\langle\tilde{w}^2\rangle}$. Row 2 shows the non-zonal potential $\tilde\phi(x,y)$ at (a) $t = 210$ and (b) $t = 70$.}
}\label{MIhistory}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and discussion}\label{discussion}
In this paper, we propose a minimum model for studying solitary zonal structures in subcritical DWs. This model complements the mHME with a generic primary instability and a background shear flow. The subcritical solitons supported by our minimum model have smaller widths and larger amplitudes than NLS solitons, which are known solutions to the mHME. Nevertheless, we find that these subcritical solitons satisfy the same ``equation of state'' as NLS solitons, which is a local relation that connects the DW envelope with the ZF velocity. Moreover, we show that these results can be qualitatively reproduced in the more complex mHWE, which subsumes our minimum model as a limit.
It could be of interest to pursue future research in the following directions. First, since subcritical solitons seem to be coherent DW packets with dominant wavenumbers, it may be possible that an analytical solution can be derived, similar to the NLS soliton \eqref{psiS}. \textcolor{black}{However, the slow-envelope assumption, which enables the NLS reduction of the mHME, is far from applicable to subcritical solitons. It is likely that a different analytical approach is required.} Second, more careful and systematic comparisons between the subcritical solitons in the minimum model and those found in gyrokinetic simulations could be useful. \textcolor{black}{Third, one could investigate the connection between subcritical solitons and the radially propagating structures induced by self-consistent (rather than background) shear flows, such as those reported recently in Ref.\,\cite{Zhu2020}.}
\acknowledgments
This research was supported by the U.S.~Department of Energy under Contract No.~DE-AC02-09CH11466. The data used for the figures in this article are available at: http://arks.princeton.edu/ark:/88435/dsp015425kd34n.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{D}{ietary} monitoring plays an important role in assessing an individual's overall dietary intake and, based on this, providing targeted dietary recommendations.
Dietitians \cite{weekes2009review} and personal monitoring solutions \cite{rouast2018using} rely on accurate dietary information to support individuals in meeting their health goals.
For instance, research has shown that the global risk and burden of non-communicable disease is associated with poor diet and hence requires targeted interventions \cite{who2017non}.
However, manually assessing dietary intake often involves considerable processing time and is subject to human error \cite{lichtman1992discrepancy}.
Automatic dietary monitoring aims to detect (i) \textit{when}, (ii) \textit{what}, and (iii) \textit{how much} is consumed \cite{vu2017wearable}.
This is a complex and multi-faceted problem involving tasks such as action detection to identify intake gestures (\textit{when}), object recognition and segmentation to identify individual foods (\textit{what}), as well as volume and density estimation to derive food quantity (\textit{how much}).
A variety of sensors have been explored in the literature, including inertial, audio, visual, and piezoelectric sensors \cite{vu2017wearable}, \cite{kyritsis2019modeling}, \cite{hantke2016hear}.
Detection of individual intake gestures can improve detection of entire eating occasions \cite{thomaz2015practical} and amounts consumed \cite{mirtchouk2016automated}.
It also provides access to measures such as intake speed, as well as meta-information for easier review of videos.
Although video is often used as ground truth for studies focused on detecting chews, swallows, and intake gestures, it has rarely been used as the basis for automatic detection.
However, there are several indications that video could be a suitable data source to monitor such events:
(i) increasing exploration of video monitoring in residential and hospital settings \cite{braeken2016secure}, \cite{hall2017implementing},
(ii) the rich amount of information embedded in the visual modality, and
(iii) recent advances in machine learning, and in particular deep learning \cite{lecun2015deep}, for video action recognition that have largely been left unexplored in dietary monitoring.
In this paper, we address this gap by demonstrating the feasibility of using deep neural networks (DNNs) for automatic detection of intake gestures from raw video frames.
For this purpose, we investigate the 3D CNN \cite{ji20133d}, CNN-LSTM \cite{donahue2015long}, Two-Stream \cite{simonyan2014two}, and SlowFast \cite{feichtenhofer2018slowfast} architectures which have been applied in the field of video action recognition, but not for dietary monitoring.
These architectures allow to consider \textit{temporal context} in the form of multiple frames.
Further, instead of relying on handcrafted models and features, deep learning leverages a large number of examples to learn feature representations on multiple levels of abstraction.
In dietary monitoring, deep learning has mainly been used for image-based food recognition (\textit{what}) \cite{ciocca2017learning}, and recently in intake gesture detection based on inertial sensors (\textit{when}) \cite{kyritsis2019modeling}.
However, it has yet to be applied on video-based intake gesture detection.
Our main contributions are the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We fill the gap between dietary monitoring and video action recognition by demonstrating the feasibility of using deep learning architectures to detect individual intake gestures from raw video frames. We conduct a laboratory study with 102 participants and 4891 intake gestures, by sourcing video from a 360-degree camera placed in the center of the table. A ResNet-50 SlowFast model achieved the best $F_1$ score of 0.858.
\item Video action recognition can build on both appearance and motion features. It is in general not clear which are more important for a given action \cite{feichtenhofer2018have}. Using a 2D CNN without temporal context, we show that appearance (individual frames) performs better than motion (optical flow between adjacent frames) for detecting intake gestures.
\item Similarly, it is not clear to what extent temporal context improves model accuracy of detecting a given action \cite{karpathy2014large}. Comparing the best model \textit{with} (ResNet-50 SlowFast) and the best 2D CNN \textit{without} temporal context, we find a relative $F_1$ improvement of 8\%.
\end{enumerate}
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows:
In Section \ref{sec:related}, we discuss the related literature, including dietary monitoring and video action recognition.
Our proposed models are introduced in Section \ref{sec:method}, and the dataset in Section \ref{sec:dataset}.
We present our experiments and results in Section \ref{sec:experiments}, and draw conclusions in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\textwidth]{figures/models}
\caption{The four investigated approaches from video action recognition based on temporal context $t$ (adapted from Carreira and Zisserman \cite{carreira2017quo}).}
\label{fig:architectures}
\end{figure*}
\section{Related Research}
\label{sec:related}
\subsection{Dietary monitoring}
\label{sec:related:sub:food-intake}
At the conceptual level, dietary monitoring broadly captures three components of recognition, namely \textit{what} (e.g., identification of specific foods), \textit{how much} (i.e., quantification of consumed food), and \textit{when} (i.e., timing of eating occasions).
Traditional paper-based methods such as recalls and specialized questionnaires \cite{block1982review} are still commonly used by dietitians.
Amongst end-users, mobile applications that allow manual logging of individual meals are also popular.
These active methods are characterized by a considerable amount of effort, and known to be affected by biases and human error \cite{lichtman1992discrepancy}.
Realizing the requirement for objective measurements of a person's diet, several sensor-based approaches of passively collecting information associated with diet have been proposed in the literature.
With the emergence of labeled databases of food images \cite{chen2016deep}, \cite{ciocca2017learning}, food recognition from still images has become a popular task in computer vision research.
The state of the art uses features learned by deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to distinguish between food classes \cite{ciocca2018cnn}.
CNNs are DNNs especially designed for visual inputs.
Image-based estimation of food volume and associated calories typically extends food recognition by volume estimation of different foods, and linking with nutrient databases \cite{puri2009recognition}, \cite{zhang2015snap}.
Estimation of food volume from audio and inertial sensors based on individual bite sizes has also been proposed \cite{mirtchouk2016automated}.
In detecting intake behavior, we distinguish between detection of events describing meal microstructure (e.g., individual intake gestures), and detecting intake occasions as a whole (e.g., a meal), which can be seen as clusters of detected events \cite{dong2014detecting}.
Besides aiding in the estimation of food volume \cite{mirtchouk2016automated}, information about meal microstructure can be leveraged to improve active methods \cite{ye2016assisting}.
It also allows dietitians to quantify measures of interest such as the rate of eating \cite{robinson2014systematic}.
In general, detection of chews and swallows is typically attempted using on-body audio or piezoelectric sensors, whilst detection of intake gestures is the domain of wrist-mounted inertial sensors \cite{heydarian2019assessing}.
Chews and swallows generate characteristic audio signatures, which was exploited for automatic detection of meal microstructure as early as 2005 \cite{amft2005analysis}, \cite{passler2012food}.
Swallows can also be registered using piezoelectric sensors measuring strain on the jaw \cite{sazonov2012sensor}.
Inertial sensors can be used to measure the acceleration and spatial movements of the wrist to identify intake gestures \cite{amft2005detection}, \cite{shen2017assessing}, \cite{zhang2018sense}.
Recently, DNNs were applied for this purpose \cite{kyritsis2019modeling}.
\subsection{Video-based intake gesture recognition}
\label{sec:related:sub:video-based-gesture-recognition}
Despite the importance of visual sensors for recording ground truth, video data of eating occasions is rarely considered as the basis for automatic detection of meal microstructure.
This is surprising, as the visual modality contains a broad range of information about intake behavior.
In fact, in 2004, one of the earliest works in this field considered surveillance type video recorded in a nursing home to detect intake gestures \cite{gao2004dining}.
This approach relied on optical flow-based motion features, which were used to train a Hidden Markov Model.
A further approach used object detection of face, mouth, and eating utensils which was realised with haar-like appearance features \cite{okamoto2016grillcam}.
We also see skeleton-based approaches with additional depth information \cite{hondori2012monitoring}, \cite{tham2014automatic}.
Deep learning, which is the state of the art for video action recognition, has not been explored to the best of our knowledge.
\subsection{Video action recognition}
\label{sec:related:sub:video-action-recognition}
The task of action recognition from video extends 2D image input by the dimension of time.
While temporal context can carry useful information, it also complicates the search for good feature representations given the typically much larger dimensionality of the raw data.
Before the proliferation of deep learning, approaches in video action recognition would follow the traditional paradigm of pattern recognition:
Computing complex hand-crafted features from raw video frames, based on which shallow classifiers could be learned.
Such features were either video-level aggregation of local spatio-temporal features such as HOG3D \cite{klaser2008spatio}, or point trajectories of dense points computed, e.g., using optical flow \cite{wang2011action}.
The following four deep learning architectures emerged from the literature on video action recognition, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:architectures}:
\subsubsection{3D CNN -- Spatio-temporal convolutions}
The 3D CNN approach features 3D convolutions instead of the 2D convolutions found in 2D CNNs.
Videos are treated as spatio-temporal volumes, where the third dimension represents temporal context.
3D CNNs can thus automatically learn low-level features that take into account both spatial and temporal information.
This approach was first proposed in 2010 by Ji et al. \cite{ji20133d}, who integrated 3D convolutions with handcrafted features.
Running experiments with end-to-end training on larger datasets, Karpathy et al. \cite{karpathy2014large} reported that it works best to slowly fuse the temporal information throughout the network.
However, they found that temporal context only improves model accuracy for some classes such as juggling; furthermore, it reduced accuracy for some classes \cite{karpathy2014large}.
Other experiments regarding architecture choices concluded that 3D CNN can model appearance and motion simultaneously \cite{tran2015learning}.
\subsubsection{CNN-LSTM -- Incorporating recurrent neural networks}
In the CNN-LSTM approach, the temporal context is modelled by a recurrent neural network (RNN).
RNNs are DNNs that take the previous model state as an additional input.
In 2015, Donahue et al. \cite{donahue2015long} proposed to use the sequence of high-level spatial features learned by a CNN from individual video frames as input into a long short-term memory (LSTM) RNN.
Such LSTM networks are known to be easier to train for longer sequences \cite{hochreiter1997long}.
The CNN-LSTM model has the advantage of being more flexible with regards to the number of input frames, but has relatively many parameters and appears to be more data hungry in comparison to other approaches \cite{carreira2017quo}.
\subsubsection{Two-Stream -- Decoupling appearance and motion}
In 2014, Simonyan and Zisserman \cite{simonyan2014two} observed that 2D CNN models without temporal context achieved accuracy close to the 3D CNN approach \cite{karpathy2014large}, and that state-of-the-art accuracies involved handcrafted trajectory-based representations based on motion features.
They proposed the two-stream architecture, which decouples appearance and motion by using a single still frame (appearance) and temporal context in form of stacked optical flow (motion).
Both are fed into separate CNNs, where the appearance CNN is pre-trained on the large ImageNet database.
While the original design employed score-level fusion \cite{simonyan2014two}, later variants used feature-level fusion of the last CNN layers \cite{feichtenhofer2016convolutional}.
\subsubsection{SlowFast -- Joint learning at different temporal resolutions}
The SlowFast architecture proposed by Feichtenhofer et al. \cite{feichtenhofer2018slowfast} in late 2018 learns from temporal context at multiple temporal resolutions.
As of mid 2019, it represents the state of the art in video action recognition with 79\% accuracy on the large Kinetics dataset without any pre-training.
The idea of decoupling slow and fast motion is integrated into the network design.
Two pathways make up the SlowFast architecture, consisting of a 3D CNN each: The \textit{slow} pathway has more capacity to learn about appearance than motion, while the \textit{fast} pathway works the other way around.
This is realized by setting a factor $\alpha$ as the difference in sequence downsampling, and a factor $\beta$ as the difference in learned channels.
A number of lateral connections allow that information from both pathways is fused.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.95\columnwidth]{figures/stages}
\caption{Illustration of sample outputs at the two stages. In Stage I, the model estimates the probability $p_{intake}$ for a target frame. For models with temporal context, input consists of multiple frames (16 in our experiments), of which the last frame is the target. In Stage II, detections of intake events are realized using a local maximum search on the $p_t$-thresholded series of probabilities, where the detections have to be at least $d$ apart (in our experiments, $d = 2s$).}
\label{fig:stages}
\end{figure}
\section{Proposed Method}
\label{sec:method}
Detecting individual intake gestures from video requires prediction of sparse points in time.
We adopt the approach of Kyritsis et al. \cite{kyritsis2019modeling} and split this problem into two stages, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:stages}:
\begin{description}
\item[Stage I:] \textbf{Estimation of state probability at the frame level}, i.e., estimating the probability $p_{intake}$ for each frame, and
\item[Stage II:] \textbf{Detection of intake gestures}, by selecting sparse points in time based on the estimated probabilities.
\end{description}
\makeatletter
\newcommand{\thickhline}{%
\noalign {\ifnum 0=`}\fi \hrule height 1pt
\futurelet \reserved@a \@xhline
}
\newcolumntype{"}{@{\hskip\tabcolsep\vrule width 1pt\hskip\tabcolsep}}
\makeatother
\newcommand{\slow}[1]{\textcolor{orange}{#1}}
\newcommand{\fast}[1]{\textcolor{cyan}{#1}}
\newcommand{\frme}[1]{\textcolor{red}{#1}}
\newcommand{\flow}[1]{\textcolor{blue}{#1}}
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{\textbf{Small model instantiations}. We report temporal, spatial, and channel dim. of convolution kernels as $\{T\times S^2$, $C\}$, temporal and spatial dim. of pooling ops. as $\{T \times S^2\}$, and stride sizes likewise. Corresponding output sizes are reported as $\{T\times S^2\times C\}$.}
\label{tab:small}
\setlength{\extrarowheight}{2pt}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{ p{.7cm} " p{.6cm} | p{1.2cm} " p{1.1cm} | p{1.6cm} " p{.6cm} | p{1.8cm} " p{.6cm} | p{1.2cm} " p{1.7cm} | p{1.6cm} }
& \multicolumn{2}{c"}{0a) 2D CNN\tnote{a}} & \multicolumn{2}{c"}{1a) 3D CNN} & \multicolumn{2}{c"}{2a) CNN-LSTM} & \multicolumn{2}{c"}{3a) Two-Stream\tnote{a}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{4a) SlowFast\tnote{b}} \\
Layer & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{\frme{frame}\\\flow{flow}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \parbox[t]{1.3cm}{\frme{frame}\\\flow{flows}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{slow}\\\fast{fast}} \\ [.3cm]
\thickhline
data & & \parbox[t]{1.3cm}{$128^2\times\frme{3}|\flow{2}$} & & $16\times128^2\times3$ & & $16\times128^2\times3$ & & \parbox[t]{1.3cm}{\frme{$128^2\times3$}\\\flow{$128^2\times32$}} & & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times128^2\times3$}\\\fast{$16\times128^2\times3$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
conv0\tnote{c} & & & & & & & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,3$\\str. $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.3cm}{\frme{$128^2\times3$}\\\flow{$128^2\times3$}} & & \\ [.3cm]
\hline
conv1 & \parbox[t]{.8cm}{$3^2,32$\\str. $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$128^2\times32$} & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$3\times3^2,32$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.7cm}{$16\times128^2\times32$} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,32$\\str. $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{2cm}{$16\times128^2\times32$} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,32$\\str. $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.3cm}{\frme{$128^2\times32$}\\\flow{$128^2\times32$}} & \parbox[t]{2cm}{$\slow{1}|\fast{3}\times3^2,\slow{32}|\fast{8}$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times128^2\times32$}\\\fast{$16\times128^2\times8$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
pool1 & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $64^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{1.1cm}{$2\times2^2$\\str. $2\times2^2$} & $8\times64^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $16\times64^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$64^2\times32$}\\\flow{$64^2\times32$}} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{$1\times2^2$\\str. $1\times2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times64^2\times32$}\\\fast{$16\times64^2\times8$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
conv2 & \parbox[t]{.8cm}{$3^2,32$\\str. $1^2$} & $64^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$3\times3^2,32$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & $8\times64^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,32$\\str. $1^2$} & $16\times64^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,32$\\str. $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$64^2\times32$}\\\flow{$64^2\times32$}} & \parbox[t]{2cm}{$\slow{1}|\fast{3}\times3^2,\slow{32}|\fast{8}$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times64^2\times32$}\\\fast{$16\times64^2\times8$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
pool2 & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $32^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{1.1cm}{$2\times2^2$\\str. $2\times2^2$} & $4\times32^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $16\times32^2\times32$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$32^2\times32$}\\\flow{$32^2\times32$}} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{$1\times2^2$\\str. $1\times2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times32^2\times32$}\\\fast{$16\times32^2\times8$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
conv3 & \parbox[t]{.8cm}{$3^2,64$\\str. $1^2$} & $32^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$3\times3^2,64$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & $4\times32^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,64$\\str. $1^2$} & $16\times32^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,64$\\str. $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$32^2\times64$}\\\flow{$32^2\times64$}} & \parbox[t]{2cm}{$\slow{1}|\fast{3}\times3^2,\slow{64}|\fast{16}$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times32^2\times64$}\\\fast{$16\times32^2\times16$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
pool3 & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $16^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1.1cm}{$2\times2^2$\\str. $2\times2^2$} & $2\times16^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $16\times16^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$16^2\times64$}\\\flow{$16^2\times64$}} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{$1\times2^2$\\str. $1\times2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times16^2\times64$}\\\fast{$16\times16^2\times16$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
conv4 & \parbox[t]{.8cm}{$3^2,64$\\str. $1^2$} & $16^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$3\times3^2,64$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & $2\times16^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,64$\\str. $1^2$} & $16\times16^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,64$\\str. $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$16^2\times64$}\\\flow{$16^2\times64$}} & \parbox[t]{2cm}{$\slow{1}|\fast{3}\times3^2,\slow{64}|\fast{16}$\\str. $1\times1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times16^2\times64$}\\\fast{$16\times16^2\times16$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
pool4 & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $8^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{1.1cm}{$2\times2^2$\\str. $2\times2^2$} & $1\times8^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & $16\times8^2\times64$ & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$2^2$\\str. $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$8^2\times64$}\\\flow{$8^2\times64$}} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{$1\times2^2$\\str. $1\times2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$4\times8^2\times64$}\\\fast{$16\times8^2\times16$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
fusion & & & & & & & & $8^2\times64$ & & $8^2\times64$ \\
\hline
flatten & & $4096$ & & $4096$ & & $16\times4096$ & & $4096$ & & $4096$ \\
\hline
dense & & $1024$ & & $1024$ & & $16\times1024$ & & $1024$ & & $1024$ \\
\hline
lstm & & & & & & $16\times128$ & & & & \\
\hline
dense & & $2$ & & $2$ & & $16\times 2$ & & $2$ & & $2$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[a] For 2D CNN and Two-Stream, colors \frme{red} and \flow{blue} highlight how dimensions differ between \frme{frames} and \flow{flows}.
\item[b] For SlowFast, colors $\slow{\text{orange}}|\fast{\text{cyan}}$ highlight the differences in model parameters and dimensions between the \slow{slow} and \fast{fast} pathways.
\item[c] Only for flow input; Serves the purpose of producing 3 channels for transfer learning.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{\textbf{ResNet-50 model instantiations}. We report temporal, spatial, and channel dim. of conv. kernels as $\{T\times S^2$, $C\}$, temporal and spatial dim. of pooling ops. as $\{T \times S^2\}$, and stride sizes likewise. The corresponding output sizes are reported as $\{T\times S^2\times C\}$.
\label{tab:resnet}
\setlength{\extrarowheight}{3pt}
\newcommand{\negthickspace}{\negthickspace}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{ p{.7cm} " p{.9cm} | p{.7cm} " p{1.4cm} | p{1.1cm} " p{.9cm} | p{1.2cm} " p{.9cm} | p{1.3cm} " p{1.9cm} | p{1.8cm} }
Layer & \multicolumn{2}{c"}{0b) 2D CNN\tnote{a}} & \multicolumn{2}{c"}{1b) 3D CNN} & \multicolumn{2}{c"}{2b) CNN-LSTM} & \multicolumn{2}{c"}{3b) Two-Stream\tnote{a}} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{4b) SlowFast\tnote{b}} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{\frme{frame}\\\flow{flow}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{\frme{frame}\\\flow{flows}} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{\slow{slow}\\\fast{fast}} \\ [.3cm]
\thickhline
data & & \parbox[t]{.6cm}{$224^2$\\$\times\frme{3}|\flow{2}$} & & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times128^2$\\$\times3$} & & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times224^2$\\$\times3$} & & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$224^2\times3$}\\\flow{$224^2\times32$}} & & \parbox[t]{2cm}{\slow{$2\times128^2\times3$}\\\fast{$16\times128^2\times3$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
conv0\tnote{c} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2, 3$\\stride $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{.7cm}{$112^2$\\$\times3$} & & & & & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2,3$\\stride $1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$224^2\times3$}\\\flow{$224^2\times3$}} & & \\ [.3cm]
\hline
conv1 & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$7^2,64$\\stride $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{.6cm}{$112^2$\\$\times64$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{$3\times5^2,64$\\stride $1\times1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times128^2$\\$\times64$} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$7^2,64$\\stride $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times112^2$\\$\times64$} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$7^2,64$\\stride $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$112^2\times64$}\\\flow{$112^2\times64$}} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{$\slow{1}|\fast{3}\times5^2,\slow{64}|\fast{8}$\\stride $1\times1^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$2\times128^2\times64$}\\\fast{$16\times128^2\times8$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
pool1 & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2$\\stride $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{.6cm}{$56^2$\\$\times64$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{$3\times3^2$\\stride $2\times2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$8\times64^2$\\$\times64$} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2$\\stride $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times56^2$\\$\times64$} & \parbox[t]{1cm}{$3^2$\\stride $2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$56^2\times64$}\\\flow{$56^2\times64$}} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{$1\times3^2$\\stride $1\times2^2$} & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$2\times64^2\times64$}\\\fast{$16\times64^2\times8$}} \\ [.3cm]
\hline
\parbox[t]{.4cm}{res2.x\\($\times3$)} & $\begin{matrix} 1^2, 64 \\ 3^2, 64 \\ 1^2, 256 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{.6cm}{$56^2$\\$\times256$} & $\begin{matrix} 3\times1^2, 64 \\ 1\times3^2, 64 \\ 1\times1^2, 256 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$8\times64^2$\\$\times256$} & $\begin{matrix} 1^2, 64 \\ 3^2, 64 \\ 1^2, 256 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times56^2$\\$\times256$} & $\begin{matrix} 1^2, 64 \\ 3^2, 64 \\ 1^2, 256 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$56^2\times256$}\\\flow{$56^2\times256$}} & $\begin{matrix} \slow{1}|\fast{3}\times1^2, \slow{64}|\fast{8} \\ 1\times3^2, \slow{64}|\fast{8} \\ 1\times1^2, \slow{256}|\fast{32} \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$2\times64^2\times256$}\\\fast{$16\times64^2\times32$}} \\ [.5cm]
\hline
\parbox[t]{.4cm}{res3.x\\($\times4$)} & $\begin{matrix} 1^2, 128 \\ 3^2, 128 \\ 1^2, 512 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{.6cm}{$28^2$\\$\times512$} & $\begin{matrix} 3\times1^2, 128 \\ 1\times3^2, 128 \\ 1\times1^2, 512 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$4\times32^2$\\$\times512$} & $\begin{matrix} 1^2, 128 \\ 3^2, 128 \\ 1^2, 512 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times28^2$\\$\times512$} & $\begin{matrix} 1^2, 128 \\ 3^2, 128 \\ 1^2, 512 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$28^2\times512$}\\\flow{$28^2\times512$}} & $\begin{matrix} \slow{1}|\fast{3}\times1^2, \slow{128}|\fast{16} \\ 1\times3^2, \slow{128}|\fast{16} \\ 1\times1^2, \slow{512}|\fast{64} \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$2\times32^2\times512$}\\\fast{$16\times32^2\times64$}} \\ [.5cm]
\hline
\parbox[t]{.4cm}{res4.x\\($\times6$)} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 1^2, 256 \\ 3^2, 256 \\ 1^2, 1024 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{.6cm}{$14^2$\\$\times1024$} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 3\times1^2, 256 \\ 1\times3^2, 256 \\ 1\times1^2, 1024 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$2\times16^2$\\$\times1024$} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 1^2, 256 \\ 3^2, 256 \\ 1^2, 1024 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times14^2$\\$\times1024$} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 1^2, 256 \\ 3^2, 256 \\ 1^2, 1024 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$14^2\times1024$}\\\flow{$14^2\times1024$}} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 3\times1^2, \slow{256}|\fast{32} \\ 1\times3^2, \slow{256}|\fast{32} \\ 1\times1^2, \slow{1024}|\fast{128} \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$2\times16^2\times1024$}\\\fast{$16\times16^2\times128$}} \\ [.5cm]
\hline
\parbox[t]{.4cm}{res5.x\\($\times3$)} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 1^2, 512 \\ 3^2, 512 \\ 1^2, 2048 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{.6cm}{$7^2$\\$\times2048$} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 3\times1^2, 512 \\ 1\times3^2, 512 \\ 1\times1^2, 2048 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$1\times8^2$\\$\times2048$} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 1^2, 512 \\ 3^2, 512 \\ 1^2, 2048 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.2cm}{$16\times7^2$\\$\times2048$} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 1^2, 512 \\ 3^2, 512 \\ 1^2, 2048 \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.5cm}{\frme{$7^2\times2048$}\\\flow{$7^2\times2048$}} & $\negthickspace\begin{matrix} 3\times1^2, \slow{512}|\fast{64} \\ 1\times3^2, \slow{512}|\fast{64} \\ 1\times1^2, \slow{2048}|\fast{256} \end{matrix}$ & \parbox[t]{1.8cm}{\slow{$2\times8^2\times2048$}\\\fast{$16\times8^2\times256$}} \\ [.5cm]
\hline
fusion & & & & & & & & $7^2\times2048$ & & $1\times1^2\times2560$ \\
\hline
\parbox[t]{.6cm}{spatial\\pool} & & $1^2\times2048$ & & $1\times1^2\times2048$ & & $16\times1^2\times2048$ & & $1^2\times2048$ & & \\
\hline
flatten & & $2048$ & & $2048$ & & $16\times2048$ & & $2048$ & & $2560$ \\
\hline
lstm & & & & & & $16\times128$ & & & & \\
\hline
dense & & $2$ & & $2$ & & $16\times 2$ & & $2$ & & $2$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[a] For 2D CNN and Two-Stream, colors \frme{red} and \flow{blue} highlight how dimensions differ between \frme{frames} and \flow{flows}.
\item[b] For SlowFast, colors $\slow{\text{orange}}|\fast{\text{cyan}}$ highlight the differences in model parameters and dimensions between the \slow{slow} and \fast{fast} pathways.
\item[c] Only for flow input; Serves the purpose of producing 3 channels for transfer learning.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Stage I: Models for frame-level probability estimation}
\label{sec:method:sub:models}
In Stage I, our models estimate $p_{intake}$, which is the probability that the label of the target frame is ``intake''.
The four models identified from the literature on video action recognition represent our main models (3D CNN, CNN-LSTM, Two-Stream, SlowFast; see Fig. \ref{fig:architectures}).
In addition to the target frame, each of these four models considers a temporal context of further frames preceding the target frame.
As a baseline and for experiments, we additionally employ a 2D CNN.
Because the 2D CNN does not have a temporal context, this enables us to (1) discern to what extent the temporal context improves model performance and (2) directly compare the importance of appearance and motion features.
For each model, we propose a small instantiation with relatively few parameters, and a larger instantiation using ResNet-50 \cite{he2016deep} as backbone.
In the following, we present each of the proposed models adapted for food intake gesture detection (see Tables \ref{tab:small} and \ref{tab:resnet} for details).
Source code for all models is available at \url{https://github.com/prouast/deep-intake-detection}.
\setcounter{subsubsection}{-1}
\subsubsection{2D CNN}
\label{subsec:2d-cnn}
The 2D CNN functions as a baseline for our study, indicating what is possible without temporal context.
This allows us to discern the importance of the temporal context for intake gesture detection.
Further, the 2D CNN also allows us to directly compare a model based solely on motion to one solely based on visual appearance.
This assessment is not possible for the other four models.
Motion information can be of importance for classes with fast movement such as juggling \cite{karpathy2014large}.
For detection of intake gestures, it seems intuitive that appearance may be the more important modality, which is what we are seeking to confirm here.
For appearance input is \textit{the single target frame}, and for motion \textit{the optical flow between the target frame and the frame directly preceding it}.
We use Dual TV-L$^1$ optical flow \cite{zach2007duality}, which produces two channels of optical flow corresponding to the horizontal and vertical components, as opposed to three RGB channels for frames.
\setlist[description]{font=\normalfont\itshape\space}
\begin{description}
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}a) Small instantiation] A five-layer CNN of the architecture type popularised by AlexNet \cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet}.
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}b) ResNet-50 instantiation] We adopt the architecture given by \cite{he2016deep}, which allows us to use pre-trained models.
\end{description}
\subsubsection{3D CNN}
\label{subsec:3d-cnn}
This model has the ability to learn spatio-temporal features.
We extend the 2D CNN introduced in the previous section by using 3D instead of 2D convolutions.
The third dimension corresponds to the temporal context.
We use temporal pooling following the slow fusion approach \cite{karpathy2014large}.
\begin{description}
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}a) Small instantiation] Extending the small 2D CNN to 3D, we use temporal convolution kernels of size 3 as recommended by \cite{tran2015learning}; temporal pooling is realized in the max pooling layers.
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}b) ResNet-50 instantiation] We extend ResNet-50 \cite{he2016deep} to 3D, but modify the dimensions to fit our input, since we do not use transfer learning for the 3D CNN. Within each block, the first convolutional layer has a temporal kernel size of 3, a choice adopted from \cite{feichtenhofer2018slowfast}. Temporal fusion is facilitated by using temporal stride 2 in the second convolutional layer of the first block in each block layer.
\end{description}
\subsubsection{CNN-LSTM}
\label{subsec:cnn-lstm}
The CNN-LSTM adds an LSTM layer to model a sequence of high-level features learned from raw frames.
Note that this does not allow the model to learn low-level spatio-temporal features (as opposed to 3D CNN).
Given the clear temporal structure of intake gestures (movement towards the mouth and back), it does however seem intuitive that knowledge of the development of high-level features from temporal context could help predict the current frame.
\begin{description}
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}a) Small instantiation] We use the features from the first dense layer of the small 2D CNN described previously as input into one LSTM layer with 128 units.
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}b) ResNet-50 instantiation] The spatially pooled output of a ResNet-50's \cite{he2016deep} last block is used as input into one LSTM layer with 128 units.
\end{description}
\subsubsection{Two-Stream}
\label{subsec:two-stream}
For our instantiations of the Two-Stream approach, we follow the original work by Simonyan and Zisserman \cite{simonyan2014two} to select the model input:
The appearance stream takes the target frame as input;
meanwhile, the motion stream is based on the stacked horizontal and vertical components of optical flow calculated using Dual TV-L$^1$ from pairs of consecutive frames in the temporal context.
\begin{description}
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}a) Small instantiation] Motion and appearance stream both follow the small 2D CNN architecture; after the last pooling layer, the streams are pooled using spatially aligned conv fusion as proposed by \cite{feichtenhofer2016convolutional}.
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}b) ResNet-50 instantiation] Motion and appearance stream both follow the ResNet-50 \cite{he2016deep} architecture; after the last block layer, the streams are pooled using spatially aligned conv fusion \cite{feichtenhofer2016convolutional}.
\end{description}
\subsubsection{SlowFast}
\label{subsec:slowfast}
The SlowFast model processes the temporal context at two different temporal resolutions.
Since our dataset has fewer frames than in the original work \cite{feichtenhofer2018slowfast}, we choose the factors $\alpha=4$ and $\beta=0.25$ for our SlowFast instantiations.
\begin{description}
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}a) Small instantiation] Both pathways are based on the small 2D CNN; we extend the convolutional layers to 3D and set the temporal kernel size to $1$ for the slow pathway and to $3$ for the fast pathway. Following \cite{feichtenhofer2018slowfast}, we choose time-strided convolutions of kernel size $3\times1^2$ for a lateral connection after each of the four convolutional layers. Fusion consists of temporal average pooling and spatially aligned 2D conv fusion \cite{feichtenhofer2016convolutional}.
\item[\arabic{subsubsection}b) ResNet-50 instantiation] We directly follow \cite{feichtenhofer2018slowfast} who themselves used ResNet-50 as backbone for SlowFast, only using the same dimension tweaks as in our ResNet-50 2D CNN. Fusion consists of global average pooling and concatenation.
\end{description}
\subsection{Loss calculation}
\label{sec:method:sub:loss}
We use cross-entropy loss for all our models.
At evaluation time, we only consider the target frame for prediction, which corresponds to the last frame of the input (see Fig. \ref{fig:stages}).
The same applies to loss calculation during training for all models except CNN-LSTM:
Following \cite{carreira2017quo}, we train the CNN-LSTM using the labels of all input frames, but evaluate only using the label of the target frame.
Due to the nature of our data, the classes are very imbalanced with many more ``non-intake'' frames than ``intake'' frames.
When computing mini-batch loss, we correct for this imbalance by using weights calculated as
\renewcommand{\vec}[1]{\mathbf{#1}}
\begin{equation}
w_i = \frac{m}{C(i)*n}
\end{equation}
to scale the loss for the $m$ labels $\vec{y}=\{y_1, ..., y_m\}$ in each minibatch, where $n$ is the number of classes and $C(i)$ is the number of elements of $\vec{y}$ which equal $y_i$.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\textwidth]{figures/recording}
\caption{Recording of one session. The spherical video is remapped to equirectangular representation, cropped, and reshaped to square shape.}
\label{fig:recording}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\caption{Summary statistics for our dataset and the training/validation/test split.}
\label{tab:oreba-summary}
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c c | c c c | c c c | c c c }
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Training} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Validation} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Test} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Total} \\
Type & \# & Mean [s] & Std [s] & \# & Mean [s] & Std [s] & \# & Mean [s] & Std [s] & \# & Mean [s] & Std [s] \\
\thickhline
Participants & 62 & 802.25 & 243.31 & 20 & 785.97 & 243.74 & 20 & 891.00 & 222.27 & 102 & 816.46 & 240.07 \\
Intake Gestures & 2924 & 2.35 & 1.03 & 952 & 2.28 & 1.00 & 997 & 2.29 & 1.01 & 4891 & 2.32 & 1.02 \\
\hline
\thickhline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Stage II: Detecting intake gestures}
\label{sec:method:sub:detect}
We follow a maximum search approach \cite{kyritsis2019modeling} to determine the sparse individual intake gesture times.
Based on estimated frame-level probabilities $\vec{p}$, we first derive $\vec{p'}$ by setting all probabilities below a threshold $p_t$ to zero.
This leaves all frames $\{f:p_{intake,f} \geq p_t\}$ as candidates for detections, as seen at the bottom of Fig. \ref{fig:stages}.
Subsequently, we perform a search for local maxima in $\vec{p'}$ with a minimum distance $d$ between maxima.
The intake gesture times are then inferred from the indices of the maxima.
\section{Dataset}
\label{sec:dataset}
We are not aware of any publicly available dataset including labeled video data of intake gestures.
Related studies that involved collection of video data as ground truth typically do not make the video data available, and instead focus on the inertial \cite{kyritsis2019modeling} and audio sensor data \cite{merck2016multimodality}.
For this research, we collected and labeled video data of 102 participants consuming a standardized meal of lasagna, bread, yogurt, and water in a group setting (ethics approval H-2017-0208).
The data was collected in sessions of four participants at a time seated around a round table in a closed room without outside interference.
Participants were invited to consume their meal in a natural way\footnote{After the meal, 64 of the 102 participants (63\%) responded to the statement ``The presence of the video camera changed my eating behavior'' (5-point Likert scale, ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree). With an average score of 2.11, we conclude that participants did not feel that the presence of the camera considerably affected their eating behavior.} and encouraged to have a conversation in the process.
A 360fly-4K camera was placed in the center of the table, recording all four participants simultaneously.
As illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:recording}, raw spherical video was first remapped to equirectangular representation.
We then cropped out a separate video for each individual participant such that the dimensions include typical intake gestures.
Each video was trimmed in time to only include the duration of the meal, and spatially scaled to a square shape.
Two independent annotators labeled and cross-checked the intake gestures in all 102 videos as durations using ChronoViz\footnote{See \url{http://chronoviz.com}.}.
Each gesture is assigned as start timestamp the point where the final uninterrupted movement towards the mouth starts; as end timestamp, it is assigned the point when the participant has finished returning their hand(s) from the movement or started a different action.
Based on the start and end timestamps, we derive a label for each video frame according to the following procedure:
If a video frame was taken between start and end of an annotated gesture, it is assigned the label ``intake''.
If a video frame is taken outside of any annotated gestures, it is assigned the label ``non-intake''.
The dataset is available from the authors on request.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
\newcommand\tp{\mathit{TP}}
\newcommand\fn{\mathit{FN}}
\newcommand\fp{\mathit{FP}}
\begin{table*}[t]
\centering
\caption{Results for Stages I and II. Reported values are based on the test set, which was only evaluated once.}
\label{tab:results}
\begin{threeparttable}
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c | c | c c | c c c c c c }
Model & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Features used\tnote{a}} & Temporal & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Stage I} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Stage II\tnote{c}} \\
& Frames & Flows & context\tnote{b} & \#Params & UAR & $p\hat{}_t$ & $\tp$ & $\fp_1$ & $\fp_2$ & $\fn$ & $F_1$ \\
\thickhline
0a) \textcolor{small_2d_cnn_frame}{$\blacksquare$} Small 2D CNN & \checkmark & & \multirow{4}{*}{Without} & 4.26M & 82.63\% & 0.957 & 670 & 39 & 287 & 321 & 0.674 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
0a) \textcolor{small_2d_cnn_flow}{$\blacksquare$} Small 2D CNN & & \checkmark & & 4.26M & 71.76\% & 0.793 & 662 & 45 & 1023 & 329 & 0.487 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
0b) \textcolor{resnet_2d_cnn_frame}{$\blacksquare$} ResNet-50 2D CNN & \checkmark & & & 23.5M & 86.39\% & 0.964 & 829 & 54 & 211 & 162 & 0.795 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
0b) \textcolor{resnet_2d_cnn_flow}{$\blacksquare$} ResNet-50 2D CNN & & \checkmark & & 23.5M & 71.34\% & 0.865 & 661 & 53 & 1163 & 330 & 0.461 \\
\thickhline
1a) \textcolor{small_3d_cnn}{$\blacksquare$} Small 3D CNN & \checkmark & & \multirow{8}{*}{With} & 4.39M & 87.54\% & 0.997 & 795 & 37 & 169 & 196 & 0.798 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
2a) \textcolor{small_cnn_lstm}{$\blacksquare$} Small CNN-LSTM & \checkmark & & & 4.85M & 83.36\% & 0.983 & 674 & 17 & 104 & 317 & 0.755 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
3a) \textcolor{small_two_stream}{$\blacksquare$} Small Two-Stream & \checkmark & \checkmark & & 4.34M & 81.96\% & 0.973 & 653 & 36 & 185 & 338 & 0.700 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
4a) \textcolor{small_slowfast}{$\blacksquare$} Small SlowFast & \checkmark & & & 4.49M & 88.71\% & 0.996 & 754 & 31 & 103 & 237 & 0.803 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
1b) \textcolor{resnet_3d_cnn}{$\blacksquare$} ResNet-50 3D CNN & \checkmark & & & 32.2M & 88.77\% & 0.992 & 775 & 25 & 54 & 216 & 0.840 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
2b) \textcolor{resnet_cnn_lstm}{$\blacksquare$} ResNet-50 CNN-LSTM & \checkmark & & & 24.6M & 89.74\% & 0.996 & 791 & 29 & 38 & 200 & 0.856 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
3b) \textcolor{resnet_two_stream}{$\blacksquare$} ResNet-50 Two-Stream\hspace{2mm} & \checkmark & \checkmark & & 47.0M & 85.25\% & 0.997 & 806 & 49 & 82 & 185 & 0.836 \\
\cline{1-3} \cline{5-12}
4b) \textcolor{resnet_slowfast}{$\blacksquare$} ResNet-50 SlowFast & \checkmark & & & 36.7M & 89.01\% & 0.987 & 824 & 23 & 83 & 167 & 0.858 \\
\thickhline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tablenotes}
\item[a] Frame (appearance) features are \textit{raw frames}; Flow (motion) features are \textit{optical flow computed between adjacent frames}.
\item[b] Temporal context consists of 16 frames, the last of which is the target frame.
\item[c] Downsampling to 8 fps causes temporally close events to merge, hence total number of intake gestures in the test set is 991.
\end{tablenotes}
\end{threeparttable}
\end{table*}
We use a global split of our dataset into 62 participants for training, 20 participants for validation, and 20 participants for test as summarized in Table \ref{tab:oreba-summary}.
To reduce computational burden, we downsample the video from 24 fps to 8 fps, and resize to dimensions 140x140 (128x128 after augmentation).
\subsection{Stage I: Estimating frame-level intake probability}
\label{subsec:classification}
We apply the models introduced in Section \ref{sec:method} to classify frames according to the two labels ``intake'' and ``non-intake''.
For our experiments, we distinguish between models without and with temporal context:
\begin{itemize}
\item Models \textit{without} temporal context (0a-0b) are of interest as a baseline, and to experimentally compare appearance and motion features. For appearance, input is the \textit{single target frame}, and for motion, \textit{optical flow between the target frame and the one preceding it}.
\item For the models \textit{with} temporal context (1a-4b), input consists of 16 frames, which corresponds to 2 seconds at 8 fps. The last of these frames is the prediction target. To take maximum advantage of the available training data, we generate input using a window shifting by one frame. The use of temporal context implies that the first 15 labels are not predicted.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Training}
We use the Adam optimizer to train each model on the training set.
Training runs for 60 epochs with a learning rate starting at 3e-4 and exponentially decaying at a rate of 0.9 per epoch.
Models without temporal context are trained using batch size 64, while models with temporal context are trained using batch size 8.\footnote{Batch sizes were chosen considering space constraints training on NVIDIA Tesla V100 at fp32 accuracy, and to be consistent across models.}
Using the validation set, we keep track of the best models in terms of unweighted average recall (UAR), which is not biased by class imbalance.
For regularization, we use l2 loss with a lambda of 1e-4.
Dropout is used in all small instantiations of our models on convolutional and dense layers with rate 0.5, but we do not use dropout for the ResNet-50 instantiations.
We also use data augmentation by dynamically applying random transformations: Small rotations, cropping to size 128x128, horizontal flipping, brightness and contrast changes.
All models are learned end-to-end, optical flow is precomputed using Dual TV-L$^1$ \cite{zach2007duality}.
\subsubsection{Transfer learning and warmstarting for better initial parameters}
While the initial small 2D CNN is trained from scratch, we use it to warmstart the convolutional layers of both the small CNN-LSTM and the small Two-Stream model.
The ResNet-50 2D CNN is initialized using an off-the-shelf ResNet-50 trained on the ImageNet database.
To fit ImageNet dimensions, we resize our inputs for this model to 224x224, as listed in Table \ref{tab:resnet}.
We use the ResNet-50 2D CNN to warmstart the convolutional layers of both the ResNet-50 CNN-LSTM and the ResNet-50 Two-Stream model.
All 3D-CNN and SlowFast models are trained from scratch.
\subsection{Stage II: Detecting intake gestures}
\label{subsec:gestures}
For the detection of intake gestures, we build on the exported frame-level probabilities using the models trained in Stage I.
We then apply the approach described in Section \ref{sec:method:sub:detect} to determine sparse detections.
\subsubsection{Evaluation scheme}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\columnwidth]{figures/scheme}
\caption{The evaluation scheme proposed by Kyritsis et al. \cite{kyritsis2019modeling}. (1) A true positive is the first detection within each ground truth event; (2) False positives of type 1 are further detections within the same ground truth event; (3) False positives of type 2 are detections outside ground truth events; (4) False negatives are non-detected ground truth events.}
\label{fig:scheme}
\end{figure}
We use the evaluation scheme proposed by Kyritsis et al. \cite{kyritsis2019modeling} as seen in Fig. \ref{fig:scheme}.
According to the scheme, one correct detection per ground truth event counts as a true positive ($\tp$), while further detections within the same ground truth event are false positives of type 1 ($\fp_1$).
Detections outside ground truth events are false positives of type 2 ($\fp_2$), and non-detected ground truth events count as false negatives ($\fn$).
Based on the aggregate counts, we calculate precision ($\frac{\tp}{\tp+\fp_1+\fp_2}$), recall ($\frac{\tp}{\tp+\fn}$), and the $F_1$ score ($2*\frac{\mathit{Precision}*\mathit{Recall}}{\mathit{Precision}+\mathit{Recall}}$).
\subsubsection{Parameter setting}
The approach described in Section \ref{sec:method:sub:detect} requires setting two hyperparameters: The minimum distance between detections $d$, and the threshold $p_t$.
We follow Kyritsis et al. \cite{kyritsis2019modeling} and set $d=2s$, which approximates the mean duration of intake gestures, see Table \ref{tab:oreba-summary}.
Since we only run one final evaluation of each model on the test set, we use the validation set to approximate a good threshold $p_t$.
Hence, for each model, we run a grid search between $0.5$ and $1$ on the validation set using a step size of $0.001$ and choose the threshold that maximizes $F_1$.
Table \ref{tab:results} lists the final $\vec{p\hat{}_t}$.
\subsection{Results}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.45\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/box_features_f1}
\caption{Features used}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.27\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/box_temp_f1}
\caption{Temporal context}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.27\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/box_depth_f1}
\caption{Model depth}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Comparing model performance in terms of $F_1$ scores. It is apparent that (a) models using frames as features perform better than models using optical flow, (b) models with temporal context tend to perform better than models without, and (c) larger (deeper) models tend to perform better. Models are color-coded according to Table \ref{tab:results}.}
\label{fig:scatter}
\end{figure}
The best result is achieved by the state-of-the-art ResNet-50 SlowFast network with an $F_1$ score of $0.858$.
In general, we find that model accuracy is impacted by three factors of model choice, namely (i) frame or flow features, (ii) with or without temporal context, and (iii) model depth.
Fig. \ref{fig:scatter} illustrates this by plotting the $F_1$ values grouped by each of these factors.
\subsubsection{Frame and flow features, Fig. \ref{fig:scatter} (a)}
Using the 2D CNN, we are able to directly compare how frame (appearance) and flow (motion) features affect model performance.
For the small and ResNet instantiations, frame features lead to a relative $F_1$ improvement of 38\% and 72\% over flow features.
An improvement is also measurable for UAR.
Further, the Two-Stream models, which mainly rely on flow features, perform worse than the other models with temporal context.
We can conclude that for detection of intake gestures, more information is carried by visual appearance than by motion.
\subsubsection{Temporal context, Fig. \ref{fig:scatter} (b)}
To assess the usefulness of temporal context, we compare the accuracies of our models with and without temporal context.
The straightforward extension of Small 2D CNN to Small 3D CNN adds a 17\% relative $F_1$ improvement.
Comparing the best models with (ResNet-50 SlowFast) and without temporal context (ResNet-50 2D CNN), we find a relative $F_1$ improvement of 8\%.
We conclude that temporal context considerably improves model accuracy.
Considering model choice, we observe that the Small 3D CNN is superior to its CNN-LSTM counterpart, however the opposite is true for the ResNet-50 instantiations.
This may be due to the fact that for the ResNet instantiations, the CNN-LSTM is pre-trained on ImageNet, while the 3D CNN is not.
We conclude that the 3D CNN could be useful for slim models (e.g., for mobile devices), but for larger models, all architectures with temporal context should be considered.
\subsubsection{Model depth, Fig. \ref{fig:scatter} (c)}
We also see that the deeper ResNet-50 instantiations achieve higher $F_1$ scores than the small ones for all combinations except the flow-based 2D CNN.
Note that the improvement due to model depth is especially noticeable in the $F_1$ score, and less so in UAR.
\subsection{Why do frame features perform better?}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.384\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/aligned_2d_cnn_flow}
\caption{2D CNN (flow)}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.308\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/aligned_2d_cnn_frame}
\caption{2D CNN (frame)}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.308\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/aligned_3d_cnn}
\caption{3D CNN}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}{.384\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/aligned_cnn_lstm}
\caption{CNN-LSTM}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.308\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/aligned_two_stream}
\caption{Two-Stream}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.308\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/aligned_slowfast}
\caption{SlowFast}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Aggregating $p_{intake}$ by model for all ground truth events in the validation set. Predictions have been aligned in time and linearly interpolated. We plot the median and $[q_{25},q_{75}]$ interval for small and ResNet-50 instantiations respectively. Models are color-coded according to Table \ref{tab:results}.}
\label{fig:aligned}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1010_2/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{31}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=31, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=small_2d_cnn_flow, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_2d_cnn_flow.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1010_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=small_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1010_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_2d_cnn_flow, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_2d_cnn_flow.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1010_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1010_2/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{30}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1010_2/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Cutting lasagne}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1015_1/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\fill[red, opacity=.5] (1.192,0) rectangle (1.912,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{51}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=51, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=small_2d_cnn_flow, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_2d_cnn_flow.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1015_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=small_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1015_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_2d_cnn_flow, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_2d_cnn_flow.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1015_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures//1015_1/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{50}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1015_1/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Preparing intake}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}{\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/legend_frame_flow}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Example situations showing uncertainty of flow (motion) models compared to frame (appearance) models. Play-on-click in Adobe Acrobat Reader.}
\label{fig:example-1}
\end{figure}
To help explain why frames perform better as features for this task, we took a closer look at some example model predictions from the validation set.
It appears that flows are in general useful as features; however, the data shows that in comparison to frame models, flow models are less certain about their predictions.
For example, Fig. \ref{fig:example-1} (a) shows how during periods with no intake gestures, small movements such as using cutlery can cause higher uncertainty in flow models.
On the other hand, Fig. \ref{fig:example-1} (b) shows how flow models are also overall less confident when correctly identifying intake gestures.
This can also be observed by looking at aggregated predictions for all events in Fig. \ref{fig:aligned}: Models based solely on flows (a) are less certain about predictions, while their predictions also contain more variance than models based on frames (b).
Further, this is also reflected in the lower thresholds required to trigger a detection for flow models, as is evident from Table \ref{tab:results}.
These lower thresholds and uncertainty are linked to the large number of false positives of these models.
\subsection{Why do models with temporal context perform better?}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1020_2/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] (p) at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\fill[red, opacity=.5] (0.76,0) rectangle (1.75,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{41}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=41, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=small_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1020_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1020_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=small_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1020_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1020_2/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{40}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1020_2/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Raised fork}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1075_1/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{31}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=31, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=small_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1075_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_2d_cnn_frame, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_2d_cnn_frame.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1075_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=small_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.oreba_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1075_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1075_1/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{30}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1075_1/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Blowing nose}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}{\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/legend_frame_sequence}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Example situations where models with temporal context are superior to models without temporal context. Play-on-click in Adobe Acrobat Reader.}
\label{fig:example-2}
\end{figure}
Our results show that while models based on single frames perform reasonably well, there is measurable improvement when adding temporal context.
Hence, we also looked at this comparison for example model predictions from the validation set to help make the difference easier interpretable.
Indeed, in some cases, it appears intuitive to a human observer how the temporal context is helpful to interpret the target frame.
For example, in Fig. \ref{fig:example-2} (a), the participant keeps the fork raised after completing an intake gesture.
A frame by itself can seem to be part of an intake gesture, while the participant is actually resting this way or is being interrupted.
Without temporal context, the 2D CNN models are unaware of this context, resulting in poor performance.
Availability of temporal context also helps models to become more confident in their predictions.
Further, errors due to outliers are more easily avoidable with temporal context, such as blowing nose in Fig. \ref{fig:example-2} (b).
On the aggregate level, Fig. \ref{fig:aligned} illustrates how predictions by models with temporal context (c)-(f) have a more snug fit with the ground truth events, and less variance in their predictions.
\subsection{Where do the models struggle?}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1004_1/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\fill [red, opacity=.5] (1.12,0) rectangle (1.78,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{31}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=31, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=resnet_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1004_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_cnn_lstm, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_cnn_lstm.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1004_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_slowfast, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_slowfast.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1004_1/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{30}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1004_1/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Eating bread crust}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1060_2/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\fill [red, opacity=.5] (0.9625,0) rectangle (1.8625,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{17}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=17, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=resnet_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1060_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_cnn_lstm, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_cnn_lstm.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1060_2/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_slowfast, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_slowfast.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1060_2/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{16}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1060_2/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Licking finger}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1054_1/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\fill [red, opacity=.5] (0.4705,0) rectangle (2.1647,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{51}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=51, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=resnet_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1054_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_cnn_lstm, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_cnn_lstm.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1054_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_slowfast, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_slowfast.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1054_1/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{50}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1054_1/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Sipping water}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.5\columnwidth}
\centering
\begin{animateinline}[label=myAnim, height=1.8cm, width=4cm, timeline=figures/1112_1/timeline.txt]{8}%
\hspace{1.8cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[text width=.2cm] at (.2,0.9) {\scriptsize $p$};
\draw[color=gray!30] (.4,0) -- (2.2,0) (.4,.45) -- (2.2,.45) (.4,.9) -- (2.2,.9) (.4,1.35) -- (2.2,1.35) (.4,1.8) -- (2.2,1.8);
\end{tikzpicture}
\newframe%
\multiframe{41}{iFrom=0+1,iTo=1+1}{%
\hspace{2.2cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}%
\begin{axis}[scale only axis, height=1.8cm, width=1.8cm, axis lines*=left, ymin=-0.01, ymax=1.01, xmin=1, xmax=41, hide axis]%
\addplot[color=resnet_3d_cnn, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_3d_cnn.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1112_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_cnn_lstm, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_cnn_lstm.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1112_1/data.csv};
\addplot[color=resnet_slowfast, mark=none, line width=.4mm, restrict expr to domain={\coordindex}{\iFrom:\iTo}] table[y="prob.resnet_slowfast.eval", x="seq", col sep=comma]{figures/1112_1/data.csv};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\multiframe{40}{iFrom=1+1}{%
\includegraphics[width=1.8cm,height=1.8cm]{figures/1112_1/video\iFrom}%
\hspace{0.4cm}%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[-, opacity=0] (0,0)--(1.8,0);%
\end{tikzpicture}
}%
\end{animateinline}
\caption{Too hot}
\vspace*{2mm}
\end{subfigure}
~
\begin{subfigure}{\columnwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{figures/legend_frame_error}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Example situations where the best models cause false negatives (a-b) and false positives of type 1 (c) and type 2 (d). Note that a true positive always preceeds false positives of type 1. Play-on-click in Adobe Acrobat Reader.}
\label{fig:example-3}
\end{figure}
Examining the results in Table \ref{tab:results}, it appears that mainly false negatives and also false positives of type 2 are problematic for our best models.
To help understand in what circumstances the models struggle, we compiled examples from the validation set where the best models make mistakes.
The examples show that these mistakes tend to happen in cases of ``outlier behavior'' that differs substantially from the typical behavior in the dataset.
False negatives occur mostly for intake gestures that are less noticeable or less common, such as eating bread crust or licking a finger, see Fig. \ref{fig:example-3} (a) and (b).
An example for false positives of type 2 is when the participant interrupts an intake gesture as depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:example-3} (d).
We see false positives of type 1 as mostly representing a shortcoming of the Stage II approach, i.e., when the duration of an intake gesture exceeds 2 seconds, seen in Fig. \ref{fig:example-3} (c).
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
In this paper, we have demonstrated the feasibility of detecting intake gestures from video sourced through a 360-degree camera.
Our two-stage approach involves learning frame-level probabilities using deep architectures proposed in the context of video action recognition (Stage I), and a search algorithm to detect individual intake gestures (Stage II).
Through evaluation of a variety of models, our results show that appearance features in form of the individual raw frames are well suited for this task.
Further, while single frames on their own can lead to useful results with $F_1$ of up to 0.795, the best model considering a temporal context of multiple frames achieves a superior $F_1$ of 0.858.
This result is achieved with a state-of-the-art SlowFast network \cite{feichtenhofer2018slowfast} using ResNet-50 as backbone.
Overall, we see several benefits and opportunities that the use of video holds for dietary monitoring.
First, the proliferation of 360 degree video reduces the practical challenges of recording images of human eating occasions.
This could be used to capture the intake of multiple individuals with a single camera positioned in the center of a table (e.g., families eating from a shared dish \cite{burrows2019dietary}).
Second, the models could be leveraged to support dietitians in reviewing videos of intake occasions.
For instance, instead of watching a twenty minute video, imagery of the actual intake gestures could be automatically extracted for assessment.
Third, the models could be used to semi-automate the ground truth annotation process (e.g., for inertial sensors) by pre-annotating the videos.
Finally, the models could be used to further the development of fully automated dietary monitoring \cite{hantke2016hear} (e.g., care-taking robots, life-logging, patient monitoring).
As a limitation of our approach, we noted that the distribution of participant behavior has a ``fat tail'' as it includes many examples of outlier behavior that models misinterpret (e.g., sudden interruption due to a conversation, blowing on food).
To deal with such events, future research may employ larger databases of samples to train models.
Further, in comparison to approaches based on inertial sensors, our approach has a limitation in that it requires the participant to consume their meal at a table equipped with a camera.
Hence, our vision models should be directly benchmarked against models based on inertial sensor data to determine their relative strengths and weaknesses.
Going one step further, fusion of both modalities could also be explored.
Finally, Stages I and II could be unified into a single end-to-end learning model using CTC loss \cite{graves2006connectionist}, which may alleviate some of the shortcomings of the current approach.
However, it needs to be considered that (i) this is directly only feasible for the CNN-LSTM model without increasing the requirement for GPU memory, and (ii) a larger temporal context and dataset may be required.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
We gratefully acknowledge the support by the Bill \& Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1171389].
This work was additionally supported by an Australian Government Research Training (RTP) Scholarship.
\bibliographystyle{assets/IEEEtran}
|
\section{Background}
\label{sec:background}
In this section we review several key topics on which our proposed method relies. We start by reviewing multi-stage stochastic decision making problems and then review Bayesian networks, and decision diagrams.
\subsection{Multi-stage stochastic decision making}
\label{sec:dm}
We study a class of multi-stage stochastic decision making problems. At each stage of such problems the decision variables need to be set before the random variables are observed. In other words we act first and observe later. For example, we first need to decide how many workers we need to assign for a task and only later we observe the actual workload for the task. The goal is to assign values to decision variables at each stage in a way that the expected utility is maximized (or if desired, minimized). Note that in multi-stage stochastic problems the values chosen for the set of decision variables at each stage are conditioned both on the values of previously determined decision variables and the previously observed random variables. An example problem follows.
\begin{example}[Production Planning]
\label{ex:walsh}
(from \cite{Walsh02})
In each quarter we sell between 101 and 105 items of a product. We need to satisfy the uncertain demand with probability 0.8 in every quarter. At the start of each quarter we decide how many books to print for the quarter, and the demand is known at the end of that quarter. The optimal production plan should minimize the expected cost of storing surplus items.
\end{example}
The uncertainties of a multi-stage stochastic problem can be modeled as a factored distribution among the random and decision variables. Bayesian networks are one of the most popular representations of factored distribution that we review next.
\subsection{Bayesian Network}
\label{sec:bn}
A Bayesian network is a probabilistic graphical model which represents the conditional dependencies among a set of variables by edges in a directed graph. This representation facilitates compact encoding and efficient inference~\cite{Koller09}.
In addition to the graph structure
we must specify the conditional probability distribution at each node. If the variables are discrete, this can be represented as a \emph{conditional probability table}, which lists the probability that the child node takes on each of its different values for each combination of values of its parents.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{BN.png}
\caption{A Bayesian network representing a hidden Markov model. According to this model, the joint distribution $P(S_1, S_2, H_1, H_2)$ factorizes as $P(H1) \cdot P(S_1|H_1) \cdot P(H_2 | H_1) \cdot P(S_2 | H_2)$. }
\label{fig:BookBN}
\end{figure}
A hidden Markov model which is a simple Bayesian network that captures a multi-stage stochastic process.
Figure~\ref{fig:BookBN} shows the structure and probability tables of a hidden Markov model.
\subsection{Decision Diagram}
\label{sec:decisiondiagram}
Decision diagrams are compact alternatives to decision trees. A decision diagram is a directed acyclic graph where nodes are variables and edges represent the assignment of value to the variables. Every path from a root node to a terminal node represents an assignment to all variables.
\section{Compiling FSCP to Decision Diagram}
\label{sec:compilation}
Processing a factorized model can sometimes result in solving identical subproblems repeatedly. Some search-based algorithms for processing graphical models avoid these redundant computations by identifying identical subtrees in the search tree and merging them, hence obtaining a compact equivalent graph~\cite{MateescuDM08}.
The factorized nature of FSCP problems suggests the possibility of applying a similar approach to these problems. This will turn the search tree into a graph which we call an \emph{And-Or Decision Diagram (AODD)}. However, merging identical subtrees repeatedly is not a practical method for compiling FSCPs, as it requires construction of the And-Or search tree. In this section, we describe a method for generating AODDs during the search, without the need to materialize the full search tree.
We traverse the And-Or search tree in a depth-first manner. However, before expanding each node, we first check whether the subtree rooted at this node is identical to another subtree visited earlier during the search. If this is the case, instead of expanding the node we connect its parent to the root of the existing subtree.
The described procedure depends on a method for testing the equivalence of subproblems without exploring them. Each subtree is uniquely identified by assignment to the variables preceding this node in the tree. However, it can be the case that the subproblem only depends on a subset of those variable. Following the terminology used in the probabilistic reasoning community, we call this subset the \emph{context} of the subproblem:
\begin{definition}[context]
For every internal node in the And-Or search tree, the path from the root to that node defines a (partial) assignment. We call a factor (i.e. constraint or probabilistic factor) \emph{active} if it has some unassigned variable in its scope. The \emph{context} of a node is the set of assignments to variables on its path which are in the scope of some active factor.
\end{definition}
In Example~\ref{ex:book}, variable $H_1$ is assigned after $S_1, V_1, S_2, V_2$. Figure~\ref{fig:BookBN} shows that the context of this variable is $\{S_1, S_2\}$. As one can observe in Figure~\ref{fig:trees}, the subtrees for assignments $\{V_1=2, S_1=1, V_2=2, S_2=2\}$ and $\{V_1=2, S_1=1, V_2=1, S_2=2\}$ are identical and can be merged. A similar case holds for subtrees of assignments $\{V_1=2, S_1=1, V_2=2, S_2=1\}$ and $\{V_1=2, S_1=1, V_2=1, S_2=1\}$.
Algorithm~\ref{alg:compile} summarizes the procedure for compiling an FSCP over domain ${\cal D}'$ into an AODD. Before solving each subproblem, the cache key is generated from the context of the subproblem root node (Line~\ref{aodd:key}). The cache is then inspected ( Line~\ref{aodd:inspect}). If an identical subproblem is found, the node is merged with the existing subgraph. Otherwise, the search proceeds. The value of each node is calculated based on the values of its children (Line~\ref{aodd:val_begin}-\ref{aodd:val_end}), and the node is stored in the cache before backtracking (Line~\ref{aodd:store}).
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\input{algorithm.tex}
\caption{Compiling the And-Or decision diagram \label{alg:compile}}
\end{algorithm}
Figure~\ref{fig:trees} (right) shows the And-Or decision diagram of Example~\ref{ex:book} obtained using the described method. It can be observed that the identical subproblems which we mentioned earlier, are now merged. Once the AODD is generated, the optimal policy can be retrieved in the same way that it is obtained from an And-Or search tree.
The proposed method makes it possible to compile an FSCP to AODD on the fly, by introducing a small modification to the And-Or search procedure. This can lead to significant performance gains, as demonstrated in the next section.
\section{Conclusion \& Future Work}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We presented a method for compiling factored stochastic constraint programs into And-Or decision diagrams. Our experiments demonstrate the advantages of such a compilation, especially when there is a lot of redundancy in the search space.
Decision diagrams have been successfully used in combinatorial optimization for obtaining bounds~\cite{BergmanCHH16}. A direction for future work is to devise compilation methods that create relaxed And-Or decision diagrams, which can then be used for obtaining bounds during search. There exists some recent work on using more sophisticated techniques for identification of equivalent and dominant subproblems~\cite{UnaGSS19,ChuBS12}. This motivates future work on subproblem identification in And-Or search.
The SCP problems usually include \emph{chance} constraints, i.e. constraints that should be satisfied at least in a certain fraction of possible scenarios. Our current formalism only considers hard constraints. Generalizing this work to include chance constraints is another promising direction for future work.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
To evaluate our approach, in this section we investigate the following research questions:
\begin{itemize}
\item [\textbf{Q1}] How effective is our method in identifying identical subproblems and compressing the search tree?
\item [\textbf{Q2}] What is the effect of compilation on the performance of And-Or search compared with the existing methods?
\item [\textbf{Q3}] When doesn't the compilation help?
\end{itemize}
We address the above research questions using the \emph{knapsack} and the \emph{investment} problems. \begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Knapsack} problem (based on a problem from
\cite{hnich2011survey}): Consider a knapsack with a certain capacity. Assume at each stage, an item has arrived and we need to choose to pick the item or leave it. The weight and value of each item is stochastic and is observed after making the decision. There are 5 different possibilities for items' weight, and 3 possibilities for their values. The goal is to maximize the expected sum of values of the collected items subject to the hard constraint that the total weight of the items is less than the capacity of the knapsack. We implemented two variations of this problem: In the \emph{independent} version (Knapsack-I), all variables are independent and in the \emph{chain} version (Knapsack-C), weight and value at each stage depend on the similar variables at the previous stage.
\item {\bf Investment} problem (based on a problem from \cite{babaki2017stochastic}): Consider a company that has two options for investment at the start of each season, and only at the end of the season observes the stochastic return.
There are 4 possibilities of return for each investment option.
The first option has a higher return on average but the second option brings more tax relaxation at the end of the horizon. The goal is to maximize the expected returns by considering the tax relaxations. Similar to the previous problem, we have two variations of this problem (denoted by Investment-I and Investment-C). Note that for this problem, we have a hard constraint that the total sum of return of the second option should be less or equal to the total sum of return of the first option.
\end{itemize}
We ran experiments on machines with an Intel i5-4590 processor (3.3GHz) and 8GB of RAM running Linux Ubuntu 16.04. We extended the constraint programming solver Mini-CP~\cite{minicp} with And-Or search, caching, and compilation functionality. The time-out used was 1800 seconds. The MIP solver is Gurobi-8.1\footnote{\url{www.gurobi.com}}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{reduction.pdf}
\caption{Comparing the size of And-Or search tree and decision diagram. Note that the scales are logarithmic.}
\label{fig:reduction}
\end{figure}
To address \textit{Q1}, we compare the performance of our approach on both problems with and without compilation.
We measure the effects of compilation by varying the number of stages in both problems.
As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:reduction}, compilation leads to significant reductions for both problems. As the number of stages increase, so does the number of identical subproblems, which in turn results in exponential reductions.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{knapsack-chain.pdf}
\caption{Knapsack-C}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{knapsack-independent.pdf}
\caption{Knapsack-I}
\end{subfigure}\\
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{investment-chain.pdf}
\caption{Investment-C}
\end{subfigure}%
~
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{investment-independent.pdf}
\caption{Investment-I}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Comparing the runtime of our method (AODD) with scenario-based (MIP) and And-Or branch and bound (AOBB) approaches. The runtime is measured in seconds.}
\label{fig:runtime}
\end{figure}
To investigate the performance of our approach compared with the existing methods and address \textit{Q2}, we compare our algorithm with the scenario-based conversion to MIP and And-Or branch and bound approach~(AOBB)~\cite{babaki2017stochastic}. The results presented in Figure~\ref{fig:runtime} show that without compilation, we are not able to solve problems beyond 6 stages using both MIP and AOBB approaches. However our approach scales to 25 stages and easily solves these problem in less than 5 minutes.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c c c}
\toprule
\# stages & MIP & AOBB & AODD \\
\midrule
1 & 0.0240 & 0.0002 & 0.0067\\
2 & 0.0019 & 0.0016 & 0.0409\\
3 & 0.0116 & 0.0351 & 0.1965\\
4 & 0.3221 & 0.6099 & 2.7660\\
5 & 3.4789 & 3.9858 & 58.4728\\
6 & M & 76.6795 & M \\
7 & M & T & M \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparing the runtime (s) of our method AODD with AOBB and MIP using the \emph{Knapsack(H)} problem. We either run out of memory (M) during generation of the problem or timeout (T) when solving the problem.
}
\label{tab:nohelp}
\end{table}
It is important to note that the compilation is more effective when the number of identical subproblems is high.
Hence, the structure of the model affects its performance. To address \textit{Q3}, we consider the knapsack problem and change the Bayesian network by including a hidden variable per item as described in~\cite{babaki2017stochastic}. We refer to this model as \emph{knapsack-H}.
The results in Table~\ref{tab:nohelp} show that compilation is less effective for this variant of the knapsack problem compared to the chain and independent versions.
While solving 25-stages Knapsack-C takes only 9 seconds and 20-stages Knapsack-I takes 1 minutes to solve using AODD, Knapsack-H is not solved beyond 5 stages.
When solving Knapsack-H, all hidden variables appear last in the ordering. Since all other variables depend on these hidden variables, there are no identical subproblems before reaching the hidden variables in the search tree. This leads to less reduction in Knapsack-H compared to the other two variants (see Figure~\ref{fig:hmm}).
The AOBB approach takes advantage of bounding to solve the 6-stages problem, which suggests a future direction to explore bounding in AODD.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{hmm.pdf}
\caption{Comparing the And-Or search tree and decision diagram size of different types of the Knapsack problem using the compilation approach. Both scales are logarithmic.}
\label{fig:hmm}
\end{figure}
\section{Introduction}
Constraint satisfaction and optimization problems are usually assumed to be \emph{deterministic}, meaning that all parameters of the problem, also known as \emph{problem data}, are known with certainty. This ignores the complex, uncertain, and dynamic nature of the realworld problems. Stochastic constraint programming is an attempt to address the problem of decision making under uncertainty using the constraint programming paradigm~\cite{Walsh02,hnich2011survey}.
Recent developments in machine learning, together with abundance of collected data, has made it possible to capture our uncertain knowledge about the world as probabilistic models. \emph{Probabilistic graphical models} are a popular representation which assume a factorized joint distribution over random variables~\cite{Koller09}. This has motivated work on \emph{Factored Stochastic Constraint Programming}~(FSCP) which assumes that random variables follow such a factored model. FSCP allows us to model many applications in which decision variables are set before the random variables in alternating stages, i.e. we act first and observe later. For example, practical problems arise in transportation, finance, and the energy sector~\cite{wallace2005}.
The state-of-the-art method for solving FSCP problems, called And-Or Branch and Bound~(AOBB), explores a search space consisting of two types of nodes: The \emph{And} nodes which correspond to random variables, and the \emph{Or} nodes which correspond to decision variables. To explore this search space efficiently, AOBB uses two pruning techniques that are commonly used in constraint satisfaction and optimization, namely constraint propagation and bounding~\cite{babaki2017stochastic}. However, these techniques are mainly applicable to the Or nodes. The presence of random variables calls for alternative techniques to improve search-space exploration. A similar issue has been encountered for search-based probabilistic inference algorithms, and has been addressed by identifying repeated subproblems, among other methods~\cite{BacchusDP09}. Identification of repeated subproblems has recently received attention in the constraint programming community, too~\cite{UnaGSS19,ChuBS12}. In this paper we apply this idea to the FSCP problems and demonstrate the gains that can be obtained from them in problems with repeated subproblems. The contributions of this work are:
\begin{itemize}
\item Proposing a method for identification of repeated subproblems in FSCP problems,
\item Compiling an And-Or search tree into a decision diagram,
\item Extending a generic CP solver with the capability of performing And-Or search and compilation, and evaluating this approach through comparison with existing alternatives.
\end{itemize}
The paper is organized as follows. We first present the background material in Section~\ref{sec:background}.
In Section~\ref{sec:scp} we present a brief description of FSCP and And-Or search. Section~\ref{sec:compilation} describes our method for caching the subproblems and compilation of FSCP into a decision diagram. We evaluate the proposed method in Section~\ref{sec:experiments}. We discuss the relation with existing work in Section~\ref{sec:related}, and conclude with directions for future research in Section~\ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Related work}
\label{sec:related}
Our method is closely related to the And-Or search trees for graphical models (for example see~\cite{MateescuDM08}). In those studies the And-Or nodes have a different meaning from ours, where an And node corresponds to problem decomposition, and an Or node represents branching. Most of these works assume only one type of variable (only decision or random variables). \emph{Mixed deterministic-probabilistic networks}~\cite{MateescuD08} include both deterministic and probabilistic factors, but only include decision variables, and solve the probabilistic reasoning problems (e.g. MPE and MAP inference) subject to constraints.
To the best of our knowledge, \cite{Marinescu09} is the only work in this area which includes both decision and random variables. This work evaluates influence diagrams using And-Or search graphs and uses a SAT solver to avoid exploring the subproblems with zero probability. Our method generalizes this approach by incorporating hard constraints on decision variables and using global constraints and the propagation power of CP.
Factored SCPs bridge the gap between influence diagrams and stochastic constraint programming by imposing probabilistic and deterministic factors over decision and random variables~\cite{babaki2017stochastic}. And-Or search with branch and bound has been previously used to evaluate influence diagrams when no constraint propagation is involved~\cite{YuanWH10}. And-Or search trees have also been used to solve stochastic constraint programs with independent random variables~\cite{Walsh02}. Neither of these methods exploits identical subproblems during the search.
Compilation to decision diagrams is a well-known technique in AI with celebrated success in model counting~\cite{MuiseMBH12}, probabilistic inference~\cite{ChoiKD13}, probabilistic logic programming~\cite{FierensBRSGTJR15}, and planning~\cite{SpeckGM18,HoeySHB99}, among others. Recently, decision diagrams have received attention in combinatorial optimization, too. However, in most of these studies the construction of decision diagrams is problem-specific. A notable exception is the work of~\cite{UnaGSS19} which proposes methods for compilation of CP subproblems to decision diagrams. This study proposes sophisticated methods for identification of identical subproblems, which require interaction with the propagation algorithms.
Scenario-based approaches are approximate methods that solve SCP problems by sampling a subset of possible scenarios from the probability distribution~\cite{TarimMW06,HemmiT018}. Our work demonstrates that it is possible to take all scenarios into account without the need to explicitly enumerate them.
\section{Stochastic Constraint Programming}
\label{sec:scp}
Stochastic constraint programming (SCP) is a framework for modeling and solving multi-stage stochastic decision making problems. A multi-stage stochastic constraint satisfaction program is defined as a 7-tuple $\mathbf{P} = \langle
{\cal V}, {\cal S}, \mathcal{D}, \mathcal{P}, \mathcal{C}, \theta, \prec
\rangle$~\cite{hnich2011survey}. ${\cal V}$ and ${\cal S}$ are decision variables and random (stochastic) variables, respectively. $\mathcal{D}$ is the domain of variables in ${\cal V} \cup {\cal S}$, $\mathcal{P}$ is a function that for each variable in ${\cal S}$ defines a probability distribution over its domain. $\mathcal{C}$ is a set of constraints. Each constraint is specified over a non-empty subset of ${\cal V}$ and a (possibly empty) subset of ${\cal S}$.
$\theta$ is a function that assigns a minimum satisfaction probability to each constraint in $\mathcal{C}$.
$\prec$ is a partial ordering over ${\cal V} \cup {\cal S}$: ${\cal V}_1 \prec {\cal S}_1 \prec \ldots \prec {\cal V}_T \prec {\cal S}_T$. The sets ${\cal V}_i$ and $ {\cal S}_i$ respectively partition ${\cal V}$ and ${\cal S}$ and can be possibly empty, and $T$ is the number of stages.
A solution to the stochastic constraint program is a \textit{policy tree} where each path represents an assignment to the variables in ${\cal V} \cup {\cal S}$, and follows the ordering $\prec$.
In this tree each decision variable has just one child (corresponding to the selected value) and each random variable has as many children as the number of values in its domain. For each constraint in ${\cal C}$, the sum of probabilities of paths in which the constraint is satisfied should meet the minimum probability requirement specified by $\theta$.
Given a \emph{utility} function $U({\cal V}, {\cal S})$ this definition can be extended to an optimization setting where the objective is to maximize (or minimize) the expected utility:
\begin{align}
\max_{{\cal V}_1} \sum_{{\cal S}_1} \ldots \max_{{\cal V}_T} \sum_{{\cal S}_T} P({\cal S}) \times U({\cal V}, {\cal S}) \label{eq:exputil}
\end{align}
\subsection{Factored Stochastic Constraint Program}
The assumption of independent random variables falls short of representing the existing correlations between random variables in the real world. This motivates a generalization in which ${\cal P}$ specifies a join probability distribution over variables in ${\cal S}$. In factored stochastic constraint programming (FSCP) the join distribution is factorized, i.e. $P(\mathcal{S}) = \prod_{\mathcal{S}_i \subset \mathcal{S}} \phi(\mathcal{S}_i)$. This is the assumption that we are making in the rest of this work. We also make the same extra assumptions as those made by ~\cite{babaki2017stochastic}: 1) The utility function is represented by a single \emph{utility variable}. This is not a restriction as long as the utility function can be encoded by a set of constraints. 2) The threshold assigned to all constraints by $\theta$ is one, i.e. all constraints are \emph{hard} and should be satisfied in all \emph{possible} (non-0 probability) paths.
\begin{example}[Production Planning, continued]
\label{ex:book}
Assume that in Example~\ref{ex:walsh} the demand and supply in quarter $i$ are represented respectively by random variable $S_i$ and decision variable $V_i$, both with domain $\{1, 2\}$. The demand depends on the market sentiment (represented by random variable $H_i$), which itself depends on the market sentiment in the previous quarter. The goal is to minimize the expected number of unsold books in the last quarter, while disallowing shortages.
\end{example}
Assuming $T=2$ quarters, the dependencies between random variables can be represented by the Bayesian network of Figure~\ref{fig:BookBN}. The objective function, constraints, and domains of the corresponding FSCP are as follows:
{\small
\begin{align}
&\min_{V_1} \sum_{S_1} \min_{V_2} \sum_{S_2} P(S_1, S_2) \times U \nonumber \\
&\text{s.t.} \nonumber \\
& W = V_1 - S_1 \label{cons:l1} \\
& U = W + V_2 - S_2 \label{cons:l2} \\
& V_1, S_1, V_2, S_2 \in \{1, 2\} \quad W \in \{0,\ldots,2\} \quad U \in \{0, \ldots, 4\} \nonumber
\end{align}
}
The optimal policy tree for Example~\ref{ex:book} is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:policy}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={right,center},capbesidewidth=3.5cm}}]{figure}[\FBwidth]
{\caption{The optimal policy tree of Example~\ref{ex:book}. The decision in the second quarter ($V_2$) depends on the realized demand in the first quarter ($S_1$). }\label{fig:policy}}
{\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{policy.pdf}}
\end{figure}
The structure of an FSCP problem can be summarized in a graphical representation called the \emph{factor graph}. We will later use this structure the factor graph to identify the identical subproblems during search.
\begin{definition}[factor graph]
The factor graph is a bipartite graph which represents the factorization of a function with several variables.
An FSCP factor graph can be represented by a graph $G=(V \cup F, E)$ where each $v \in V$ corresponds to a variable, and each node $f \in F$ corresponds to a \emph{factor} (that is, a constraint or conditional probability table). The nodes $v \in V$ and $f \in F$ are connected to each other if and only if the variable corresponding to $v$ appears in the scope of the factor corresponding to $f$.
\end{definition}
The factor graph of Example~\ref{ex:book} is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:factor}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.22]{factor.png}
\caption{The factor graph of Example~\ref{ex:book}. White squares are variables and black squares represent the factors. Factors represented by $f_1, \ldots, f_4$ correspond to conditional probabilities from the Bayesian network of Figure~\ref{fig:BookBN}. Factors $f_5$ and $f_6$ correspond to the constraints in Equations~\ref{cons:l1} and~\ref{cons:l2}.}
\label{fig:factor}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Solving FSCP using And-Or search}
The expression in Equation~\ref{eq:exputil} can be represented by a graphical structure called the \emph{And-Or search tree}. Solving an SCP problem, i.e. evaluating this expression, is possible by traversing this tree. An And-Or search tree has two types of internal nodes: 1) \emph{And} nodes which correspond to random variables and \emph{sum} operator, and 2) \emph{Or} nodes which correspond to decision variables and \emph{max} operator. An edge represents the assignment of a value to the variable that corresponds to the source node. A path from the root to a leaf represents an assignment to every variable in ${\cal V} \cup {\cal S}$ and the order of variables on each path follows $\prec$.
Given an assignment $({\cal V} = v, {\cal S} = s)$ on a path, the \emph{value} of the leaf node is defined as $P(s)U(v,s)$. The value of an internal node $u$ can be computed recursively: If $u$ corresponds a random variable, $value(u) = \sum_{c \in \text{children}(u)} value(u)$. Otherwise $value(u) = \max_{c \in \text{children}(u)} value(u)$. The optimal policy can be extracted by examining the trace of a bottom-up traversal of the tree.
Instead of storing the value $P(s)U(v,s)$ at the leaves, we can take advantage of the factorization of probabilities and store these values on edges of the tree. Recall that an edge represents the assignment of a value to a variable. This assignment might reduce some factors of the distribution to a value. It might also reduce the domain of the utility variable to a value. We define the weight of an edge as the product of these values. Figure~\ref{fig:trees} (left) shows the And-Or search tree of Example~\ref{ex:book}.
When constraints are present, only subtrees that satisfy the constraints are included in this evaluation procedure. In such cases we can use constraint propagation to explore the search space more efficiently. Since the hard constraints should be satisfied in all possible scenarios, two modifications should be made to the standard constraint programming machinery: First, failure of any child of an And node immediately fails the node itself. Second, a reduction in the domain of a random variable caused by propagation is considered failure, as it implies that there is a possible scenario in which a constraint is violated.
The procedure described above uses constraint reasoning to prune the search space. Another possible improvement is to establish bounds that will guarantee that a subtree cannot lead to a solution better than what is already obtained. The And-Or Branch-and-Bound method uses such bounds to further prune the search space~\cite{babaki2017stochastic}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.14]{book_ao.pdf}%
\includegraphics[scale=0.14]{book_aodd.pdf}
\caption{The And-Or search tree (left), and And-Or decision diagram (right) for Example~\ref{ex:book}. The edges are annotated with two values: the assignment to the source variable (top), and the edge weight (bottom). The nodes are annotated with the name of corresponding variable (top) and the node value (bottom). Failure is represented by a red diamond.}
\label{fig:trees}
\end{figure*}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{Introduction}
Survival analysis has been proven useful in many areas including cancer research, clinical trials, epidemiological studies, actuarial science, and so on.
A large body of methods have been developed under various survival models and data subject to {\it right-censoring}.
Comprehensive discussion on those methods can be found in Kalfleisch and Prentice (2002), Lawless (2003), and the references therein.
In practice, some complex features may appear in the dataset and make the analysis become challenging. In this paper, we mainly discuss \textit{left-truncation} and \textit{measurement error in covariates}.
Left-truncation usually comes from the prevalent sampling design, in which individuals only experience the initiating event but not the failure event before the recruiting time. Under this sampling scheme, individuals might not be observed because they experience the failure event before the recruiting time. In this sense, left-truncation may cause the delayed entry of subjects and may tend to produce a biased sample. Several methods have been developed based on different types of models. For example, Qin and Shen (2010) proposed two different methods of the estimating equations to estimate $\beta$ based on Cox proportional hazards (PH) model. Huang, Follman, and Qin (2012) proposed the semiparametric likelihood inference for the Cox PH model based on the length-biased sampling which is a special case of left-truncation. Su and Wang (2012) developed the semi-parametric approach for the joint modelling between the left-truncated and right-censored survival outcomes and the longitudinal covariates. In addition, Shen, Ning, and Qin (2009) and Ning, Qin and Shen (2014) proposed valid methods to estimate the parameter for the accelerated failure time model.
Not only the models mentioned above, different type of models are also discussed in the developments of survival analysis based on specific purposes. For example, different from the investigation of the hazard ratio based on the Cox PH model, sometimes researchers may be more interested in the risk difference attributed to the risk factors. Based on this purpose, the additive hazards model is considered, and the formulation is given by
\begin{equation} \label{additive_hazard_model}
\lambda(t|V) = \lambda_0 (t) + \beta^\top V,
\end{equation}
where $V$ is a $p$-dimensional vector of the covariates, $\lambda(t|V)$ is the conditional hazard function of the survival time given the covariates $V$, $\lambda_0(t)$ is the unspecified baseline hazard function, and $\beta$ is a $p$-dimensional vector of mainly interested parameter. Some methods have been proposed to deal with the additive model when left-truncation occurs. For example, Huang and Qin (2013) proposed the conditional estimating equation. Chen (2019a) developed the pseudo likelihood method to derive the estimator.
The second important feature is the measurement error in covariates. As discussed in Carroll et al. (2006), ignoring the error effect of covariates in the analysis may incur the tremendous bias of the estimator. With the absence of left-truncation, several methods have been developed to correct the error. To name a few, Nakamura (1992) developed an approximate corrected partial likelihood method which was extended by Buzas (1998) and Hu and Lin (2002). Huang and Wang (2000) proposed a nonparametric approach for settings with repeated measurements for mismeasured covariates. Xie et al. (2001) explored a least squares method to calibrate the induced hazard function. More related methods are also reviewed in Chen (2019c).
When both biased sample and measurement error occur simultaneously, several methods based on different type of models have been proposed. For example, Chen (2018) developed the three-stage procedure to deal with error-prone variables based on the accelerated failure time model. Chen (2019b) studied the cure model with left-truncated data and measurement error. Chen and Yi (2019) proposed the corrected pseudo likelihood estimation to estimate the parameter for the Cox PH model subject to left-truncated and right-censored survival data and covariate measurement error. However, other survival models, such as the additive hazards model, have not been fully explored when those two complex features occur in the dataset. Hence, in this paper, we mainly focus on the discussion of the additive hazards model.
On the other hand, high-dimensional data also attracts our attention. The analysis becomes difficult and the non-informative variables may appear as the dimension of variable increases. In order to collect the informative variables and make the analysis reasonable, the technique of \textit{variable selection} is one of useful tools to achieve this goal, and such method is also frequently implemented to the analysis of survival data. For example, Lin and Lv (2013) developed the variable selection method for the additive hazards model. However, they mainly focused on the survival data subject to right-censoring, and the analysis of variable selection with left-truncation and measurement error is not fully explored.
In this paper, we consider this important problem and develop inference methods for analysis of high-dimensional left-truncated and right-censored survival data with measurement error. We mainly focus on the discussion of the additive hazards model. Different from the estimating equation approach, we adopt the pseudo likelihood method proposed by Chen (2019a), which provides the more efficient and robust estimator. Based on the pseudo likelihood method, we proposed the simulation-based three-stage procedure to correct measurement error, select the informative variables, and derive the estimators simultaneously.
The motivated example of this paper is the Worcester Heart Attack Study (WHAS500) data which is collected by Hosmer et al. (2008).
The main goal of this study is to determine the factors associated with trends over time in the incidence and survival rates following hospital admission for acute myocardial infarction (MI). The data were collected over thirteen 1-year periods beginning in 1975 and extending through 2001 on all MI patients admitted to the hospitals in Worcester, Massachusetts. There are 500 observations and 22 variables in this dataset. Specifically, as discussed in Hosmer, Lemeshow, and May (2008), the beginning of survival time was defined as the time the subject was admitted to the hospital. The main interest is the survival time of a patient who was discharged and still alive. Hence, an inclusion criterion is that only those subjects who are discharged and still alive are eligible to be included in the analysis. That is, the minimum survival time would be the length of the time a patient stayed in the hospital; individuals whose observation times are shorter than the minimum survival time are not included in this analysis.
Basically, the data are pertinent to three important events in calendar time: time of hospital admission, time of hospital discharge, and time of last follow-up (which is either failure or censoring). The total length of follow-up is defined as the length of time between hospital admission and the last follow-up, and the length of hospital stay is defined as the time length between hospital admission and hospital discharge. Data can only be collected for those individuals whose total length of follow-up is longer than the length of hospital stay, which is the so-called left-truncation (e.g., Kalbfleisch and Prentice 2002, Section 1.3; Lawless 2003, Section 2.4).
The rest of this article is organized as follows. We first introduce the structure of left-truncated and right-censored (LTRC) survival data and measurement error model in Section~\ref{Data-structure}. We next present our proposed method in Section~\ref{Proposed-method}. Basically, we propose the three-stage procedure to deal with error-prone variables, select the active variables, and estimate the parameters simultaneously. In addition, we also provide the valid estimation procedure to derive the cumulative baseline hazards function and the distribution function of the truncation time. We give some model settings to examine the numerical performances of the estimator and
implement the proposed method to WHAS500 dataset in in Section~\ref{Simulation}. Finally, the discussion of the paper is summarized in Section~\ref{Conclusion}.
\section{Notation and Model} \label{Data-structure}
\subsection{Data Introduction}
{
For an individual in the target disease population, let $\xi$ be the calendar time of the recruitment (e.g., the recruitment starts right at the hospital discharge) and let $u$ and $v$ denote the calendar time of the initiating event (e.g., hospital admission) and the failure event (e.g., death), respectively, where $u<v$ and $u < \xi < v$. Let $T^\ast = v-u$ be the lifetime (e.g., the time length between the hospital admission and the failure) and $ A^\ast = \xi -u$ be the truncation time (e.g., the time length between the hospital admission and the hospital discharge). Let $V^\ast$ be a $p$-dimensional vector of covariates. Let $h(a)$ be the unspecified probability density function of $A^\ast$, and let $H(a) = \int_0^a h(\nu)d\nu$ denote the distribution function of $A^\ast$. Let $f(t)$ and $S(t)$ be the density function and the survivor function of failure time $T^\ast$, respectively.
Consistent with the notation considered by Chen (2019a, 2019b), for an individual with $T^\ast \geq A^\ast$, we let $\left(A,T,V\right)$ denote $\left(A^\ast,T^\ast,V^\ast\right)$ to indicate such an individual is eligible for the recruitment so that measuring $\left(A,T,V\right)$ is possible. Figure~\ref{fig:LTRC} gives an illustration of the relationship among those variables.
However, if $T^\ast < A^\ast$, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:Truncation}, the individual is not included in the study so that the researcher cannot obtain any information of such individual.
We further define $C$ as the censoring time for a recruited subject. Let $Y = \min \{ T, A+C \}$ be the observed time and let $\Delta = I(T \leq A+C)$ be the indicator of a failure event. Suppose we have a sample of $n$ subjects where for $i=1,\cdots,n$, $\left(Y_i,\Delta_i,A_i,V_i \right)$ has the same distribution of $\left(Y,\Delta,A,V \right)$, and let $\left(y_i,\delta_i,a_i,v_i \right)$ denote the realization value.
For the following development, we make standard assumptions which are commonly considered for survival data analysis and related frameworks (e.g., Huang and Qin 2013; Chen 2019a):
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(A1)]Conditional on $V^\ast$, $T^\ast$ are independent of $A^\ast$;
\item[(A2)] Censoring time is non-informative.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{1\textwidth}
\centering{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{LTRC-1.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Schematic depiction of LTRC data for $T^\ast \geq A^\ast$} \label{fig:LTRC}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.9\textwidth}
\centering{\includegraphics[width=.8\linewidth]{LTRC_for_truncation-1.eps}}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Schematic depiction of LTRC data. Truncation occurs when $T^\ast < A^\ast$} \label{fig:Truncation}
\end{figure}
}
\subsection{Measurement Error Model} \label{Def: Measurement}
In practice, covariates are often subject to measurement error. For $i=1,\cdots,n$, we write $V_i = \left( X_i^\top, Z_i^\top \right)^\top$, where $X_i$ and $Z_i$ are $p_x$-dimensional and $p_z$-dimensional vectors of the covariates, respectively. Moreover, we also decompose $\beta$ in (\ref{additive_hazard_model}) by $\beta = \left( \beta_x^\top, \beta_z^\top \right)^\top$, where $\beta_x$ and $\beta_z$ are $p_x$-dimensional and $p_z$-dimensional vectors of parameters associated with the covariates $X_i$ and $Z_i$, respectively. Let $p = p_x + p_z$.
Suppose that $X_i$ is measured with error with an observed value or surrogate $W_i$, and that $Z_i$ is precisely observed. The classical additive measurement error model (Carroll et al. 2006, Ch1) is assumed to describe the relationship between $W_i$ and $X_i$:
\begin{equation} \label{mea_classic}
W_i = X_i + \epsilon_i,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon_i$ is independent of $\left\{ X_i,Z_i,C_i,A_i,T_i \right\}$, and $\epsilon_i \sim N(0,\Sigma_{\epsilon})$ with covariance matrix $\Sigma_{\epsilon}$.
If $\Sigma_\epsilon$ is unknown, then additional information, such as repeated measurements or validation data, is needed so that $\Sigma_\epsilon$ can be estimated. To ease of the discussion and focus the presentation on the analysis of impact on measurement error, we let $\Sigma_\epsilon$ be a known covariance matrix.
\section{Methodology} \label{Proposed-method}
In this section, we first briefly review the likelihood approach, which was proposed by Chen (2019a), based on the unobserved covariate $X$. After that, we present the extension by incorporating the error-prone variables and variable selection.
\subsection{Construction of the Likelihood Function} \label{Chen-2019}
Let $N_i(t) = \Delta_i I(Y_i \leq t)$ denote the counting process for the observed failure events. The modified at-risk process is denoted by $R_i(t) = I(A_i \leq t \leq Y_i)$ for the adjustment of the truncation time.
Under Condition (A1), by the similar derivations in Appendix A of Chen (2019a), one can show that the joint density function of $(A,T)$ given $V = v$ is proportional to
\begin{equation} \label{joint_pdf}
\frac{f(t|v) dH(a)}{\int_0^\infty S(u|z)dH(u)} = \frac{f(t|v)}{S(a|v)} \times \frac{S(a|v) dH(a)}{\int_0^\infty S(u|z)dH(u)},
\end{equation}
where $\frac{f(t|v)}{S(a|v)}$ is the density function of $T$ given $A$ and $V$, and $\frac{S(a|v) h(a)}{\int_0^\infty S(u|v)h(u)du}$ is the density function of $A$ given $V$. Therefore, for $i=1,\cdots,n$, under Condition (A2) and model $(\ref{additive_hazard_model})$, the {\it full} likelihood function is given by
\begin{equation} \label{Full}
L_F (\beta, \lambda_0,H) = \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{\left\{ \lambda_0 (y_i) + \beta_x^\top x_i + \beta_z^\top z_i \right\}^{\delta_i} S(y_i |x_i, z_i) dH(a_i)}{\int S(u|x_i,z_i) dH(u) },
\end{equation}
where $S(t |x_i, z_i) = \exp \left\{ -\Lambda_0 (t) - \left( \beta_x^\top x_i + \beta_z^\top z_i \right) t \right\}$ is the survivor function under model $(\ref{additive_hazard_model})$.
Moreover, we can decompose $(\ref{Full})$ into $L_C \times L_M$ , where
\begin{equation} \label{Conditional}
L_C (\beta, \lambda_0) = \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{\left( \lambda_0 (y_i) + \beta_x^\top x_i + \beta_z^\top z_i \right)^{\delta_i} S(y_i | x_i, z_i)}{ S(a_i|x_i, z_i)}
\end{equation}
is the likelihood of $(Y,\Delta)$ given $A,X,Z$; and
\begin{equation} \label{Marginal}
L_M (\beta, \lambda_0,H) = \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{ S(a_i |x_i ,z_i) dH(a_i)}{\int S(u|x_i,z_i) dH(u)}
\end{equation}
is the likelihood of $A$ given $X$ and $Z$.
Different from the conventional martingale method or the estimating equation approach, Chen (2019a) derived the estimator of $\beta$ by maximizing the pseudo likelihood function based on (\ref{Full}). There are some advantages. The first advantage is that \textit{misspecification} is considered. That is, the property of the martingale method holds only if the model is correctly specified, while the likelihood method does not need such strong condition (Lin and Wei 1989). The second advantage is that the likelihood method gives the more robust and more efficient estimator. This property is shown by numerical studies in Chen (2019a).
\subsection{Inferential Procedure} \label{Proposed-Chen}
In this section, we extend the setting in Section~\ref{Chen-2019} by incorporating the error-prone and high-dimensional covariates. To deal with error-prone covariate, select active covariate variables, and estimate parameters simultaneously, we propose a simulation-based three-stage procedure.
\begin{description}
\item[Step 1:] {\it Simulation}
Let $B$ be a given positive integer and let $\mathcal{Z} = \left\{ \zeta_0, \zeta_1,\cdots, \zeta_M \right\}$ be a sequence of pre-specified values with
$0 = \zeta_0 < \zeta_1 < \cdots < \zeta_M$, where $M$ is a positive integer, and $\zeta_M$ is a prespecified positive number such as $\zeta_M = 2$.
\text{\ \ \ \ }For a given subject $i$ with $i=1,\cdots,n$ and $b=1,\cdots,B$, we generate $U_{i,b}$ from $N(0,\Sigma_\epsilon)$, and define $W_i \left(b,\zeta\right)$ as
\begin{eqnarray} \label{conti_SIMEX}
W_i \left(b,\zeta\right) = W_i + \sqrt{\zeta} U_{i,b}
\end{eqnarray}
for every $\zeta \in \mathcal{Z}$ and $b=1,\cdots,B$. Therefore, the conditional distribution of $W_i \left(b,\zeta\right)$ given $X_i$ is $N\left(X_i,(1+\zeta)\Sigma_\epsilon \right)$.
\item[Step 2:] {\it Estimation and selection}
We adopt the likelihood function in Section~\ref{Chen-2019}. Specifically, replacing $X_i$ by $W_i \left(b,\zeta\right)$ gives
\begin{equation} \label{Full-correct}
L_F^\ast (\beta, \lambda_0,H) = L_C^\ast (\beta, \lambda_0) \times L_M^\ast (\beta, \lambda_0,H),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{Conditional-correct}
L_C^\ast (\beta, \lambda_0) = \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{\left( \lambda_0 (y_i) + \beta_x^\top w_i \left(b,\zeta\right) + \beta_z^\top z_i \right)^{\delta_i} S(y_i | w_i \left(b,\zeta\right), z_i)}{ S(a_i|w_i \left(b,\zeta\right), z_i)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{Marginal-correct}
L_M^\ast (\beta, \lambda_0,H) = \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{ S(a_i |w_i \left(b,\zeta\right) ,z_i) dH(a_i)}{\int S(u|w_i \left(b,\zeta\right),z_i) dH(u)}.
\end{equation}
\text{\ \ \ \ }By the similar derivations in Chen (2019a), for given $b$ and $\zeta$, the estimators of $\Lambda_0(\cdot)$ and $\lambda_0(\cdot)$ are respectively determined by
\begin{equation} \label{Baseline_Hazard-correct}
\widehat{\Lambda}_0 (t;\beta,b,\zeta) = \int_0^t \frac{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n \{ dN_i(u) - R_i (u) \left( \beta_x^\top W_i(b,\zeta) + \beta_z^\top Z_i \right) du \}}{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n R_i(u)}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{baseline_kernel-correct}
\widehat{\lambda}_\sigma (y;b,\zeta) = \frac{1}{\sigma} \int K \left( \frac{y-\widetilde{y}}{\sigma} \right) d\widehat{\Lambda}_0 (\widetilde{y}; \beta, b,\zeta),
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{y}$ is the independent copy of $y$, $K(\cdot)$ is the second order symmetric kernel function and $\sigma$ is the positive-value bandwidth. The estimator of bandwidth $\sigma$ can be determined by the cross-validation criterion, and the detailed derivations can be found in Chen (2019a).
\text{\ \ \ \ }On the other hand, we observe that only (\ref{Marginal-correct}) involves $H(\cdot)$. To estimate it, it suffices to examine (\ref{Marginal-correct}). Different from the iteration method in Chen (2019a), here we use the nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator (NPMLE) (e.g., Wang 1991) to estimate the distribution function of $A^\ast$. For a fixed parameter $\beta$ and given $b$ and $\zeta$, the NPMLE of $H(a)$ in (\ref{Marginal-correct}) is given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{est-H}
\widehat{H}(a;b,\zeta) = \left( \sum \limits_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{\widehat{S}(a_i | w_i(b,\zeta), z_i )} \right)^{-1} \sum \limits_{i=1}^n \frac{I(a_i \leq a)}{\widehat{S}(a_i | w_i(b,\zeta), z_i )},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\widehat{S}(a_i | w_i(b,\zeta), z_i ) = \exp\left\{ -\widehat{\Lambda}_0(a_i;\beta,b,\zeta) \exp\left( \beta_x^\top w_i(b,\zeta) + \widehat{\beta}_z^\top z_i \right) \right\}$ and $\widehat{\Lambda}_0(t;\beta,b,\zeta)$ is determined in (\ref{Baseline_Hazard-correct}).
\text{\ \ \ \ }Therefore, replacing the unspecified functions in (\ref{Conditional-correct}) and (\ref{Marginal-correct}) by (\ref{Baseline_Hazard-correct}), (\ref{baseline_kernel-correct}), and (\ref{est-H}) gives the pseudo likelihood function $L_F^\ast (\beta, \widehat{\lambda}_0,\widehat{H})$, where $\widehat{\lambda}_0$ and $\widehat{H}$ represent (\ref{baseline_kernel-correct}) and (\ref{est-H}) for ease of notation.
\text{\ \ \ \ }To do the variable selection, we propose to use different penalty functions for $\beta$. Let $\rho(\beta)$ denote the penalty function and let $\vartheta$ be the tuning parameter. There are several choices of the penalty function, including the LASSO (Tibshirani 1996), adaptive LASSO (ALASSO, Zou 2006), and SCAD (Fan and Li 2001) methods. The detailed formulations are listed as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item LASSO:
The penalty function based on the LASSO method is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho(\beta) = \sum \limits_{r=1}^p \left| \beta_r \right|.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item ALASSO:
The penalty function based on the ALASSO method is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho(\beta) = \sum \limits_{r=1}^p w_r\left| \beta_r \right|,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $w = \left( w_1,\cdots,w_p \right)$ is the vector of weights. As suggested by Zou (2006), the weight can be set as $w_r = \beta_r^{-\gamma_1}$ for any $\gamma_1 > 0$ and $r = 1,\cdots,p$. Noting that $\gamma_1 = 0$ gives $w_r = 1$ for all $r = 1,\cdots,p$, thus yielding the LASSO penalty. To find an estimate of $w_r$, one may first find a consistent estimate $\widetilde{\beta}$ of $\beta$ and then take $\widetilde{w}_r = \widetilde{\beta}_r^{-\gamma_1}$ as a weight for $r = 1,\cdots,p$.
\item SCAD:
The penalty function based on the SCAD method is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho'(\beta) = I\left(\beta \leq \vartheta \right) + \frac{\left( a \vartheta - \beta \right)_+}{(a-1)\vartheta} I\left(\beta \geq \vartheta \right),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $(x)_+ = \max\{x,0\}$ and $a>0$ is a fixed parameter. As suggested by Fan and Li (2001), we let $a = 3.7$.
\end{itemize}
As a result, for the given $b$ and $\zeta$, we calculate
\begin{eqnarray} \label{est-beta-b-zeta}
\widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta) = \argmax \limits_{\beta} \left\{ L_F^\ast (\beta, \widehat{\lambda}_0,\widehat{H}) + \vartheta \rho(\beta) \right\}.
\end{eqnarray}
\text{\ \ \ \ }In implementing the proposed method, choosing sensible tuning parameters is critical. There is no unique way of selecting a suitable tuning parameter, and methods such as the Akaike information criterion (AIC), the Bayesian information criterion (BIC), the Cross Validation (CV), and the Generalized Cross Validation (GCV) may be considered. Suggested by Wang et al. (2007), BIC tends to outperform among those procedures, especially in the setting with a penalized likelihood function. Consequently, we employ the BIC approach to select the tuning parameter $\vartheta$. To emphasize the dependence on the tuning parameter, we let $\widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta,\vartheta)$ denote the estimator obtained from (\ref{est-beta-b-zeta}). Define
\begin{eqnarray} \label{BIC_beta}
BIC_\beta(\vartheta) = 2nL_F^\ast\left(\beta, \widehat{\lambda}_0, \widehat{H}\right) + \hbox{log}(n) \times \text{df} \left\{ \widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta,\vartheta) \right\},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\text{df} \left\{ \widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta,\vartheta) \right\}$ represents the number of non-zero elements in $ \widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta,\vartheta)$ for the given $\vartheta$. The optimal tuning parameter $\vartheta$, denoted by $\widehat{\vartheta}$, is determined by minimizing (\ref{BIC_beta}) within suitable ranges of $\vartheta$. As a result, the estimator of $\beta$ based on (\ref{est-beta-b-zeta}) is determined by $\widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta) = \widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta,\widehat{\vartheta})$.
\item[Step 3:] {\it Extrapolation}
Based on (\ref{est-beta-b-zeta}), we define
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widehat{\beta}(\zeta) =\frac{1}{B} \sum \limits_{b=1}^B \widehat{\beta}(b,\zeta)
\end{eqnarray*}
for any given $\zeta \in \mathcal{Z}$. For $r = 1,\cdots, p$, let $\widehat{\beta}_r(\zeta)$ denote the $r$th element of $\widehat{\beta}(\zeta)$. Then for each $r$ fit a regression model to the sequence $\left\{ \left(\zeta, \widehat{\beta}_r(\zeta)\right): \zeta \in \mathcal{Z} \right\}$ and extrapolate it to $\zeta = -1$. Let $\widehat{\beta}_r = \widehat{\beta}_r(-1)$ and denote $\widehat{\beta} = \left( \widehat{\beta}_1,\cdots,\widehat{\beta}_p \right)$ as the final estimator of $\beta$.
\end{description}
The key idea of the proposed three-stage procedure is to use simulated surrogate measurements to delineate the patterns of different degrees of measurement error on inference results. The first and third stages adopt the simulation-extrapolation (SIMEX) method (Cook and Stefanski 1994; Carroll et al. 2006, Chapter 5) which is applicable to error-contaminated covariates. The second stage of the proposed method undertakes the selection of important variables for settings with different magnitudes of mismeasurement. It is imperative to address the impact of measurement error on variable selection in this step.
\subsection{Estimation of the Cumulative Baseline Hazards Function} \label{est-Lambda-0}
In this section, we discuss the procedure of estimating $\Lambda_0(\cdot)$ after the parameter $\beta$ is estimated in Sections~\ref{Proposed-Chen}.
Write $\widehat{\beta} = \left(\widehat{\beta}_x^\top, \widehat{\beta}_z^\top \right)^\top$. For $r = 1,\cdots,p_x$ and $s = 1,\cdots,p_z$, let $\widehat{\beta}_{x,r}$ denote the $r$th component in $\widehat{\beta}_x$ and let and $\widehat{\beta}_{z,s}$ be the $s$th component in $\widehat{\beta}_z$.
Let
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_x = \left\{ r = 1,\cdots,p_x : \ \widehat{\beta}_{x,r} \neq 0 \right\}\ \text{and} \ \widehat{\mathcal{S}}_z = \left\{ s = 1,\cdots,p_z : \ \widehat{\beta}_{z,s} \neq 0 \right\}
\end{eqnarray*}
denote the sets containing the indices which reflect the non-zero components of the estimators $\widehat{\beta}_x$ and $\widehat{\beta}_z$, respectively. Moreover, define $\widehat{\mathcal{S}} = \widehat{\mathcal{S}}_x \cup \widehat{\mathcal{S}}_z$.
Let $\widehat{\beta}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}$ denote the subvector of $\widehat{\beta}$ containing non-zero elements based on $\widehat{\mathcal{S}}$. In addition, let $W_{i,\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_x}(b,\zeta)$ and $Z_{i,\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_z}$ denote two subvectors of $W_i(b,\zeta)$ and $Z_i$ containing non-zero elements based on $\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_x$ and $\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_z$, respectively.
For $b = 1,\cdots,B$ and $\zeta \in \mathcal{Z}$, replacing $\beta$ by $\widehat{\beta}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}$ in (\ref{Baseline_Hazard-correct}) gives
\begin{equation} \label{est-Lambda-b-zeta}
\widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}},0} (t;b,\zeta) = \int_0^t \frac{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n \{ dN_i(u) - R_i (u) \widehat{\beta}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}^\top \left( W_{i,\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_x}^\top(b,\zeta), Z_{i,\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_z}^\top \right)^\top du \}}{\sum \limits_{i=1}^n R_i(u)}
\end{equation}
for a given time $t$. Taking averaging on (\ref{est-Lambda-b-zeta}) with respect to $b$ gives
\begin{eqnarray} \label{est-Lambda-zeta}
\widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}},0} (t;\zeta) = \frac{1}{B} \sum \limits_{b=1}^B \widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}},0} (t;b,\zeta) \ \ \text{for}\ \ \zeta \in \mathcal{Z},
\end{eqnarray}
where $t$ is a given time.
To estimate the cumulative baseline hazard function $\Lambda_0(t)$ at a given time point $t >0$, we adopt Step 3 in Section~\ref{Proposed-Chen} and fit a regression model to $\left\{ \left( \zeta, \widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}},0} (t;\zeta) \right) : \zeta \in \mathcal{Z} \right\}$ through a regression function $\varphi_\Lambda(\zeta;\Gamma_\Lambda)$ with the associated parameter denoted by $\Gamma_\Lambda$, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{reg-Lambda-0}
\widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}},0} (t;\mathcal{Z}) = \varphi_\Lambda(\mathcal{Z};\Gamma_\Lambda) + \eta_\Lambda
\end{eqnarray}
with a noise term $\eta_\Lambda$, then we extrapolate it to $\zeta = -1$. The resulting value, denoted as $\widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{S},0} (t)$, is taken an estimate of $\Lambda_0(t)$.
\subsection{Estimation of the Distribution Function of Truncation Time} \label{est-H-0}
Once $\widehat{\beta}$ is obtained, we can also derive the estimator of $H(\cdot)$, and the procedure is parallel with the idea in Section~\ref{est-Lambda-0}. Specifically, first replacing $\beta$ in (\ref{est-H}) by $\widehat{\beta}$ based on $\widehat{\mathcal{S}}$ gives
\begin{eqnarray} \label{est-H-b-zeta}
\widehat{H}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a;b,\zeta) = \left( \sum \limits_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{\widehat{S}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a_i | w_i(b,\zeta), z_i )} \right)^{-1} \sum \limits_{i=1}^n \frac{I(a_i \leq a)}{\widehat{S}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a_i | w_i(b,\zeta), z_i )}
\end{eqnarray}
for a given time $a$, where $\widehat{S}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a | w_i(b,\zeta), z_i ) = \exp\left[ -\widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}},0} (a;b,\zeta) \exp\left\{ \widehat{\beta}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}^\top \left( W_{i,\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_x}^\top(b,\zeta), Z_{i,\widehat{\mathcal{S}}_z}^\top \right)^\top \right\} \right]$ and $\widehat{\Lambda}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}},0} (t;b,\zeta)$ is determined in (\ref{est-Lambda-b-zeta}).
Next, taking average on (\ref{est-H-b-zeta}) with respect to $b$ gives
\begin{eqnarray} \label{est-H-zeta}
\widehat{H}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a;\zeta) = \frac{1}{B} \sum \limits_{b=1}^B \widehat{H}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a;b,\zeta)
\end{eqnarray}
for $\zeta \in \mathcal{Z}$, where $a$ is a given time.
Finally, similar to (\ref{reg-Lambda-0}), we fit a regression model to $\left\{\left(\zeta, \widehat{H}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a;\zeta) \right) : \zeta \in \mathcal{Z} \right\}$ and then extrapolate it to $\zeta = -1$. Consequently, the resulting value, denoted as $\widehat{H}_{\widehat{\mathcal{S}}}(a)$, is taken an estimate of $H(\cdot)$.
\section{Numerical Studies} \label{Simulation}
\subsection{Model Setting}
Let $n$ be the sample size and here we keep $n = 400$. Let $\beta_{x0} \in \mathbb{R}^{p_x}$ and $\beta_{z0} \in \mathbb{R}^{p_z}$ be the true parameters as described in (\ref{additive_hazard_model}), and we denote $\beta_{0} = \left( \beta_{x0}^\top, \beta_{z0}^\top \right)^\top$. Here we let $p = p_x + p_z$ and $p_x = p_z$. We consider $p_x = p_z = 15$ or $20$, which indicates $p=30$ or $40$. Let $\mathcal{S} = \{ r : \beta_r \neq 0, r = 1,\cdots,p \}$ denote the set containing non-zero elements, and $q = |\mathcal{S}|$ is the number of elements in $\mathcal{S}$. For the entries of $\beta_{x0}$ and $\beta_{z0}$, we let $\beta_{x0} = \beta_{z0} = \left( \underbrace{1,\cdots,1}_{\left[\frac{p_x}{4}\right]}, \underbrace{-1,\cdots,-1}_{\left[\frac{p_x}{4}\right]}, \underbrace{0,\cdots0}_{1-2\left[\frac{p_x}{4}\right]}, \right)$, where $[\cdot]$ stands for the Gauss integer.
Let $\Sigma = \left(
\begin{array}{c c}
\Sigma_x & \Sigma_{xz} \\
\Sigma_{xz}^\top & \Sigma_z
\end{array}
\right)$, where $\Sigma_{xz}$ is the $p_x \times p_z$ covariance matrix of $X$ and $Z$ with entries $\sigma_{xzij}$, $\Sigma_x$ and $\Sigma_z$ are, respectively, $p_x \times p_x$ and $p_z \times p_z$ covariance matrices with entries $\sigma_{xij}$ and $\sigma_{zij}$ for $i,j=1,\cdots,p_x$. In particular, we let $\sigma_{xzij} = 0.5^{(2+|i-j|)}$, $\sigma_{xij} = \sigma_x^2 \rho_x^{|i-j|}$ and $\sigma_{zij} = \sigma_z^2 \rho_z^{|i-j|}$ with $\sigma_x^2 = \sigma_z^2 = 1.0$ and $\rho_x = \rho_z = 0.6$ for $i,j=1,\cdots,p_x$. Therefore, let the covariates $(X^\ast{}^\top, Z^\ast{}^\top)^\top$ be generated by normal distribution $N\left(\mathbf{0}_{p}, \Sigma
\right)$, where $\textbf{0}_{p}$ is the $p$-dimensional zero vector.
Four model formulations for $(A^\ast,T^\ast)$ are considered in this simulation study as follows:
\begin{description}
\item[Model 1:] $\lambda(t|X^\ast,Z^\ast) = 0.5 \sqrt{t} + \beta_{x0}^\top X^\ast + \beta_{z0}^\top Z^\ast$, $A^\ast \sim U(0,100)$;
\item[Model 2:] $\lambda(t|X^\ast,Z^\ast) = 0.5 \sqrt{t} + \beta_{x0}^\top X^\ast + \beta_{z0}^\top Z^\ast$, $A^\ast \sim \exp(10)$;
\item[Model 3:] $\lambda(t|X^\ast,Z^\ast) = \hbox{log}(t) + \beta_{x0}^\top X^\ast + \beta_{z0}^\top Z^\ast$, $A^\ast \sim \exp(10)$;
\item[Model 4:] $\lambda(t|X^\ast,Z^\ast) = \exp(2t) + \beta_{x0}^\top X^\ast + \beta_{z0}^\top Z^\ast$, $A^\ast \sim \exp(10)$.
\end{description}
The observed data $(A,T,X,Z)$ is collected from $(A^\ast,T^\ast,X^\ast, Z^\ast)$ by conditioning on that $T^\ast \geq A^\ast$. We repeatedly generate data these steps we obtain a sample of a required size $n=400$. For the measurement error process, we consider model (\ref{mea_classic}) with error $\epsilon \sim N \left( 0, \Sigma_\epsilon \right)$, where $\Sigma_{\epsilon}$ is the diagonal matrix where the diagonal entry is taken as $ 0.01$, $0.5$, or $0.75$.
Let $C$ be the censoring time generated from the uniform distribution $U(0,c)$, where $c$ is a constant that is chosen to yield about 50\% censoring rate.
Consequently, $Y$ and $\Delta$ are determined by $Y = \min \left\{ T, A+C \right\}$ and $\Delta = I \left( T \leq A + C \right)$, and the sample with size $n = 400$ is $\left\{ (Y_i, \Delta_i, A_i, W_i, Z_i) \right\}$.
In implementing the proposed method, we set $B = 500$ and partition the interval $[0,2]$ into subintervals with the equal width 0.25 with the resulting cutpoints set as the values of $\zeta$. We take the regression function in Step 3 of the proposed method to be the quadratic polynomial functions, as suggested in Carroll et al. (2006, p.126).
Finally, we perform 1000 simulations for each setting.
\subsection{Simulation Results}
To assess the performance of the estimator of $\beta$, we report several measures, the $L_1$-norm
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\| \Delta_\beta \right\|_1 = \sum \limits_{i} \left| \widehat{\beta}_i - \beta_{0,i} \right|
\end{eqnarray*}
and the $L_2$-norm
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left\| \Delta_\beta \right\|_2 = \sqrt{ \sum \limits_{i} \left( \widehat{\beta}_i - \beta_{0,i} \right)^2},
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\Delta_\beta = \widehat{\beta} - \beta_0$. In addition, we calculate the number of the correctly selected variables (\#S) and the number of the falsely excluded variables (\#FN).
For Models 1-4, we compare the performance of the estimators obtained from applying the proposed method to the surrogate covariates as opposed to the estimators obtained from fitting the data with the true covariate measurements. We examine three different penalty functions as discussed in Section~\ref{Proposed-Chen}, including the LASSO, ALASSO, and SCAD methods. In comparison, we also examine the \textit{naive estimators} of $\beta$, denoted by $\widehat{\beta}_\text{naive}$, which is derived by directly implementing the observed covariates $W_i$ in (\ref{Full}).
In Tables~\ref{Simulation_A}-\ref{Simulation_D}, we report the numerical results of our proposed method and the naive approach as well as those obtained from the true covariate measurements. It is clear and expected that the results obtained from using the true covariate measurements are the best with the smallest norms under all settings. Regarding the performance on the proposed method with the three different penalty functions, the ALASSO and SCAD tend to slightly outperform the LASSO in terms of the specificity and the finite sample biases, indicated by the $L_1$-norm and $L_2$-norm. In terms of correctly selecting variables, the LASSO method includes more variables than the ALASSO and SCAD methods. All methods perform equally well in terms of falsely excluding variables and sensitivity, producing nearly perfect results. Furthermore, it is revealed that the naive method performs unsatisfactorily, with considerable finite sample biases produced and unreliable variable selection and exclusion results.
\subsection{Analysis of the Worcester Heart Attack Study (WHAS500) Data}
In this section, we apply the proposed method to analyze the data arising from the Worcester Heart Attack Study (WHAS500), which is described in Section~\ref{Introduction}. Specifically, as discussed by Hosmer, Lemeshow, and May (2008), the beginning of a survival time was defined as the time that subject was admitted to a hospital. The main interest is in the survival times of patients who were discharged alive from hospitals. Hence, a selection criterion was imposed that only those subjects who were discharged alive were eligible to be included in the analysis. That is, their minimum survival time would be the length of their hospital stay; individuals whose failure times did not exceed the minimum survival time were not enrolled in this analysis, and hence the left-truncation happens. With such a criterion, a sample of size 461 was selected and the truncation rate was approximately 7.8\%. Be more specifically, total length of follow-up (lenfol) is the last event time (i.e., $Y_i = \min \left\{T_i,A_i + C_i \right\}$), length of hospital stay (los) is the truncation time (i.e., $A_i$), and vital status at last follow-up (fstat) is $\delta_i$. These 461 patients contribute the measurements which satisfy the constraint $T_i \geq A_i$. In this dataset, the censoring rate is 61.8\%.
The following covariates are included in our analysis: initial heart rate (\texttt{hr}, $X_1$), initial systolic blood pressure (\texttt{sysbp}, $X_2$), initial diastolic blood pressure (\texttt{diasbp}, $X_3$), body mass index (\texttt{bmi}, $X_4$), history of cardiovascular disease (\texttt{cvd}, $Z_1$), atrial fibrillation (\texttt{afb}, $Z_2$), cardiogenic shock (\texttt{sho}, $Z_3$), age at hospital admission (\texttt{age}, $Z_4$),
gender (\texttt{gender}, $Z_5$), congestive heart complications (\texttt{chf}, $Z_6$), complete heart block (\texttt{av3}, $Z_7$), MI Order (\texttt{miord}, $Z_8$), and MI Type (\texttt{mitype}, $Z_9$). As indicated by Bauldry et al. (2015) and Rothman (2008), it is reasonable to assume that covariates $X_1$, $X_2$, $X_3$ and $X_4$ are subject to mismeasurement due to the reasons including inaccurate measurement devices and/or procedures, the biological variability, and temporal variations. In this dataset, we have $p_x = 4$ and $p_z = 9$, yielding that $p = p_x + p_z = 13$.
Since this dataset contains no additional information, such as repeated measurements or validation data, for the characterization of the measurement error process, we conduct sensitivity analyses to investigate the measurement error effects. Specifically, let $\Sigma$ be the sample covariance matrix of $\left(X_1,X_2,X_3,X_4 \right)^\top$, and for sensitivity analyses we consider $\Sigma + \Sigma_e$ to be the covariance matrix $\Sigma_\epsilon$ for the measurement error model (\ref{mea_classic}), where $\Sigma_e$ is the diagonal matrix with diagonal elements $\sigma_e$, which is specified as $\sigma_e = 0.15$, $0.5$, or $0.75$.
Table~\ref{RDA_A} summarizes the estimates the result of variable selection of both the proposed and the naive methods. We first observe that the LASSO method produces more variables than the SCAD and ALASSO methods. The proposed method with three different penalty functions gives the robust result of variable selection regardless of the degrees of error effect. It is interesting to see that both ALASSO and SCAD methods select the same variables regardless of values of $\sigma_e^2$, it indicates that ALASSO and SCAD are highly recommended to adopt in analysis. Compared with the proposed method, we can observe that the naive method selects more variables. In addition, there are several variables which are commonly selected based on both methods, including \texttt{sysbp}, \texttt{diasbp}, \texttt{bmi}, \texttt{afb}, \texttt{av3}, \texttt{miord}, and \texttt{mitype}.
\section{Conclusion} \label{Conclusion}
Variable selection and estimation for survival data are always important topics and also attract our attentions. Even though several methods have been proposed to deal with these problems, there has been little work of addressing these two complex features simultaneously in inferential procedures. In this paper, we develop the three-stage procedure to simultaneously correct error-prone variables, select variables, and estimate the parameters of main interest. We further demonstrate satisfactory finite sample performance of our methods using simulation studies.
One of the advantage is that the proposed method is based on the pseudo likelihood approach, which produces the more robust and efficient estimator (Chen 2019a). In addition, the proposed three-stage procedure can be naturally extended to other models. It implies that the proposed method provides a flexible approach to deal with different situations.
Finally, even though we have developed the valid method with such complex setting, there are still some challenges and extensions. For example, mismeasurement in the discrete covariates may happen, and it is also called \textit{misclassification} problem. It is also interesting to explore misclassification, even mixture of measurement error and misclassification. In addition, even we discuss the high-dimensional data analysis, but we only consider the case $p <n$. Actually, the \textit{ultrahigh-dimensional} data analysis, i.e., $p \gg n$, is also an important topic. Finally, even though we have no theoretical results of the proposed method in the current manuscript, numerical results provide the satisfactory performance of the proposed method, including precise estimation and high accuracy of variable selection. Exploring theoretical results of the proposed method, including consistency or oracle property, is also an important work in the future.
\section*{Conflict of Interest}
This paper has no Conflict of Interest.
\clearpage
\begin{table}
\huge
\caption{Simulation result for Model 1 }\label{Simulation_A}
\scriptsize
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c ccccc cccc ccc}
\\
\hline\hline
$p\ (q)$ & $\sigma_{\epsilon}$ & Method & \multicolumn{4}{c} { Result of proposed estimator $\widehat{\beta}$ } & & \multicolumn{4}{c} {Result of naive estimator $\widehat{\beta}_\text{naive}$ } \\ \cline{4-7} \cline{9-12}
& & & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN
& & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN \\
\hline
30 (17) & 0.15 & LASSO & 1.290 & 0.101 & 18.450 & 0.000 & & 5.241 & 0.608 & 23.450 & 0.001 \\%& & 0.043 & 0.029\\
& & SCAD & 1.160 & 0.094 & 17.926 & 0.000 & & 4.179 & 0.355 & 20.926 & 0.006 \\%& & 0.038 & 0.026 \\
& & ALASSO & 1.150 & 0.094 & 17.965 & 0.000 & & 4.506 & 0.424 & 21.994 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.050 & 0.030\\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 1.481 & 0.149 & 18.822 & 0.000 & & 7.178 & 0.759 & 25.223 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.049 & 0.027\\
& & SCAD & 1.061 & 0.138 & 17.006 & 0.000 & & 6.862 & 0.643 & 21.176 & 0.005 \\%& & 0.046 & 0.024\\
& & ALASSO & 1.361 & 0.139 & 17.893 & 0.000 & & 6.677 & 0.695 & 22.777 & 0.004 \\%& & 0.055 & 0.031\\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 2.451 & 0.686 & 18.456 & 0.000 & & 10.833 & 1.008 & 24.996 & 0.001 \\%& & 0.033 & 0.026\\
& & SCAD & 1.792 & 0.559 & 17.084 & 0.000 & & 8.789 & 0.899 & 21.088 & 0.005 \\%& & 0.032 & 0.024\\
& & ALASSO & 1.988 & 0.575 & 18.037 & 0.000 & & 8.994 & 0.951 & 21.050 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.049 & 0.030\\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.336 & 0.013 & 19.160 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\%& & 0.029 & 0.029\\
& & SCAD & 0.331 & 0.009 & 17.796 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\% & & 0.027 & 0.028\\
& & ALASSO & 0.332 & 0.011 & 18.449 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\% & & 0.031 & 0.029\\
\hline
40 (21) & 0.15 & LASSO & 0.810 & 0.044 & 25.768 & 0.000 & & 2.280 & 0.244 & 34.778 & 0.002\\% & & 0.028 & 0.027\\
& & SCAD & 0.632 & 0.029 & 22.626 & 0.000 & & 2.763 & 0.229 & 30.656 & 0.005 \\%& & 0.025 & 0.024 \\
& & ALASSO & 0.774 & 0.033 & 22.578 & 0.000 & & 2.557 & 0.235 & 30.765 & 0.002 \\%& & 0.032 & 0.028 \\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 1.352 & 0.205 & 24.470 & 0.000 & & 5.352 & 0.605 & 34.470 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.023 & 0.037\\
& & SCAD & 1.308 & 0.144 & 22.182 & 0.000 & & 4.308 & 0.544 & 30.182 & 0.005\\% & & 0.023 & 0.034 \\
& & ALASSO & 1.255 & 0.123 & 21.430 & 0.000 & & 4.655 & 0.523 & 31.594 & 0.004\\% & & 0.040 & 0.037\\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 1.852 & 0.291 & 24.178 & 0.000 & & 7.752 & 0.691 & 34.178 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.021 & 0.035\\
& & SCAD & 1.744 & 0.259 & 22.766 & 0.000 & & 6.744 & 0.653 & 29.766 & 0.006 \\%& & 0.019 & 0.032 \\
& & ALASSO & 1.754 & 0.264 & 22.000 & 0.000 & & 6.014 & 0.684 & 30.074 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.044 & 0.036 \\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.324 & 0.013 & 23.251 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\%& & 0.029 & 0.029\\
& & SCAD & 0.321 & 0.010 & 21.796 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\% & & 0.027 & 0.028\\
& & ALASSO & 0.342 & 0.012 & 21.598 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\% & & 0.031 & 0.029\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\begin{table}
\huge
\caption{Simulation result for Model 2 }\label{Simulation_B}
\scriptsize
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c ccccc ccc c c c c}
\\
\hline\hline
$p\ (q)$ & $\sigma_{\epsilon}$ & Method & \multicolumn{4}{c} { Result of proposed estimator $\widehat{\beta}$ } & & \multicolumn{4}{c} {Result of naive estimator $\widehat{\beta}_\text{naive}$ } \\ \cline{4-7} \cline{9-12}
& & & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN
& & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN \\
\hline
30 (17)& 0.15 & LASSO & 1.150 & 0.078 & 20.197 & 0.000 & & 4.351 & 0.278 & 22.976 & 0.003\\
& & SCAD & 0.879 & 0.046 & 19.142 & 0.000 & & 3.879 & 0.246 & 20.714 & 0.006\\
& & ALASSO & 0.950 & 0.059 & 19.877 & 0.000 & & 4.295 & 0.269 & 20.970 & 0.004\\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 1.161 & 0.081 & 20.298 & 0.000 & & 5.143 & 0.381 & 25.538 & 0.002\\
& & SCAD & 0.869 & 0.046 & 19.980 & 0.000 & & 4.869 & 0.346 & 21.440 & 0.005\\
& & ALASSO & 1.001 & 0.059 & 20.000 & 0.000 & & 4.303 & 0.358 & 22.037 & 0.003\\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 1.692 & 0.165 & 23.486 & 0.000 & & 7.692 & 0.565 & 26.486 & 0.003\\
& & SCAD & 1.508 & 0.130 & 22.042 & 0.000 & & 6.508 & 0.530 & 25.077 & 0.005\\
& & ALASSO & 1.573 & 0.145 & 22.447 & 0.000 & & 6.713 & 0.542 & 25.387 & 0.003\\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.892 & 0.049 & 19.246 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & SCAD & 0.726 & 0.032 & 17.916 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & ALASSO & 0.759 & 0.040 & 18.334 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
\hline
40 (21)& 0.15 & LASSO & 0.954 & 0.054 & 26.094 & 0.000 & & 4.956 & 0.335 & 31.094 & 0.004\\
& & SCAD & 0.584 & 0.026 & 22.162 & 0.000 & & 4.584 & 0.326 & 29.602 & 0.006\\
& & ALASSO & 0.712 & 0.037 & 22.538 & 0.000 & & 4.782 & 0.334 & 29.548 & 0.003\\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 1.365 & 0.093 & 26.702 & 0.000 & & 5.365 & 0.493 & 29.702 & 0.003\\
& & SCAD & 1.058 & 0.058 & 22.622
& 0.000 & & 5.058 & 0.458 & 27.622
& 0.008\\
& & ALASSO & 1.140 & 0.060 & 22.584 & 0.000 & & 5.400 & 0.460 & 27.433 & 0.005\\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 1.305 & 0.099 & 26.356 & 0.000 & & 6.305 & 0.699 & 27.356 & 0.005\\
& & SCAD & 1.182 & 0.087 & 22.802 & 0.000 & & 6.182 & 0.587 & 25.802 & 0.008\\
& & ALASSO & 1.289 & 0.090 & 23.000 & 0.000 & & 5.289 & 0.612 & 26.013 & 0.006\\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.883 & 0.033 & 24.870 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & SCAD & 0.552 & 0.015 & 21.872 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & ALASSO & 0.648 & 0.026 & 22.483 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\begin{table}
\huge
\caption{Simulation result for Model 3 }\label{Simulation_C}
\scriptsize
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c ccccc cccc ccc}
\\
\hline\hline
$p\ (q)$ & $\sigma_{\epsilon}$ & Method & \multicolumn{4}{c} { Result of proposed estimator $\widehat{\beta}$ } & & \multicolumn{4}{c} {Result of naive estimator $\widehat{\beta}_\text{naive}$ } \\ \cline{4-7} \cline{9-12}
& & & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN
& & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN \\
\hline
30 (17) & 0.15 & LASSO & 0.716 & 0.065 & 20.092 & 0.000 & & 3.716 & 0.265 & 26.092 & 0.004 \\% & & 0.042 & 0.027 & &
& & SCAD & 0.627 & 0.059 & 18.670 & 0.000 & & 3.627 & 0.259 & 24.670 & 0.005 \\% & & 0.032 & 0.029 & & \\
& & ALASSO & 0.640 & 0.059 & 18.143 & 0.000 & & 3.640 & 0.248 & 25.179 & 0.004\\% & & 0.063 & 0.029 & & \\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 0.884 & 0.085 & 21.532 & 0.000 & & 4.862 & 0.385 & 26.532 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.034 & 0.024 & & \\
& & SCAD & 0.511 & 0.064 & 20.942 & 0.000 & & 4.511 & 0.320 & 24.142 & 0.006 \\% & & 0.028 & 0.023 & & \\
& & ALASSO & 0.667 & 0.076 & 21.000 & 0.000 & & 4.567 & 0.366 & 24.110 & 0.004 \\% & & 0.039 & 0.024 & & \\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 0.998 & 0.083 & 21.398 & 0.000 & & 5.998 & 0.483 & 27.398 & 0.003 \\% & & 0.041 & 0.019\\
& & SCAD & 0.609 & 0.064 & 20.786 & 0.000 & & 5.609 & 0.444 & 25.786 & 0.004 \\%& & 0.035 & 0.018\\
& & ALASSO & 0.771 & 0.075 & 20.000 & 0.000 & & 5.719 & 0.455 & 25.130 & 0.004\\% & & 0.041 & 0.021\\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.443 & 0.016 & 20.964 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\% & & 0.025 & 0.021\\
& & SCAD & 0.333 & 0.010 & 17.378 & 0.001 & &$-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\% & & 0.024 & 0.019\\
& & ALASSO & 0.334 & 0.011 & 18.000 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\%& & 0.028 & 0.021\\
\hline
40 (21) & 0.15 & LASSO & 1.290 & 0.101 & 23.450 & 0.000 & & 4.290 & 0.301 & 28.450 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.043 & 0.029\\
& & SCAD & 1.160 & 0.094 & 22.926 & 0.000 & & 4.160 & 0.294 & 27.926 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.038 & 0.026 \\
& & ALASSO & 1.206 & 0.094 & 23.000 & 0.000 & & 4.156 & 0.284 & 26.112 & 0.004 \\%& & 0.050 & 0.030\\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 1.481 & 0.149 & 23.822 & 0.000 & & 4.481 & 0.349 & 30.822 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.049 & 0.027\\
& & SCAD & 1.061 & 0.138 & 22.006 & 0.000 & & 4.061 & 0.331 & 28.006 & 0.005 \\%& & 0.046 & 0.024\\
& & ALASSO & 1.161 & 0.139 & 22.000 & 0.001 & & 4.561 & 0.339 & 28.030 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.055 & 0.031\\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 1.551 & 0.186 & 24.456 & 0.000 & & 5.451 & 0.686 & 32.456 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.033 & 0.026\\
& & SCAD & 1.332 & 0.159 & 22.084 & 0.000 & & 4.792 & 0.599 & 28.084 & 0.005 \\%& & 0.032 & 0.024\\
& & ALASSO & 1.488 & 0.151 & 22.000 & 0.000 & & 4.788 & 0.575 & 29.301 & 0.003 \\%& & 0.049 & 0.030\\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.936 & 0.073 & 23.160 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ \\%& & 0.029 & 0.029\\
& & SCAD & 0.831 & 0.069 & 21.796 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\% & & 0.027 & 0.028\\
& & ALASSO & 0.842 & 0.072 & 22.000 & 0.000 & &$-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\% & & 0.031 & 0.029\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\begin{table}
\huge
\caption{Simulation result for Model 4 }\label{Simulation_D}
\scriptsize
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c ccccc ccc c c c c}
\\
\hline\hline
$p\ (q)$ & $\sigma_{\epsilon}$ & Method & \multicolumn{4}{c} { Result of proposed estimator $\widehat{\beta}$ } & & \multicolumn{4}{c} {Result of naive estimator $\widehat{\beta}_\text{naive}$ } \\ \cline{4-7} \cline{9-12}
& & & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN
& & $L_1$-norm & $L_2$-norm & \#S & \#FN \\
\hline
30 (17)& 0.15 & LASSO & 0.689 & 0.037 & 20.190 & 0.000 & & 3.689 & 0.337 & 25.190 & 0.003 \\
& & SCAD & 0.433 & 0.016 & 19.980 & 0.000 & & 3.433 & 0.316 & 23.980 & 0.005\\
& & ALASSO & 0.571 & 0.029 & 20.000 & 0.000 & & 3.471 & 0.329 & 23.100 & 0.003\\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 0.650 & 0.035 & 20.510 & 0.000 & & 4.650 & 0.455 & 27.510 & 0.003\\
& & SCAD & 0.378 & 0.014 & 19.960 & 0.000 & & 4.378 & 0.414 & 24.960 & 0.007\\
& & ALASSO & 0.407 & 0.027 & 20.030 & 0.000 & & 4.407 & 0.430 & 24.100 & 0.004\\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 0.661 & 0.037 & 21.294 & 0.000 & & 5.174 & 0.507 & 26.294 & 0.004\\
& & SCAD & 0.434 & 0.027 & 19.654 & 0.000 & & 4.934 & 0.470 & 23.654 & 0.006\\
& & ALASSO & 0.450 & 0.037 & 20.100 & 0.000 & & 4.650 & 0.447 & 23.120 & 0.004\\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.466 & 0.025 & 19.780 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & SCAD & 0.312 & 0.019 & 17.850 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & ALASSO & 0.360 & 0.022 & 18.100 & 0.000 & &$-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
\hline
40 (21)& 0.15 & LASSO & 1.150 & 0.078 & 24.976 & 0.000 & & 4.150 & 0.478 & 27.976 & 0.003\\
& & SCAD & 0.879 & 0.046 & 22.142 & 0.000 & & 3.879 & 0.346 & 25.142 & 0.004\\
& & ALASSO & 0.917 & 0.069 & 22.200 & 0.000 & & 3.950 & 0.379 & 25.600 & 0.003\\
\\
& 0.50 & LASSO & 1.161 & 0.081 & 23.298 & 0.000 & & 4.161 & 0.481 & 30.298 & 0.002\\
& & SCAD & 0.869 & 0.046 & 21.980 & 0.000 & & 3.869 & 0.346 & 28.980 & 0.006\\
& & ALASSO & 0.921 & 0.068 & 22.400 & 0.000 & & 3.903 & 0.389 & 29.400 & 0.003\\
\\
& 0.75 & LASSO & 1.192 & 0.085 & 24.486 & 0.000 & & 4.962 & 0.465 & 33.486 & 0.003\\
& & SCAD & 0.858 & 0.043 & 21.042 & 0.000 & & 4.508 & 0.430 & 29.040 & 0.005\\
& & ALASSO & 0.913 & 0.066 & 22.000 & 0.000 & & 4.713 & 0.442 & 29.000 & 0.004\\
\\
& true $X$ & LASSO & 0.892 & 0.049 & 23.246 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & SCAD & 0.726 & 0.032 & 21.916 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
& & ALASSO & 0.759 & 0.040 & 22.100 & 0.000 & & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}
\huge
\caption{Sensitivity analyses for analysis of WHAS500 data}\label{RDA_A}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c c ccc c ccc c ccc c ccc}
\\
\hline\hline
& \text{Covariate} & \multicolumn{3}{c} { $\sigma_\epsilon = 0.15$ } & & \multicolumn{3}{c} { $\sigma_\epsilon = 0.50$ } & & \multicolumn{3}{c} {$\sigma_\epsilon = 0.75$ } & & \multicolumn{3}{c} {naive estimator } \\ \cline{3-5} \cline{7-9} \cline{11-13} \cline{15-17}
& & LASSO & SCAD & ALASSO & & LASSO & SCAD & ALASSO & & LASSO & SCAD & ALASSO & & LASSO & SCAD & ALASSO \\
\hline
& hr & 0.038 & 0 & 0 & & 0.071 & 0 & 0 & & 0.076 & 0 & 0 & & 0.026 & 0 & 0 \\
& sysbp & 0.120 & 0.040 & 0.036 & & 0.118 & 0.025 & 0.019 & & 0.121 & 0.028 & 0.027 & & 0.160 &0.150 &0.164\\
& diasbp & -0.064 & -0.096 & -0.126 & & -0.066 & -0.111 & -0.143 & & -0.062 & -0.115 & -0.142 & & -0.210 & -0.184 & -0.207\\
& bmi & -0.142 & -0.174 & -0.204 & & -0.139 & -0.185 & -0.216 & & -0.140 & -0.193 & -0.220 & & -0.111 &-0.084 &-0.107\\
& cvd & 0 & 0 & 0 & & 0 & 0 & 0 & & 0& 0 & 0 &&0.001& 0 &0 \\
& afb & 0.120 & 0.039 & 0.036 & & 0.118 & 0.025 & 0.019 & & 0.121 & 0.028 & 0.021 & & 0.183 & 0.157 & 0.180\\
& sho & 0 & 0 & 0 & & 0 & 0 & 0 & & 0 & 0 & 0 & & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
& age & 0.045 & 0 & 0 & & 0.046 & 0 & 0& & 0.047 &0 & 0 && 0.096 & 0.079 & 0.095 \\
& gender & 0.045 & 0 & 0 & & 0.060 & 0 & 0 && 0.061 & 0 & 0 && 0.091 & 0.081 & 0.095\\
& chf & 0.086 & 0 & 0& & 0.086 & 0 & 0 & & 0.088 & 0 & 0 & & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
& av3 & -0.132 & -0.164 & -0.194& & -0.132 & -0.178 & -0.209 && -0.163 & -0.215 & -0.242 && -0.223 & -0.206 & -0.230 \\
& miord & -0.015 & -0.047 & -0.063& & -0.017 & -0.063 & -0.094 && -0.024 & -0.076 & -0.104 && -0.103 & -0.077 & -0.010\\
& mitype & 0.575 & 0.495 & 0.514& & 0.526 & 0.432 & 0.449& & 0.496 & 0.4022 & 0.416 && 0.328 & 0.318 & 0.331\\
\hline
\#$S$ & & 11 & 7 & 7 & & 11 & 7 & 7 & & 11 & 7 & 7 && 11 & 9 & 9\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}
\clearpage
\section*{References}
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Bauldry, S., Bollen, K. A. and Adair, L. S. (2015) Evaluating measurement error in readings of blood pressure for adolescents and young adults. {\em Blood Pressure}, {24}, 96-102.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Buzas, J. F. (1998). Unbiased scores in proportional hazards regression with covariate measurement error. {\em Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference}, 67, 247-257.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Carroll, R. J., Ruppert, D., Stefanski, L. A., and Crainiceanu, C. M. (2006) {\em Measurement Error in Nonlinear Model}. Chapman \& Hall/CRC, New York.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Chen L.-P. (2018) Semiparametric estimation for the accelerated failure time model with length-biased sampling and
covariate measurement error. {\em Stat},7:e209. \\DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sta4.209
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Chen, L.-P. and Yi, G. Y. (2019). Semiparametric methods for left-truncated and right-censored survival data with covariate measurement error. Submitted.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Chen, L.-P. (2019a) Pseudo likelihood estimation for the additive hazards model with data subject to left-truncation and right-censoring. {\em Statistics and Its Interface}, 12, 135–148.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Chen, L.-P. (2019b) Semiparametric estimation for cure survival model with left-truncated and right-censored data and covariate measurement error. arXiv:1812.11973. {\em Statistics and Probability Letters}, 154, 108547. DOI: 10.1016/j.spl.2019.06.023.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Chen, L.-P. (2019c). Statistical analysis with measurement error or
misclassification: Strategy, method and application. {\em Biometrics}, 75, 1045-1046.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Cook, J. R. and Stefaski, L. A. (1994) Simulation-Extrapolation Estimation in Parametric Measurement Error Models. {\em Journal of the American Statistical Association}, 89, 1314 - 1328.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Fan, J. and Li, R. (2001) Variable selection via nonconcave penalized
likelihood and its oracle properties. {\em Journal of the American Statistical Association}, 96, 1348-1360.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S. and May, S. (2008) {\em Applied Survival Analysis: Regression Modeling of Time to Event Data}. John Wiley and Sons Inc
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Hu, C. and Lin, D. Y. (2002). Cox regression with covariate measurement error. {\em Scandnavian Journal of Statistics}, 29, 637-655.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Huang, C. Y., Follmann, D. A., and Qin, J. (2012) A maximum pseudo-profile likelihood estimator for the Cox model under length-biased sampling. {\em Biometrika}, 99, 199-210.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Huang, C. Y. and Qin, J. (2013) Semiparametric estimation for the additive hazards model with left-truncated and right-censored data. {\em Biometrika}, 100, 877-888.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Huang, Y. and Wang, C. Y. (2000). Cox regression with accurate covariates unascertainable: A nonparametric correction approach. {\em Journal of the American Statistical Association}, 95, 1209-1219.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Kalbfleisch, J. D. and Prentice, R. L. (2011) {\em The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data}. Wiley.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Lawless, J. F. ( 2003) {\em Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data}. Wiley
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Lin, D. Y. and Wei, L. J. (1989) The robust inference for the Cox
proportional hazards model. {\em Journal of the American Statistical
Association}, 84, 1074-1078.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Lin, W. and Lv, J. (2013) High-dimensional additive hazards regression. {\em Journal of American Statistical Association}, 108, 247 - 264.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Nakamura, T. (1992). Proportional hazards model with covariates subject to measurement error. {\em Biometrics}, 48, 829-838.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Ning, J., Qin, J., and Shen, Y. (2014). Semiparametric accelerated failure time model for length-biased data with application to dementia study. {\em Statistica
Sinica}, 24, 313-333.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Qin, J. and Shen, Y. (2010) Statistical methods for analyzing right-censored length-biased data under Cox model. {\em Biometrics}, 66, 382-392.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Rothman K. J. (2008) BMI-related errors in the measurement of obesity. {\it International Journal of Obesity}, {32}, 56-59.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Shen, Y., Ning, J., and Qin, J. (2009). Analyzing length-biased data with semiparametric transformation and accelerated failure time models. {\em Journal of the
American Statistical Association}, 104, 1192-1202.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Su, Y. R. and Wang, J. L. (2012) Modeling left-truncated and right-censored survival data with longitudinal covariate. {\em The Annals of Statistics}, 40, 1465-1488.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Tibshirani, R. (1996) Regression Shrinkage and Selection via the LASSO. {\em Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B}, 58, 267 - 288.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Wang, H., Li, R. and Tsai, C. (2007) Tuning parameter selectors for the smoothly clipped absolute deviation method. {\em Biometrika}, 94, 553 - 568.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Wang, M.-C. (1991). Nonparametric estimation from cross-sectional survival data. {\em Journal of the
American Statistical Association}, 86 130–143.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Xie, S. H., Wang, C. Y., and Prentice, R. L. (2001). A risk set calibration method for failure time regression by using a covariate reliability sample. {\em Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B}, 63, 855-870.
\par\vskip 2mm\noindent\refhg Zou, H. (2006) The Adaptive Lasso and Its Oracle Properties. {\em Journal of the American Statistical Association}, 101, 1418 - 1429.
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
The goal of this paper is to propose a large class of new correlation measures for multipartite systems and their holographic duals, motivated by the recent work~\cite{Dutta:2019gen}.
In most of the current studies of quantum entanglement~\cite{Vidal:2002rm,Kitaev:2005dm,Levin:2006,Casini:2004bw,Casini:2012ei,Casini:2008cr,Hung:2018rhg,RT:RT-formula,HRT:HRT-formula} we often
divide the total system into two: $A$ and its complement $A^{c}$, and compute the entanglement entropy $S_{A}:=-{\rm Tr}\rho_{A}\log\rho_{A}$.
In the gauge/gravity correspondence
\citep{Maldacena:AdS/CFT}, the Ryu-Takayanagi formula \citep{RT:RT-formula,HRT:HRT-formula}
allows us to use a codimension-2 surface in AdS to compute the entanglement entropy in holographic CFTs. This discovery starts a new era
of studying relations between spacetime geometry and quantum
entanglement precisely~\citep{Swingle:TensorNetwork,VanRaamsdonk:Buildingup1,MaldacenaSusskind:ERequalsEPR,FGHMR:LinearEinsteinequationfrom1stLaw,MiyajiTakayanagi:SurfaceStateCorrespondence,MTW:OptimizationofPathIntegral1,CKMTW:OptimizationofPathIntegral2,PYHP:HaPPYcode,FreedmanHeadrick:BitThreads}.
It has been known that the entanglement entropy truly measures quantum entanglement
only for pure states $\ket{\psi}_{AB}$. Therefore it is interesting to ask what is the analogy of that and the Ryu-Takayanagi formula when $\rho_{AB}$ is a mixed state. Recently there have been several proposals~\cite{Dutta:2019gen, Kudler-Flam:2018qjo,Tamaoka:2018ned,Kudler-Flam:2019oru,Kudler-Flam:2019wtv,Kusuki:2019zsp} and it turns out that the entanglement wedge cross section wins most of the attentions in the dual gravity side.
Another important question is how to find multipartite correlation measures and their geometric dual. It is known that there are much richer correlation structures in quantum
systems consisting of three or more subsystems (see e.g. \citep{HHHH:QuantumEntanglement}). However the holographic interpretation of multipartite correlations is less known, though it is obviously crucial for the understanding of the emergence of bulk geometry from many-body quantum entanglement on the boundary.
In~\cite{Umemoto:2018jpc}, an analogy of bipartite entanglement wedge cross section for multiple subsystems, $\Delta_W$ has been proposed and it shares a lot of common features with the multipartite generalization of entanglement of purification $\Delta_P$. This motivates the authors in~\cite{Umemoto:2018jpc} to propose the conjecture $\Delta_P=\Delta_W$. The difficulty to compute $\Delta_P$ makes it a bit hard to test $\Delta_P=\Delta_W$ though this conjecture is the most natural generalization of the $E_P=E_W$ conjecture proposed in~\cite{Takayanagi:2017knl,NDHZS:HEoP}. See~\cite{Bao:2018gck,Takayanagi:2018zqx,Cui:2018dyq,Yang:2018gfq,Bao:2018fso,Agon:2018lwq,Heydeman:2018qty,Caputa:2018xuf,Guo:2019azy,Liu:2019qje,Bhattacharyya:2019tsi,Ghodrati:2019hnn,BabaeiVelni:2019pkw,Bao:2019bib,Du:2019emy,Guo:2019pfl,Bao:2019wcf,Harper:2019lff,Akhavan:2019zax,Kusuki:2019rbk,Zhou:2019jlh,Umemoto:2019jlz,Jeong:2019xdr,Kusuki:2019evw,CKNR:EntanglementWedge,Wall:Maximinsurfaces,HHLR:EntanglementWedge,Bao:2019zqc,Kusuki:2019evw} for recent progress.
In this paper, we introduce a new class of multipartite correlation measures in generic quantum systems.
They are defined by generalizing the reflected entropy method for multipartite systems. Among these new measures, there is a special one called multipartite reflected entropy $\Delta_R$ invariant under the permutations of subsystems.
We then show that the holographic duals of our new measures are different types of minimal codimension-2 surfaces in the entanglement wedge \citep{CKNR:EntanglementWedge,Wall:Maximinsurfaces,HHLR:EntanglementWedge}, motivated by Ryu-Takayanagi proposal for multi-boundaries. In particular the holographic dual of $\Delta_R$ is proportional to $\Delta_W$ defined in~\cite{Umemoto:2018jpc}. We perform the large $c$ computation of $\Delta_R$ using replica trick and twist operators and find precise agreement with the holographic computation in AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$. This agreement tempts us to propose another candidate dual to multipartite entanglement wedge cross section $\Delta_{R}=2\Delta_{W}$ and also strongly supports our holographic conjectures for the new class of generalized reflected entropies.
This paper is organized as follows:
In Section \ref{sec2}, we give the definition of a class of generalized reflected entropies and focus on a special one $\Delta_R$ invariant under permutations of subsystems.
In Section \ref{sec3}, we introduce a class of multipartite generalizations of entanglement wedge cross-section in holography and find that there is a one to one correspondence with the generalizations of reflected entropy.
In Section \ref{sec4}, we perform a large $c$ computation of $\Delta_R$ in tripartite case and find agreement with holographic computation. This agreement supports our holographic conjectures between generalized reflected entropies and generalized entanglement wedge cross-sections. We discuss some information theoretic properties of $\Delta_R$ in Section \ref{sec5} and conclude in Section \ref{sec6}.
\textit{Note added}: After all the results in this paper were obtained, \citep{Bao:2019zqc} appeared in which they construct similar
generalization of reflected entropy for $\Delta_W$, which is different from ours.
\section{Generalized reflected entropy\label{sec2}}
Consider a quantum state on a circle, which is made up of six intervals: $A,B,C,a,b$ and $c$, shown in Fig.\ref{ew}. For holographic CFTs, it is known that the holographic entanglement entropy for $\rho_{ABC}$ is given by the Ryu-Takayanagi surface, the sum of 3 bulk geodesics bounded by the ends of $A,B,C$, as shown in Fig.\ref{ew}. Recently the triangle type of 3 other geodesics, with 3 ends located on the bulk Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces, has been defined as the multipartite entanglement wedge cross-sections, $\Delta_W$~\cite{Umemoto:2018jpc}. This has been understood as a total correlation measure among subsystems $A$, $B$ and $C$. In particular, the triangle sum can not be decomposed as (sum of) bipartite entanglement wedge cross-sections. This suggests that the measure $\Delta_W$ is an intrinsic 3-body correlation measure. One obvious question is how to understand the triangle from CFT point of view. This is one of our motivations.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{ew.png}\\
\caption{Tripartite entanglement wedge cross-sections $\Delta_W$ of subsystems $ABC$ in AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$. $\mathit{Left}:$ A pure state in $2d$ CFT on a circle made up of six intervals: $A,B,C,a,b\text{ and }c$. The dotted lines denote Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces of $ABC$. $\mathit{Right}:$ Entanglement wedge, the interior of the Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces $\cup\ ABC$, in which the closed curve denotes $\Delta_W$.}
\label{ew}
\end{figure}
In this section, we define a class of correlation measures for $1+1$ dimensional quantum field theory (QFT) state on a circle. The following definition was motivated by a holographic CFT state on a circle in AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$. But we stress that the definition itself is independent of holography.
Recently an interesting measure called {\it reflected entropy} has been proposed as a bipartite correlation measure for a mixed state $\rho_{AB}$~\cite{Dutta:2019gen}. The idea is to introduce a canonical purification for subsystems $A,B$ and then measure the entanglement entropy.
Without going into the detail definition of reflected entropy in information theory, let us understand reflected entropy in the following intuitive way. Start from a pure state $\psi_{ABc}\in\mathcal{H}_{ABc}$ defined on a circle and the mixed state $\rho_{AB}$ can be viewed as the reduced density matrix by tracing out $c$. There is a simple and canonical purification for a given $\rho_{AB}$ by doubling the Hilbert space:
\begin{equation}
|\sqrt{\rho_{AB}}\rangle = |\sqrt{\text{Tr}_c|\psi\rangle\langle\psi|}\rangle \in (\mathcal{H}_{A}\otimes\mathcal{H}_{A^*})\otimes(\mathcal{H}_{B}\otimes\mathcal{H}_{B^*})\equiv \mathcal{H}_{AA^*BB^*}\ .
\end{equation} This can be obtained by flipping Bras to Kets for basis of a given density matrix $\rho_{AB}$. It can be shown that
\begin{equation}
\rho_{AB} = \text{Tr}_{\mathcal{H}_{A^*B^*}} |\sqrt{\rho_{AB}}\rangle\langle\sqrt{\rho_{AB}}|\ .
\end{equation} The reflected entropy is defined as
\begin{equation}
S_R(A:B) := S(AA^*)_{\sqrt{\rho_{AB}}}\ .
\end{equation}
The reflected entropy turns out to be a good measure of correlations between $A$ and $B$ for state $\rho_{AB}$~\cite{Dutta:2019gen}:
\begin{equation}
\text{pure state}:~S_R(A:B) = 2S(A)\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\text{factorized state}:~S_R(A:B) = 0\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\text{bounded from below}:~S_R(A:B) \geq I(A:B)\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\text{bounded from above}:~S_R(A:B) \leq 2\text{min}\{S(A),S(B)\}\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\text{for states saturating Araki-Lieb inequality}:~S_R(A:B)= 2\text{min}\{S(A),S(B)\}\ .
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{MER1}\caption{\label{fig:MER1} Canonical purification of $\rho_{AB}$: $|\sqrt{\rho_{AB}}\rangle = |\sqrt{\text{Tr}_c|\psi\rangle\langle\psi|}\rangle$. Tracing out $c$ corresponds to gluing $c$ from 2 circles and we view this process as a fundamental step to obtain a big pure state. The red dashed line separates $AA^*$ from $BB^*$ and defines reflected entropy $S_R$.
}
\end{figure}
Let us give a graph description of the canonical purification procedure in Fig.\ref{fig:MER1}. Assign a circle for each Hilbert space. Start from the pure state $\psi_{ABc}$ and glue $c$ from the two circles and we obtain the purified state
\begin{equation}
|\sqrt{\rho_{AB}}\rangle = |\sqrt{\text{Tr}_c|\psi\rangle\langle\psi|}\rangle\ .
\end{equation}
This should be viewed as a fundamental step to build up another canonical pure state start from one pure state. We stress that the final canonical state is independent of $c$, because for a given $\rho_{AB}$ one can choose another $c'$ which does the same purification as $c$ and the final canonical state would not change. Therefore the reflected entropy is independent of $c$. This is not surprising because $S_R$ is an intrinsic property of the mixed state $\rho_{AB}$. Later we will see that $c$ is helpful to understand the global structure when we have a big complicated purified state. This is roughly because a nontrivial $c$ in our setup indicates that the initial state $\rho_{AB}$ is a mixed state or in another word $AB$ is entangled with others and we do not know the full information of $AB$. Related to this, after gluing along $c$, one can schematically view $c$ representing some entanglement between $AB$ and $A^*B^*$. Another convenient way to understand Fig.\ref{fig:MER1} is to imagine that there are $2d$ spacetime surfaces bounded by circles. The possible meaning of the radial direction is Euclidean time. Consider all the states in the formalism of path integral. After gluing two spacetime patches along $c$ we have obtained a pure state associated to two boundaries $AA^*$ and $BB^*$. The red curve along two spacetime patches readily separates two boundaries $AA^*$ and $BB^*$ and plays the role of the entangling surface in spacetime. After all these constructions and interpretations we can define a robust entanglement entropy associated to the red curve, the reflected entropy
\begin{equation}
S_R(A:B)=S(AA^*:BB^*)_{\sqrt{\rho_{AB}}}=\text{Entanglement Entropy of Red Curve}\ .
\end{equation}
Now we are ready to generalize our construction of canonical purification to multipartite $\rho_{ABC\cdots}$. Consider a state on a circle made up of six intervals: $A,B,C,a,b\text{ and }c$, shown in Fig.\ref{ew}. We can do different canonical purifications by gluing different regions $a$, $b$ or $c$.
The easiest way is to pick up two circles and glue $a,b,c$ once and we get a pure state $\sqrt{\rho_{ABC}}$. Since the spacetime geometry after gluing is like a pair of pants, one can have 3 options to draw a red curve to separate 3 boundaries $AA^*$, $BB^*$ and $CC^*$ respectively from other parts. These correspond to measure the reflected entropy for bipartitions $(A:BC)$, $(B:AC)$ and $(C:AB)$
\begin{equation}
S_R(A:BC)=S(AA^*:BB^*CC^*)\sqrt{\rho_{ABC}}\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S_R(B:AC)=S(BB^*:AA^*CC^*)\sqrt{\rho_{ABC}}\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S_R(C:AB)=S(CC^*:AA^*BB^*)\sqrt{\rho_{ABC}}\ .
\end{equation}
One can also perform 2 steps of canonical purification to create a pure state using 4 copies of $\mathcal{H}_{ABC}$. For instance, we first perform the canonical purification by gluing $c$ from two copies $\mathcal{H}_{ABCabc}$ and $\mathcal{H}_{A'B'C'a'b'c'}$ and obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{stp1}
\psi_1=|\sqrt{\text{Tr}_c|\psi_{ABCabc}\rangle\langle\psi_{ABCabc}|}\,\rangle\ .
\end{equation}
Then we pick up another copy of $\psi_1$ and do canonical purification again by gluing $b$ and $b'$ and obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{stp2}
\psi_2=|\sqrt{\text{Tr}_{bb'}|\psi_1\rangle\langle\psi_1|}\,\rangle\ .
\end{equation}
Now we are left with $a,a',a'',a'''$ and we can pair them and glue. We can try to draw red curves to bipartition the final pure state in the Hilbert space consisting of 4-copy of $\mathcal{H}_{ABC}$. Entanglement entropy of each curve will measure some correlations among $\rho_{ABC}$. These will include some biparitite reflected entropy detected in the 2-copy purification mentioned before and also some other new measures.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6in]{ptc.png}\\
\caption{The procedure to construct the pure state with three similar steps. Step $i$: from the original pure state $\rho_0=|\psi_{ABCabc}\rangle \langle \psi_{ABCabc}|$ to $\psi_1=|\sqrt{\text{Tr}_c\rho_0}\,\rangle$. Step $ii$: from $\rho_1=|\psi_1\rangle \langle \psi_1|$ to $\psi_2=|\sqrt{\text{Tr}_{bb'}\rho_1}\,\rangle$. Step $iii$: from $\rho_2=|\psi_2\rangle \langle \psi_2|$ to $\psi_3=|\sqrt{\text{Tr}_{aa'a''a'''}\rho_2}\,\rangle$, whose density matrix is $\rho_3=|\psi_3\rangle \langle \psi_3|$ and this is the boundary state in final 8-copy purification (also seen in Fig.\ref{ps}).}
\label{ptc}
\end{figure}
In this work we are particularly interested in another purification involving $8$ copies of $\mathcal{H}_{ABC}$ for the reason we will see later. By adding one more step of canonical purification to the 4-copies purification by doubling Hilbert space one can get
\begin{equation}
\label{stp3}
\psi_3=|\sqrt{\text{Tr}_{aa'a''a'''}|\psi_2\rangle\langle\psi_2|}\,\rangle\ .
\end{equation}
In order to make it more transparent we draw our purification process in Fig.\ref{ptc}. We switch our notations a little bit for labeling different copies. We stress that even though $a,b,c$ (and the copies of them) are involved in the purification process, the final big pure state $\psi_3$ does not depend on $a,b,c$ and their copies because essentially all of them are traced out. To understand this better, one can view $a,b,c$ as a certain purification for $\rho_{ABC}$ in the beginning and change them to another purification will not affect the final big state constructed here. According to the notation in Fig.\ref{ptc} the final state involves 8 copies of $A,B,C$ and it should be denoted specifically as
\begin{equation}
\psi_3=\psi_{AA'A_1A'_1A_{'}A'_{'}A_{1'}A'_{1'}BB'B_{'}B'_{'}B_1B'_1B_{1'}B'_{1'}CC_{'}C_1C_{1'}C'C'_{'}C'_1C'_{1'}}\ .
\end{equation}
One can now try to draw curves to bipartition the final pure state $\psi_3$. There are certain curves running over all bridges among $a,b,c$. For instance, one such curve separates the big pure state into two and the entanglement entropy associated with that curve is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{bp}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)\equiv S(AA'A_1A'_1B_1B'_1B_{1'}B'_{1'}CC_{'}C_1C_{1'}:A_{'}A'_{'}A_{1'}A'_{1'}BB'B_{'}B'_{'}C'C'_{'}C'_1C'_{1'})_{\psi_3}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We define such entanglement entropy as {\it multipartite reflected entropy}. We stress again that for each curve doing the bipartition there is a well defined generalized reflected entropy.
Last but not least, for any given pure state constructed by the above procedure, one can trace out some part of it and get a new mixed state. And one can do once more canonical purification for this mixed density matrix and obtain another new pure state.
It is not hard to realize that by such kinds of constructions, we can build a pure state in any even number copies of Hilbert spaces.
We can compute these entropies using replica trick. For instance, as the $\pmb{n}\to 1$ limit of R\'enyi entropy $\Delta_R$ can be computed by
\begin{equation}
\label{ry1}
\begin{split}
\Delta_R(A:B:C)=\lim_{\pmb{n} \to 1}S_{\pmb{n}}, \quad S_{\pmb{n}}=\frac{1}{1-\pmb{n}}\ln\text{Tr}_R(\text{Tr}_L\rho_3)^{\pmb{n}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $L$ denotes the left side of the bi-partition in (\ref{bp}), namely
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
L\equiv \{ AA'A_1A'_1, B_1B'_1B_{1'}B'_{1'},CC_{'}C_1C_{1'}\}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\section{Holography of generalized reflected entropy\label{sec3}}
In the previous section, we construct many big pure states by performing canonical purifications for a quantum system on a circle and define different generalized reflected entropies from them. Though some of the newly defined entropies are inspired from holography, all the definitions by themselves are independent of holography. We study their holographic duals in this section. Again we will first understand the bipartite case and the multipartite generalization will be understood straightforwardly after that. The bipartite case has been largely developed in~\cite{Dutta:2019gen}. We review the bipartite case for the purpose of generalizations. Notice that previously we perform canonical purification by solely working with quantum systems on a circle. Now for those quantum systems having bulk gravity dual, we have to extend the previous gluing procedure together with the bulk. For simplicity we will focus on static cases through this section.
Let us first recall the case of $\rho_{AB}$. Start from a global pure state $\psi_{ABc}$ having a classical bulk solution as its gravity dual. Tracing out $c$ corresponds to discard other bulk regions and keep only the entanglement wedge for $\rho_{AB}$. For a fixed time slice, this was defined as the region bounded by $A\cup B\cup \Gamma_{AB}$ where $\Gamma_{AB}$ is the Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces for $\rho_{AB}$. Now doubling the Hilbert space for $\mathcal{H}_{AB}$ means to pick up another copy of the entanglement wedge. Doing the canonical purification for boundary $\rho_{AB}$ would correspond to gluing the bulk entanglement wedges along $\Gamma_{AB}$ since this is the most natural way to construct the new bulk geometry to respect the purified boundary constructed in the previous section without creating new boundaries. We draw the constructed bulk geometry in Fig.~\ref{fig:MER2}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{MER2}\caption{\label{fig:MER2} Canonical purification of $\rho_{AB}$ together with entanglement wedges: Tracing out $c$ corresponds to gluing Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces (blue lines) for two copies of entanglement wedges and the new bulk geometry describes two entangled boundary quantum systems $AA^*$ and $BB^*$. We view this process as a fundamental step to obtain a bulk geometry describing a big pure state. The orange line is the minimal surface in the bulk seperating $AA^*$ from $BB^*$.
}
\end{figure}
Now the question is which minimal surface is the geometrical dual of the reflected entropy $S_R(A:B)$ constructed in the previous section, the entanglement entropy between $AA^*$ and $BB^*$ for the constructed pure state. Intuitively this surface (line in the present example) should count the entanglement flux between $AA^*$ and $BB^*$ and is naturally given by the so called entanglement wedge cross section on each copy. Because of a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry under exchanges of $A$ and $A^*$, $B$ and $B^*$, the geometry dual of $S_R(A:B)$, the closed minimal curve $\Sigma^{min}$ is exactly twice of $E_W$. This is one of the main results in~\cite{Dutta:2019gen}, where a number of evidences have been provided to support this duality.
Let us now do some comparison with Fig.\ref{fig:MER1} since they are closely related. In Fig.\ref{fig:MER1}, dashed black lines $c$ do not correspond to real physical objects. They just indicate which part we have traced out. And the dashed red curve there does not correspond to any physical object either. They are used to bipartition the quantum system described by the final pure state. Here things are rather different. Both the real blue lines and the orange lines have precise physical meanings. The former is the Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces for the entanglement entropy of $\rho_{AB}$ and the latter is the geometric dual of the reflected entropy.
Before we generalize the above geometric dual of reflected entropy to multi-partite cases, let us give some general remarks. In previous section, we associated a general reflected entropy to each curve separating the final pure state into two. For theories having classical bulk duals, due to similar geometric structures there will be one to one correspondence between the separating curve in the previous section and the minimal curve in this section. Therefore we expect for any well constructed generalized reflected entropy there will be a minimal surface dual to it. Let us stress that this argument will lead us to find duality between a large class of generalized reflected entropies and new types of minimal surfaces consist of entanglement wedge cross sections, beyond those known before~\cite{Umemoto:2018jpc,Takayanagi:2017knl,NDHZS:HEoP}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5in]{ps.png}\\
\caption{A pure state constructed by 8 copies of the subsystem $ABC$ together with dual glued bulk. The entangling surface (denoted by the closed orange curve) is just twice of the minimal cross sections in Fig.\ref{ew}, which is also the holographic dual of entanglement entropy $S(AA'A_1A'_1B_1B'_1B_{1'}B'_{1'}CC_{'}C_1C_{1'}:A_{'}A'_{'}A_{1'}A'_{1'}BB'B_{'}B'_{'}C'C'_{'}C'_1C'_{1'})$, defined to be multipartite reflected entropy of subsystems $ABC$, namely $\Delta_R(A:B:C)$. It can be seen that $\Delta_R(A:B:C)=2\Delta_W(A:B:C)$ for holographic states.}
\label{ps}
\end{figure}
Now we are ready to generalize the canonical purification procedure together with the bulk to multipartite cases. Let us first discuss 3-body mixed state $\rho_{ABC}$ defined on a circle. One can essentially repeat what we discussed in last section for 2-copy purification, 4-copy purification, 8-copy purification by adding the bulk. Without further analysis, let us list the dual reflected entropy for different types of minimal surfaces constructed in the bulk below. We particularly draw the final big pure state in 8-copy canonical purification in Fig.\ref{ps} where the orange line denotes a minimal curve which is the bulk geometric dual to multipartite reflected entropy $\Delta_R(A:B:C)$ constructed in previous section. It is easy to see that this is twice of the multipartite entanglement wedge cross sections $\Delta_W(A:B:C)$ defined in~\citep{Umemoto:2018jpc}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{2copy.png}\\
\caption{Canonical purification of $\rho_{ABC}$ ($\mathit{left}$) with the minimal cross section denoted by the orange line dual to $S_R(A:BC)$. This is twice of $E_W(A:BC)$ denoted by the orange line in the entanglement wedge of $\rho_{ABC}$ ($\mathit{right}$)}
\label{2copy}
\end{figure}
Similarly, we draw a pure state in 2-copy canonical purification in Fig.\ref{2copy} where the left orange line denotes a minimal curve which is dual to reflected entropy $S_R(A:BC)$. It can be seen that this is twice of bipartite cross-section $E_W(A:BC)$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5in]{4copy.png}\\
\caption{Canonical purification of $\rho_1$ ($\mathit{left}$) with the minimal cross section denoted by the orange line dual to $S(AA'A_1A_1'CC_1)_{|\sqrt{\rho_1}\rangle}$. This is twice of $\Sigma_{(1)}^{min}(C:A:B)$ denoted by the orange line in the entanglement wedge of $\rho_{ABC}$ ($\mathit{right}$).}
\label{4copy}
\end{figure}
Then, we draw a pure state in 4-copy canonical purification in Fig.\ref{4copy} where the left orange line denotes a minimal curve which is dual to $S(AA'A_1A_1'CC_1)_{|\sqrt{\rho_1}\rangle}$. It can be seen that this is twice of $\Sigma_{(1)}^{min}(C:A:B)$ defined as the minimal curve with the shape shown in right figure of Fig.\ref{4copy}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6in]{8copy.png}\\
\caption{Canonical purification of $\rho_2$ ($\mathit{left}$) with the minimal cross section denoted by the orange line dual to $S(BB'B_{'}B_{'}'C'C{'}'C_1'C_{1'}')_{\psi_3}$ . This is twice of $\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(A:B:C)$ denoted by the orange line in the entanglement wedge of $\rho_{ABC}$ ($\mathit{right}$). Notice that $\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(A:B:C)$ is different from $\Delta_W(A:B:C)$.}
\label{8copy}
\end{figure}
We also draw a pure state in 8-copy canonical purification in Fig.\ref{8copy} where the left orange line denotes a minimal curve which is dual to $S(BB'B_{'}B_{'}'C'C_{'}'C_1'C_{1'}')_{\psi_3}$. It can be seen that this is twice of $\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(A:B:C)$ defined as the minimal curve with the shape shown in right figure of Fig.\ref{8copy}.
It can be seen that there are some inequalities between cross sections mentioned above, which are
\begin{equation}
E_W(A:BC)+E_W(B:CA)\le \Sigma_{(1)}^{min}(C:A:B)\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\frac{\Sigma_{(1)}^{min}(A:B:C)+\Sigma_{(1)}^{min}(B:C:A)+\Sigma_{(1)}^{min}(C:A:B)}{2}\le \Delta_W(A:B:C)\ ,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&E_W(A:BC)+E_W(B:CA)+E_W(C:AB)\\
&\le \text{min}\{\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(A:B:C),\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(B:C:A),\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(C:A:B)\}\\
&\le \text{max}\{\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(A:B:C),\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(B:C:A),\Sigma_{(2)}^{min}(C:A:B)\}\\
&\le \Delta_W(A:B:C)\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Apart from $2^n$-copy purifications, any even-copy pure state can be constructed (not unique). For example, we can construct 12-copy pure state by tracing out two copies from the 8-copy pure state and then performing canonical purification, i.e., $\psi_4=|\sqrt{\text{Tr}_{A_1B_1C_1A_{'}'B_{'}'C_{'}'}\rho_3}\rangle$.
Regarding that there are many different purifications in this manner, and for each purification there are many different bipartitions (and therefore different entanglement entropies), we deduce that there exist a lot of dual pairs of generalized reflected entropy and its holographic counterpart. We are not going to list all of them and consider them as direct consequence of our discussion above.
\section{Computation of $\Delta_R$ in AdS$_{3}/$CFT$_2$}\label{sec4}
Now we consider $\Delta_R$ for a simple example in AdS$_{3}$/CFT$_{2}$. We work in Poincar\'e patch, and a static ground state of CFT$_{2}$
on an infinite line is described by a bulk solution with the metric
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}=\frac{dx^{2}+dz^{2}}{z^{2}}\ ,\quad x\in(-\infty,+\infty),z\in[0,+\infty)\ .
\end{equation}
The three subsystems we choose are the intervals $A=[-d_2,-d_1-r]$, $B=[-d_1+r,d_1-r]$,
$C=[d_1+r,d_2]$, where $d_2>d_1>0$ and $r$ is relatively small compared
to both $d_1$ and $d_2$. We require that the entanglement wedge of $ABC$
is connected, as shown in Fig.\ref{6pt}. Let us first consider the holographic computation.
This involves the computation of multipartite entanglement wedge cross section $\Delta_W$ given in~\cite{Umemoto:2018jpc}. In this example we have to find a triangle type configuration with the minimal length, where 3 ending points
of the geodesics are located on 3 Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces (semi-circles) separately, as shown
in Fig.\ref{6pt}.
Because of the reflection symmetry $x\to-x$, the problem was further reduced to find a special angle $\theta$
such that the length of 3 geodesics is minimal
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{W}(A:B:C)=\min_{\theta}\left[\frac{L(\theta)}{4G_{N}}\right]\ .
\end{equation}
Then we compute $\Delta_R(A:B:C)$ in CFT$_2$ for the same setup in Fig.\ref{6pt} with replica trick.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{6pt.png}\\
\caption{Three subsystems $A$, $B$ and $C$ in CFT$_2$ and tripartite entanglement wedge cross section in AdS$_3$.}
\label{6pt}
\end{figure}
We first use replica trick to extend the purification $\psi_3$ to $\psi_3^{(m)}$ following the method in~\cite{Dutta:2019gen}, where $m$ is an even number. The three steps (\ref{stp1}) (\ref{stp2}) (\ref{stp3}) will be generalized to
\begin{equation}
\label{stpi}
\begin{split}
i:\ \psi_1^{(m)}&=|(\text{Tr}_c\rho_0)^{\frac{m}{2}}\rangle\ , \\
ii:\ \psi_2^{(m)}&=|(\text{Tr}_{bb'}\rho_1^{(m)})^{\frac{m}{2}}\rangle\ , \\
iii:\ \psi_3^{(m)}&=|(\text{Tr}_{aa'a''a'''}\rho_2^{(m)})^{\frac{m}{2}}\rangle \ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $\sqrt{\rho}$ changed to $\rho^{\frac{m}{2}}$. These steps can be represented by path integral and replica trick. For instance the first step is illustrated in Fig.\ref{replica2}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{replica1.png}
\end{minipage}}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{replica2.png}
\end{minipage}}
\centering
\caption{Use replica trick to represent $\psi_1^{(m)}$. (a): $\text{Tr}_c\rho_0$ and (b): $\psi_1^{(m=6)}$.}
\label{replica2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6in]{replica42.png}\\
\caption{Replica trick representing $\text{Tr}_R (\text{Tr}_L\rho_3^{(m)})^{\pmb{n}}$ to calculate $\pmb{n}$-th Renyi entropy. Here $m=2,\pmb{n}=3$ with 24 replicas in total. There are $\pmb{n}$ similar boxes, each representing the density matrix $\rho_3^{(m)}=|\psi_3^{(m)}\rangle \langle \psi_3^{(m)}|$. The rule to glue edges of cut is as follows: in each box, bra and ket of the same object are glued, e.g., the edge $\langle A|$ and $|A\rangle$ are glued. And the ket of $+$ object glues to the bra of the $-$ object in the next box, e.g., $|B+\rangle$ in the left box and $\langle B-|$ in the middle box.}
\label{replica4}
\end{figure}
Now we calculate $\pmb{n}$-th R\'enyi entropy
\begin{equation}
\label{ry2}
\begin{split}
S_{\pmb{n}}=\frac{1}{1-\pmb{n}}\ln \frac{\text{Tr}_R(\text{Tr}_L\rho^{(m)}_3)^{\pmb{n}}}{(\text{Tr}\rho^{(m)}_3)^{\pmb{n}}}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Compared with (\ref{ry1}), in addition to $\rho_3\to \rho_3^{(m)}$, there is a normalized factor $(\text{Tr}\rho^{(m)}_3)^{\pmb{n}}$.
To compute R\'enyi entropy we have to replicate the previous replicas ($\rho_3^{(m)}$ corresponds to single box in Fig.\ref{replica4} with $m^3$-replica) $\pmb{n}$ times. So there are $m^3\pmb{n}$ replicas in total (shown in Fig.\ref{replica4}), with which we can work out six twist operators $\sigma_i(x_i)$, located at $x_1=-d_2,x_2=-d_1-r,x_3=-d_1+r,x_4=d_1-r,x_5=d_1+r,x_6=d_2$ respectively. It can be counted from replicas that the conformal dimensions $h_i$ of operators $\sigma_i(x_i)$ are (see Appendix \ref{cw})
\begin{equation}
\label{hi}
\begin{split}
h_1=h_6=\frac{c}{24}(m^3-m)\pmb{n} \ , \quad h_2=h_3=\frac{c}{12}(m^2-1)\pmb{n} \ , \quad h_4=h_5=\frac{c}{6}(m-\frac{1}{m})\pmb{n}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Although these dimensions look different, they will all go to zero when $m\to 1$. Once twist operators $\sigma_i(x_i)$ are specified, conformal dimensions $h_f$ of the leading operator $\sigma_f$ in OPE contractions $\sigma_i(x_i) \sigma_j(x_j) \to \sigma_f(x_f)$ can also be directly counted. For example,
\begin{equation}
\label{hf}
\begin{split}
h_{16}=h_{23}=h_{45}=\frac{c}{6}(\pmb{n}-\frac{1}{\pmb{n}})\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It's not surprising that they are equal because $ABC$ are symmetric.
The trace of density matrix is related to 6-point correlation function of twist operators
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\text{Tr}_R (\text{Tr}_L\rho_3^{(m)})^{\pmb{n}}=\langle \sigma_1(x_1)\sigma_2(x_2)\sigma_3(x_3)\sigma_4(x_4)\sigma_5(x_5)\sigma_6(x_6)\rangle_{CFT^{\otimes m^3\pmb{n}}}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In the large $c$ limit with $\frac{h_i}{c}$ fixed, this correlation function can be determined by a $6$-point Virasoro block $\mathcal{F} $ which in any channel exponentiates~\citep{Hartman:2013mia}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{F} \approx \exp\left[-\frac{c}{6}f\left(\frac{h_f}{c}, \frac{h_i}{c}, x_i\right)\right]
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $f$ is determined by the solution of a monodromy problem as follows. Consider the differential equation
\begin{equation}
\label{diff}
\begin{split}
\psi''(z) + T(z) \psi(z) = 0
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
T(z) = \sum_{i=1}^6 \left(\frac{6 h_i/c}{(z-x_i)^2} - \frac{c_i}{z-x_i}\right)\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
$c_i$ are called accessory parameters restricted by three equations which require $T(z)$ to vanish as $z^{-4}$ at infinity, namely
\begin{equation}
\label{treg}
\begin{split}
\sum_{i=1}^6 c_i = 0 \ , \quad \sum_{i=1}^6(c_i x_i- \frac{6 h_i}{c}) = 0 \ , \quad \sum_{i=1}^6(c_i x_i^2 - \frac{12 h_i}{c}x_i) = 0 \ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The differential equation (\ref{diff}) has two solutions, $\psi_1$ and $\psi_2$. As we take the solutions on a closed contour around one or more singular points, they undergo some monodromy
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
{\psi_1 \choose \psi_2} \rightarrow M {\psi_1 \choose \psi_2}\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=4in]{cc.png}\\
\caption{The channel and contours chosen to determine the monodromies.}
\label{cc}
\end{figure}
We choose contours around the singular points which correspond to the OPE contractions in the chosen channel as shown in Fig.\ref{cc}. That is to say, for each contraction $O_i(x_i) O_j(x_j) \to O_f(x_f)$, we choose a contour $\gamma_f$ enclosing $x_i$ and $x_j$. The monodromies on these cycles should satisfy the conditions
\begin{equation}
\label{trm}
\begin{split}
\text{Tr} M_f = -2 \cos \left(\pi \sqrt{1-\frac{24}{c}h_f}\right)\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Plus three conditions (\ref{treg}), there are totally six equations of accessory parameters $c_i$. So we can solve $c_i$ which are the partial derivative of $f$ with respect to $x_i$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i} = c_i\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
There are two semiclassical blocks in $\Delta_R(A:B:C)$, namely $f(\frac{1}{6}(\pmb{n}-\frac{1}{\pmb{n}}), h_i, x_i)$ and $f(0, h_i, x_i)$ which are the numerator and the denominator in (\ref{ry2}) respectively. `0' in the later one $f(0, h_i, x_i)$ means that differential equation (\ref{diff}) has trivial monodromy, i.e., $\text{Tr} M_f =2$. When $m\to 1$, $f(0, 0, x_i)$ becomes constant because it can be easily checked that $c_i=0$ is a solution. Thus, the partial derivatives of $\Delta_R(A:B:C)$ to $x_i$ are
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial \Delta_R(A:B:C)}{\partial x_i}=\lim_{m,\pmb{n} \to 1}\frac{1}{1-\pmb{n}}\left[-\frac{c}{3}\frac{\partial f\left(\frac{1}{6}(\pmb{n}-\frac{1}{\pmb{n}}), h_i, x_i\right)}{\partial x_i}\right]\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Note that only when $r$ is sufficiently less than $d_1$ and $d_1$ is sufficiently less than $d_2$ our channel Fig.\ref{cc} is valid to give the result. Otherwise, $\Delta_R$ will experience phase transitions, as discussed in~\cite{Umemoto:2019jlz}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.95\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5in]{compr3.jpg}
\end{minipage}}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.95\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5in]{compa2.jpg}
\end{minipage}}
\centering
\caption{Comparison between the derivative of $\frac{\Delta_R}{2}$ and $\Delta_W$ (divided by $\frac{c}{6}=\frac{1}{4G_N}$) with respect (a): to $r$, with $d_1=20,d_2=100$ and (b): to $d_1$, with $r=0.5,d_2=100$.}
\label{comp}
\end{figure}
Then the derivative of $\Delta_R$ with respect to $y$ ($y=d_1,d_2 \text{ or }r$) is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial \Delta_R(A:B:C)}{\partial y}&=-\frac{c}{3}\lim_{m,\pmb{n} \to 1}\frac{1}{1-\pmb{n}}\left(\sum_{i=1}^6\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_i}\frac{\partial x_i}{\partial y}\right)\\
&=-\frac{c}{3}\lim_{m,\pmb{n} \to 1}\frac{1}{1-\pmb{n}}\left(\sum_{i=1}^6c_i\frac{\partial x_i}{\partial y}\right)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We numerically plot the partial derivative of (half of) $\Delta_R$ with respect to $r$ and $d_1$ and compare it with that of $\Delta_W$ in Fig.\ref{comp}. It can be seen that $\frac{\Delta_R}{2}$ fits well with $\Delta_W$.~\footnote{However, when $r$ or $a$ becomes larger, it can be seen from the numerical data that $\frac{\Delta_R}{2}$ differs gradually from $\Delta_W$.}
\section{Some properties of $\Delta_{R}$}\label{sec5}
In this section we discuss some information theoretic properties of tripartitie reflected entropy $\Delta_{R}$.
When $\rho_{ABC}=|\psi_{ABC}\rangle \langle \psi_{ABC}|$ is pure, $|\psi_1\rangle=|\psi_{ABC}\rangle \otimes |\psi_{A'B'C'}\rangle$, and it can be checked that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)=&EE(AC:B)+EE(A':B'C')+EE(A'_1B_1':C'_1)\\
&+EE(C_{'}:A_{'}B_{'})+EE(B_{1'}C_{1'}:A_{1'})+EE(B'_{1'}:A'_{1'}C'_{1'})\\
=&S(B)+S(A')+S(C'_1)+S(C_{'})+S(A_{1'})+S(B'_{1'})\\
=&2(S(A)+S(B)+S(C))\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{sc.png}\\
\caption{A special case in which we study quantum information aspects of $\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)$.}
\label{sc}
\end{figure}
For some special $\rho_{ABC}$ as shown in Fig.\ref{sc} where $a,b\to 0$, one can easily check some properties of $\Delta_R(A:B:C)$. The purification is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
|\psi_3\rangle=|\psi_1\rangle_{ABCA'B'C'}\otimes |\psi_1\rangle_{A_1B_1C_1A_1'B_1'C_1'}\otimes |\psi_1\rangle_{A_{'}B_{'}C_{'}A'_{'}B'_{'}C'_{'}}\otimes |\psi_1\rangle_{A_{1'}B_{1'}C_{1'}A_{1'}'B_{1'}'C_{1'}'}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $|\psi_1\rangle=|\rho_{ABC}^{\frac{1}{2}}\rangle$. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{qidr}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)\equiv &EE(AA'A_1A'_1B_1B'_1B_{1'}B'_{1'}CC_{'}C_1C_{1'}:A_{'}A'_{'}A_{1'}A'_{1'}BB'B_{'}B'_{'}C'C'_{'}C'_1C'_{1'})\\
=&EE(AA'C:BB'C')+EE(A_1A'_1B_1B_1'C_1:C'_1)\\
&+EE(C_{'}:A_{'}A'_{'}B_{'}B'_{'}C'_{'})+EE(B_{1'}B'_{1'}C_{1'}:A_{1'}A'_{1'}C'_{1'})\\
=&S(AA'C)+S(C'_1)+S(C_{'})+S(A_{1'}A'_{1'}C'_{1'})\\
=&2(S(AA'C)+S(C))
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $S(X)$ means $S(\text{Tr}_{X}\rho_1)$. From (\ref{qidr}) we can see that $\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)\ge S(C)>0$, which implies that $\rho_{ABC}$ in this case can't be seperable.
Now we check some properties of $\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)$ in this case. Due to the positivity of mutual information
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
I(AC:A')=S(AC)+S(A')-S(AA'C)\ge 0
\end{split}
\end{equation}
it can be derived that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)=&2(S(AA'C)+S(C))\\
\le&2(S(AC)+S(A')+S(C))\\
=&2(S(AC)+S(A)+S(C))\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Similarly
\begin{equation}
\label{ub}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)\le2(S(BC)+S(B)+S(C))\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We could not show
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)\le2(S(AB)+S(A)+S(B))\ ,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
but since the right side has much larger UV divergence, this is expected to be true.~\footnote{We thank Koji Umemoto for pointing this out.}
From strong sub-additivity
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S(BB'C')+S(ABC)\ge S(B'C')+S(AC)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and Araki-Lieb inequality
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S(AB)-S(C)\le S(ABC)\ ,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
it can be derived that
\begin{equation}
\label{I}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)=&2(S(BB'C')+S(C))\\
\ge&2(S(C)+ S(B'C')+S(AC)-S(ABC))\\
\ge&2(S(AB)+S(BC)+S(AC)-2S(ABC))\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which is defined as $D_3(A:B:C)\times 2$ in~\cite{Umemoto:2019jlz}.
We can also derive polygamy, namely for a pure state $\rho_{A_1A_2BC}$
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A_1A_2:B:C)=&2(S(A_1A_2)+S(B)+S(C))\\
=&2(S(BC)+S(B)+S(C))\\
\le&2(S(B)+S(C)+S(B)+S(C))\\
=&2(S(B)+S(C)+S(B)+S(C)+S(A_1)-S(A_2BC)+S(A_2)-S(A_1BC))\\
=&2(S(B)+S(C)+S(A_1)-S(A_1BC)+S(B)+S(C)+S(A_2)-S(A_2BC))\\
\le&\Delta_{R}(A_1:B:C)+\Delta_{R}(A_2:B:C)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where in the third line we used the positivity of mutual information $I(B:C)$ and in the last line we used (\ref{I}).
From strong sub-additivity and positivity of mutual information
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S(AA'C)+S(BB'C)\ge& S(AA')+S(BB')\\
I(C:C')\ge&0\ ,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
it can be derived that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)=&2(S(AA'C)+S(C))\\
=&S(AA'C)+S(BB'C')+2S(C)\\
=&S(AA'C)+S(BB'C)+S(C)+S(C')\\
\ge &S(AA')+S(BB')+S(CC')\\
=&S_R(A:BC)+S_R(B:CA)+S_R(C:AB)\ .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec6}
In this paper, we defined a class of generalized reflected entropy for multipartite states. We show that the generalizations of reflected entropy can be defined canonically. We particularly show that the generalization of reflected entropy to multipartite case is not unique. After $n$ steps of canonical purifications we have obtained a big pure state associated to $2^n$ copies of the original Hilbert space. Each bipartition of the large Hilbert space will define a generalized reflected entropy. In this sense, the generalization depends on both $n$ and the bipartition. Based on this one can construct pure state in any even copies of Hilbert spaces. We develop a general method using replica trick and twist operators in CFTs to compute generalized reflected entropies.
Based on the holographic conjecture of reflected entropy \citep{Dutta:2019gen}, we defined a class of minimal surfaces $\Sigma^{min}$ as the holographic counterparts of the generalized reflected entropies, and in particular we show that for holographic theories there is a one to one correspondence between generalized reflected entropy and $\Sigma^{min}$. It leads us to propose a new class of entropies in CFT as dual of various combinations of cross-sections in the entanglement wedge and therefore discovered a new class of quantities which can be used to test AdS/CFT. In tripartite case we focus on a particular generalized reflected entropy $\Delta_{R}(A:B:C)$ and show that its holographic dual is twice of the multipartite entanglement wedge cross sections $\Delta_W$.
We explicitly computed $\Delta_{R}$ for a simple setup in AdS$_{3}$/CFT$_{2}$ and find precise agreement with holographic computation.
Several future questions are in order: First, generalize our holographic conjectures to black hole backgrounds and time-dependent background geometry. Second, generalize our new entropy measures systematically to $n$-partite case and to higher dimensions where we expect that many new types of generalized reflected entropy will appear following our construction. Third,
looking for the dictionary between generalized reflected entropy and minimal cross-sections in $n$-partite case. Understanding holographic $n$-partite states will be quite useful to understand the emergence of bulk geometry from boundary CFT.
We shall report the progress in future publications.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Koji Umemoto for a lot of helpful discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Originally developed in order to understand the physics of relativistic plasmas,
Thermal Field Theory is now a mature field \cite{Bellac:2011kqa,Kapusta:2006pm,Laine:2016hma}.
At weak coupling, for instance in QED or in QCD at high temperature
($T\gg \Lambda_{QCD}$), a number of different scales related to different physical situations
arise \cite{Arnold:1997gh}, such as the screening mass ($\sim eT$ in QED and $\sim gT$ in QCD), also called the soft scale, and the magnetic mass ($\sim g^2T$ in QCD and missing in QED), also known as the ultrasoft scale.
If the coupling constant is small enough these scales are well separated, and effective field theory (EFT) techniques are useful in order to disentangle the physics at each scale.
In the case of static properties (thermodynamic quantities), for QCD, the suitable EFT at the soft scale is called Electric QCD (EQCD) \cite{Ginsparg:1980ef,Appelquist:1981vg,Kajantie:1995dw}, and the EFT at the ultrasoft scale is Magnetic QCD (MQCD) \cite{Braaten:1995jr}. The latter has the peculiarity that perturbation theory in the coupling constant breaks down. For QED, at the soft scale we have an analogous EFT called EQED, but at the ultrasoft scale MQED corresponds to a free theory. These are local effective theories and the number of terms in the Lagrangian at a given order is finite and can be constructed systematically, making it possible to carry out calculations at very high order \cite{Laine:2018lgj}.
For dynamical quantities (real time phenomena), there is also an EFT suitable at the soft scale, the celebrated HTL effective Lagrangian \cite{Braaten:1991gm}. However, this effective Lagrangian is non-local and it is not clear how to construct higher order terms in the $1/T$ and weak coupling expansions, unless they are explicitly calculated. This was one of the motivations to apply the On-Shell Effective Field Theory (OSEFT) \cite{Manuel:2014dza} to this problem in ref. \cite{Manuel:2016wqs}, where the leading power corrections to the photon self-energy were calculated. The complete leading power corrections for massless QED, namely including the fermion sector, were worked out
in ref. \cite{Carignano:2017ovz}, in which the explicit form of the power suppressed terms in the Lagrangian was also given. However, this is not the full story: if the soft external momentum is of order $eT$, there can be weak coupling corrections at two loops which give rise to contributions of the same order as the leading power corrections \cite{Braaten:1989mz, Mirza:2013ula}. In this paper we calculate these contributions for the photon sector. The complete correction to the HTL Lagrangian up to NLO for this sector in $d$ space dimensions reads
\begin{align}
& {\cal L}_{HTL}^{\rm NLO} =\frac{e^2 \nu^{3-d}}{2} \int \frac{d^d \bf p}{(2 \pi)^d} \left\lbrace \frac{ N_f(p) }{2 p^3}
F_{\rho \alpha} \frac{v^\alpha v^\beta}{(v \cdot \partial)^4 } \partial^4 F _{\beta}^{\,\,\rho} \right
\nonumber\\
& \left. +
e^2(d-1) \Lambda_{(d)}^2
\left( \frac{N_f(p)}{p^3}F_{\rho\alpha} \left[\frac{v^\alpha v^\beta}{(v \cdot \partial)^2 } \left( \frac{1}{2} + \frac{\partial_0}{v\cdot \partial}\right)
-\frac{n^\alpha v^\beta+v^\alpha n^\beta}{2(v \cdot \partial)^2 }
\right] F_\beta^{\,\,\rho} \right.\right.\nonumber\\
&\left.\left. -\frac{1}{2p^2}\frac{dN_f(p)}{dp}F_{\rho\alpha}\frac{v^\alpha v^\beta}{(v \cdot \partial)^2 }F_\beta^{\,\,\rho} \right)\right\rbrace
\,,
\label{1}
\end{align}
where $n^\mu =(1,{\bf 0})$, $v^\mu =(1,{\bf v})$, ${\bf v}={\bf p}/p$, $p=\vert{\bf p}\vert$ and $F_{\mu\nu}$ is the electromagnetic stress tensor. The parameter $\nu$ is the scale that is conventionally introduced in DR so that $e=e(\nu)$ remains dimensionless.
The quantities $N_f(p)$ and $\Lambda_{(d)}$
depend on the distribution functions and are defined later on (see (\ref{distro}) and (\ref{Delta})).
The first term in Eq. (\ref{1}) is of order ${\cal O}(e^2 Q^2)$ where $Q$ is the external momentum, and was obtained in \cite{Manuel:2016wqs,Carignano:2017ovz}. The second term is of order ${\cal O}(e^4 T^2 )$ and is obtained for the first time in this work. For external momentum $Q\sim e T $ both terms have the same size.
For
$d\to 3$ the second term is finite and the UV divergence of the first term can be removed by the usual QED counterterm \cite{Carignano:2017ovz}.
\section{Preliminaries}
In the following we will work in the Keldysh representation of the real time formalism \cite{Carrington:1997sq,Thoma:2000dc,Carrington:2006xj}.
For massless fermions and photons in the Feynman gauge, lines are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
iS_j(P) &= i {\slashed P}\Delta_j(P) \,,\qquad
-i D_j^{\mu\nu}(L) & = -i g^{\mu\nu} \tilde\Delta_j(L)\,
\label{defs1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $j=r,a,p,d,s$ labels retarded, advanced, principal value, difference and symmetric propagators, respectively.
For both bosonic and fermionic fields, the symmetric propagator is obtained from the difference of the retarded and advanced propagators by multiplying by the appropriate distribution functions. Our definitions are
\begin{align}
&\Delta_{r/a}(P) = \tilde\Delta_{r/a}(P) = \frac{1}{P^2 \pm ip^0 \eta}\,, \nonumber\\
& \Delta_p(P) = \tilde\Delta_p(P) = \frac{1}{2}\big[\Delta_r(P) + \Delta_a(P)\big] \,, \nonumber\\
\Delta_{d}(P) & = \tilde\Delta_d(P) = \Delta_r(P)-\Delta_a(P)
=-2\pi i \frac{p^0}{\vert p^0\vert}\delta (P^2) \,, \nonumber\\
\Delta_s(P) &= N_f(P) \Delta_d(P) \,, \qquad \tilde{\Delta}_s(P) = N_b(P) \Delta_d(P) \,,
\label{defs2}
\end{align}
with $\eta\to 0^+$, $P=(p^0, {\bf p})$ and
\begin{eqnarray}
N_f(P) = 1-2n_f(P) \,,\quad N_b (P)= 1 + 2n_b (P) \,, \\
n_f(P) = \frac{1}{e^{p_0/T}+1} \,,\quad n_b(P) = \frac{1}{e^{p_0/T}-1} \,,
\label{distro}
\end{eqnarray}
where
$T$ is the temperature.
The distribution functions fulfill
\begin{equation}
N_b(P) = - N_b(-P) \,, \qquad N_f(P) = - N_f(-P) \,, \\
\end{equation}
and satisfy the KMS condition
\begin{equation}
N_f(P_1)N_f(P_2)+N_f(P_2)N_b(P_3)+N_b(P_3)N_f(P_1)+1 = 0 \,,
\label{KMS}
\end{equation}
which holds for arbitrary momenta $P_1+P_2+P_3=0$.
We will calculate the retarded self-energy, from which one can reconstruct the remaining Keldysh components of the self-energy, and all components of the dressed propagator.
We use $\Pi^{\mu\nu}(Q)$ to denote the retarded self-energy where
$Q =(q_0,{\bf q})$, $q=\vert {\bf q}\vert$.
We will define the self-energy as $-i$ times the appropriate Feynman diagram, so that the Dyson equation gives the inverse resummed propagator as $D_{\mu\nu}^{-1}(Q) - \Pi_{\mu\nu}(Q)$,
and the Debye mass is obtained as $m_D^2 = \lim_{{\bf q}\to 0}\Pi^{00}(q_0=0,{\bf q})$.
Our method is general and we expect it to be applicable to the study of systems that are not necessarily in thermal equilibrium.
For simplicity
we focus on an isotropic medium in the absence of parity-violating effects.
In this case, we can
decompose the photon self-energy $\Pi^{\mu\nu}(Q)$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{pi-def}
\Pi^{\mu\nu}(Q) =
\Pi_T(n\cdot Q, Q^2) \,\bar P^{\mu\nu}
-\frac{Q^2}{q^2}\Pi_L(n\cdot Q, Q^2)\,P^{\mu\nu} \,,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have introduced
\begin{equation}
P^{\mu\nu} = \frac{\bar n^\mu \bar n^\nu}{\bar n^2} \,, \qquad \bar P^{\mu\nu} = g^{\mu\nu}-\frac{Q^\mu Q^\nu}{Q^2} - P_{\mu\nu} \,,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\bar n^\mu = n^\mu - Q^\mu \,\frac{ (n \cdot Q ) }{Q^2} \,.
\end{equation}
Note that $Q_\mu\bar P^{\mu\nu}=Q_\mu P^{\mu\nu}=0$, guaranteeing that the photon self-energy is transverse. The functions $\Pi_T$ and $\Pi_L$ are defined as
\footnote{Note that our conventions differ from those used in \cite{Manuel:2016wqs} and \cite{Carignano:2017ovz}: more specifically, our definitions for $\Pi^{\mu\nu}$ and for $\Pi_T$ both differ by a minus sign with the ones used there. We also take this opportunity to point out some misprints in these works:
the definition of the Debye mass after formula (45) in \cite{Manuel:2016wqs} should read $m_D^2=e^2 T^2/3$ and Eq. (45) should have the opposite sign. There are also related misprints in \cite{Carignano:2017ovz}: in Eq.(10) $m_D^2/2$ should read $m_D^2$, while Eq. (11) should have an overall plus sign.}
\begin{equation}
\Pi_L = \Pi^{00}
\,, \qquad
\Pi_T = \frac{1}{d-1}\left(\Pi^\mu_{~\mu} + \frac{Q^2}{q^2}\Pi^{00} \right) \,,
\label{00mumu}
\end{equation}
when working in $D=1+d$ dimensions. These expressions allow us to determine the full photon self-energy by just calculating $\Pi^{00}$ and $\Pi^\mu_{~\mu}$.
Using the Dyson equation (defined below Eq.(\ref{KMS})) and equations
(\ref{defs1}, \ref{defs2}) the dressed propagator has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
D_{\mu\nu}^{\textcolor{black}{\ast}}(Q) = \frac{\bar P_{\mu\nu}}{Q^2-\Pi_T}+\frac{q^2}{Q^2}\frac{P_{\mu\nu}}{q^2+\Pi_{L}} + \frac{Q^\mu Q^\nu}{Q^4}\,.
\label{dressed}
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Calculation}
At two loops, only two types of diagrams contribute to the photon self-energy, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}.
We call the diagrams on the left and right sides of the figure, respectively, the ``vertex'' and ``self'' diagrams.
There is an additional diagram of the self type with the photon line starting and ending on the lower line of the loop. The contribution from this diagram is identical to the one from the self graph that is shown, and we will take it into account by including a factor of two.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{vertex-self.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:1} Diagrams contributing to the photon self-energy at two loops. Left: ``vertex" diagram; right: ``self-energy" (or simply ``self") diagram.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Vertex diagram}
The vertex diagram in terms of retarded, advanced and symmetric propagators reads
(using a compact notation omitting plus signs: $LP= L+P$, $PQ = P+Q$, $LPQ = L+P+Q$)
\begin{align}
& \Pi^{\mu\nu}_{\rm (vertex)}(Q) = \frac{e^4}{4}\int \frac{d^4P}{(2\pi)^4} \int \frac{d^4L}{(2\pi)^4} {F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm V}}(L,P,Q) \, \big\{ \label{v1} \\
& \Delta_{a}(P) \Delta_{r}(L) \Delta_{a}(LP) \Delta_{s}(PQ) \Delta_{s}(LPQ)
+\Delta_{a}(P) \Delta_{r}(L) \Delta_{s}(LP) \Delta_{s}(PQ) \Delta_{r}(LPQ) \nonumber \\
+&\Delta_{a}(P) \tilde\Delta_{s}(L) \Delta_{a}(LP) \Delta_{r}(PQ) \Delta_{s}(LPQ)
+\Delta_{s}(P) \Delta_{a}(L) \Delta_{a}(LP) \Delta_{r}(PQ) \Delta_{s}(LPQ) \nonumber \\
+&\Delta_{a}(P) \tilde\Delta_{s}(L) \Delta_{s}(LP) \Delta_{r}(PQ) \Delta_{r}(LPQ)
+\Delta_{s}(P) \Delta_{a}(L) \Delta_{s}(LP) \Delta_{r}(PQ) \Delta_{r}(LPQ) \nonumber \\
+&\Delta_{a}(P) \tilde\Delta_{s}(L) \Delta_{a}(LP) \Delta_{s}(PQ)\Delta_{a}(LPQ)
+\Delta_{a}(P) \Delta_{r}(L) \Delta_{a}(LP) \Delta_{r}(PQ) \Delta_{a}(LPQ)\nonumber \\
+& \Delta_{s}(P) \Delta_{a}(L) \Delta_{r}(LP)\Delta_{r}(PQ) \Delta_{r}(LPQ)
+ \Delta_{s}(P) \tilde\Delta_{s}(L) \Delta_{r}(LP) \Delta_{r}(PQ) \Delta_{r}(LPQ)\nonumber
\big\}\,,
\end{align}
where we have dropped terms that depend on
propagators that are all advanced, or all retarded, with respect to the variable $L$,
as they vanish after contour integration.
The Dirac structure of the fermion propagators and vertices can be factored out in the trace
\begin{equation}
{F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm V}} = \text{Tr}\big[\gamma^\mu \; \slashed{P}\;\gamma_\lambda \; (\slashed{P}+\slashed{L})\;\gamma^\nu \;(\slashed{P
}+\slashed{L}+\slashed{Q})\; \gamma^\lambda \;(\slashed{P}+ \slashed{Q}) \big]\,.\nonumber
\label{trvertex}
\end{equation}
The diagonal elements of this trace ($\mu=\nu$), which are the only ones needed for our calculation, are invariant under the following changes of variables
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{ch1} & (a) & P\to -P-L-Q \,, \\
\label{ch2} & (b) & P\to -P-Q\,,\quad L\to -L \,.
\end{eqnarray}
These changes of variables, together with the KMS relation,
allow to reduce (\ref{v1}) to the following three terms
(here and in the following the notation $ \Pi^{\mu\mu}$ denotes equal indices and summation is implied only if the two indices appear one up and one down)
\begin{align}
\Pi_{\rm (vertex)}^{\mu\mu}(Q) & = \frac{e^4}{2}\int \frac{d^4P}{(2\pi)^4} \int \frac{d^4L}{(2\pi)^4} {F^{\mu\mu}_{\rm V}}(L,P,Q) N_f(P) \nonumber \\
& \Big\lbrace N_f(Q+P+L) \Delta_{a}(L) \Delta_{d}(P) \Delta_{r}(P+Q) \Delta_{a}(L+P) \Delta_{d}(Q+P+L) \nonumber\\
& +2 N_b(L) \big[ \Delta_{d}(P) \Delta_{d}(L) \Delta_{r}(P+Q) \Delta_{p}(P+L) \Delta_{r}(Q+P+L) \nonumber\\ &+ \Delta_{p}(L) \Delta_{d}(P) \Delta_{r}(P+Q) \Delta_{d}(P+L) \Delta_{r}(Q+P+L) \big] \Big\rbrace \,,
\label{v2}
\end{align}
where we have dropped terms which do not depend on the distribution functions and therefore do not contain the medium effects we are interested in.
Finally, we use KMS (\ref{KMS}) together with some additional variable changes (which need not leave the trace invariant) to bring our expression into a form
where all terms contain the factor $\Delta_d(P)\Delta_d(L)$, which will be most convenient when performing the integrations.
In particular, we will employ
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{ch3} & (c) & L\to -P-L-Q \,, \\
\label{ch4} & (d) & L \to L-P \,.
\end{eqnarray}
We arrive at
\begin{align}
& \Pi^{\mu\mu}_{\rm (vertex)}(Q) = \frac{e^4}{2}\int \frac{d^4P}{(2\pi)^4} \int \frac{d^4L}{(2\pi)^4} N_f(P) \Delta_{d}(P) \Delta_{d}(L) \nonumber\\
\Big[& N_f(L) \Delta_{r}(P+Q) \Delta_{r}(L+Q) \Delta_{r}(P+Q+L) F^{\mu\mu}_{\rm V (c)} \nonumber\\
+& 2 N_b(L) \Delta_{r}(P+Q) \Delta_{p}(L+P) \Delta_{r}(P+Q+L) F^{\mu\mu}_{\rm V} \nonumber\\
+& N_f(L) \Delta_{p}(L-P)\Delta_{r}(P+Q)\Delta_{r}(L+Q) F^{\mu\mu}_{\rm V (d)} \Big] \,,
\label{eq:finVertex}
\end{align}
where we labeled by $F_{(i)}$ the result of the trace after a given variable change, so in our notation $F^{\mu\mu}_{V(a)} = F^{\mu\mu}_{V(b)} = F^{\mu\mu}_V$.
\subsection{Self-energy diagram}
The expression for the second diagram of Fig. \ref{fig:1} in terms of retarded, advanced and symmetric propagators reads, after dropping again medium-independent terms,
(again in compact notation)
\begin{align}
& \Pi^{\mu\nu}_{\rm (self)}(Q) = \frac{e^4}{4}\int \frac{d^4P}{(2\pi)^4} \int \frac{d^4L}{(2\pi)^4} F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S}(L,P,Q) \Big\lbrace \nonumber \\
& \tilde\Delta_{s}(L)\Delta_{s}(P)\Delta_{r}(PQ)\Delta_{r}(PQ)\Delta_{r}(LPQ)
+ \tilde\Delta_{s}(L)\Delta_{a}(P)\Delta_{s}(PQ)\Delta_{r}(PQ)\Delta_{r}(LPQ) \nonumber\\
+ & \tilde\Delta_{s}(L)\Delta_{a}(P)\Delta_{s}(PQ)\Delta_{a}(PQ)\Delta_{a}(LPQ)
+ \tilde\Delta_{s}(L)\Delta_{a}(P)\Delta_{r}(PQ)\Delta_{a}(PQ)\Delta_{s}(LPQ) \nonumber\\
+ & \Delta_{a}(L)\Delta_{s}(P)\Delta_{r}(PQ)\Delta_{r}(PQ)\Delta_{s}(LPQ)
+ \Delta_{a}(L)\Delta_{a}(P)\Delta_{s}(PQ)\Delta_{r}(PQ)\Delta_{s}(LPQ) \nonumber \\
+ & \Delta_{r}(L)\Delta_{a}(P)\Delta_{s}(PQ)\Delta_{a}(PQ)\Delta_{s}(LPQ) \Big\rbrace \,.
\label{eq:piself1}
\end{align}
The Dirac trace in this case is given by
\begin{equation}
F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S} = \text{Tr}\big[\gamma^\mu \; \slashed{P}\;\gamma^\nu (\slashed{P}+\slashed{Q}) \gamma_\lambda \;(\slashed{Q}+\slashed{P}+\slashed{L})\;\gamma^\lambda \;(\slashed{P} +\slashed{Q})\; \big] \,.\label{self-fac3} \nonumber
\end{equation}
The expression in Eq. (\ref{eq:piself1}) appears to contain pinch singularities, but they can be shown to vanish using the KMS
relation (\ref{KMS}).
We are then left with the following terms,
\begin{align}
\Pi^{\mu\nu}_{\rm (self)}(Q) = & \frac{e^4}{4}\int \frac{d^4P}{(2\pi)^4} \int \frac{d^4L}{(2\pi)^4} F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S}(L,P,Q) \Big\lbrace \nonumber \\
& \Delta_{s}(P) \Delta_{r}(PQ)^2 \left(\Delta_{a}(L) \Delta_{s}(LPQ)+\tilde\Delta_{s}(L) \Delta_{r}(LPQ)\right) \nonumber\\
+ &\Delta_{a}(P) \tilde\Delta_{s}(L) N_f(PQ) \left[\Delta_{r}(PQ){}^2 \Delta_{r}(LPQ)-\Delta_{a}(PQ){}^2 \Delta_{a}(LPQ)\right] \nonumber\\
+ & \Delta_{a}(P) N_f(PQ) \Delta_{s}(LPQ) \left[\Delta_{a}(L) \Delta_{r}(PQ){}^2-\Delta_{r}(L) \Delta_{a}(PQ){}^2\right] \big. \Big\rbrace\,.
\end{align}
As for the vertex diagram,
we now make changes of variables to bring our expression to a simpler form in which the occupation numbers depend on individual internal loop momenta.
In this case however none of the variable changes will leave the trace invariant so that all combinations need to be computed separately.
A recurring combination given by the difference of the squares of two propagators can be conveniently rewritten as follows:
\begin{equation}
\Delta_r^2(P)-\Delta_a^2(P)=\left.\frac{d}{dM^2}\Big[\Delta_r(P,M)-\Delta_a(P,M)\Big]\right\vert_{M^2=0}=\left.
\frac{d}{dM^2}\Delta_d(P,M)\right\vert_{M^2=0}\,,
\end{equation}
where we have introduced $\Delta_j(P,M) \equiv \Delta_j(P)\vert_{{\bf p}^2 \rightarrow {\bf p}^2 + M^2} $.
After these simplifications only five terms survive and we arrive at
\begin{align}
\Pi^{\mu\nu}_{\rm (self)}(Q) &= \frac{e^4}{4}\int \frac{d^4P}{(2\pi)^4} \int \frac{d^4L}{(2\pi)^4} N_f(P) \Delta_{d}(L) \nonumber\\
\Big\lbrace
& \Delta_{a}(P+Q)^2 \Delta_{d}(P) \Delta_{a}(Q+P+L) \left[ N_b(L) F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S}+ N_f(L) F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S(c)} \right] \nonumber\\
+&
\Delta_{r}(P+L) \frac{d}{dM^2} \Delta_{d}(P,M) \Delta_{r}(P+Q) \left[ N_b(L)F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S(b)} + N_f(L) F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S(e)} \right] \nonumber\\
+&
\Delta_{a}(P+L)^2 \Delta_{d}(P) \Delta_{a}(Q+P+L) N_b(L) F^{\mu\nu}_{\rm S(a)}
\Big\rbrace \,,
\label{eq:finSelf}
\end{align}
where we introduced a fifth variable change $(e): L \rightarrow L+P \,, P \rightarrow -P-Q$,
and the $M^2$ derivative will be taken after we have performed the $p^0$ integral using the delta function in the factor $\Delta_d(P,M)$.
\subsection{$\Pi^\mu_{~\mu} (Q)$}
\label{trace-component}
The full result for $\Pi^\mu_{~\mu} (Q)$ is obtained by combining $\Pi^\mu_{~\mu \rm (vertex)} + 2 \Pi^{\mu}_{~\mu\rm (self)}$. By inspecting the momentum structure of our expressions, we observe that for arbitrary $L$ there are collinear divergences when $L$ is parallel to $P$, hence the expressions obtained so far are formal and must be regulated. A convenient way to do this
is to use dimensional regularization (DR).
In certain kinematical limits the collinear divergences cancel exactly. This is the case in the soft $L$ limit, as considered in ref. \cite{Aurenche:2003ac}, and also in the case we are interested in, namely the soft $Q$ limit.
In order to be consistent within our DR prescription we also check for possible additional contributions from performing the Dirac traces in $D=d+1=4+2\epsilon$ dimensions. The evaluation of $F_V$ and $F_S$ thus leads to additional pieces coming from the relation $\gamma^\mu\gamma_\mu = g^\mu_{~\mu} = D$. In the following we will focus on the small $\epsilon$ limit, even though we will later provide our final result for arbitrary $D$. \\
Expanding for small $Q$, regularizing with DR and exploiting the symmetry of the integrand when possible to interchange $L$ with $P$, we obtain \footnote{In the denominators below, we have dropped the $\pm i\eta$ prescriptions. This can safely be done if we assume $q^0> q$, or equivalently $Q^2>0$. The arbitrary case can be recovered by replacing $q^0\to q^0+i\eta$.}
\begin{align}
\Pi^{\mu}_{\mu}(Q) & =
- 2 e^4 \nu^{6-2d}\int d l^0 \int d p^0 \int\frac{d^d \bf l}{(2\pi)^d}\int\frac{d^d\bf p}{(2\pi)^d}
\,\delta(L^2) \delta(P^2) \left[ N_b(L) - N_f(L) \right] \nonumber\\
\Bigg\lbrace & N_f(P) (1+\epsilon) \left[ \frac{3}{2} \frac{Q^2}{(L\cdot Q) (P\cdot Q)} - \frac{2}{(P\cdot Q)} + \frac{Q^2}{(P\cdot Q)^2} - \frac{2}{(P\cdot L)} \right] \nonumber\\
&- \frac{1}{p} (1+2\epsilon) \left[ \frac{dN_f(P)}{d{p^0}} - \frac{N_f(P)}{{ p^0}} \right]
+ {\cal O}(\epsilon^2)
\Bigg\rbrace \,.
\label{eq:pimumusmallQ1}
\end{align}
After doing the $p^0$ and $l^0$ integrals by employing the delta functions, several of these pieces (including those containing a collinear divergency $\sim 1/(P\cdot L)$ for any $\pm i\eta$ prescription) vanish due to the symmetry of the integrand. In principle ${\cal O}(\epsilon^2)$ pieces from the trace might also contribute if both a radial and a collinear divergence are present. We however checked separately that these pieces are also collinear-safe, so that they do not contribute, and they have thus been omitted in our expression.
Note that (\ref{eq:pimumusmallQ1}) holds for any distribution functions that fulfill the conditions (\ref{KMS}).
Exploiting the parity invariance of the distribution functions, we can now introduce the four-velocities associated with the on-shell positive and negative-energy massless degrees of freedom involved in our calculation and write $L^\mu = \pm l v_l^\mu$, $P^\mu = \pm p v^\mu$, with $v_l^\mu = (1, {\bf v}_l)$ and $v^\mu = (1, {\bf v})$ (see e.g. \cite{Carignano:2017ovz} for details).
The angular part of the integral over ${\bf l}$ is trivial and the radial integral over $|{\bf l}|=l$ depends exclusively on the combination $N_f(l) - N_b(l)$, and gives a finite result. The remaining integral over ${\bf p}$ requires however a bit more attention.
Focusing again on the $\epsilon\to 0$ limit, the relevant contributions are
\begin{align}
\Pi^{\mu}_{~\mu}(Q) & = - 2 e^4 \nu^{3-d} \Lambda_{(3)}^2 \int \frac{d^d\bf p}{(2\pi)^d} \Bigg\lbrace \frac{1}{p^2}\frac{dN_f(p)}{dp} \nonumber\\
& + \frac{N_f(p)}{p^3} \Big[ \left(\frac{Q^2}{(v\cdot Q)^2} - 1 \right)
+ \epsilon \left( \frac{Q^2}{(v\cdot Q)^2} - 2 \right) \Big] \Bigg\rbrace \,,
\label{eq:pimumusmallQ2}
\end{align}
where we have introduced the quantity
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_{(d)}^2=\nu^{3-d}\int \frac{d^d \bf l}{(2\pi)^d} \left( \frac{ N_b(l) - N_f(l) }{l} \right) \,.
\label{Delta}
\end{equation}
For thermal distributions,
$\Lambda^2_{(3)}=T^2/4$.
The radial $p$ integral in the second line of (\ref{eq:pimumusmallQ2}) is formally divergent when $d\to3$, whereas in the same limit the angular integral of the first term in the square bracket vanishes. Thus we see that some additional care is required when considering this contribution.
After a proper treatment of these two integrals in DR (see e.g. \cite{Carignano:2017ovz} for a collection of the relevant formulas), we find that the radial integral is ${\cal O} (1/\epsilon)$, whereas the angular integral over the first term in the square bracket is ${\cal O} (\epsilon)$, so that the final result for their product is finite. The angular integral over the second term in the square brackets is finite and hence, due to the explicit
factor of $\epsilon$ in front of the round bracket (which was produced by the $D=4+2\epsilon$ dimensional trace), this second term also
gives a finite result.
Including the finite contribution from the first line of (\ref{eq:pimumusmallQ2}), we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\Pi^{\mu}_{~\mu}(Q) = -\frac{e^4T^2}{8\pi^2} \left[ 1 + \frac{q^0}{q} \log\left(\frac{q^0+q + i\eta}{q^0-q+i \eta} \right) \right]\,,
\label{mumu}
\end{equation}
where we have restored the $+i\eta$ prescription for retarded quantities.
We would like to stress here that the use of a consistent regularization scheme is crucial in order to obtain this result: in particular,
if one works in $D=4$ and regulates the radial integral with a naive cut-off,
one misses the contribution of the second line of (\ref{eq:pimumusmallQ2}), and hence the second term in (\ref{mumu}).
\subsection{$\Pi^{00} (Q)$}
The full result for $\Pi^{00} (Q)$ is obtained by adding $\Pi^{00}_{\rm (vertex)} + 2 \Pi^{00}_{\rm (self)}$.
In this case expressions are lengthier, but upon carrying out the small $Q$ expansion at leading order and performing the $l^0$ and $p^0$ integrations,
we again find that all collinear divergences cancel and arrive at {\footnotemark[2]}
\begin{align}
\Pi^{00}(Q) & = e^4 \nu^{3-d}\Lambda_{(d)}^2
\int \frac{d^d{\bf p}}{(2\pi)^d} \Bigg\lbrace \frac{N_f(p)}{p^3} \left[ 1 + \frac{2 q^0 Q^2}{(v \cdot Q)^3} - \frac{Q^2}{(v \cdot Q)^2} - 2 \frac{q_0^2}{(v\cdot Q)^2} \right] \nonumber\\
&- \frac{1}{p^2} \frac{dN_f(p)}{dp} \left[ 1 + \frac{Q^2}{(v\cdot Q)^2} - 2 \frac{q^0}{(v\cdot Q)} \right] \Bigg\rbrace + {\cal O}(\epsilon) \,.
\label{eq:pi00smallQ2}
\end{align}
As in section \ref{trace-component}, for $d=3$ we find a diverging radial integral multiplied by a vanishing angular one.
Using DR we find again that the divergent part of the radial integral $(\sim 1/\epsilon)$ and the vanishing angular one $(\sim \epsilon)$ combine into a finite expression,
and we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\Pi^{00}(Q) = - \frac{e^4T^2}{8\pi^2} \left[ 1 - \frac{q_0^2}{Q^2} \right]\,.
\label{pi00}
\end{equation}
As {in the case of} the $\Pi^{\mu}_{~\mu}$ component, we have checked for additional possible contributions stemming from performing the trace in $D$ dimensions. In this case only ${\cal O}(\epsilon)$ pieces are present, and - unlike the previous case - we find them to be exactly proportional to the result for $D=4$, which we showed above to be finite. We can thus safely take the $\epsilon\to 0$ limit and see that they do not contribute.
As a cross-check of our result, we can compute the limit
\begin{equation}
\lim_{{\bf q}\to 0} \Pi^{00}(q^0=0,{\bf q}) = -\frac{e^4T^2}{8\pi^2} \,,
\end{equation}
which is consistent with results in the literature and can be associated with a NLO correction to the Debye mass \cite{Kapusta:2006pm}.
Once again, if one works in $D=4$ and naively regulates the radial integrals with a hard cut-off, one misses the contribution from the first line of (\ref{eq:pi00smallQ2}),
leading to an incorrect result in (\ref{pi00}) (specifically, $\Pi^{00}(Q)$ would be proportional to the HTL result).
\section{Results and outlook}
In this work, we computed the two-loop hard contribution to the photon self-energy in a medium at leading order for small momentum using the real-time formalism. This provides the missing ingredient
to build the full NLO contribution to the HTL effective action.
The contribution is found to be finite for $d=3$ as a result of a non-trivial series of cancellations of divergences which we treated consistently using dimensional regularization.
From the computed results for $\Pi^{00}$ and $\Pi^{\mu}_{~\mu}$ we can reconstruct the photon self-energy associated with this contribution using Eqs. (\ref{pi-def}) and (\ref{00mumu}). However, in order to find the
effective Lagrangian from which these contributions are derived, it is convenient to reconstruct $\Pi^{\mu\nu}$ before the last angular integral is performed. It is straightforward to check that (\ref{mumu}) and (\ref{pi00}) can be obtained from,
\begin{equation}
\Pi^{\mu\nu}(Q)= -\frac{e^4T^2}{8\pi^2} \int \frac{d\Omega_v}{4\pi} \Big( \frac{1}{2} + \frac{q^0}{v\cdot Q} \Big) A^ {\mu\nu}
\,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
A^{\mu\nu} = v^\mu v^\nu \frac{Q^2}{(v\cdot Q)^2} - \frac{v^\mu Q^\nu + v^\nu Q^\mu}{v\cdot Q} + g^{\mu\nu} \,
\end{equation}
is the same structure that appears in the HTL self-energy.
Hence, the corresponding effective Lagrangian reads
\begin{equation}
{\cal L} = - \frac{e^4T^2}{16\pi^2}\int \frac{d\Omega_v}{4\pi}F_{\rho\mu}\frac{v^\mu v^\nu}{(v \cdot \partial)^2 } \left( \frac{1}{2} + \frac{\partial_0}{v\cdot \partial}\right) F_\nu^{\,\,\rho}\,.
\end{equation}
For completeness, we also give the result in arbitrary dimension $D=d+1$, not necessarily close
to the $D=4$ case.
For this we need an extra structure,
\begin{align}
B^{\mu\nu} & = \frac{n^\mu Q^\nu + n^\nu Q^\mu}{v\cdot Q} + \frac{v^\mu Q^\nu + v^\nu Q^\mu}{v\cdot Q} \frac{q^0}{v\cdot Q} - (n^\mu v^\nu + n^\nu v^\mu) \frac{Q^2}{(v\cdot Q)^2} - g^{\mu\nu} \frac{2q^0}{v\cdot Q} \,.
\end{align}
We can then write,
\begin{align}
\Pi^{\mu\nu}(Q) &=
e^4 \nu^{3-d} \Lambda_{(d)}^2\Big(\frac{d-1}{2}\Big)\int\frac{d^d\bf p}{(2\pi)^d}\Bigg\lbrace \frac{N_f(p)}{p^3} \Big[ \Big( 1 + \frac{2 q^0}{v\cdot Q} \Big) A^{\mu\nu} \nonumber\\
& + B^{\mu\nu} \Big] - \frac{1}{p^2}\frac{dN_f}{dp} A^{\mu\nu} \Bigg\rbrace \,,
\end{align}
which trivially fulfills the Ward identity $Q_\mu \Pi^{\mu\nu}(Q)= 0$, since both $A^{\mu\nu}$ and $B^{\mu\nu}$ are transverse.
This self-energy agrees with the result in (\ref{eq:pimumusmallQ2}) when $\epsilon\to 0$ (as explained in the paragraph under equation (\ref{Delta})) and can be obtained from the second term in (\ref{1}), which verifies the claim that (\ref{1})
is indeed the NLO Lagrangian of the HTL effective theory.
The Lagrangian (\ref{1}) describes the dynamics of soft photons in a medium at NLO for arbitrary kinematics.
With minor modifications,
it also describes the NLO dynamics of soft photons in a QCD medium: in the first term $e^2\to \sum_{q=u,d,s} Q_q^2 e^2$ and in the second term $e^4\to \sum_{q=u,d,s} Q_q^2 e^2 C_F N_c g^2$, where $Q_q$ is the charge of the quark $q$, $g$ is the QCD coupling constant, $N_c=3$ is the number of colors, and $C_F=(N_c^2-1)/2N_c$.
We emphasize that the two-loop self-energies calculated in this paper, together with the power corrections to the one-loop self-energies calculated in \cite{Carignano:2017ovz}, provide the full NLO soft photon propagator for both an EPP and a QGP.
This result follows from the fact that:
a) for the two-loop diagrams, a soft internal photon is suppressed by a factor of $e$ (or $g$), and a soft internal fermion is even more suppressed; and
b) the contribution of soft fermions to the one-loop soft photon self-energy is also suppressed (${\cal O}(e^5 T^2)$ in an EPP and ${\cal O}(e^2 g^3 T^2)$ in a QGP) \cite{Mirza:2013ula}.
Our result can therefore be applied to any e.m. process involving soft photons
for which the precision needed includes ${\cal O}(e^2, Q^2/T^2)$ corrections.
As an example, we calculate the dispersion relation at NLO in \ref{app:b}.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{introduction}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
Neural networks have recently demonstrated tremendous success in influencing decisions across mass-impact domains, such as finance \citep{7966019, AAAI1816160}, pricing \citep{CHIARAZZO2014810, shukla2019dynamic, ye2018customized} and policy-making \citep{doi:10.1080/10919392.2015.1125187}. Because decisions in these domains have significant societal implications, questions about the models' interpretability and learning behavior commonly arise. Trust in the system and associated applicability take center stage when analysts intend to validate their prior domain expertise about the data, vis-à-vis the learned statistical model. This \textit{a priori} knowledge can relate to an attribute following a certain distribution in nature. In this work, we focus on one such intuitive trend, namely, monotonicity.
Even though real-world data encompasses high-dimensional inputs with multiple interactions \citep{HALL2014694}, it is common to possess prior domain knowledge about the monotonic trend (non-increasing / non-decreasing) between a subset of input features and the output, giving rise to partial monotonicity \citep{partial_monotone}. For instance, economic theories in house pricing \citep{house_pred} expect selling price to increase with total area. Monotonicity constraints act as a regularizer, and enhance generalization to test data, apart from facilitating human-in-the-loop adaptive learning. Such considerations demand specific attention in deep learning where prediction accuracy may be improved at the expense of interpretability \citep{chen2018learning}.
In this study, we test a novel gradient-based loss for incorporating partial monotonicity within deep neural networks, which is implemented in combination with an empirical risk function to penalize non-monotonic trends. Our contribution is to demonstrate that monotonicity can be introduced effectively and flexibly as required by domain expertise in real-world applications. Our approach stays independent of the model structure, facilitating seamless integration with already-deployed networks. This helps us to preserve the versatility of deep networks and deliver a scalable solution. Moreover, configurable weight proportions for the two components in the custom loss help control degree of monotonicity, thereby, adding much-needed transparency across complex black-box models.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\section{Related work}\label{related work}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
Monotonicity is enforced commonly with neural networks either by changing (i) model architecture or (ii) the learning process. Architecture alterations relate to connecting hidden nodes differently or imposing constraints on weights of certain input/hidden nodes. Most published work has focused on these structural changes - starting from positive weight constraints by \cite{wang_archer}. \cite{sillmono} introduced those constraints into a three-layer neural network for full monotonicity, which was further extended by \cite{partial_monotone} to partial monotonic functions for low-dimensional spaces. Generalizing the approach, \cite{dln} proposed deep lattice networks (DLN) using a combination of linear calibrators and lattices for learning monotonic functions. Though DLN outperforms previous methods, constructing a lattice with $D$ features ($2^D$ simplex) is computationally expensive for large spaces. Moreover, lattices, being structurally rigid, use multi-linear interpolation for unseen data - leading to step-wise and non-intuitive relationship between the input and output.
Monotonicity can be incorporated within the learning process i.e. the backpropagation step by adding constraints, either as an additional cost with standard loss function ("soft" constraint); or as a "hard" constraint, similar to Lagrangian multipliers. \cite{mrquezneila2017imposing} compare these two types of constraints and establish that soft constraints perform better because satisfying hard constraints leads to sub-optimal outputs. \cite{pathakICCV15ccnn} show that alternative loss formulations can be equivalent to optimizing convolutional networks in a constrained manner. We contribute to this field of soft-constraint methods by introducing a point-wise loss (PWL) function for enforcing partial monotonicity within any DNN, without any change in architecture.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\section{Point-wise Loss (PWL)}\label{pwl}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
Consider the general setting of a supervised learning problem with a training set of $n$ examples $\{(x_i, y_i)\}$, $i = 1, \dots , n$. The label could either be real-valued ($y_i \in \mathbb{R}$), or binary ($y_i \in \{0, 1\}$ such as classification labels). The objective of the methods presented below is to determine an estimator function $f(x)$ which is monotonic with respect to $x[M]$, where $M$ is a subset of features defined by $M \subseteq \mathcal{D}$ in $x \in \mathbb{R}^\mathcal{D}$. A function $f$ is said to be monotonically increasing in $M$ if $f(x_i) \geq f(x_j)$ for any two feature vectors $x_i, x_j \in x$, such that $x_i[M] \geq x_j[M]$ and $x_i[p] = x_j[p],$ for all $p \in \mathcal{D}\setminus M$. Without loss of generality, we use non-decreasing monotonicity for our study.
We present a point-wise loss (PWL) function that incorporates monotonic knowledge into neural networks by altering the learning process. The objective function with point-wise derivatives which embeds \textit{a priori} knowledge about monotonicity is inspired from finite element analysis as approximation \citep{strang1972approximation, wilmott1995mathematics} and classes of functions presented by \cite{dugas2009incorporating}. We formulate the following minimax objective function $\mathcal{L}_{mono}$ computed over $x_i, \; \forall \; i \in [1, n]$:
\begin{equation}
\min \mathcal{L}_{mono} = \min \left\{ \sum_{i=1}^{n} \max \bigg(0, -{\div_M f(x_i;\theta)} \bigg) + \mathcal{L}_{NN} \right\}
\label{eq:pwl}
\end{equation}
where $\div_M$ is divergence with respect to feature set $x[M]$, i.e., $\sum_j \frac{\partial f(x_i; \theta)}{\partial x[M]_i^j} \;\; \forall\;\; j \in M$, $\theta$ are the trainable parameters, and $\mathcal{L}_{NN}$ refers to the empirical risk minimization for neural networks.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Evaluation Strategy}\label{evalStrategy}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
To evaluate the performance of DNN trained with PWL, we compare it to DLN. DLN is geared towards providing structural monotonicity guarantees irrespective of the trends in data, while PWL focuses on learning monotonicity from the data. We use two metrics: (i) area under the ROC curve (AUC) and (ii) our monotonicity metric $\mathcal{M}_k$ (defined in \eqref{eq:mono1} and \eqref{eq:mono2}) for this analysis.
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_k = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n} \mathbbm{1}_{(\delta_i)}, \text{where}
\label{eq:mono1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\delta_i=
\begin{cases}
1& \text{if } \Delta_+ f(x_j;\theta) \geq 0 \;\;\forall\;\; j \ni \{x_j[k] \in [\kappa_{min}, \kappa_{max}), x_j[p]=x_i[p] \;\;\forall\;\; p\neq k\}\\
0 & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\label{eq:mono2}
\end{equation}
Here, the latent variable $\delta$ is an indicator that measures the degree of monotonicity $\mathcal{M}_k$ for the $k^{th}$ feature across the entire dataset. $\Delta_+$ refers to the forward difference operator for non-decreasing monotonicity \citep{wilmott1995mathematics}. The range for evaluating monotonicity of feature $k$ is set to $[\kappa_{min}, \kappa_{max})$, i.e. the lowest and highest values of the $k$th feature present in the training data.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\section{Experiments}\label{ex}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
We compare the performance of PWL and DLN across three data sources : (1) an artificial dataset, (2) UCI - Adult dataset and (3) Airline Ancillary dataset, summarized in Appendix (Table \ref{tab:data}). Our models are trained on cross-entropy loss for classification problems, and mean squared loss for regression. PWL uses Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD) for optimization of the objective loss function. DLN implementation is similar to the one proposed by \cite{dln}.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Artificial dataset}\label{artificialdata}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
We synthesize an artificial dataset (sinusoidal in $x$ and exponential in $y$; Fig. \ref{fig:toy}a) to visualize learning on the 2-D functional space. We observe that standard DNN with squared loss and moderate batch size detects the overall trend, but there are regions of non-monotonicity (Fig. \ref{fig:toy}b). Monotonicity is ensured along $y$ after incorporating PWL with same DNN architecture, however, the curves appear to be marginally sharper than the target function (Fig. \ref{fig:toy}c). Contour lines for DLN are closest to the target function (Fig. \ref{fig:toy}d). Although DLN learns better than PWL, our alternative PWL formulation is able to bring DNN closer to monotonicity without a complete overhaul in architecture, unlike DLN.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=14cm]{images/toy.pdf}
\caption{Function $f(x, y) = sin(x) + e^{y}$ ; $x \in [0,1]$ and $y \in [0,1]$ are the principal axis along horizontal and vertical dimensions respectively. \textit{Contours}: (a) Target (b) DNN estimated (c) PWL estimated (d) DLN estimated}
\label{fig:toy}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Model performance on the two datasets. ($\mathcal{M}_k$: monotonicity metric \eqref{eq:mono1}; $\mathcal{T}$: run-time in $10^3$ seconds)}
\begin{tabular}{c | c c c | c c c }
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Models} &
\multicolumn{3}{c}{UCI - Adult} &
\multicolumn{3}{c}{Airline Ancillary} \\
& AUC & $\mathcal{M}_k$ & $\mathcal{T}$ & AUC & $\mathcal{M}_k$ & $\mathcal{T}$\\
\hline
DLN & \textbf{0.917} & \textbf{1.000} & 5.586 & 0.708 & \textbf{1.000} & 7.770\\
PWL & 0.908 & 0.856 & \textbf{0.338} & \textbf{0.722} & 0.985 & \textbf{1.375}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:results}
\end{table}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\subsection{UCI - Adult dataset}\label{ucidata}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
Similar to \cite{dln}, census data from the UCI repository \citep{adult_df} is used to predict whether a person's income exceeds \$50,000 or not. Monotonicity is enforced with respect to education level, hours per week, and capital gain. Considering education level for illustration, we note that DLN marginally edges out PWL on AUC and monotonicity measure $\mathcal{M}_k$ (See Table \ref{tab:results}). However, analysis of conditioned trends on education level (Fig. \ref{fig:adult}a) suggests that the DLN is learning similar (consistent step-wise slope) patterns for each person. PWL results demonstrate varying trajectories for each person, i.e. it differentiates between individuals after considering non-linear interactions. We found the actual correlation between education level and income to be $0.33$, indicating that the data may not be completely positive monotonic. Hence, the DLN does guarantee monotonicity but at the cost of sometimes ignoring real signals from data, which are detected by PWL (red lines in Fig. \ref{fig:adult}b).
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{images/adult_v3.pdf}
\caption{UCI - Adult dataset: Conditioned trends for Education Level}
\label{fig:adult}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{images/airline_v3.pdf}
\caption{Airline Ancillary dataset: Conditioned trends for Ancillary Price}
\label{fig:price}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\subsection{Airline Ancillary dataset}\label{airlinedata}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
Ancillary pricing \citep{shukla2019dynamic, shukla2019adaptive} is a sub-field within airline pricing where ancillaries are priced in association with partner airlines using an A/B testing framework. Domain knowledge suggests that the ancillary purchase probability should follow a non-increasing monotonic trend with respect to price. We use this dataset to evaluate the DLN and PWL model performances in a real-world setting. Upon experimenting with different iterations of the DLN i.e. increasing lattice size and number of lattices, we find that DLN's training time increases significantly without noticeable improvement in AUC (Appendix: Table \ref{tab:res-perf}). On the other hand, PWL model is more tractable and solves faster (Table \ref{tab:results}). In addition, we find that PWL outperforms DLN in terms of AUC and has similar $\mathcal{M}_k$ score (Table \ref{tab:results}). DLN makes predictions in a step-wise fashion with linearly interpolated segments (Fig. \ref{fig:price}a), thereby missing out on customer dynamics for unobserved regions. However, PWL produces curves with smoother derivatives - suggesting the possibility of greater personalization for customers, and establishing continuity of trend on either side of the price horizon (as expected).
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\section{Conclusion}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
In this work, we explored one way of incorporating \textit{a priori} knowledge - monotonicity, to leverage domain expertise into data-driven approaches. We tested a point-wise loss (PWL) function that penalizes non-monotonicity, against deep lattice networks (DLN) which enforce monotonicity via calibrated look-up tables. We discussed how DLN guarantees monotonicity at the cost of learning from data, whereas PWL strives to achieve a compromise between minimizing empirical risk and enforcing monotonicity. DLN is unable to differentiate between individual data points, a model characteristic desired in the real-world to drive personalized decisions. In contrast, varying trajectories learned by PWL provide more power for customized decision-making. In addition, PWL can be used as a plug-in for enforcing soft monotonicity, while retaining the flexibility and power of deep networks. However, PWL demands a wise choice of the relative importance of different terms in the loss function - an open problem in the deep learning community. In future work, we aim to facilitate transfer learning between different PWL model iterations to regularize the loss weight proportions.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
We sincerely and gratefully acknowledge our airline partners for their continuing support. The academic partners are also thankful to
deepair (\href{https://www.deepair.io/}{www.deepair.io}) for funding this research.
\bibliographystyle{unsrtnat}
|
\section{Introduction}
In the cold and dense molecular phase of the interstellar medium (ISM), it is much easier to trigger runaway gravitational collapse, which makes giant molecular clouds (GMCs) the preferred birth-site of stars. Key questions in the study of star formation (SF) on galactic scales therefore include how the gas gets to these densities and temperatures, and what controls the amount of cold gas with respect to the other thermal phases of the ISM. A thorough understanding of the properties, evolution and dynamics of the ISM and especially of the cold molecular phase, is a vital step towards a predictive theory of SF \citep{MacLow&Klessen2004, McKee&Ostriker2007, Klessen&Glover2016}.
The ISM is composed of three main thermal phases: a hot ($T \sim 10^{6} \: {\rm K}$) ionised phase produced by mechanical energy input from supernovae and stellar winds; a warm ($T \sim 10^{4} \: {\rm K}$) phase that can be further subdivided into largely ionised gas (found e.g.\ in H~{\sc ii} regions around massive stars or the diffuse ionised medium) or largely neutral atomic gas; and a cold phase composed of a mix of atomic and molecular gas \citep{McKee1977}. Although the warm atomic phase is generally close to thermal equilibrium \citep[e.g.][]{Wolfire1995}, the ISM is a rich and dynamic system and perturbations can generate thermal instabilities that lead to runaway cooling and the formation of cold, dense gas clouds. Clouds that are dense and massive enough to shield themselves from the interstellar radiation field develop high molecular fractions, becoming GMCs. General causes for these perturbations include gravitational instabilities, cloud-cloud collisions of warm atomic gas, and shocks in the turbulent ISM \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{Klessen&Hennebelle2010, Smith+2014, Dobbs2014}. Once formed, GMCs may be disrupted by feedback from the stars forming within them \citep{Krumholz+2014} or by external processes such as galactic shear \citep[e.g.][]{Jeffreson+2018}.
Larger-scale processes can play a fundamental role as well: spiral arms and bars can gather together warm gas, triggering the formation of cold clouds and initiating the SF process. The global rotation curve of a galaxy is a central parameter, directly affecting the Toomre Q parameter and thus the local stability against gravitational collapse of the disc \citep{Li+2005} as well as controlling the local shear experienced by the ISM.
Most noticeably, in the question of what controls SF, galaxy interactions and mergers play a prominent role. Mergers are often associated with bursts of SF \citep{Larson&Tinsley1978, Lonsdale+1984, Barton+2000, Ellison+2008, Renaud+2014} and the most vigorously star-forming galaxies can all be morphologically interpreted as merging pairs \citep{SandersAndMirabel1996}. These enhancements in SF may be triggered by the collapse of previously stable gas due to cloud collisions and gas compression in tidally-induced spiral arms \citep{Toomre&Toomre1972}. In addition, mergers can result in a substantial redistribution of the angular momentum of the gas and also in the formation of bars \citep{Mihos&Hernquist1996}, both of which act to drive large-scale gas flows towards the centre of the most massive galaxy, leading to a nuclear starburst.
Simulations \citep[e.g.][]{Cox+2006, DiMatteo+2007, Renaud+2014} show that the SF histories of these interactions exhibit an increase in SF immediately after the pericentric passage of the companion and then again during the coalescence phase with an increase of the SF rate (SFR) of at least a factor of two with respect to the isolated case.
However, the details are case-specific and initial conditions such as orbital parameters, mass ratios, gas fractions and the initial stability of the isolated disc all play an important role \citep{DiMatteo+2007, Cox+2008} such that not every merger is immediately linked to an enhanced SFR. \citet{Cox+2008} showed that there is a strong correlation with the mass ratio and found that for high mass differences between the two galaxies it is questionable whether the interaction drives any SF whatsoever, since the tidal disturbance is small. Even for similar masses the merger can, for example, remove a large amount of gas from the galaxy during the first encounter via tidal tails. If this gas cannot fully re-accrete during the coalescence phase, the galaxy will be unable to form significantly more stars than in its isolated state \citep{DiMatteo+2007}.
In addition, if the isolated galactic disc is mainly Toomre unstable it will already be collapsing and radially flowing towards the centre. In this case, the disc is maximally star forming and the rate is self-regulated by the energy input of stellar feedback to counterbalance the midplane pressure exerted by the disc \citep{Ostriker&Shetty2011, Shetty&Ostriker2012}, combined with the energy input from radial infall \citep{Krumholz+2018}. If the interaction cannot significantly increase the midplane pressure and drive radial inflow, it is unlikely that the SFR will be enhanced.
In recent decades, numerical simulations of the ISM have improved substantially, reaching ever higher resolutions and including more and more physical ingredients. There has been important progress in understanding the relative importance of different physical processes and their direct effect on the ISM phases and thus on the regulation of SF \citep[e.g.][]{Dale+2014, Gatto+2015, Walch+2015, Kim&Ostriker2017, Peters+2017, Hill+2018,Rahner+2019}. However simulations that can resolve scales smaller than entire GMCs rarely include larger galactic scale phenomena\footnote{Exceptions are dwarf galaxy simulations where the total gas mass is small and more detailed studies are possible \citep[e.g.][]{Hu+2016, Hu+2017, Emerick+2019}.} and are often carried out using highly idealised setups, such as isolated or colliding clouds or kpc-sized portions of the stratified galactic disc.
Larger-scale simulations typically rely on sub-grid models to follow the SF process, which abstract the complex nature of the ISM on the cloud and sub-cloud scales \citep[e.g.][]{Hopkins+2014, Vogelsberger+2014, Shaye+2015, Pillepich+2018}. In these cases, the transition from atomic to molecular gas and the composition of the ISM on the scale of individual GMCs are at best only marginally resolved. In spite of this, these models have proved very successful for developing a general understanding of the dynamics of the ISM in galaxies and its global SF properties. However, their predictive power starts to become questionable on smaller scales and research bridging the gap between these large-scale models and detailed simulations of individual clouds has only recently started to become computationally viable.
The details of how a galaxy encounter affects its cold molecular gas content and the following SF on the level of individual molecular clouds remains an open question. For instance, it has been debated whether the increase of SF during the encounter reflects an increase in the available molecular gas reservoir or whether it follows from a higher SF efficiency with strong arguments favouring both sides \citep{Cox+2006, Krumholz+2012, Pan+2018}. Some of the observational studies endorsing the higher efficiency scenario assume a different conversion factor between CO and H$_2$ with respect to more quiescent galaxies \citep{Daddi+2010} and some numerical studies seem to hint at such a scenario \citep{Renaud+2019}. But ultimately these highly interesting questions can only be fully addressed with models capable of properly resolving the molecular phase of the ISM.
In this paper, we study the ISM of a galaxy undergoing a merger with a particular focus on the molecular gas. We try to understand how the encounter affects the gas properties with the help of high-resolution galactic-scale simulations carried out using the {\sc arepo} moving-mesh code \citep{Springel2010}. One key goal of our current study is to quantify the relative importance of local feedback and global dynamical processes for regulating the SFR and shaping the molecular phase of the ISM.
We take inspiration for our model from the well-studied interacting galaxy M51 (also known as NGC 5194 or the Whirlpool galaxy). M51 is a nearby and almost face-on example of a galaxy currently undergoing a merger, in this case with its smaller neighbour NGC 5195, with a mass ratio around one-half \citep{Schweizer1977, Mentuch+2012}. Owing to this interaction, it displays a prominent grand-design spiral pattern. Because of this, plus its relative proximity and favourable inclination, it has been the target of many observational studies, of which the most important for our purposes is probably the PdBI Arcsecond Whirlpool Survey (PAWS; \citealt{Schinnerer+2013}), which mapped CO emission on scales down to $\sim 40$~pc, comparable to the size of individual GMCs.
Our simulations are not the first to attempt to model M51. We follow the lead of \citet{Dobbs+2010}, who simulated the gas and the stars of a system inspired by the present-day M51 system. However, they used an isothermal equation of state for the gas, preventing them from studying the cold gas distribution or the properties of individual GMCs. More recently, \citet{Pettitt+2017} performed smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) simulations of an interacting galaxy morphologically similar to M51 using a more sophisticated thermal treatment. However, the SPH particle mass in their simulations was $2000 \: {\rm M_{\odot}}$, rendering them unable to resolve all but the largest GMCs. The simulations presented here have considerably higher resolution, down to a few M$_\odot$, allowing us to resolve a much broader range of GMCs.
Our paper is organised as follows. In Section \ref{sec:Methods} we describe our model, the numerical methods and the initial conditions of our simulation. We describe the outcome of our simulations in Section \ref{sec:Results} with a particular emphasis on the ISM properties and the SFR. We then proceed to analyse the role of the galactic interaction on the ISM phases in Section \ref{sec:Discussion} by comparing simulations of an isolated and an interacting galaxy with the same initial properties. We discuss the limitations and problems of our model in Section \ref{sec:caveats} and summarise our findings in Section \ref{sec:Conclusions}.
\section{Methods}
\label{sec:Methods}
\subsection{Numerical code}
\label{sec:Arepo}
Our simulations were performed with {\sc arepo} \citep{Springel2010}, which is a moving-mesh hydrodynamic code coupled with an $N$-body gravity solver.
The fundamental conservation laws needed to describe the evolution of an unmagnetised\footnote{Although the ISM of M51 is known to be magnetised \citep[see e.g.][]{Fletcher+2011}, we restrict our attention here to the unmagnetised case for simplicity, and defer any investigation of MHD effects to a future study.} fluid are conservation of mass, momentum and energy:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Continuity}
\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot (\rho \boldsymbol{u}) = 0;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:euler}
\frac{\partial \boldsymbol{u}}{\partial t} + \boldsymbol{u} \cdot \nabla \boldsymbol{u} = - \frac{\nabla P}{\rho} - \nabla \Phi;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:energy}
\frac{\partial \rho e}{\partial t} + \nabla \cdot [(\rho e + P)\boldsymbol{u}] = \rho \Dot{Q} + \rho \frac{\partial \Phi}{\partial t}.
\end{equation}
Here $\rho$ is the mass density, $\boldsymbol{u}$ is the velocity field, $P$ is the thermal pressure, $\Phi$ is the gravitational potential, $e = e_{\rm th} + \Phi + \boldsymbol{u}^2 / 2$ is the total energy per unit mass, and $e_{\rm th}$ is the thermal energy per unit mass. The term $\Dot{Q}$ hides all the complexity of the chemical and radiative cooling and heating processes described in Section~\ref{sec:SGChem} below.
To close the system, we use an ideal gas equation of state,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:eos}
P = (\gamma - 1) \rho e_{\rm th},
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is the adiabatic index. We set $\gamma = 5/3$ throughout the simulation, even in gas which is predominantly molecular. We justify our neglect of the rotational degrees of freedom of the molecular gas by noting that in our simulations, gas with a high molecular fraction is typically too cold to excite the rotational energy levels of H$_{2}$.
These fluid equations are then solved in 3D on a time-dependent mesh constructed by computing the Voronoi tesselation of the domain given a set of mesh-generating points. By assigning to each mesh-generating point the local velocity of the fluid, the grid can naturally follow the flow and continuously adapt the configuration of the cells which will approximately retain constant mass. As a quasi-Lagrangian scheme, the resolution of {\sc arepo} strongly depends on the fluid density. Moreover, instead of inferring the necessary time-step globally based on the Courant criterion, this is done locally and every cell is evolved in time based on its local conditions. The code is therefore able to efficiently deal with problems having a large dynamical range both in space and in time, which is necessary to study a multi-scale problem such as the ISM dynamics of a galaxy.
Other strengths of the {\sc arepo} code include its (nearly) Galilean invariance, its good shock treatment, its minimization of advection errors and the lack of an underlying preferential mesh geometry. At every interface between cells, the code finds the flux by solving the Riemann problem in the rest-frame of the interface. Since the cells are moving approximately at the local fluid velocity, these fluxes are kept minimal and advection errors are thus small. Furthermore in this way the solution is independent from the chosen frame of reference and best suited to study problems where there is no preferred flow direction.
To compute the gravitational potential, {\sc arepo} uses a tree-based approach adapted from an improved version of {\sc gadget-2} \citep{Springel2005}. The contribution of the gas cells is included by treating each as a point mass located at the centre of the cell, with an associated gravitational softening. This softening changes as the gas cell grows or shrinks, with a lower limit in our simulations of $0.1$~pc.
The self-gravity of the gas is mainly important on small scales when local gravitational runaway collapse sets in, leading to SF. On larger scales, the gravity is dominated by the dark matter and the old stellar population of the galaxy. We follow the behaviour of both components by simulating the dynamical evolution of a set of representative dark matter (DM) and star particles, which are assumed to be collisionless, meaning that they only enter into the gravity calculation. The masses and softening lengths chosen for these particles are discussed in Section~\ref{sec:resolution} below.
\subsection{Chemical network}
\label{sec:SGChem}
The chemical evolution of the gas is modelled using the NL97 network of \citet{Glover+2012}, which combines the network for hydrogen chemistry presented in \citet{Glover+2007a,Glover+2007b} with a highly simplified treatment of CO formation and destruction developed by \citet{Nelson+Langer1997}. The NL97 network was first implemented in {\sc arepo} by \citet{Smith+2014} and has subsequently been used in a number of studies with this code \citep[e.g.][]{Bertram+2015,Sormani+2018}. The effects of dust shielding and H$_{2}$ and CO self-shielding from the non-ionizing UV part of the interstellar radiation field are modelled using the {\sc TreeCol} algorithm developed by \citet{Clark+2012}. The background radiation is taken to be spatially constant at a solar-neighbourhood value \citep{Draine1978}.
We also solve for the thermal evolution of the gas due to radiative heating and cooling, which we compute simultaneously with the chemical evolution. We use a detailed atomic and molecular cooling function, the latest version of which is described in \citet{Clark+2018}. Of particular note here is our treatment of the cooling of the gas at high temperatures ($T \gg 10^{4}$~K) owing to the effects of permitted atomic transitions, since this is of great importance for modelling the effects of supernova feedback. We treat cooling due to transitions in atomic hydrogen in a fully non-equilibrium fashion using the H and electron abundances computed in our chemical model. For cooling due to transitions in He and metals we use the collisional ionization equilibrium cooling rates tabulated in \citet{Gnat+Ferland2012} instead.
We finally impose a temperature floor of $20$~K on the simulated ISM. Without this floor, the code can occasionally produce anomalously low temperatures in cells close to the resolution limit undergoing strong adiabatic cooling, with unfortunate effects on the stability of the code. Since the equilibrium gas temperature is comparable to or larger than 20~K throughout the full range of densities resolved in our simulation \citep[see e.g.\ the temperature-density plots in the high resolution simulations of individual clouds presented in][]{Clark+2018}, we do not expect the presence of this temperature floor to have any effects on the results of our simulations.
\subsection{Sink particles}
\label{sec:SinkParticles}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/rhoproj_isothermal.pdf}
\caption{Total gas column density map of the isothermal test run at $t \simeq 450$~Myr.}
\label{fig:rhoproj_isothermal}
\end{figure}
In order to form stars, gas must undergo gravitational collapse and increase its density by many orders of magnitude from typical GMC densities to protostellar densities. Despite {\sc arepo}'s adaptive capabilities, it is not computationally feasible to simulate the whole of this process in simulations of the scale presented here. We therefore adopt a technique widely used in computational studies of SF and replace the densest gravitationally-bound collapsing regions in the simulation with collisionless sink particles.
Sink particles, hereafter referred to as sinks, are mainly used in high resolution simulations of individual clouds where the SF process can be spatially and temporally resolved reasonably well. Typically galactic-scale simulations cannot resolve the collapse within GMCs, and tend to avoid using accreting sink particles to represent SF. Instead non-accreting star particles are often employed where particles of a given mass representing stars are stochastically created in the densest parts of the ISM \citep[e.g.][]{Katz1992, Katz+1996, Stinson+2006}. These schemes are often fine-tuned to reproduce the Schmidt-Kennicutt relation \citep{Schmidt1959, Kennicutt1989, Kennicutt1998}; although they tend to produce a healthy matter cycle in the ISM, their power to predict SF is strongly limited. Since our resolution reaches below GMC scales, we use accreting sink particles that we describe here and discuss possible caveats and limitations in Section \ref{sec:caveats}.
Following \citet{Bate+1995} and \citet{Federrath+2010}, sink particles form if within an accretion radius $r_{\rm acc}$, a region above a density threshold $\rho_{\rm c}$ satisfies these criteria:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The gas flow in this region is converging. To establish this, we require not only that the velocity divergence is negative ($\nabla \cdot v < 0$) but also that the divergence of the acceleration is negative ($\nabla \cdot a < 0$).
\item The region is located at a local minimum of the potential.
\item The region is not situated within the accretion radius of another sink and also will not move within the accretion radius of a sink in a time less than the local free-fall time.
\item The region is gravitationally bound, i.e. $U > 2 (E_{\rm k} + E_{\rm th})$, where $U = G M^2 / r_{\rm acc}$ is the gravitational energy of the region within the accretion radius, $E_{\rm k} = 1/2 \sum_i m_i \Delta v_i^{2}$ is the total kinetic energy of all gas particles within the accretion radius with respect to the centre of collapse, and $E_{\rm th} = \sum_i m_i e_{{\rm th}, i}$ is the total internal energy of the same region.
\end{enumerate}
These criteria help to ensure that a region of the gas is only converted into a sink particle if it is truly self-gravitating and collapsing.
If a gas cell satisfies all of the above criteria it is turned into a collisionless sink particle. These are then allowed to accrete mass during the simulation. If a gas cell within $r_{\rm acc}$ is denser than the threshold density and the gas is also gravitationally bound to the sink particle, then we move an amount of mass
\begin{equation}
\Delta m = \left(\rho_{\rm cell} - \rho_{\rm c}\right) V_{\rm cell}
\end{equation}
from the cell to the sink, where $\rho_{\rm cell}$ is the initial gas density in the cell and $V_{\rm cell}$ is its volume. Afterwards the new density of the cell is simply the threshold density $\rho_{\rm c}$. We also update appropriately any other quantities in the cell that depend on the mass, such as the total momentum or kinetic energy. In the case where a given gas cell is located within the accretion radii of multiple sink particles, we place the accreted mass from it onto the sink to which the gas is most strongly bound.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lcr}
\hline
$\rho_{\rm c}$ (g~cm$^{-3}$) & $10^{-21}$ \\
$r_{\rm acc}$ (pc) & $2.5$ \\
Softening length (pc) & $2.5$ \\
\hline
$\epsilon_{\rm SF}$ & $0.05$ \\
$r_{\rm sc}$ (pc) & $5.0$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Parameters of the sink particles; $\rho_{\rm c}$ is the sink density threshold, $r_{\rm acc}$ is the accretion radius, $\epsilon_{\rm SF}$ is the SF efficiency, and $r_{\rm sc}$ is the scatter radius of SNe around the sink. For details see the text.\label{tab:sinks}}
\end{table}
As discussed in more detail in \citet{Springel2010}, {\sc arepo} makes use of a hierarchical time-stepping scheme in which individual gas cells and collisionless particles can have different timesteps, meaning that at any given time not every cell and particle is active. Accretion onto a sink particle is allowed only when the sink particle itself and the candidate gas cells are active. In order to ensure that we do not miss accretion from cells that spend only a short time within the sink accretion radius, we make sure that the timestep used to evolve the sinks is the same as the shortest one of the gas cells.
In order to properly follow the hierarchical collapse and correctly resolve the underlying fragmentation, we ensure that the local Jeans length is resolved by at least four resolution elements (\citealt{Truelove+1997}; see also \citealt{Federrath+2011} for further discussion). In the densest and coldest parts of GMCs, the Jeans length can, however, become prohibitively small. We therefore choose to stop refining for densities above $\rho_{\rm lim} = 10^{-21}$~g~cm$^{-3}$ and we set $\rho_c = \rho_{\rm lim}$. This is a good compromise between excellent resolution in the collapsing regions, and computational performance. The chosen density threshold is also well above the critical density for H$_2$ formation \citep{Smith+2014} such that this process is fully captured by the simulation.
The accretion radius is chosen such that at the given threshold density, several cells fall inside $r_{\rm acc}$ given the local size of the cells. The gravitational softening length of the collisionless sink particles is set to the same value as $r_{\rm acc}$, as this ensures that the gravitational potential is not altered much due to the infall of mass onto a sink, while at the same time limiting the size of the gravitational acceleration produced within $r_{\rm acc}$, which otherwise would have a detrimental effect on performance. The main parameters that characterise the sink particles used in our study are listed in Table \ref{tab:sinks}.
\subsection{Feedback}
\label{sec:Feedback}
To form molecular clouds we need to capture the proper cooling and chemical evolution of the dense ISM. Our chemical network in conjunction with our model of the self-shielding properties of the molecular gas from the ambient dissociating UV radiation is the key to achieving this.
To capture the disruption of molecular clouds, on the other hand, it is necessary to introduce some feedback mechanism. In principle galactic shear can disperse dense molecular clouds, but in general this is insufficient to produce realistic cloud lifetimes and masses throughout the galactic disc \citep{Jeffreson+2018}. GMCs turn out to be too massive and too long-lived when shear is the only disruptive process.
Supernovae (SNe) randomly distributed with respect to the gas have also been shown to be ineffective at destroying molecular clouds. On the contrary, they help to pile up gas into dense, compact regions, resulting in massive molecular cloud complexes with extremely long lifetimes \citep{Gatto+2015, Walch+2015}. Therefore, a feedback mechanism coupled to the SF is needed that disrupts the clouds from within. In our present study, we focus on the effects of clustered SNe forming in locations correlated with the sink particles. We have found that this is an effective way to reproduce reasonable lifetimes for our simulated molecular clouds and to generate a healthy matter cycle in the ISM.
Despite our high resolution, we cannot resolve the formation of individual stars in our simulations. Instead, sinks represent small stellar clusters formed during an SF event within a cloud. We relate the mass of stars formed to the mass of the sink by assuming that only a fraction $\epsilon_{\rm SF} = 0.05$ of the mass accreted actually forms stars, since at the scale at which we form the sinks, the SF process is still quite inefficient \citep[see e.g.][]{Evans+2009}. We then attribute a discrete stellar population to the sink based on the method described in \citet{Sormani+2017}. Given an initial mass function (IMF) we populate a set of discrete mass bins using a Poisson distribution with an appropriately chosen mean for each bin. In this way we ensure that the mass distribution of the stars formed in the simulation follows the desired IMF even when the individual sinks are too small to fully sample the IMF. This method also allows us to account for stars formed from mass accreted at later times.
For each star more massive than $8$ M$_\odot$ associated with a sink, we generate an SN event at the end of the lifetime of the star, inferred based on their mass from Table~25.6 of \citet{Maeder2009}. Since the sink represents an entire group of stars that can interact dynamically, we do not assume that the SN occurs exactly at the location of the sink. Instead, we randomly sample the SN location from a Gaussian distribution centred on the particle and with standard deviation $ r_{\rm sc} = 5$~pc.
Since the assumed efficiency of SF within the sink is relatively small, most of the mass in the sink represents gas that should be returned to the ISM once stellar feedback starts. The mass that is not locked up in stars is therefore gradually given back to the ISM with every SN event. Each event ejects a total mass of $M_{\rm ej} = (M_{\rm sink} - M_{\rm stars}) / n_{\rm SN}$, where $M_{\rm sink}$ is the mass of the sink at the time that the supernova occurs, $M_{\rm stars}$ is the mass of stars contained within the sink at that time, and $n_{\rm SN}$ is the remaining number of SN events that the sink harbors. The mass is distributed uniformly within the energy injection region. The temperature of the injection cells is not altered at this stage.
Once the last massive star has reached the end of its lifetime, the sink has a final mass of $M_{\rm stars}$. At this point, we convert it into a collisionless $N$-body particle representing its evolved stellar population. It will then become part of the group of stellar particles that make up the disc and bulge in our simulation. Our base mass resolution for these stellar particles is $\sim 10^4$ M$_\odot$ (see Section \ref{sec:IC}); in order not to lose resolution in computing gravitational interactions, we switch off accretion onto sink particles that have reached this limiting stellar mass content, and allow instead a new sink to form. In this way, sink particles can be seen as maturing star particles and we retain the ability to follow the dynamical evolution of star clusters to some extent.
Especially in the high resolution simulations, it is not uncommon to have sinks that do not accrete enough mass to form a massive star. In this case we cannot return the gas mass trapped within the sink during an SN event. Instead, after a period of $10$~Myr, if the sink still did not manage to create a massive star, we convert it into a normal star particle and return the remaining mass ($95$\%) to the ISM by uniformly adding it to all gas particles in a surrounding sphere of $R=100$~pc.
In addition to the type II SNe associated with SF, we also account for type Ia SNe, which are produced by the older stellar population in the galaxy. Based on the inferred SF history of M51 \citep{Eufrasio+2017}, we estimate a rate of one SNIa every $250$ years. We create a SN event at this rate\footnote{SNIa actually follow an exponential distribution in time having the given rate as an average.} at the position of a randomly selected star (not sink) particle of the stellar disc and bulge.
To model the supernova energy injection we use a highly modified version of the algorithm first implemented in {\sc arepo} by \citet{Bubel2015}. For every SN event, we calculate the radius of a supernova remnant at the end of its Sedov-Taylor phase based on an assumed SN energy of $10^{51}$~erg and the local mean density $\bar{n}$, which for solar metallicity yields \citep{Blondin1998}
\begin{equation}
R_{\rm ST} = 19.1 \left(\frac{\bar{n}}{1\mbox{ cm}^{-3}}\right)^{-7/17} \: {\rm pc},
\end{equation}
where in our case $\bar{n}$ is calculated including the contributions from both the ambient gas and also the mass loading of the SN event. We compare this with the radius of the injection region, $R_{\rm inj}$, defined as the size of the smallest sphere around the explosion site that contains 40 grid cells. If $R_{\rm ST} > R_{\rm inj}$, we inject $E_{\rm SN} = 10^{51}$~erg into the injection region in the form of thermal energy and fully ionise the contained gas. If, on the other hand, the Sedov-Taylor phase of the SN remnant is unresolved, then this is a sign that the local density is too high for thermal injection to be reliable.
If we were to inject thermal energy in this case, then it would be radiated away too quickly, making it unable to generate a strong shock and deposit the correct amount of kinetic energy into the ISM. This is a numerical effect that can be prevented by directly injecting the correct terminal momentum instead. This has been estimated to be \citep[see e.g.][]{Martizzi+2015, Gatto+2015, Kim&Ostriker2015}
\begin{equation}
p_{\rm fin} = 2.6 \times 10^5 n^{-2/17} \; \mbox{ M}_\odot \mbox{ km s}^{-1},
\end{equation}
for a SN of energy $E_{\rm SN} = 10^{51}$~erg and solar metallicity. We do not change the temperature or the ionization state of the region in this case as this would throw off-balance the energy budget in large unresolved regions.
Momentum injection alone can not produce a hot phase in the ISM. By keeping the injection radius small we minimise the number of occasions on which we must inject momentum rather than thermal energy. On the other hand, taking too small an injection radius leads to unphysically anisotropic momentum injection. We have found through experimentation that defining $R_{\rm inj}$ such that a total of $40$ grid cells are contained within a sphere of that radius seems to offer the best trade-off between minimizing the number of momentum injection events and minimizing the impact of grid noise and anisotropic expansion on the evolution of the individual remnants. We note that this mixed approach of injecting thermal energy in regions where $R_{\rm ST}$ is resolved and momentum in regions where this is not the case is not new. Similar methods have been successfully used by a number of other authors to study the impact of SN feedback on the ISM \citep[see e.g.][]{Kimm+2014,Hopkins+2014,Walch+2015,Simpson+2015,Kim&Ostriker2017}.
Finally, we note that SNe are not the only type of feedback associated with SF. For example, stellar winds and radiation from young stars also play an important role in dispersing GMCs, particularly since they act much earlier than SN feedback \citep[e.g.][]{Dale+2014,Inutsuka+2015,Gatto+2017,Rahner+2018, Rahner+2019}. However, it remains computationally challenging to include all of these forms of feedback in simulations with the scale and resolution of those presented here. Therefore, in our initial study we restrict our attention to the effects of SN feedback and defer an investigation of other feedback processes to future work.
\subsection{Initial conditions}
\label{sec:IC}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/ToomreQ_Vcirc.pdf}
\caption{{\em Top}: initial circular velocity curve for the galaxy model. The solid line shows the behaviour for the full galaxy, while the other lines show the contribution of the individual components. {\em Bottom}: combined star-gas Toomre parameter using the equation derived by \citet{Rafikov2001} for the chosen initial conditions. Everything below the dashed line is Toomre-unstable.}
\label{fig:vc}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Parameters of the different galaxy components.
\label{tab:mass}}
\begin{tabular}{lccr}
\hline
& Mass (M$_\odot$) & Scale length (kpc) & $h_z$ (kpc)\\
\hline
DM Halo & $6.04 \times 10^{11}$ & 28.7 & -\\
Bulge & $5.30 \times 10^9 $ & $9.03 \times 10^{-2} $& -\\
Stellar disc & $4.77 \times 10^{10} $ & 2.26 & $0.3$\\
Gas disc & $5.30 \times 10^9 $ & 2.26 & $0.3$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Initial conditions of the companion galaxy. }
\label{tab:NGC5195}
\begin{tabular}{lclc}
\hline
position & value (kpc) & velocity & value (km~s$^{-1}$) \\
\hline
$x_0$ & $-21.91$ & $v_{x_0}$ & $73.2$ \\
$y_0$ & $-8.44$ & $v_{y_0}$ & $-31.2$ \\
$z_0$ & $-4.25$ & $v_{z_0}$ & $188.6$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We set up a disc galaxy in isolation that consists of four different components: a dark matter halo, a stellar bulge, a stellar disc and a gaseous disc.
The bulge and the halo follow a spheroidal \citet{Hernquist1990} profile
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\rm spheroid}(r) = \frac{M_{\rm spheroid}}{2 \pi} \frac{a}{r(r+a)^3},
\label{eq:BulgeProfile}
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the spherical radius, $a$ is the scale-length of the spheroid (the bulge or the halo, depending on which component is considered), and $M_{\rm spheroid}$ is its mass.
The stellar and gas disc follow a double exponential density profile
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\rm disc}(R,z) = \frac{M_{\rm disc}}{4 \pi h_z h_R^2} \sech^2 \left(\frac{z}{2 h_z} \right) \exp \left(-\frac{R}{h_R} \right),
\label{eq:discProfile}
\end{equation}
where $R$ and $z$ are the cylindrical radius and height, and $h_z$ and $h_R$ are the scale-height and scale-length of the disc, respectively.
We generate the initial conditions using the method and software developed by \citet{Springel+2005}, where the choice of the profile and parameters were cosmologically motivated. The code chooses positions and velocities for the collision-less DM and stellar particles such that the desired equilibrium configuration is established. During setup the gas disc is then created by randomly converting stellar disc particles into gas particles until the desired gas mass fraction is reached. The stellar and gas discs therefore initially follow the same density profile.
We choose parameters of a typical spiral galaxy, summarised in Table \ref{tab:mass}. The total mass in baryonic matter for the modelled galaxy is chosen to be comparable to the observed baryonic mass of M51a (NGC~5194) which is estimated to be $(5.8 \pm 0.1) \times 10^{10}$~M$_\odot$ \citep{Mentuch+2012}. The scale-length of the disc corresponds approximately to the one listed in \citet{Schruba+2011} with the caveat that the interaction might have affected this observed value. We set the mass of the DM halo under the assumption that its spin parameter is directly connected to the scale-length of the disc by the disc-halo mass ratio and considering the cosmological constraints on this parameter \citep{Hernandez+2007}. The choice of the remaining parameters is motivated instead by the desire to produce a velocity curve (Fig.~\ref{fig:vc}) roughly consistent with observations \citep{Sofue1996, Oikawa+Sofue2014} and to suppress the formation of a strong bar in the simulations of the isolated galaxy. We finally settle on a typical gas-disc mass fraction of $10$~\%. At the highest gas resolution this is the borderline value which is still computationally viable, but we have to consider that this is still only about half of the estimated gas mass in M51 \citep{Mentuch+2012}.
To model the interaction with the companion galaxy, we follow the approach and initial conditions presented in \citet{Dobbs+2010}, hereafter D10. The companion is described as a single collisionless particle with initial position and velocity given in Table \ref{tab:NGC5195} \citep[taken from][ultimately from \citealt{TheisAndSpinneker2003}]{Dobbs+2010}. Since the companion is reduced to a single particle, we assign a very large gravitational softening of $\epsilon = 3$ kpc to it in order to avoid strong two-body close encounters. This is equivalent to setting the density profile of the galaxy equal to a Plummer sphere with its scale-length equal to the softening length. Given the differences in the model of the main galaxy with respect to D10 we could not reproduce their exact same orbit. However the orbit and the morphological behavior were retrieved by lowering the mass of the particle representing the companion galaxy to $4 \times 10^{10}$ M$_\odot$. Observationally the stellar mass of NGC5195, companion of M51, is estimated by photometry to be $(2.5 \pm 0.2) \times 10^{10}$~M$_{\odot}$ \citep{Mentuch+2012} and thus the mass ratio between the two galaxies is about $0.5$ \citep[see also][]{Schweizer1977}. Our ratio is much lower than that, but given that we recover the morphological behavior of the encounter, the massive particle that we included to represent the companion should rather be seen as the core of its DM halo, while the outer parts do not affect much the dynamics of the encounter.
All these initial assessments were done by running low resolution isothermal simulations with a sound speed $c_{\rm s} =$ 10~km~s$^{-1}$. With the final setup we can reproduce the global morphology of the M51 system (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_isothermal}). We obtain the typical two-armed spiral pattern and the relative position of the two galaxies in the plane of the sky. The second passage of the companion induces a large tidal H~{\sc i} tail also seen in observations. Other characteristics that we reproduce are the peculiar kink in the spiral arm pattern towards the companion (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_isothermal} approximately at position $(2.5,-2.5)$~kpc), and the connecting (only in perspective) arm. All these features were also reproduced in the original work of D10 using SPH.
Finally we set the initial temperature of the gas to $T = 10^4$ K and consider it to be fully atomic. We assume the ISM to be of solar metallicity throughout. The metallicity of the ISM in the real M51 appears to be slightly super-solar with a small radial metallicity gradient \citep{Croxall+2015}, but we do not expect this minor difference to significantly affect our results.
\subsection{Resolution}
\label{sec:resolution}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/resolution.pdf}
\caption{{\em Top}: spatial resolution as a function of local density for the high resolution run. $r_{\rm cell}$ is the radius of a sphere with the same volume as the cell. {\em Bottom}: distribution of cell masses, plotted as a function of density. The colours are linearly related to the total number of cells. Most of the computational effort is spent in the high density regime where the Jeans-length criterion determines the cell masses.
Here we reach sub-parsec resolution at densities comparable to the sink formation threshold. The Jeans-length criterion is responsible for the knee in the plots at a density of $\sim 5\times 10^{-23} \: {\rm g \, cm^{-3}}$.}
\label{fig:resolution}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Mass resolution and softening length of the different particle types.}
\label{tab:res}
\begin{tabular}{lcr}
\hline
& Mass resolution (M$_\odot$) & Softening (kpc)\\
\hline
Dark matter & $6 \times 10^5$ & $0.2$ \\
Stellar particles & $5 \times 10^4$ & $0.1$ \\
Companion galaxy & $4 \times 10^{10}$ & $3$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The mass resolutions and softening lengths used for the different types of collisionless particles included in our simulation are listed in Table \ref{tab:res}.
Given the method described in the previous section, the gas cells start with an initial mass equal to the star particles from which they are drawn. The code is however able to quickly refine them during the first few million years of the simulation until the nominal resolution is reached. For our production simulation we set a target mass resolution for the gas cells of $300$~M$_\odot$. In the denser parts of the ISM, however, we reach considerably higher resolutions, down to a few solar masses (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:resolution}), since we require the local Jeans length to be resolved by at least four resolution elements in all gas with a density $\rho < \rho_c = 10^{-21} \: {\rm g \, cm^{-3}}$. This requirement generates a differential distribution of cell masses as a function of density and temperature. We reach high spatial resolutions in the star-forming part of the ISM despite a relatively low resolution in the more diffuse phase. For stability reasons, we also try to avoid having neighbouring cells with a large volume difference. If two neighbouring cells approach a volume ratio greater than 8, the larger cell is split. The resulting spatial resolution as a function of the local gas density and the corresponding mass distribution of the cells in the different density regimes is shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:resolution}.
To help us to quantify the resolution dependence of our simulations, we have also carried out low resolution runs with a target mass resolution of $1000$~M$_\odot$. In these runs, we apply the Jeans-length refinement criterion only up to a limiting density of $\rho_{\rm lim} = 0.1 \times \rho_c = 10^{-22}$~g~cm$^{-3}$. This will result in a difference of spatial resolutions in the dense gas of about a factor of two with respect to the high resolution case. A comparison between the two simulations for a resolution study is therefore meaningful (see Appendix \ref{sec:resolutionDependece}).
Since the gas cells have different masses and sizes, we cannot use a unique gravitational softening length. Rather, we use {\sc arepo}'s adaptive softening option to scale the softening length according to the cell radius, i.e.\ $\epsilon_{\rm gas} = 2 r_{\rm cell}$, where $r_{\rm cell}$ is the radius of a sphere with the same volume as the cell.\footnote{As {\sc arepo} endeavours to prevent its grid cells from becoming highly distorted, most are quasi-spherical and so this radius is an accurate way of characterizing the size of the cells.}
If we compare the spatial resolution that we achieve in gas at typical GMC densities (a few times $10^{-22} \: {\rm g \: cm^{-3}}$ and above) with the requirements that were recently shown by \citet{Joshi+2019} to be necessary for producing converged molecular fractions in 3D simulations ($\Delta x \sim 0.2$~pc for H$_{2}$, $\Delta x \sim 0.04$~pc for CO), then we see that the chemical state of our simulations is not completely converged. Although we have more than enough resolution to successfully identify molecular-dominated clouds (the ``physical'' condition of \citealt{Joshi+2019}), we do not resolve the dense substructure within these clouds in enough detail to ensure that the molecular formation time is shorter than the cell crossing time in the densest cells (the ``dynamical'' condition of \citealt{Joshi+2019}). Therefore, although the details of the molecular gas distribution in our simulations should be qualitatively correct, some of the quantitative details may still be resolution-dependent
(see also Appendix~\ref{sec:resolutionDependece}).
\subsection{Simulation details}
\label{sec:Simulations}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/orbits.pdf}
\caption{Trajectory of the centre of mass of the simulated galaxy ({\em orange line}) and its companion ({\em blue line}). The shaded area defines the plane of the orbit.}
\label{fig:orbits}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/rhoproj_v_time.pdf}
\caption{Total gas column density projections at different times for the interacting simulation. The location of the companion ({\em white filled circle}) and its trajectory ({\em white solid} and {\em dotted line}) are plotted in each panel. Notice how the interaction triggers a two-armed spiral structure. When the companion is behind the disc of the main galaxy the trajectory is plotted with a dotted line. The simulated galaxy and its companion in the last panel at $t = 428.9$~Myr are in a configuration similar to the observed M51 galaxy. The morphological changes induced by feedback can be clearly seen by comparing the last panel to the isothermal model shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rhoproj_isothermal}.}
\label{fig:rhoproj_v_time}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/rhoproj_simulated_M51.pdf}
\caption{Column density maps of the interacting simulation at two different times. The left-hand panel shows maps of the H~{\sc i} column density at $t = 217.1$~Myr and 428.9~Myr. The remaining panels show a zoomed-in view of the H~{\sc i} ({\em central panels}) and H$_{2}$ ({\em right-hand panels}) column density in the central $20$~kpc of the galaxy at the same two output times. The grand design spiral arm pattern induced by the companion galaxy is clearly visible, especially in the upper panels. The pattern is much more pronounced in molecular gas. The bottom panels correspond to a configuration similar to the observed M51 galaxy. Also of note is the large tidal tail that has been ejected from the galaxy due to the close encounter with the companion, which is visible in the H~{\sc i} column density map but not in the H$_{2}$ column density map. The black dot indicates the position of the companion.}
\label{fig:rhoproj_simulated_M51}
\end{figure*}
As stated above, our major focus in this study is to address the relative importance of the interaction in shaping the ISM. Therefore we set up two sets of simulations. In one case the galaxy is allowed to interact with a smaller companion galaxy as described in Section \ref{sec:IC}. The same galaxy is evolved in isolation in a comparison set of simulations.
For both setups, we carry out calculations at two different resolutions, as described in Section \ref{sec:resolution}. Unless stated otherwise, all the analysis below refers to the high resolution simulations. The results of the other simulations are summarised in Appendix~\ref{sec:resolutionDependece}, where we discuss how our results depend on the chosen resolution.
For the high resolution simulations we simulate the first $\sim 40$~Myr at a low base resolution of $1000 \, \rm M_\odot$ per cell and without requiring the Jeans length to be resolved. We then switch to a base resolution of $300 \, \rm M_\odot$ per cell and finally at $\sim 80$~Myr we switch on the requirement for the Jeans length as described in Section \ref{sec:resolution} as well, reaching our nominal resolution as illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:resolution}. With this gradual increment in resolution we can overcome the strong initial collapse due to the cooling of the atomic disc without investing too much computational power into this initial transition phase.
\section{Results}
\label{sec:Results}
We start in this section by giving a general description of the outcome of the simulations, with a focus on the properties of the ISM and the SFR. We then look at how the interaction affects the total mass fractions in the different ISM phases and try to understand how the galaxy encounter influences the cold molecular gas reservoir which is available for SF.
\subsection{A qualitative description of the simulation}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/ProjZoom.pdf}
\caption{Total gas column density ({\em top left}), mass-averaged temperature along the line of sight ({\em top right}), H~{\sc i} column density ({\em bottom left}) and H$_2$ column density ({\em bottom right}) of a $(1\times1)$~kpc patch ({\em white square}) within the spiral arm of the interacting galaxy.}
\label{fig:ProjZoom}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/ProjZoomOnClouds.pdf}
\caption{We further zoom in on a few selected GMCs of the spiral arm portion shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:ProjZoom}. We show the total ({\em left}), H~{\sc i} ({\em centre}) and H$_2$ column density maps for the selected regions.}
\label{fig:ProjZoomOnClouds}
\end{figure*}
We follow the system for about $400$ Myr. This is the time when the relative position and morphology of the galaxy most closely resemble the observed M51 system. We show the trajectories of the main galaxy and its companion in Fig.\ \ref{fig:orbits}, while the evolution of the system in time can be followed looking at Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_v_time}. The companion galaxy moves on a highly eccentric orbit in front of the face-on disc relative to the observer and reaches its pericentric passage $\sim 110$~Myr after the start of the simulation. The companion then continues its orbit behind the disc of the galaxy at $\sim 270$~Myr. At the final snapshot the companion has a positive line-of-sight velocity with respect to the observer and is just emerging from behind the face-on disc of the main galaxy. At this point the distance between the two centres of mass is about $\sim 12$~kpc. Even though we stop the simulation at this time, the two galaxies will merge completely within the next orbit of the companion \citep[e.g.][]{Dobbs+2010}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/chem_phases_vs_time.pdf}
\caption{{\em Top}: Molecular {\em (solid line)}, atomic {\em (dashed line)} and ionised {\em (dotted line)} mass fraction as a function of time. Middle: Cold gas at $T<10^3$~K {\em (solid line)}, warm gas at $10^3<T<10^{4.5}$~K {\em (dashed line)} and hot gas at $T>10^{4.5}$~K mass fractions as a function of time. The interacting simulation is given in orange while the isolated one is depicted in blue. Here the gas trapped in sinks is not considered, but if we assume this gas to be cold and fully molecular the fractions change and are presented in green instead. {\em Bottom}: separation between the main galaxy's centre of mass and the companion as a function of time.}
\label{fig:chem_phases_vs_time}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/RhoT2DPDF.pdf}
\caption{Density-temperature phase diagram of the gas phase in the interacting simulation. The colour indicates the total gas mass fraction in the given $(n, T)$ bin. The vertical dashed line indicates the density threshold for sink particle formation.}
\label{fig:2DPDF_int}\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/RhoTPDF.pdf}
\caption{Mass-weighted density ({\em left panel}) and temperature PDF ({\em right panel}) of the gas phase in the simulations. The dashed line represents the cumulative density and temperature PDF respectively, i.e.\ the mass fraction with density/temperature below a given value. The blue line represents the isolated galaxy run while the orange shows the interacting simulation at the same time. The coloured regions in the temperature PDF indicate our definition of the cold/warm/hot phases (see text). Note that there is very little difference in the two cases highlighting how the interaction has little effect on the thermal phases of the ISM.}
\label{fig:RhoTPDF}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/temperature_slices.pdf}
\caption{Temperature distribution in a slice in the $z=0$ plane ({\em top}) and $y=0$ plane ({\em bottom}) for the isolated simulation.}
\label{fig:temperature_slices}
\end{figure}
The interaction is responsible for the development of a typical two-armed tidally induced spiral pattern in the disc \citep{Toomre&Toomre1972}. These arms are particularly pronounced in molecular gas and are the loci of intense SF (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_simulated_M51}). Due to the close passage, the outer parts of one of the arms are flung out, creating an extended tidal tail similar to what is seen in 21~cm observations of M51 \citep[see e.g.][]{Rots+1990}. This tidal tail is predominantly atomic as we can see in the bottom panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_simulated_M51}.
Due to gravitational instabilities the warm gas is pushed out of its thermal equilibrium and rapidly cools from its initial temperature of $T=10^4$~K. Part of it becomes molecular and builds up large and dense GMC associations. In the isolated galaxy simulation these are distributed in a flocculent style pattern, while in the interacting case they are mainly assembled inside the tidally induced spiral arm structure (Fig.\ \ref{fig:ProjZoom}). The clouds formed are filamentary, with complex substructure (Fig.~\ref{fig:ProjZoomOnClouds}), due to turbulence induced by a combination of SN feedback, galactic shear, and self gravity. See Smith et al. (submitted) for a discussion of the relative importance of the galactic potential with respect to the SN feedback in shaping the filamentary properties of clouds in a similar setup to the one used here. A detailed analysis of the GMCs in this M51-like galaxy simulation is deferred to a future study.
The ultraviolet component of the interstellar radiation field cannot penetrate these clouds and the pressure can thus drop quite substantially due to runaway cooling down to the temperature floor of $20$~K. This favours local collapse, which leads to intense SF. These newly-formed stars are responsible for clustered SN feedback that disrupts the parental clouds, creates large expanding superbubbles, and drives turbulence in the ISM. This favours a self-regulating matter cycle of the ISM \citep[see e.g.][]{MacLow&Klessen2004, Klessen&Glover2016} whose properties converge to a roughly steady state after $\sim 100$~Myr in the isolated case (see next paragraph). Only the slow depletion of gas affects this equilibrium.
Since we lack early feedback such as winds or ionizing radiation, the earliest SNe exploding in each star-forming region are predominantly located in high density environments. In general, the momentum deposited by these SNe can create low density bubbles in which further SNe explode, with the combined effect of the clustered SNe eventually destroying the cloud. However, we encounter a few cases where this does not occur, so the SNe cannot completely disrupt the cloud. These pathological clouds continue to accrete mass onto sinks for a substantial amount of time, leading to extremely compact and massive clusters. We will come back to this point in Section \ref{sec:caveats}.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/ChemFractionInPhases.pdf}
\caption{Mass-weighted average of the chemical abundance relative to the number of hydrogen nuclei in a given density--temperature bin for molecular hydrogen ({\em top left}), CO ({\em top right}), H$^{+}$ ({\em bottom left}) and atomic hydrogen ({\em bottom right}). Note that for molecular hydrogen, a fraction of $0.5$ corresponds to fully molecular gas.}
\label{fig:ChemFractionInPhases}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Thermal phases of the ISM}
Sink particles are formed in the densest collapsing parts of the cold ISM. As described in Section \ref{sec:SinkParticles}, this removes dense cold gas from the hydrodynamic simulation and locks it into collisionless particles. Only part of this gas is directly converted into stars, while the rest is temporarily trapped inside the sink and will be returned to the gas phase after the associated SNe occur. This prompts the question of how to account for this material when examining the distribution of gas across the different phases of the ISM, since we do not have any information about the density, temperature, or chemical composition of the trapped gas. One reasonable assumption would be that it is cold and fully molecular. However, this is likely an oversimplification; the real thermodynamical state of the gas could differ, especially if the stellar population within the sink is already in an advanced state of evolution and feedback has started to affect its contents. Nevertheless, this assumption does at least offer an upper limit on the cold molecular gas fraction in the simulations. Alternatively, by not including the gas in sinks at all, we instead recover a lower limit on the cold molecular gas fraction. This approach has the advantage that the state of the gas included in the analysis emerges self-consistently from the simulation and no additional assumptions have to be made. In our thermal analysis of the ISM phases, we have chosen the latter option and hence do not account for the trapped gas; the absolute value of the PDF and molecular fractions will be affected by this. However, this is the case for both isolated and interacting simulations, so a comparison between the two is consistent and the effect of the interaction can still be effectively studied. Finally, note that in some of the analysis later in the paper, we do attempt to account for the trapped material, making the assumption that it is cold and molecular.
After an initial transition phase, shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:chem_phases_vs_time}, the ISM in the simulated galaxy develops a three-phase thermal structure with a sharp lower limit of $20$~K due to the imposed temperature floor (see Fig.'s\ \ref{fig:2DPDF_int} and \ref{fig:RhoTPDF}). An upper limit of roughly 70\% of the gas mass is in the cold ($T<10^3$~K) phase, assuming the gas in the sink particles is primarily cold (Fig.\ \ref{fig:chem_phases_vs_time}), a fraction rather higher than the 50\% found in the Milky Way \citep{Ferriere2001}. This is perhaps appropriate for this actively star-forming galaxy.
Most of the remaining gas mass is in the warm stable phase around $T=10^4$~K with less than $10$~\% in the hot phase peaking at $10^6$~K, generated by SN feedback and strong shocks. Note however that our resolution prescription (Section \ref{sec:resolution}) is tuned to have the highest resolution in the dense part of the ISM at GMC scales, so it is likely that the fraction of gas in the hot diffuse phase where spatial resolution is small is not numerically converged. Numerical diffusion across interfaces in unresolved regions between hot and warm gas tends to favor cooling, thus under-predicting hot gas fractions. Moreover, a higher number of SN events with an unresolved Sedov-Taylor expansion implies a lower production rate of hot gas since momentum energy injection is unable to contribute to the hot phase. For an indication of the actual trend of the hot phase fraction as a function of resolution see Appendix \ref{sec:resolutionDependece}.
In Fig.\ \ref{fig:temperature_slices} we show the temperature of the gas in a slice through the mid-plane of the central $5$~kpc of the isolated galaxy. We can see that the cold phase is organised into GMC structures with a relatively low volume filling factor. These clouds are embedded in the warm phase at $T=10^4$~K while the clustered feedback coming from the sink particles drives superbubbles generating outflows producing the volume-filling hot phase, which permeates most of the volume above and below the disc.
Figure \ref{fig:ChemFractionInPhases} shows that only the densest and coldest parts of the ISM ($n > 10^2$~cm$^{-3}$ and $T\simeq 20$~K) are fully molecular and CO-bright. Because no CO is found below $n\lesssim 100$~cm$^{-3}$ the molecular gas in the transition zone between $\sim10$ and $10^4$~K is CO-dark.
In the top right panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:ChemFractionInPhases} there are parts of the temperature-density phase space populated with high CO fractions but very little H$_2$. These are rapidly evolving SN shells where the simple model of CO chemistry used in our simulations does not capture the correct behaviour of the CO. The NL97 network used in our simulations assumes that photodissociation is the dominant destruction process for CO. In most of the ISM, this is a good assumption, but it breaks down in dense gas heated to high temperatures by strong shocks, where we would expect collisional dissociation of CO to dominate. Fortunately, this limitation of the NL97 network is highly unlikely to have a significant effect on the dynamical behaviour of the gas, since the cooling in these conditions is dominated by atomic line cooling and is hence insensitive to the CO content. In addition, the actual fraction of mass in this region of density-temperature space is small, as Figure~\ref{fig:2DPDF_int} makes clear.
As expected given the microscopic cross-section for collisional ionization of hydrogen, gas with a temperature $T \gg 10^4$~K is fully ionised. The atomic gas, on the other hand, lives in a wide region of the density-temperature phase space. A considerable fraction of the atomic gas is found at temperatures $T \sim 10^{4}$~K or $T \sim 100$~K, corresponding to the warm neutral medium (WNM) or cold neutral medium (CNM), respectively. However, there is also a substantial amount of atomic hydrogen in the transition region between these two thermally stable regimes (see also Figure~\ref{fig:2DPDF_int}), as is observed in the Milky Way \citep{Heiles2001}. It should also be noted that as our simulations do not include the local effects of ionizing radiation from young stars, we underestimate the ionization rate in warm ($T \sim 10^{4} \: {\rm K}$) low density gas, particularly far above or below the galactic midplane. Therefore, in our simulations this material remains largely atomic, while in a more realistic simulation it would be more highly ionised. As we are primarily interested in the behaviour of the dense gas and the SFR in our simulated galaxies, this should not have a significant impact on our results.
In Fig.\ \ref{fig:RhoTPDF} we also compare the density and temperature distributions of the ISM in the interacting galaxy to the isolated one. We notice that the interaction increases only marginally the amount of cold gas and the ISM phases are in general not affected by the merger. In Fig.\ \ref{fig:chem_phases_vs_time} where we show the time evolution of the gas mass in the different thermal/chemical phases for the two simulations, we see that after $\sim 100$~Myr, when the companion reaches its point of closest approach to the galaxy, the tidally-induced two-armed spiral pattern starts to develop and this correlates with an increase in cold molecular gas. However this difference is relatively small, amounting to only a few percent throughout the simulation time. Secular changes in the gas fractions as gas is consumed in SF are far larger.
\subsection{Star Formation}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/SFR_proj.pdf}
\caption{SFR as a function of time for the {\it Isolated} ({\em blue}) and {\it Interacting} ({\em orange}) runs, respectively. The black dotted line shows the separation of the centre of mass between the main galaxy and the companion for the interacting case. Three representative times are chosen ({\em black crosses}) for which we show the morphology of the interacting simulation ({\em top three panels}) and isolated simulation ({\em bottom three panels}). Despite the clear differences in the morphology of the galaxies in the two simulations, the SFR is surprisingly similar. This shows that the interaction has little effect on the SFR. The interaction merely dictates the morphology of the star-forming regions, but the intensity is controlled by the self-regulated feedback within the ISM.}
\label{fig:SFR_proj}
\end{figure*}
Gravitational collapse occurs in GMCs where densities are highest and the ISM is cold enough to trigger runaway collapse leading to SF. We therefore expect a similar behaviour of the SFR to that of the cold molecular gas that we described in the previous section.
We show the SFR as a function of time for the isolated and interacting runs in Fig.\ \ref{fig:SFR_proj}. Around $t = 80$~Myr we turn on the full refinement scheme and previously stable gas becomes unstable due to better resolved collapse. This explains the spike in SF noticeable just after the onset of our highest resolution scheme. In less than 20~Myr the ISM self-regulation brings this value back down to previous levels. SF increases after the point of closest separation, when the spiral arms start to develop ($t\simeq 110$~Myr). However, the difference between the isolated and interacting runs is small and at the end of the simulation the difference in the total mass of stars formed in the two simulations is less than $10$\% (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:cumulative_SFR}).
At $t = 418$~Myr, the time at which our simulation is at an equivalent evolutionary phase to M51, we find an SFR of $4$~M$_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$ which is comparable to the observed value of $4.6$~M$_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$ \citep{Pineda+2018}. However if we consider that we started with a galaxy that had only half of the gas mass of M51a, we conclude that our depletion times are most likely too short by a factor of about two. This may reflect the lack of early feedback that can shut off SF earlier in the evolution of a newborn star cluster than SNe alone.
We did not include any type of hot circumgalactic coronal gas from which the disc could replenish its gas reservoir, nor did we simulate other types of gas inflow. Therefore, even though we include a mass return from the sink particles, we are slowly depleting the gas available to SF (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:gas_depletion}). This is also reflected in the measured SFR in Fig.\ \ref{fig:SFR_proj}, where we see a slow but steady decline in SF at later stages of the simulation.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/cumulative_SFR.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative SFR as a function of time, i.e.\ total amount of stars formed up to a given time $t$. The isolated galaxy is plotted in blue and the interacting one in orange. As in Fig.\ \ref{fig:SFR_proj} we also show the separation of the galaxy and its companion for the interacting simulation ({\em dotted line}). }
\label{fig:cumulative_SFR}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/gas_depletion.pdf}
\caption{Gas mass ({\em solid line}) as a function of time for the interacting ({\em orange}) and isolated ({\em blue}) simulation. Part of the gas is locked into sink particles ({\em dashed line}) and will be returned to the gas phase over time, but part will be lost to stars contributing to a global steady depletion of gas. The dash-dotted line therefore shows the sum of the mass in sinks plus gas mass.}
\label{fig:gas_depletion}
\end{figure}
To have an idea of where the SF is taking place, we look at how it correlates with the local gas column density. Observationally the gas surface density is connected to the SFR by a simple power law $\Sigma_{\rm SFR} \propto \Sigma_{\rm gas}^{\alpha}$ where $\alpha \simeq 1.4$ known as the Schmidt-Kennicutt relationship \citep{Schmidt1959, Kennicutt1989, Kennicutt1998}. An even narrower relationship with an exponent close to unity can be observed if only the molecular gas is considered \citep{Bigiel+2008}. Although this relation does not seem to be as universally applicable and in several instances can exhibit a large scatter \citep{Shetty+2014, Shetty+2014b}, it has been extensively used in the literature to connect large-scale galaxy properties directly to the local SF by abstracting the complexity of the SF process to a simple power law.
To see whether and how this relation develops in our simulations in Fig.\ \ref{fig:SK} we convolve the H$_2$ column density and the SFR surface density map with a Gaussian function of variable standard deviations $\sigma$ and then cross-correlate the two quantities. we find that the observed slope and scaling is well reproduced for $\sigma = 100$~pc. This smoothing is reasonable, as we do not expect molecular gas and SF to remain correlated down to arbitrarily small scales within galaxies \citep{Schruba+2010,Kruijssen+2018}, and a recent study has shown that the scale on which this decorrelation occurs is around 100--200~pc for a range of different galaxies \citep{Chevance+2019}. The mean SFR for every H$_2$ column density bin (orange line of Fig.\ \ref{fig:SK}), however, follows a slightly steeper power law with higher rates for higher surface density regimes with respect to the observed one. This connects to the low depletion times that we observe in our simulations (see next paragraph).
We do not see a significant change in the slope, scaling and broadening of the relation if we consider the isolated galaxy simulation instead. This is an indication that the mechanism that controls SF is similar in the two instances and the relation emerges due to the local dynamics of the collapse, something that the galactic-scale interaction seems to have little impact on.
Morphologically, however, the two galaxies differ substantially and accordingly so does the distribution of the star-forming regions that are correlated with the molecular gas. The isolated galaxy remains flocculent throughout the simulation; frequently SF occurs at the edges of expanding superbubbles, which compress the gas and facilitate GMC formation. The interacting simulation instead develops strong spiral arms that correlate with SF (see Fig.\ \ref{fig:ProjSFR}). Since no new SF is generated during the encounter, it seems that the interaction is only grouping the GMCs and the associated SF into spiral arms as opposed to these structures being the trigger for new collapse.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/ProjSFR.pdf}
\caption{For the region shown in Fig.\ \ref{fig:ProjZoom} we show the location of the sink particles formed, coloured by their age ({\em central panel}) and the SFR surface density convolved with a Gaussian aperture of $\sigma = 5$~pc averaged over the past $4$~Myr.}
\label{fig:ProjSFR}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{images/SK.pdf}
\caption{H$_2$ column density map convolved with a Gaussian function with standard deviation $\sigma = 100$~pc {\em (left)} at a time of $\sim 200$~Myr. SFR surface density map convolved with the same kernel {\em (centre)}. On the {\em right} we show the Schmidt-Kennicutt type relation based on the two maps. The {\em green} line is the observed relation taken from \citet{Bigiel+2008}, the {\em orange} line describes the mean while the {\em blue} line is the mode of the SFR distribution in each surface density bin. The {\em top} row indicates the interacting simulation while on the {\em bottom} we show the isolated one.}
\label{fig:SK}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:Discussion}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/depletionTime_vs_time.pdf}
\caption{Depletion times ($\tau_{\rm dep} = M_{\rm i} / \rm{SFR}$) as a function of time for the isolated ({\em blue}) and interacting ({\em orange}) simulation. The H~{\sc i} ({\em dotted line}) and H$_2$ ({\em dashed line}) depletion times are shown. Since a lot of gas is trapped into sink particles, the H$_2$ depletion time is a lower limit. Considering all of the gas in the sink particles as molecular, we can sum it with the H$_2$ gas ({\em solid line}) to get an upper limit on the molecular gas depletion time.}
\label{fig:depletionTime_vs_time}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/surface_density.pdf}
\caption{Surface density as a function of radius for the isolated {\em (top)} and the interacting simulation {\em (bottom)} at a simulation time of $\sim 400$~Myr. The total gas {\em (solid black line)}, H~{\sc i} {\em (dashed line)} and H$_2$ {\em (dotted line)} surface densities are shown. We also show the distribution of sink particles {\em (orange line)} and the SFR surface density {\em (blue line)}. Due to the high radial variability for some of the quantities, we also plotted {\em (thicker lines)} the same quantities convolved with a Gaussian filter to better show the radial profile.}
\label{fig:surface_density}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/Cumulative_mass_distribution.pdf}
\caption{Cumulative total/H~{\sc i}/H$_2$ gas mass distribution {\em (solid, dashed and dotted lines)} as a function of galactocentric radius normalised to the total mass in each component for the isolated {\em (blue)} and interacting galaxy {\em (orange)} at a simulation time around $400$~Myr. We also show the normalised cumulative SFR as a function of galactocentric radius for the two simulations {\em (dot-dashed line)}. }
\label{fig:cumulative_mass}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/depletion_time_vs_R.pdf}
\caption{Depletion times of the total {\em (green)}, molecular {\em (red)} and atomic {\em (blue)} gas as a function of radius for the isolated {\em (top)} and interacting {\em (bottom)} galaxy. The depletion times are calculated for a simulation time around $400$~Myr and averaged over a time period of $\sim 20$~Myr. The shaded area is a one sigma deviation from that average.}
\label{fig:depletion_time_vs_R}
\end{figure}
Given the findings of the previous two sections, we see that the interaction, for the type of encounter considered here, is not able to significantly change the structure of the ISM in terms of thermal phases and chemical state (see Figs.\ \ref{fig:chem_phases_vs_time}, \ref{fig:RhoTPDF}). This is reflected in the almost identical SF history experienced by the two galaxies (Figs.\ \ref{fig:SFR_proj}, \ref{fig:cumulative_SFR}).
Major galaxy interactions are generally associated with enhanced SFRs \citep{Larson&Tinsley1978, Lonsdale+1984, Barton+2000, Ellison+2008, Renaud+2019}. Outliers are however possible and the details are strongly dependent on the orbital parameters of the encounter and the stability of the isolated disc \citep{DiMatteo+2007}. This is actually in line with the inferred SF history of the M51 galaxy which lacks the fingerprint of enhanced SF activity but had a roughly constant rate of $5 \, \rm M_\odot yr^{-1}$ during the past few gigayears which even declined somewhat in the past $100$~Myr \citep{Eufrasio+2017}. This is roughly what we see also for the simulated system (Fig.\ \ref{fig:SFR_proj}.
Most simulated mergers, however, show the peak of the SFR during the coalescence phase \citep{Cox+2006, DiMatteo+2007, Renaud+2014}, which could be associated with a different behaviour of the ISM due to more extreme galaxy conditions. This phase is not followed by our model, so it is possible that the bulk of the SF is yet to come.
The strength of the SF burst decreases for smaller mass ratios between the two galaxies and can be negligible when the tidal disturbance is small, as in the case of minor mergers \citep{Cox+2008}. Even though our nominal mass ratio turns out rather low, based on dynamical considerations we have argued that our simulated companion galaxy de facto represents just its core (see Section \ref{sec:IC}) and that the actual mass ratio is closer to the observed one of M51. If this statement is erroneous, on the other hand, the lack of enhanced SF is not an exception, but rather the normal behaviour for mergers in this mass regime in agreement with \citet{Cox+2008}. A better treatment of the mass distribution of the companion galaxy, instead of treating it as a simple point mass, will shed light on this.
\citet{DiMatteo+2007} suggested that in some cases the close encounter can eject considerable amounts of gas into the diffuse tidal tail, which then cannot fully re-accrete at later stages of the merger, thereby explaining the lack of enhanced SF. Our simulation also develops such a diffuse atomic tidal tail (bottom panel of Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_simulated_M51}). It could therefore be that this is removing significant amounts of gas from the pool available to SF while still increasing the SFR in more central regions.
From Fig.\ \ref{fig:cumulative_mass}, where we plot cumulative masses as a function of radius for the two simulations, we can see that this is however not the case. Almost 20\% of the total mass of the interacting galaxy is at $R\gtrsim 10$~kpc and thus in the tidal tail, however in the isolated case a similar mass fraction is in the part of the disc that is mainly atomic and not star forming. Therefore it is unlikely that the interaction is effective at removing gas which would otherwise have been available for SF.
We conclude that the two galaxies have essentially the same amount of gas available for SF throughout the simulation. This is also seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:depletionTime_vs_time}, where we show the depletion times of the different ISM components versus time and notice that between the interacting and the isolated simulation there is only a marginal difference during their evolution. Globally, the interaction is not able to change the relation between the available gas and the SFR, which explains also why the inferred Schmidt-Kennicutt relations for the two cases are the same.
As suggested in Fig.\ \ref{fig:cumulative_mass}, we do not see a significant mass flow to the very centre, as the mass profiles up to $\sim 2.5$~kpc are similar in the two simulations. Other studies found that galaxy interactions drive large gas flows towards the central regions and therefore drive a nuclear star burst \citep{Torrey+2012, Moreno+2015}. This is not reproduced in our high resolution simulations for this specific merger system, and so the SF rate remains low.
The interaction is, however, able to redistribute the gas mass within the disc for more intermediate radii as we can notice from Fig.\ \ref{fig:surface_density}, where we plot the radial surface density profiles. As a matter of fact, in the interacting case roughly $60$\% of the mass is within the central $\sim 6$~kpc while the same radius contains only $30$\% in the isolated disc (Fig.\ \ref{fig:cumulative_mass}). Such a strong difference between the two is absent if we look at the cumulative SFR profile (dot-dashed line in Fig.\ \ref{fig:cumulative_mass}). This indicates that the interaction studied here is able to produce changes to the SF efficiency locally. This can also be appreciated in Fig.\ \ref{fig:depletion_time_vs_R} where we plot depletion times as a function of radius. We see here that variations of the order of a few are possible. These differences are significant as they are greater than just the temporal fluctuations of the local depletion times.
The question arises then as to what is controlling the ISM phases and the SFR if the interaction is ineffective in doing so. The isolated disc collapses and generates GMCs leading to SF in the central $8\text{--}10$~kpc which is the region that is initially marginally Toomre unstable (Fig.\ \ref{fig:vc}). Once the collapse started, a self-regulating equilibrium is generated where the energy input from the stellar feedback acts to counterbalance the forces responsible for cooling the gas to GMC levels to be available for SF again. The disc is essentially maximally star forming in the sense that in the Toomre unstable regions there is no gas reservoir that is not available for SF. Stars form at a rate set by the requirement that feedback balance the vertical pressure in the disc \citep{Ostriker+2010, Ostriker&Shetty2011}. The interaction is not able to increase the SFR since no new gas is added and all of the available gas is already available for SF. If the encounter is then not able to considerably change the conditions that control the turnover time of molecular gas, such as midplane pressure, SFR is unaltered.
These conclusions are case specific for the type of interaction studied here. If for instance the companion galaxy had a non-negligible ISM fraction, direct collision of the two gas discs could have led to local collapse in the Toomre stable part of the isolated disc, resulting thus in an enhanced SFR.
Moreover, if the mass ratio between the two galaxies were greater, we might have seen a more pronounced mass flow towards the centre, more compression in the tidal tail, and an increase of midplane pressure, all factors that could lead to higher SFRs, either by changing the available amount of gas or by increasing the SF efficiency. Exploring these issues will require a more extensive parameter study of galaxy interactions, which is out of the scope of the study presented here.
\section{Caveats}
\label{sec:caveats}
The ISM is dynamically complex, and so our simulations are inevitably a simplification compared to the true behaviour of the ISM in a galaxy. In particular, there are several important physical processes that are not included in our current model. These include magnetic fields and early stellar feedback such as ionizing radiation and winds.
Early feedback is responsible for clearing out the surrounding gas so that when SNe explode, every SN event can deposit a much higher energy into the ISM than in the case of SNe being directly injected into the high-density molecular phase. In our simulations it is often the initial SN that takes over the role of early feedback of clearing out the surroundings and preparing the region for the later SNe to disrupt the cloud. Although the specific details of this disruption are likely sensitive to the specific feedback implementation, the sole fact of having a mechanism to self-consistently disrupt clouds from within ensures that the ISM is self-regulated by the internal feedback and so a healthy matter-cycle is achieved. These simulations are therefore well suited to address questions regarding the global life cycle of the ISM or the formation and early stages of GMCs.
In a few cases, however, we find that the initial SNe explode in such a dense environment that they cannot efficiently pre-process the surrounding ISM for later SNe to be effective. Instead, in these cases the injected energy is quickly radiated away and the bubble re-collapses before further SNe can pressurise its interior and drive further expansion. Consequently, SF cannot be halted by feedback but instead continues for an unphysically long period of time, generating extremely massive star clusters and long-lived GMCs. While some models predict re-collapse of massive clouds and subsequent SF cycles \citep[see e.g.][]{Rahner+2017,Rahner+2018,Rahner+2019}, in our simulations this is largely a numerical artefact.
If for some dynamical reason these massive clusters decouple from the parental cloud\footnote{The gas is collisional while the stars are collisionless, so it is not unusual for the two components to decouple, for instance during cloud collisions.}, the SNe associated with the cluster can deposit their energy much more efficiently into the ISM. Since the cluster is unphysically massive, it also produces a large number of SNe. The resulting superbubble can therefore be extremely large and have a significant impact on the morphology of the entire galaxy. This is probably a major reason for the spiral arms being much less defined in the interacting simulations compared to the isothermal runs (compare Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_isothermal} and Fig.\ \ref{fig:rhoproj_simulated_M51} for instance).
Early feedback is also responsible for shutting down SF much earlier in the life of a young GMC than in the case of SNe alone \citep[see e.g.][]{Gatto+2017,Kannan+2018,Fujimoto+2019}. The absence of early feedback may therefore lead us to overestimating the SFR. To some extent this has been corrected for by our assumption of the local SF efficiency within the individual sink particles (Section \ref{sec:SinkParticles}). Moreover, even if our SFRs are overestimated in some cases, the effect should be comparably strong in both simulations, meaning that the trend that we see in Fig.\ \ref{fig:SFR_proj} should be similar and our conclusions should not change.
Our neglect of magnetic fields means that we are missing a source of stabilizing pressure against collapse and cloud formation. The compression of gas into spiral arms due to the galactic interaction could potentially be a trigger to overcome this additional pressure force and initiate cloud formation. In this case the interaction with the companion could have a more dramatic effect on the cold molecular phase than in the simulations presented in this paper. This should be investigated in dedicated studies.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:Conclusions}
We have performed high resolution {\sc arepo} simulations of a massive spiral galaxy interacting with a smaller companion. The properties of the galaxies and the orbital parameters of the encounter were chosen to roughly reproduce an M51-like system. For comparison purposes, we also modelled the evolution of the spiral galaxy in the absence of the interaction. Our simulations reach sub-parsec spatial resolution in dense molecular gas throughout the galaxy. We include the major physical ingredients thought to play key roles in the formation and destruction of GMCs to get a healthy life-cycle of the molecular gas in the galaxy. These include a time-dependent, non-equilibrium chemical network able to follow hydrogen and CO chemistry, local shielding from the molecule-dissociating part of the interstellar radiation field, sink particle formation to follow local centres of collapse and model stellar birth, and coupled SN feedback.
The isolated galaxy stays mostly flocculent throughout the simulation while in the case of the interaction a strong two-armed spiral pattern develops, along with an extended atomic tidal tail similar to the one observed for M51a. The final morphology and configuration closely resembles the M51 system, although our feedback prescription created strong superbubbles disrupting the otherwise clean spiral pattern much more than in the real case.
The ISM in the simulations settles into a typical three-phase medium with the cold molecular gas organised into dense GMCs associated with intense SF. Atomic gas makes up the cold neutral medium as well as the warm $T\sim10^4$~K phase into which the molecular cloud complexes are embedded. Supernova explosions coupled to recent SF activity are responsible for creating large superbubbles disrupting surrounding clouds and generating the hot ionised volume filling phase. The ISM properties roughly converge to an equilibrium state after an initial transition phase and only vary slowly after this due to gas depletion.
A lower limit of $\sim 10$\% and an upper limit of $\sim 60$\% of the gas mass is molecular, depending on what one assumes regarding the chemical state of gas trapped inside sink particles. We find an SFR of $4.0$~M$_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$ at a time corresponding to the current evolutionary phase of M51, in good agreement with the measured value of $4.6$~M$_\odot$ yr$^{-1}$. Due to lack of early feedback, however, our depletion times are too low by a factor of at least two considering that we started with a less massive ISM disc.
With this study we tried to further understand how the interaction of two galaxies can affect the ISM and the resulting SFR. Galaxy interactions are frequently invoked to induce star-bursts and to produce a general increase in SFRs. In the case analysed here, however, we find that other factors such as the initial disc stability and local feedback are more important than the interaction itself for controlling the ISM properties. While morphologically very different from each other, we find that the ISM phases of the two simulations are only marginally affected by the interaction, resulting in an almost identical SF history for the two cases. The galaxy interaction is {\em not} the trigger of strong star-bursts in the disc for our simulations. The M51 system is therefore a prototypical example of a merger event where SF is not controlled by the interaction but rather by pre-existing galaxy conditions and the self-regulating nature of the ISM. This is also supported by the observations that suggest a roughly constant SF rate during the past several $10^8$ years.
In the two scenarios simulated, the total gas accessible to SF is roughly the same. The interaction can not remove gas from the pool available to SF by shooting it into the diffuse tidal tail, as that mainly comes from an already stable part of the isolated disc. Nor is it compressing previously stable gas in the outskirts of the disc enough to trigger additional SF there. The global depletion times are therefore very similar in the two simulations. Locally, however, the interaction modifies the radial profile of the gas, making the galaxy more compact for intermediate radii and inducing local changes in the depletion times.
In the isolated galaxy, collapse is triggered in the Toomre unstable part of the disc. In this region the ISM is maximally star forming in the sense that there is no locked-up gas that is not accessible to SF, and the rate is self-regulated by feedback from young stellar populations injecting energy into the system to counterbalance the mid-plane pressure. Since the interaction cannot drastically change the latter, the ISM changes only slightly. On the other hand, the outer regions of the disc, which were stable in the isolated case, are unable to form stars even in the interacting simulation since the encounter ejects most of this gas into the extended atomic tidal tail.
We conclude that SFR and the balance of the gas between the different phases is set by self-regulation in response to stellar feedback, and the effect of the interaction is limited here to inducing changes in the morphology of the galaxy, grouping the already present molecular gas and associated SF into dense spiral arms.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Mattis Magg, Ondrej Jaura, Eric Pellegrini and Ana Duarte Cabral Peretto for insightful comments and discussions. We further thank R\"udiger Pakmor and Volker Springel for letting us use their code. MCS, RGT, SCOG, and RSK acknowledge support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft via the Collaborative Research Centre (SFB 881) ``The Milky Way System'' (subprojects B1, B2, and B8) and the Priority Program SPP 1573 ``Physics of the Interstellar Medium'' (grant numbers KL 1358/18.1, KL 1358/19.2, and GL 668/2-1). RGT also thanks the AMNH and the Kade foundation for its support and hospitality in the early stages of this project. RSK furthermore thanks the European Research Council for funding in the ERC Advanced Grant STARLIGHT (project number 339177). RJS gratefully acknowledges an STFC Ernest Rutherford fellowship (grant ST/N00485X/1) and HPC from the Durham DiRAC supercomputing facility (grants ST/P002293/1, ST/R002371/1, ST/S002502/1, and ST/R000832/1). The authors acknowledge support by the state of Baden-W\"urttemberg through bwHPC and the German Research Foundation (DFG) through grant INST 35/1134-1 FUGG. M-MML acknowledges partial support from US NSF grant AST-1815461, and the hospitality of the Insitut f\"ur Theoretische Astrophysik during writing of this paper. PCC acknowledges support from the Science and Technology Facilities Council (under grant ST/N00706/1). PCC also acknowledges StarFormMapper, a project that has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme, under grant agreement no. 687528.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{A nondifferentiable energy model for cohesive fracture}
In this section, we review prior work by Papoulia \cite{optiIJF}
as well as related
works
on nondifferentiable energy models for fracture. We assume isothermal
conditions throughout so that
temperature effects can be neglected
and consideration of thermodynamics reduces to mechanical
potential and kinetic energy.
Let $\Omega\subset\R^{n_{\rm dim}}$ ($n_{\rm dim}=2,3$) denote the initial configuration
of the body under consideration. Let $\mathcal{S}\subset\Omega$ be a union
of $(n_{\rm dim}-1)$-dimensional surfaces (when $n_{\rm dim}=3$) or
curves (when $n_{\rm dim}=2$) that may each cut across the entire domain.
Let
$u:\Omega\rightarrow\R^{n_{\rm dim}}$ be the displacement field, assumed
to be differentiable except possibly for jumps on $\mathcal{S}$.
In this model of solid mechanics and fracture, two
potential energies exist, one associated with the bulk model and one
with a network of surfaces $\mathcal{S}$ inside the domain that serve as
potential sites of fracture. Thus, the mechanical potential
has the form:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E} =
\int_\Omega \Psi(u)\,dV + \int_{\mathcal{S}} \Phi(\llbracket u\rrbracket)\,dS
- \int_\Omega f\cdot u\,dV
- \int_{\mathcal{S}_t}\tilde{t}\cdot u\,dS
\label{eq:twoterm}
\end{equation}
where $\llbracket u\rrbracket$ denotes the jump in $u$ across the
surface. Here, $\Psi$ corresponds to the strain-energy density function
while $\Phi$ corresponds to energy density of new surfaces (fracture).
The final two terms correspond to body loads ($f$) and traction loads ($\tilde t$)
respectively, Here $\mathcal{S}_t$ denotes the portion of $\partial\Omega$
with traction loads.
Note that the use of a potential energy functional implies reversibility;
we return to this matter below.
Later on, we will add another term to the optimization formulation to
account for momentum. In addition, we will impose displacement
boundary conditions
and inequality constraints. The latter will be used to model contact
and a no-interpenetration requirement for the mesh.
We further stipulate that $\Phi(\llbracket u\rrbracket)$
is a nondifferentiable function of $\llbracket u\rrbracket$
when $\llbracket u\rrbracket =0$. As explained in
\cite{optiIJF}, this is an essential ingredient of the formulation; see
also Charlotte et al.\ \cite{charlotte} in a slightly different context.
Because of the nondifferentiability at $\llbracket u\rrbracket =0$, no jumps in $u$
will occur across any surface
until a positive finite level of loading occurs.
The above model falls into the category of ``cohesive zone'' models
\cite{Barenblatt,Rice,Dugdale} because it accounts for crack propagation
with explicit representation of crack surfaces and an associated
displacement-traction relation (which is obtained as a derivative of $\Phi$ for
nonzero values of $\llbracket u\rrbracket$).
Furthermore, it falls into the category of ``initially rigid'' cohesive
zone models because of the property that there is no crack opening until
a specific positive finite load level is attained. Initially rigid models are
preferred over the alternative ``initially elastic'' models in problems
where the crack path is not known a priori. Inclusion of a network
of initially elastic
surfaces would lower the global stiffness of $\Omega$; as the number of
crosscutting surfaces in $\mathcal{S}$ tends to infinity, the global stiffness is driven to 0.
In contrast, there is no limit to how much surface area may be encompassed
by $\mathcal{S}$ in \eqref{eq:twoterm} for
the class of nondifferentiable potentials $\Phi(\llbracket u\rrbracket)$
proposed in \cite{optiIJF}.
In \cite{PV1}, it was argued that unless
significant care is taken in designing the algorithm, methods for
initially rigid cohesive fracture are
likely to be ``time discontinuous.''
The issue is
that after space discretization, a system of ODE's for nodal values of the
displacement $u$ and other quantities arises, i.e., a system of the form
$d\u/dt = \f(\u)$. The forcing
function $\f(\u)$ of these ODE's is a discontinuous
function of $\u$, and this leads to nonconvergent or unreliable numerical methods.
In \cite{optiIJF} and also in this paper,
the problems of time discontinuity are sidestepped
because the modeling technique does not lead to a system of ODE's---the
usual step of passing to a weak form does not apply because
the potential is nondifferentiable. Instead, the method involves time
steps each of which corresponds to a
physically based energy minimization operation.
The formulation \eqref{eq:twoterm} thus reduces the problem of modeling fracture
to a sequence of optimization problems. These are infinite dimensional
problems,
but they are reduced to finite-dimensional optimization using
finite element analysis as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:fem}.
This problem was solved in \cite{optiIJF}
using a continuation method. Hirmand and Papoulia \cite{DGopti} solve
it using a Nitsche discontinuous Galerkin method
(see also the related work by Radovitzky et al.\ \cite{Radov})
in which the multipliers of the
optimization problem are interpreted as stresses at the crack surface.
The contribution of the present paper is a solution method for the optimization problem
\eqref{eq:twoterm} using a novel interior-point method. A
key step in the development, as
explained in Section~\ref{sec:ipfm},
is to recast a certain equation (namely, the second
line of \eqref{eq:optmodeldisc}) that appears in the optimization problem
as an inequality (namely, the second line of \eqref{eq:mainprob}).
This technique is commonplace in the optimization literature
but is new (as far as we know) to fracture mechanics.
General background on interior-point methods is provided in Section~\ref{sec:ipbg}.
As mentioned earlier, the development of the formulation
continues in Section~\ref{sec:fem}, which explains our
finite-element discretization.
The method as described so far is reversible.
Irreversibility may be incorporated via the
additional dependence of $\Phi$ in \eqref{eq:twoterm} on
a damage variable as detailed in Section~\ref{sec:fem}.
The interior-point
formulation is provided in Section~\ref{sec:ipfm}. Most
of the literature on interior-point methods relates to convex
optimization. Our optimization problem is nonconvex, which
requires modifications to the interior-point method compared
to the previous literature as explained in Section~\ref{sec:nonconv}.
The interior-point method needs a feasible starting point; for
this we rely on a technique developed in Section~\ref{sec:phaseI}.
Details of the computational procedure are spelled
out in Section~\ref{sec:compproc}. Our computational
experiments are described in Section~\ref{sec:compexp}; these
experiments involve checking the balance of energy, the computation of
which is described in Section~\ref{sec:energy_balance}. We conclude
in Section~\ref{sec:conc} with an itemization of the development
of the optimization models as well as the components of our computational
method.
We conclude this section with a discussion of related literature.
Other
than Papoulia \cite{optiIJF} and Hirmand and Papoulia \cite{DGopti},
the most closely related work is Lorentz's \cite{Lorentz2008subgradient} method, which
also treats initially rigid fracture using a potential like
\eqref{eq:twoterm} for the same reasons as us. Lorentz does not use
an optimization method per se but rather considers the subdifferential
of \eqref{eq:twoterm} as a generalization of a system of equations for
generating a time step.
Slightly more distantly related to the present work
is the phase-field method of modeling
fracture \cite{bourdin2008}.
In this case, energy minimization is also invoked, but the
functional pertains to a smeared crack location rather than a sharp
surface. As a consequence, a sharp representation of the crack
must be determined {\em a posteriori}, although some authors
e.g., Geelen et al.\ \cite{Dolbow2},
Wang and Waisman \cite{Waisman},
have shown recently
that a sharp representation of the crack can be
directly coupled to a phase-field model.
\section{Interior-point algorithms}
\label{sec:ipbg}
In this section we present general background on interior-point
methods. For more in-depth treatment, see, e.g., \cite{Ye}.
The application of these methods to initially rigid
cohesive fracture is provided in Section~\ref{sec:ipfm}.
A {\em closed convex cone} is defined to be a set $K\subset \R^n$
with the properties that (i) $K$ is closed, (ii) $K$ is convex,
(iii) $K$ is a cone, i.e., $\x\in K\Rightarrow\lambda\x\in K$ for
all $\lambda \ge 0$, and (iv) $\bz\in K$ (i.e., $K\ne\emptyset$).
Two important special examples of closed convex cones are
$\R_n^+=\{\x\in\R^n: x_i\ge 0\>\forall i=1,\ldots,n\}$, the
{\em nonnegative orthant}, and
$C_2^{n}=\{\x\in\R^n: x_1\ge \Vert \x(2:n)\Vert\},$ the {\em second-order
cone}. Here, $\x(2:n)$ (Matlab notation) denotes the subvector of $\x$
indexed by coordinates $2$ through $n$.
The two cones mentioned in the previous paragraph both have standard
{\em self-concordant barrier functions}. For
$\R_n^+$, the standard self-concordant barrier function is
$\phi_{\rm NNO}(\x)=-\sum_{i=1}^n\log(x_i)$. For $C_2^{n}$, the
standard self-concordant barrier function is
$\phi_{\rm SOC}(\x)=-\frac{1}{2}\log(x_1^2-x_2^2-\cdots-x_n^2)$. We regard
these functions as taking on the value infinity outside the relevant cones.
These functions have the property that they are strictly convex functions
on the interior of their respective cones, and they tend to
infinity as the boundary of the cone is approached. ``Self concordance''
involves two other technical properties; see \cite{NemNest}.
If $K_1\subset \R^{n_1}, \ldots,K_r\subset \R^{n_r}$
are all closed convex cones with barrier functions
$\phi_1,\ldots,\phi_r$,
then $K_1\times\cdots\times K_r$ is also a closed convex cone, and its
barrier function is $\phi_1(\x_1)+\cdots+\phi_r(\x_r)$ for
$(\x_1,\ldots,\x_r)\in K_1\times\cdots\times K_r$.
Consider the optimization problem
$$
\begin{array}{rl}
\min_x & f(\x) \\
\mbox{s.t.} & \g(\x)=\bz, \\
& \x\in K,
\end{array}
$$
where
$K$ is a closed convex cone that has a barrier function $\phi(\x)$.
This problem may be solved as follows. Let $\mu_1\equiv\mu_{\rm init},\mu_2,\ldots$ be a decreasing
sequence of positive parameters tending to $0$. Then for $k=1,2\ldots$ we solve
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rl}
\min_\x & f(\x)+\mu_k\phi(\x) \\
\mbox{s.t.} & \g(\x)=\bz,
\end{array}
\label{eq:primbar0}
\end{equation}
an equality-constrained optimization problem, and we define $\x_k$ to be the
optimizer or approximate optimizer. On iteration $k+1$, we use $\x_k$
as the initial guess for the optimization algorithm, which is commonly
Newton's method.
In other words, we iteratively
solve a sequence of equality-constrained optimization problems.
This method is called
a {\em primal} or {\em primal-only} interior-point method.
The case most
commonly studied in the literature is the case when $f(\x)$ is
the linear function $\c^T\x$ and
convex and the equality constraints are linear: $\g(\x)\equiv A\x-\b$ for
some matrix $A$ and vector $\b$. In this case, there is an extensive
theory guaranteeing convergence to a global optimizer for the above
algorithm for a suitable sequence of weights $\mu_1,\mu_2,\ldots$.
See, e.g., \cite{NemNest}.
We can also define a {\em primal-dual} method as follows.
We first write the first-order (Lagrange or KKT)
optimality condition for \eqref{eq:primbar0},
which is,
\begin{equation}
\nabla f(\x^*)+\mu_k\nabla \phi(\x^*)+J(\x^*)^T\blambda=\bz,
\label{eq:opt1}
\end{equation}
where $\x^*$ is the optimizer of \eqref{eq:primbar0}, $J(\x^*)$ denotes
the first derivative (Jacobian matrix) of $\g(\x)$, and $\blambda$ is
the Lagrange multiplier.
Assume $k$ in the previous item is fixed for now.
In the
case of $K=\R_+^n$ so that $\phi_{\rm NNO}(\x)=-\sum_{i=1}^n\log(x_i)$
and
$$\nabla \phi(\x)=\left(
\begin{array}{c}
-1/x_1 \\
\vdots\\
-1/x_n
\end{array}
\right),$$
we define dual variable $s_i=\mu_k/x_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,n$.
Then the optimality condition \eqref{eq:opt1},
combined with feasibility and with a rearrangement of the definition of
$s_i$ yields the following system of equations:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla f(\x) - \s + J(\x)^T\blambda &=&\bz, \\
\g(\x) & = & \bz, \\
x_is_i & = &\mu_k,\quad \forall i=1,\ldots,n.
\end{eqnarray*}
The final group of equations is called ``complementarity''. It may
be rewritten $\x\circ\s=\mu_k\e$, where ``$\circ$'' is called the {\em Jordan product}
for $\R^n_+$, and
$\e$ denotes the vector of all 1's.
The Jordan product is defined exactly as: the $i$th entry
of $\x\circ\s$ is $x_is_i$. This notation also implies that $\x,\s$ are in the
cone, i.e., $x_i\ge 0$ and $s_i\ge 0$ for all $i=1,\ldots,n$.
In the case of $C_2^{n}$, the gradient of the barrier function is
$$\nabla \phi_{\rm SOC}(\x)=\left(
\begin{array}{c}
-x_1/d \\
x_2/d \\
\vdots\\
x_n/d
\end{array}
\right),$$
where $d=x_1^2-x_2^2-\cdots-x_n^2$. Then we define dual variables
$s_1=\mu_k x_1/d$, $s_2=-\mu_kx_2/d$, \ldots, $s_n=-\mu_kx_n/d$. Note that,
assuming $\x\in C_2^n$, it also follows from these formulas
that $\s\in C_2^n$.
In this
case, the optimality condition \eqref{eq:opt1} plus feasibility and the
definition of $\s$ can be written:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla f(\x) - \s + J(\x)^T\blambda &=&\bz, \\
\g(\x) & = & \bz, \\
\x\circ \s & = &\mu_k\e.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here, for $C_2^n$, the Jordan product $\x\circ \s$ is defined by
$$(\x\circ\s)_i = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\x^T\s, & i=1,\\
x_1s_i+s_1x_i, & i=2,\ldots, n.
\end{array}
\right.
$$
Here, $\e=[1,0,\ldots,0]^T$.
It can be checked that $\x\circ\s=\mu_k\e$ iff $s_1=\mu_kx_1/d$ and
$s_i=-\mu_kx_i/d$ for $i=2,\ldots,n$, where $d$ is as above, provided that
$\x,\s\in C_2^n$.
Finally, if $K_1,\dots,K_r$ are all convex cones each with a Jordan product
and with Jordan identities $(\e_1,\ldots,\e_r)$,
then the Jordan identity for $K_1\times \cdots \times K_r$
is $(\e_1,\ldots,\e_r)$ and the Jordan product
is elementwise: $(\x_1,\ldots,\x_r)\circ(\s_1,\ldots,\s_r)=(\x_1\circ\s_1,
\ldots, \x_r\circ \s_r)$.
The {\em primal-dual interior-point method} consists of solving the
system of nonlinear equations:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\nabla f(\x) - \s + J(\x)^T\blambda &=&\bz, \\
\g(\x) & = & \bz, \\
\x\circ \s & = &\mu_k\e,
\end{eqnarray*}
whose variables are $(\x,\blambda,\s)$,
using Newton's method for a sequence of decreasing $\mu_k$'s, and using
the converged (or approximately converged) solution $(\x_{k-1},\blambda_{k-1},\s_{k-1})$
as the starting guess for the $k$th iteration.
If Newton's method is applied directly to the above system,
this
yields a step called the AHO direction
(Alizadeh-Haeberly-Overton). See \cite{Todd} for an in-depth discussion.
In the nonconvex case, the known theorems are considerably weaker.
An analysis of a primal-dual interior-point method for nonconvex second-order
cone programming is presented by Yamashita and
Yabe \cite{YamashitaYabe}. The main innovation
in that work is a merit function that ensures convergence.
We have experimented with a primal-dual interior point method but
have not used it herein because it sometimes failed to converge
to a solution and instead became trapped close to a boundary of the
feasible region. The hypotheses of the Yamashita-Yabe method do
not hold for the problem herein.
Therefore, the method used in our solver is a primal-only method.
However, we use the primal-dual
formulation in the computations of energy balance detailed below
in Section~\ref{sec:energy_balance}.
\section{Finite element discretization}
\label{sec:fem}
As mentioned earlier, we
assume a physical domain $\Omega\subset \R^{n_{\rm dim}}$ ($n_{\rm dim}=2$ or
$n_{\rm dim}=3$), which is the closure of an open, bounded set with a piecewise
smooth boundary.
In this section, we describe the notation used
to define a finite-element discretization of $\Omega$ and
$u$.
Assume that $\Omega$
is meshed with a triangulation $\mathcal{T}$. The triangulation
is assumed to be simplicial, although the method can be extended
to meshes with hanging nodes. The $n_{\rm dim}$-dimensional elements of this
mesh are referred to as {\em bulk elements}.
As mentioned in the introduction, we further assume that $\Omega$
contains a union $\mathcal{S}$ of curves or surfaces to represent possible
crack paths. For the remainder of this work,
we take
$\mathcal{S}$ to be
the union of nonexterior
bounding curves or surfaces of the bulk
elements.
The cohesive method inserts {\em interface elements} along triangle
edges ($n_{\rm dim}=2$) or facets ($n_{\rm dim}=3$) for every pair of adjacent
bulk elements. Let the size of $\mathcal{S}$ (number of curves or
facets) be denoted $n_{\rm e}$. Each bulk element has its own nodes, i.e., no
node belongs to more than one bulk element.
Two adjacent bulk elements
$t_1,t_2\in\mathcal{T}$ that border on the same interface element $e$ each have nodes
in common with $e$. Therefore, the connectivity of the mesh is determined by
nodes shared between bulk and interface elements.
Let $n_0$ denote the total number of nodes of bulk elements.
Let $n_x$ denote the number of nodal degrees of freedom
not constrained by displacement or velocity boundary conditions.
Thus, $n_x\le n_{\rm dim}n_0$.
On each time step, an optimization problem is solved
to determine the displacements at the midpoint of the time
interval. For the rest of this discussion, assume the
time step is fixed so that we omit the subscript
for time.
Let $\u\in\R^{n_{\rm dim}\cdot n_0}$ be the vector of all nodal displacements
($n_{\rm dim}$ coordinate entries for each of $n_0$ nodes).
As in \cite{optiIJF}, this
value of $\u$ plays the role of the unknown at the midpoint of a time-step.
Let $\x\in\R^{n_x}$ reparameterize $\u$: $\x$
stands for the degrees of freedom associated with unconstrained
nodal displacements. The relationship between $\u$ and $\x$ is
as follows.
There is a fixed $n_{\rm dim}n_0\times n_x$ matrix $R$ such that $\u=R\x+\u_{BC}$.
Here, $\u_{BC}$ is the
$n_{\rm dim}n_0$-vector that carries information about
displacement boundary conditions.
Note
that $\u_{BC}$ will depend on the time-step index in the
case of velocity boundary conditions.
The strain energy associated with a bulk element $t\in\mathcal{T}$ is
given by an elastic or hyperelastic energy functional.
For example, in the $n_{\rm dim}=2$ case, one choice
for the energy is the one proposed by
Knowles and Sternberg
\cite{KnowSter1983} for
plane stress given by
\begin{equation}
\Psi(u) = c_1\left[\trace(C) +\mathcal{J}^{-2\beta}(1+1/\beta)\right]
\label{eq:knowles}
\end{equation}
where $\trace$ stands for the trace operator,
$\mathcal{J}=\det(C)^{(1+1/\beta)/2}$, $C=F^TF$ (Cauchy-Green
strain), $F$ is the (2-dimensional)
displacement gradient, $c_1,\beta$ are material constants. Inelastic bulk
material behavior is not considered herein.
The strain energy in the bulk is discretized as a function $b_0(\u)$
using quadrature over elements of $\mathcal{T}$, i.e.,
$$b_0(\u)=\int_\Omega \Psi(u_h)\,dV,$$
where $u_h$ is the finite-element interpolant specified by nodal values in the
vector $\u$.
This function $b_0(\u)$
is rewritten as $b(\x)$
(i.e., $b(\x)\equiv b_0(R\x+\u_{BC})$).
The momentum energy term $m_0(\u)$ arising from the
implicit midpoint rule
is derived in
\cite{optiIJF} to
be
$$m_0(\u)= \frac{2}{\Delta t^2}
(\u - \u^i -\v^i\Delta t/2)^TM(\u - \u^i -\v^i\Delta t/2),$$
where $\Delta t$ is the time
step, $M$ is the $n_{\rm dim}n_0\times n_{\rm dim}n_0$ positive definite mass matrix,
and $\u^i$ and $\v^i$ are displacement and velocity vectors from the
preceding time step.
Define $m(\x)=m_0(R\x+\u_{BC})$. This may be loosely
regarded as the discretization of kinetic energy;
see
\cite{optiIJF} for a more precise explanation.
Note that $m(\x)$ is a convex
quadratic function of $\x$.
Next, define an interface potential to stand for the second term of
\eqref{eq:twoterm}
as in \cite{optiIJF}.
This potential for a given element edge/surface $e\in\mathcal{S}$ is
\begin{equation}
\int_{\eta\in \Delta} g(\delta(\theta_e(\eta));d(\theta_e(\eta)))\theta_e'(\eta)\,d\eta
\label{eq:integint}
\end{equation}
where $\theta_e$ parameterizes the edge/surface $e$ with parameter
$\eta$ (a scalar for $n_{\rm dim}=2$; a 2-vector for $n_{\rm dim}=3$)
which lies in a reference domain $\Delta$,
$\delta(\cdot)$ is the
{\em effective opening
displacement} as calculated from displacement jump in the
element boundaries, $g$ is the interface
energy function and $d$ is a damage variable
discussed below. We follow the commonplace definition
similar to Ortiz and Pandolfi \cite{OrtizPan}:
\begin{equation}
\delta(x)=\sqrt{\llbracket u_n(x)\rrbracket^2+
(\beta^{\rm MIX})^2\Vert \llbracket u_s(x)\rrbracket\Vert^2},
\label{eq:deltaexi}
\end{equation}
where
$u_n(\cdot)$ and $u_s(\cdot)$ are the normal and tangential
opening
displacements at a point $x\in \Omega$ that
lies on an interface.
We return to these functions below. Here, $\beta^{\rm MIX}$ is
a material constant called the {\em mixity parameter}. Thus,
the second term $\Phi(\llbracket u\rrbracket)$ of
\eqref{eq:twoterm} is the composition
of the function $g(\delta;d)$ appearing in
\eqref{eq:integint} with the function $\delta(\llbracket u\rrbracket)$
appearing in \eqref{eq:deltaexi}. The dependence on $d$ is discussed
below.
The simplest physically reasonable choice for $g$ prior to the
introduction of damage is:
\begin{equation}
g(\delta) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
l\delta+q\delta^2, & \delta\in[0,\delta_u] \\
l\delta_u + q\delta_u^2, & \delta \ge \delta_u,
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
where $\delta_u$, the ultimate opening displacement, is a material parameter;
quadratic coefficient
$q=-\sigma_c/(2\delta_u)$,
$l=\sigma_c$, and $\sigma_c$, the critical traction, is another
material parameter. One checks that with these formulas, $g$ is a piecewise
$C^1$ (continuous function and first derivative) quadratic function.
Its first derivative with respect to $\delta$, $g'$, is therefore piecewise linear and continuous.
With these
choices of the three parameters, $g'(0)=\sigma_c$, indicating that
the initial traction (first derivative of energy with respect to $\delta$)
is $\sigma_c$.
The area under the curve of the plot of $g'(\delta)$
is $G_c=\sigma_c\delta_u/2$, a material parameter called the ``critical energy
release rate''.
(Note: of the three material parameters $\sigma_c,\delta_u,G_c$, only two
can be chosen independently as the previous equality demonstrates.)
We now extend this formula to include a nonnegative
scalar damage parameter $d$,
initially equal to 0.
The role of scalar $d$ is to model irreversible
damage to the interface. As in \cite{OrtizPan} and many other
previous works, we define this parameter
equal to the maximum opening displacement (not
exceeding $\delta_u$)
encountered over previous time values. When $d=\delta_u$, the
interface has no remaining cohesion. The extended formula
is:
\begin{equation}
g(\delta;d)=\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
l(d)\delta, & \delta\in [0,d], \\
l(d)\delta + q(\delta-d)^2 & \delta \in [d,\delta_u], \\
l(d)\delta_u +q(\delta_u-d)^2 & \delta >\delta_u,
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:genergy}
\end{equation}
where now $q=-\sigma_c/(2\delta_u)$,
$l(d)=-2(\delta_u-d)q$. When $d=0$, the formula in the previous
paragraph is recovered.
See Fig.~\ref{fig:gplot}. Unlike previous works such as \cite{OrtizPan},
this formula implies
that the material retains a residual critical stress when $0<d<\delta_u$.
In contrast, most previous works specify that after the onset of damage,
the interface behaves like an initially elastic interface (i.e., unloads
to the origin). The difference
in practice between the two models appears to be minor, but our formulation
has the mathematical advantage
that it prevents a pathological situation in which the second
derivative of $g$ can have an unboundedly large value.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=drawg1.eps,height=5cm}
\epsfig{file=drawg2.eps,height=5cm}
\end{center}
\caption{Plot of the function $g(\delta;d)$ (left)
and $g'(\delta;d)$ (right) defined
by \eqref{eq:genergy}. Although difficult to discern at this scale, the segment
of the curve on the left corresponding to abscissas lying in $[0,d]$ is straight (linear).}
\label{fig:gplot}
\end{figure}
In the finite element
approximation, the integral \eqref{eq:integint} is computed for each edge ($n_{\rm dim}=2$) or
facet ($n_{\rm dim}=3$)
with a $n_{\rm g}$-point Gauss quadrature rule.
Let $n_{\rm i}=n_{\rm e}n_{\rm g}$ stand for the total number
of Gauss-points of interfaces.
Let us introduce a new variable
$\s_0\in\R^{n_{\rm i}}$ that represents the effective opening displacements
at the Gauss points. In other words, $\s_0$ stores the vector of values of
$\delta(\theta_e(\eta_\iota))$, $\iota=1,\ldots,n_{\rm g}$,
described above at
each Gauss point
$\eta_1,\ldots,\eta_{n_{\rm g}}$
of each interface $e$.
Then the potential due to interfaces is written
\begin{equation}
h(\s_0;\d)
=\sum_e\sum_{\iota=1}^{n_{\rm g}}\omega_{e,\iota}g((s_0)_{e,\iota};d_{e,\iota});
\label{eq:hs0}
\end{equation}
this is the finite-element approximation to $\Phi(\llbracket u\rrbracket )$ that appears in \eqref{eq:twoterm}.
We have associated a damage variable
$d_{e,\iota}$ for $e\in \mathcal{S}$ and $\iota=1,\ldots,n_{\rm g}$,
i.e., one for each of the $n_{\rm i}$ interface Gauss points, that
indicate the level of damage.
Here, $\omega_{e,\iota}$ is the quadrature weight. This function $h$
is separable in the entries of $\s_0$, and hence its Hessian is a diagonal matrix.
Let $\s_1\in\R^{n_{\rm i}}$ denote the
normal opening displacement. Let $\s_2,\ldots,\s_{n_{\rm dim}}\in\R^{n_{\rm i}}$
stand for the tangential
opening displacements scaled by $\beta^{\rm MIX}$. (Note that for three-dimensional
problems, there is not a unique way to define a tangential coordinate
system at each point on an interface. Any method for defining tangential
coordinates is acceptable provided that it is applied consistently for
the duration of the solution procedure.)
Next, we revisit \eqref{eq:deltaexi}. First, the left-hand side is needed
only at the Gauss points of the interfaces. In this case, the left-hand side is
just $(s_0)_{e,\iota}$. A similar substitution may be made on the right-hand
side, so this constraint is rewritten as
$$(s_0)_{e,\iota}=\sqrt{(s_1)_{e,\iota}^2+\cdots+(s_{n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}^2},$$
for $e=1,\ldots,n_{\rm e}$, $\iota=1,\ldots,n_{\rm g}$. Observe that
this constraint is nondifferentiable at the origin, that is,
when for some $e,\iota$,
$(s_1)_{e,\iota}=\ldots=(s_{n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}=0$. This nondifferentiability
is fundamental to the model and is precisely the reason
why it is able to capture the initially rigid interface behavior.
A detailed explanation of the role of this nondifferentiability
is provided in \cite{optiIJF}.
The vectors $\s_1,\ldots,\s_{n_{\rm dim}}$ containing the
components of the opening displacements are functions of the
displacements stored in $\u$. In other words, we can
determine entries of $\s_1,\ldots,\s_{n_{\rm dim}}$ by evaluating
jumps of displacements interpolated from shape functions.
As mentioned earlier, we have reparameterized $\u$ by $\x$.
Therefore we can define geometric
functions $c_{k,e,\iota}$ such that
\begin{equation}
(s_k)_{e,\iota}=c_{k,e,\iota}(\x),
\label{eq:sxconstr}
\end{equation}
for $k=1,\ldots,n_{\rm dim}$,
$e=1,\ldots,n_{\rm e}$, $\iota=1,\ldots,n_{\rm g}$.
As observed in \cite{optiIJF},
these functions are nonlinear
because of geometric nonlinearity, namely, the
normal and tangent directions depend on the current values of
the displacements.
In addition to geometry, the functions
$c_{2,e,\iota},\ldots,c_{n_{\rm dim},e,\iota}$ also have the mixity factor
$\beta^{\rm MIX}$ encoded in them.
As mentioned in the introduction, one advantage of the
interior-point formulation is the ability to handle
conic convex constraints essentially for free.
One special case of conic convex
constraints is linear inequality contraints.
Let us assume that the system has additional
linear constraints of the form $E\x\ge \a$.
(Later
on, we will use these inequalities to model a simple form
of a contact constraint.)
Here, $E\in\R^{n_{\rm LI}\times n_x}$ is a known
matrix and $\a\in\R^{n_{\rm LI}}$ is a known vector, both of which
may vary from one time-step
to the next, and $n_{\rm LI}$ denotes the number of
linear inequality constraints.
Thus, the optimization problem to solve for one time-step in
the model of cohesive fracture is:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rll}
\min_{\x,\s_0,\s_1,\ldots,\s_{n_{\rm dim}}} & m(\x)+b(\x)+h(\s_0;\d)+\f^T\x \\
\mbox{s.t.}
& (s_0)_{e,\iota}=\sqrt{(s_1)_{e,\iota}^2+\cdots+(s_{n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}^2}& \forall e,\iota, \\
& (s_k)_{e,\iota}=c_{k,e,\iota}(\x) & \forall k=1,\ldots,n_{\rm dim},\forall e,\forall\iota, \\
& E\x\ge \a,\\
& (s_1)_{e,\iota}\ge 0 & \forall e,\forall\iota. \\
\end{array}
\label{eq:optmodeldisc}
\end{equation}
The terms in the objective have already been discussed except for
the last term, which stands for the sum of traction and body forces
from \eqref{eq:twoterm}.
The first, second and third constraints were
already discussed. The fourth
prevents interpenetration between neighboring
elements.
\section{Interior-point method for fracture}
\label{sec:ipfm}
A key modification to
\eqref{eq:optmodeldisc}
that makes it amenable to
an interior-point method is to replace the first equality constraint with
an inequality constraint:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rll}
\min_{\x,\s} & m(\x)+b(\x)+h(\s_0;\d)+\f^T\x \\
\mbox{s.t.}
& (s_0)_{e,\iota}\ge\sqrt{(s_1)_{e,\iota}^2+\cdots+(s_{n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}^2}& \forall e,\forall\iota, \\
& (s_k)_{e,\iota}=c_{k,e,\iota}(\x) & \forall k=1,\ldots,n_{\rm dim},\forall e,\forall\iota, \\
& E\x\ge \a, \\
& (s_1)_{e,\iota}\ge 0 & \forall e,\iota.
\end{array}
\label{eq:mainprob}
\end{equation}
Replacing the equality by an inequality constraint
does not change the optimizer because $h$ is a nondecreasing
function of $\s_0$. (In fact, it is perturbed to
a strictly increasing function as described below.)
This implies that the optimal solution to \eqref{eq:mainprob}
satisfies
$(s_0)_{e,\iota}=\sqrt{(s_1)_{e,\iota}^2+\cdots+(s_{n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}^2}$.
The benefit of this change is that an
equality constraint
of the form $(s_0)_{e,\iota}=\Vert(\s_{1:n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}\Vert$ defines a nonconvex set
with a complicated (nonmanifold) structure, whereas
the constraint $(s_0)_{e,\iota}\ge\Vert(\s_{1:n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}\Vert$
defines a convex set $C_2^{n_{\rm dim}+1}$, the
second-order cone. Here, $(\s_{1:n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}$ is the vector in
$\R^{n_{\rm dim}}$ whose
entries are $((s_1)_{e,\iota},\ldots,(s_{n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota})$.
As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:ipbg},
the primal-only interior-point method replaces the inequality
constraints in the preceding formulation with log-barrier terms. The
parameter $\mu>0$ starts at a large value and decreases to close
to zero. This leads to the following formulation:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rl}
\min_{\x,\s} & m(\x)+b(\x)+h_{\mu}(\s_0;\d)+\f^T\x
+\mu\phi_{\rm NNO}(E\x-\a)
\\
& \quad \mbox{} +
\mu\sum_{e=1}^{n_{\rm e}}\sum_{\iota=1}^{n_{\rm g}}
\zeta_{e,\iota}\left[\phi_{\rm SOC}((\s_{0:n_{\rm dim}})_{e,\iota}) +\phi_{\rm NNO}((s_1)_{e,\iota})\right] \\
\mbox{s.t.}
& (s_k)_{e,\iota}=c_{k,e,\iota}(\x) \quad \forall k=1,\ldots,n_{\rm dim},\forall e,\forall\iota. \\
\end{array}
\label{eq:primbar}
\end{equation}
The positive weight $\zeta_{e,\iota}$ is
defined by \eqref{eq:zetadef} in the next section.
In addition, we have perturbed $h$ of
\eqref{eq:mainprob} to
$h_\mu$ in \eqref{eq:primbar}, which is defined by \eqref{eq:hmu}
in the next section. As $\mu\rightarrow 0$, $h_\mu\rightarrow h$,
thus recovering the original problem.
This formulation still contains equality constraints, but they are easily eliminated
via substitution. In particular,
we substitute $c_{k,e,\iota}(\x)$ for $(s_k)_{e,\iota}$
(as in \eqref{eq:sxconstr})
thus
eliminating $(s_k)_{e,\iota}$, $k=1,\ldots,n_{\rm dim}$,
$e=1,\ldots,n_{\rm e}$, $\iota=1,\ldots,n_{\rm g}$. This elimination leaves
the following unconstrained problem:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rl}
\min_{\x,\s_0} & m(\x)+b(\x)+h_{\mu}(\s_0;\d)+\f^T\x
+\mu\phi_{\rm NNO}(E\x-\a) \\
& \quad \mbox{} +
\mu\sum_{e=1}^{n_{\rm e}}\sum_{\iota=1}^{n_{\rm g}}
\zeta_{e,\iota}\bigg[\phi_{\rm SOC}((s_0)_{e,\iota},\c_{1:n_{\rm dim},e,\iota}(\x)) \\
&\quad \quad \mbox{}
+\phi_{\rm NNO}(c_{1,e,\iota}(\x))\bigg]
\end{array}
\label{eq:primbar2}
\end{equation}
The interior-point code solves \eqref{eq:primbar2}
via a trust-region method. This is a standard technique
to extend Newton's method to
nonconvex (unconstrained) optimization. More details on the method are
in Section~\ref{sec:compproc}.
\section{Sources of nonconvexity}
\label{sec:nonconv}
The optimization problem \eqref{eq:mainprob} contains three
sources of nonconvexity as follows. The bulk energy $b(\x)$ is
nonconvex in the displacements for nonlinear hyperelasticity,
$h(\s_0;\d)$ is nonconvex in $\s_0$ due
to the negative coefficient of the quadratic term in
\eqref{eq:genergy}, and
the constraints
$(s_i)_{e,\iota}=c_{i,e,\iota}(\x)$, $i=1,\ldots,n_{\rm dim}$,
are nonlinear.
(Note that in passing from \eqref{eq:optmodeldisc} to
\eqref{eq:mainprob}, a fourth source of nonconvexity was
eliminated by replacing an equality with an inequality.)
Of these three sources,
the nonconvexity of $h$ is the most challenging
to handle, and
it is also the most fundamental to the application. Convexity
of $b(\x)$ could be recovered by adopting a simpler mechanical
model such as linear elasticity. Linearity in
the constraint $(s_k)_{e,\iota}=c_{k,e,\iota}(\x)$
could be recovered by simply assuming that the normal
vectors to the interfaces are determined by the initial rather
than current configuration.
There is, however, no apparent
way to replace or approximate $h$ with a convex function
because $g$ must have a nonconvex form similar to the
form depicted in
Fig.~\ref{fig:gplot}(left) to be physically meaningful.
Interior-point methods for nonconvex problems are considerably
more delicate than for convex problems, and we were
required to implement several stabilization methods in the
interior-point framework to cope with the nonconvexity of $h$,
which are as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
The interior-point method converges significantly faster if we weight
the log-barrier terms for the
constraints associated with interfaces by a factor proportional to
their ``local'' length. In particular, we introduced weight
$\zeta_{e,\iota}$ in \eqref{eq:primbar}, which is defined as
\begin{equation}
\zeta_{e,\iota}=10^4G_c\omega_{e,\iota},
\label{eq:zetadef}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_{e,\iota}$ is the quadrature weight in \eqref{eq:hs0}.
Using a weight proportional to $\omega_{e,\iota}$
is physically natural because it means, for example, that
the contribution to the barrier function from an interface is invariant
(up to discretization error) if the interface is subdivided into
smaller pieces. Making the weight proportional to $G_c$, the critical
energy release rate, is also natural since the other terms in the objective
function stand for work or energy quantities.
Weighting is not necessary (and is typically not even
considered) in the case of convex interior-point methods.
\item
On intermediate stages of the interior-point method, the interfaces
are favored to open by the log-barrier term
associated with the constraint
$(s_1)_{e,\iota}\ge 0$ when $\mu$ is large.
Without extra measures, they can open
by more than $\delta_u$, in which case their traction is 0 and they no longer
hold the body together. Their traction is not recovered as $\mu$
is decreased due to the nonconvexity of $h$.
For this reason, a quadratic regularization term is added to the cohesive
traction. This term has the form
$$(5\cdot 10^5)\alpha\omega_{e,\iota}\max(1-d_{e,\iota}/\delta_u,8\cdot 10^{-6})(s_0)_{e,\iota}^2,$$
where $\alpha>0$ is a small scalar, $\omega_{e,\iota}$ is the
quadrature weight in \eqref{eq:hs0},
$d_{e,\iota}$ is the damage value, $(s_0)_{e,\iota}$ is the (unknown)
effective opening displacement of
Gauss point $\iota$ of the interface $e$.
From now on, we denote:
\begin{equation}
h_\alpha(\s_0;\d)=h(\s_0;\d) + \sum_{e,\iota} (5\cdot 10^5)\alpha\omega_{e,\iota}
\max(1-d_{e,\iota}/\delta_u,0.000008)(s_0)_{e,\iota}^2,
\label{eq:hmu}
\end{equation}
As already noted in
\eqref{eq:primbar2},
the method sets $\alpha$ in \eqref{eq:hmu} equal to the barrier parameter
$\mu$ (so that the original problem is
recovered as $\mu\rightarrow 0$).
\item
The Newton step associated with the interior-point step is not always
well defined because the Hessian may not be positive definite. To address
this problem, we use a common regularization to extend
Newton to nonconvex optimization, namely, the trust-region
method. Some modifications to the standard trust-region method were necessary
for this application; these are described in detail in Section~\ref{sec:compproc}.
\end{enumerate}
The net effect of these stabilization techniques is that the method
is reasonably fast and robust on all the computational experiments tried so far.
\section{Attaining feasibility with ``Phase I'' initialization}
\label{sec:phaseI}
An issue to address is that interior-point methods for optimization
require an interior starting point.
There are so-called ``infeasible''
interior-point methods that ease this restriction,
but the theory for such methods in the case of nonconvex
problems is not well developed, and in practice they can be difficult
to use.
A natural choice for initialization is
the converged solution for the previous time
step, but such a solution may violate the inequality constraints
such as contact. In addition, for moving displacement boundary conditions
(i.e., velocity boundary conditions), the boundary nodes must be
displaced each iteration to new positions to attain feasibility.
Depending on the magnitude of the velocity, this can cause elements
along the boundary to become inverted or nearly inverted, which makes
the bulk material model behave poorly to the extent that recovering
a noninverted shape is unattainable with Newton's method.
One solution to the problem described in the last paragraph
is to take small load steps, thus limiting the degree of misshapenness
among boundary elements. The drawback of this technique is that it makes
the time-step dependent on the mesh size because a finer mesh implies
that a smaller boundary distortion can be tolerated. Recall that
the method proposed herein is an implicit method. A big advantage
of implicit methods is exactly that the time step and mesh size can
be chosen independently. Thus, coping with moving boundaries by subdividing
time-steps undermines one of the main benefits
of implicit methods.
An alternative approach, adopted here, is to start with a so-called ``Phase I''
initialization. During Phase I, the optimization problem is modified
with a new variable $t$ constrained $t\ge 0$ and a ``big $M$'' term in the objective.
A preliminary version of the modified problem is as follows.
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rl}
\min_{\x,\s_0,t} & m(\x)+b(\x)+h_{\mu_{\rm init}\sqrt{M}}(\s_0;\d)+\f^T\x +Mt \\
&\quad\mbox{}
+\mu_{\rm init}\phi_{\rm NNO}(E\x+t\e-\a)+\mu_{\rm init}\phi_{\rm NNO}(t) \\
& \quad \mbox{} +
\mu_{\rm init}\sum_{e=1}^{n_{\rm e}}\sum_{\iota=1}^{n_{\rm g}}
\zeta_{e,\iota}\bigg[\phi_{\rm SOC}((s_0)_{e,\iota},\c_{1:n_{\rm dim},e,\iota}(\x)) \\
&\quad \quad \mbox{}
+\phi_{\rm NNO}(c_{1,e,\iota}(\x)+t\e)\bigg]
\end{array}
\label{eq:primbar2phaseI0}
\end{equation}
Here, $\e$ is the vector of all 1's. Note that during Phase I, $\mu$ is held
at its initial value as suggested by the notation $\mu_{\rm init}$ appearing in
\eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0}.
The rationale for \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0} is as follows. The variable
$t$ can be initialized to a large positive value, which ensures that
the barrier functions $\phi_{\rm NNO}(\cdot)$ have positive arguments in all occurrences.
In addition, the variables $(s_0)_{e,\iota}$ can be
initialized to sufficiently large values for all interface
Gauss points $(e,\iota)$ to ensure that the argument of $\phi_{\rm SOC}$ is
feasible. Thus, except for the issue of element inversion that is discussed
below, it is straightforward to find an initial feasible point for
\eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0}. On the other hand, at the optimizer
for \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0}, $t>0$ will be a relatively small value
because the term $Mt$ in the objective function penalizes a large $t$.
If a feasible
solution to \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0} has a small value of $|t|$,
then we can simply set $t=0$ and expect to have a feasible
solution for \eqref{eq:primbar2}.
If the solution so obtained
is feasible for \eqref{eq:primbar2}, then we
proceed to a solver for
\eqref{eq:primbar2} using this initial guess.
If not, we re-solve \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0}
with $M$ increased by a factor of 8 (initially, $M=64$). A larger value of $M$ means a smaller
value of $t>0$ at the optimizer. The parameter $\alpha$
appearing in $h_\alpha$ in \eqref{eq:hmu}
is $\mu_{\rm init}\sqrt{M}$ in order to ensure that the quadratic penalty term in $h$
is not swamped by the $Mt$ term in the objective.
The ``big-$M$'' technique thus handles feasibility of the
barrier functions. Next, we further modify \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0} to prevent
element inversion that can be caused by
moving boundary conditions.
Recall that the vector of all degrees of freedom (DOFs)
$\u$ is parameterized by $\u=R\x+\u_{\rm BC}$, where $\u_{\rm BC}$ carries
the prescribed displacements and $R$ is a fixed matrix. There is always
a mathematically equivalent way to
to write the boundary constraints as $B\u=\b$, i.e., linear equations that must be satisfied
by $\u$. The transformation from $(R,\u_{\rm BC})$ to
$(B,\b)$ can be carried out using standard numerical linear algebra
such as QR factorization. Note that both $\u_{\rm BC}$ and $\b$ may depend
on the time step $\tau$, whereas $R$ and $B$ are fixed throughout the computation.
In Phase I, we let the vector of unknown displacements be $\u$ rather
than $\x$. Instead of equality constraints $B\u=\b$, we introduce
two inequalities $B\u+t\e\ge\b$
and $B\u-t\e\le \b$, where $t$ is the Phase-I artificial
variable. In turn, these two constraints are
replaced by additional terms in the barrier objective function
of the form $\mu\phi_{NNO}(B\u+t\e-\b)$ and $\mu\phi_{NNO}(-B\u+t\e+\b)$.
Thus, the problem is reformulated as:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rl}
\min_{\u,\s_0,t} & m_0(\u)+b_0(\u)+h_{\mu_{\rm init}\sqrt{M}}(\s_0;\d)+\f_0^T\u +Mt \\
&\quad\mbox{}
+\mu_{\rm init}\phi_{\rm NNO}(E_0\u+t\e-\a_0)+\mu_{\rm init}\phi_{\rm NNO}(t) \\
& \quad \mbox{} + \mu_{\rm init}\phi_{\rm NNO}(B\u+t\e-\b)+\mu_{\rm init}\phi_{\rm NNO}(-B\u+t\e+\b) \\
& \quad \mbox{} +
\mu_{\rm init}\sum_{e=1}^{n_{\rm e}}\sum_{\iota=1}^{n_{\rm g}}
\zeta_{e,\iota}\bigg[\phi_{\rm SOC}((s_0)_{e,\iota},\c_{0;1:n_{\rm dim},e,\iota}(\u)) \\
&\quad \quad \mbox{}
+\phi_{\rm NNO}(c_{0;1,e,\iota}(\u)+t\e)\bigg]
\end{array}
\label{eq:primbar2phaseI}
\end{equation}
Here, we recall the notation introduced earlier that $b_0(R\x+\u_{\rm BC})\equiv b(\x)$
and similarly for $m_0(\cdot), \f_0, E_0, \a_0, \c_0(\cdot)$. Now it is apparent
that by selecting both $t$ and $(\s_0)_{e,\iota}$ sufficiently large, all barrier
constraints are feasible and no element is inverted by the initial guess for $\u$
(the solution from the previous time-step).
It is also apparent that if $t$ is driven to a sufficiently small positive number
by optimization on \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI}, then a feasible solution for the
original (phase II) problem is obtained.
\section{Computational procedure}
\label{sec:compproc}
In this section, we provide further details of the computational procedure
of the cohesive solver. As mentioned in the last section,
during Phase I, the displacement boundary conditions
are enforced as inequalities, and therefore the vector of unknowns
for the displacements in \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI} is $\u$ rather than
$\x$.
Let $\Pi_\tau$ be the linear projection
that maps $\u$ to $\x$, i.e., $\Pi_\tau(\u)=\argmin_\x\Vert(R\x+\u_{BC,\tau})-\u\Vert$,
where $\tau$ is the time step.
The feasibility test that terminates Phase I that was described
in the previous section in more detail is:
apply $\Pi_\tau$ to $\u$ that solves \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI} to make sure that
the vector $\x$ thus obtained is feasible for the main phase.
For the purpose of notation in the solvers,
let $\bxi$ denote the concatenation $(\x,\s_0)$, the
variables of the interior method
\eqref{eq:primbar2}, or $\bar\bxi = (\u,\s_0,t)$ in the case
of Phase I when \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI} is solved.
In the algorithms that follow,
these variables $\bxi$ and $\bar\bxi$ are not meant to stand
for new independent program variables but merely notational
shorthand. For
example, if $\x$ is updated in a code that follows,
then $\bxi$ is also updated implicitly
since $\bxi$ contains $\x$ as a subvector.
We make the following observation: given a value of $\x$ or $\u$,
it is possible to efficiently compute the optimal extension
of $\x$ to $\bxi$ or $\u$ to $\bar\bxi$, where ``optimal'' in this context
means minimizing the relevant objective function $f$. One observes
from \eqref{eq:mainprob} that once $\x$ is specified, the
remaining variables $(s_0)_{e,\iota}$, $e=1,\ldots, n_{\rm e}$,
$\iota=1,\ldots,n_{\rm g}$ and $t$ (in the case of $\bar\bxi$)
are decoupled and may be optimized individually
using a univariate procedure (e.g., bisection).
Let us denote these optimal values as $\bxi^*(\x)$, $\bar\bxi^*(\u)$.
The top-level procedure is described in Fig.~\ref{fig:toplevel}.
Every third time step, the algorithm computes matrices
$H_{\mu_i}$ for $i=1,\ldots, n_\mu$, which are
positive definite matrices used in the trust-region method.
The variables maintained in the main loop
from one time step to the next are $\u$ and $\d$, which
are superscripted with the time step index $\tau$.
As discussed earlier, $\u$ (or $\x$) encodes the displacements while
$\d$ is the
damage state, which is updated from the displacements computed
on each step.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\fbox{\begin{minipage}{\dimexpr\textwidth-2\fboxsep-2\fboxrule\relax}
\begin{tabbing}
+\=++\=++\=\kill
\> From initial conditions determine initial guess for $\u^0$. \\
\> $\d^0:=\bz$. \\
\> $ \{H_{\mu}\}_\mu := 0\,\forall \mu;\quad H^{\rm PHASE1}:=0.$ \\
\> for $\tau := 1,\ldots,n_{\rm step}$ \\
\> \> if $\mbox{rem}(\tau,3)==1$ \\
\> \> \> $H^{\rm PHASE1},\{H_\mu\}_\mu=\texttt{solver}(\tau,\u^{0},\d^0,H^{\rm PHASE1},\{H_{\mu}\}_\mu,
\mbox{\sl PREPROCESS})$. \\
\> \> end if \\
\> \> $\u^\tau :=\texttt{solver}(\tau, \u^{\tau-1},\d^{\tau-1},H^{\rm PHASE1},\{H_\mu\}_\mu,\mbox{\sl ORDINARY})$. \\
\> \> Compute $\d^\tau$ from $\d^{\tau-1},\u^{\tau}$. \\
\> end for
\end{tabbing}
\end{minipage}}
\end{center}
\caption{Top-level procedure.}
\label{fig:toplevel}
\end{figure}
The sequence of $\mu$ values used in the interior-point
methods are fixed in advance as a geometrically decreasing sequence:
$\mu_i=\mu_{\rm init}\rho_{\mu}^{i-1}$ for $i=1,2,\ldots,n_{\mu}$.
The choice of parameters used is $\mu_{\rm init}=5\cdot 10^{-5}$, $\rho_\mu=0.125$,
and $n_{\mu}=6$. This means that the ultimate value
is $\mu_{n_\mu}\approx 1.5\cdot 10^{-9}$.
The procedure \verb+solver+ to solve one time step
using the interior-point method is
detailed in Fig.~\ref{fig:solvermainprob}.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\fbox{\begin{minipage}{\dimexpr\textwidth-2\fboxsep-2\fboxrule\relax}
\begin{tabbing}
+\=++\=++\=++\=++\=\kill
\> FUNCTION $\texttt{solver}(\tau,\u,\d,H^{\rm PHASE1},\{H_\mu\}_\mu,\mbox{\sl flag1})$ \\
\> Determine functions $b(\cdot)$, $m(\cdot)$, $b_0(\cdot)$, $m_0(\cdot)$ for time step $\tau$. \\
\> $\bar\bxi:=\bar\bxi^*(\u)$ \\
\> $M:=64;\quad\mu:=\mu_1;\quad R:=1.0.$\\
\> {\em /* Phase 1 to find feasible $\x$ by minimizing \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI}.}\\
\> {\em \quad Variable $M$ varies in this loop, while $\mu$ is fixed. */} \\
\> loop \\
\> \> Let $f(\cdot)$ be the objective function of \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI}.\\
\> \> $(\u,\s_0,t, R) := \texttt{minimize}(f, \bar\bxi, H^{\rm PHASE1}, R).$ \\
\> \> $\x := \Pi_\tau(\u).$ \\
\> \> if $(\x,\s_0)$ feasible for \eqref{eq:primbar2}\\
\> \> \> break \\
\> \> end if \\
\> \> $M := 8M$. \\
\> end loop \\
\> $\bxi:=(\x,\s_0)$. \\
\> if {\sl flag1} =={\sl PREPROCESS} \\
\> \> $H^{\rm PHASE1} := \nabla^2 f(\u).$ \\
\> end if \\
\> {\em /* Phase 2 to minimize \eqref{eq:primbar2}. Variable $\mu$ decreases} \\
\> {\em \quad according to fixed schedule. */} \\
\> for each $\mu:=\mu_1,\mu_2,\ldots,\mu_{n_\mu}$ \\
\> \> Let $f(\cdot)$ be the objective function of \eqref{eq:primbar2}. \\
\> \> if {\sl flag1} =={\sl PREPROCESS} \\
\> \> \> Replace $h_\mu(\cdot)$ appearing in \eqref{eq:primbar2} by $h_{\mu_1}(\cdot)$.\\
\> \> end if \\
\> \> $(\bxi,R) := \texttt{minimize}(f,\bxi,H_\mu,R)$. \\
\> \> if {\sl flag1}=={\sl PREPROCESS} \\
\> \> \> $H_\mu:=\nabla^2 f(\bxi)$ \\
\> \> end if \\
\> end for \\
\> if {\sl flag1} == {\sl PREPROCESS} \\
\> \> return $H^{\rm PHASE1}, \{H_\mu\}_\mu.$ \\
\> else \\
\> \> return $R\x+\u_{\rm BC}.$ \\
\> end if
\end{tabbing}
\end{minipage}}
\end{center}
\caption{Solver for \eqref{eq:mainprob}.}
\label{fig:solvermainprob}
\end{figure}
Note that the bulk strain-energy function $b(\x)$ in general
depends on the time step index. This is because this function $b(\cdot)$ encodes
all of the boundary and loading conditions. The momentum energy
term
$m(\x)$ also varies with the time step because it incorporates
values of the nodal velocities from previous time steps.
The interior-point minimizer, which appears in Fig.~\ref{fig:primalonly},
is a modification of the standard trust-region method
(see, e.g., Nocedal and Wright \cite{NocedalWright}).
As is standard for this method, the function $m$ appearing in the ratio test $\rho$ is
the quadratic model, that is,
$m(\x):=\nabla f(\bxi)^T\x + (\x^T\nabla^2f(\bxi)\x)/2$.
The two modifications are as follows. First, instead of the usual
identity matrix added to regularize the Hessian, we use the
Hessian computed on an artificial preliminary problem plus
a multiple of the identity. This Hessian
captures the geometry of the space of $\bxi$ more accurately than a plain identity
matrix and
therefore leads to faster convergence. This is because the objective
function $f(\bxi)$ is highly anisotropic;
some search directions (e.g., those that create significant interpenetration)
cause a large jump in the objective, while others only a small change.
The second modification is that, in addition to the usual ratio test
on function values
for determining when to accept a step, the function also implements a ratio
test on gradient norms, namely, the variable $\rho_g$ appearing
in Fig.~\ref{fig:primalonly}. It follows from Taylor's theorem that
the numerator of the definition of $\rho_g$ tends to zero rapidly as
$\Delta \bxi$ gets small, so a large value $\rho_g$ indicates that the
function is not behaving according to the Taylor prediction.
This modification was necessary because of
pathological cases of the
trust region method in which the objective function decreases while the gradient
blows up to infinity as the boundary of a cone is approached obliquely.
Applying a ratio test to the gradient prevents such occurrences.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\fbox{\begin{minipage}{\dimexpr\textwidth-2\fboxsep-2\fboxrule\relax}
\begin{tabbing}
+\=++\=++\=++\=++\=++\=++\=++\=\kill
\> FUNCTION $\texttt{minimize}(f, \bxi, \bar H, R^{\rm init})$ \\
\> $\nu := \Vert \nabla^2f(\bxi)\Vert_1; \quad R :=R^{\rm init}.$ \\
\> loop \\
\> \> $\Delta \bxi := \texttt{computeDeltaXi}(\nabla^2f(\bxi), \bar H + 10^{-3}\nu I
, \nabla f(\bxi), R).$ \\
\> \> $\bxi^{\rm TEST} := \bxi + \Delta\bxi.$ \\
\> \> if $\bxi^{\rm TEST}$ infeasible \\
\> \> \> $R := R/4.$ \\
\> \> else \\
\> \> \> $\rho:=\frac{f(\bxi) - f(\bxi^{\rm TEST})}{m(\bxi)-m(\bxi^{\rm TEST})}.$ \\
\> \> \> $\rho_g := \frac{\Vert \nabla f(\bxi^{\rm TEST}) - \nabla f(\bxi) -
\nabla^2 f(\bxi)\Delta \bxi\Vert}{\Vert\nabla f(\bxi)\Vert+
\Vert\nabla f(\bxi^{\rm TEST})\Vert}.$ \\
\> \> \> if $\rho < 1/8$ or $\rho_g > 1$ \\
\> \> \> \> $R := R/4.$ \\
\> \> \> else \\
\> \> \> \> if $\rho < 1/4$ \\
\> \> \> \> \> $R := R /2.$ \\
\> \> \> \> else if $\rho \ge 3/4$ and $\lambda > 0$ and $\rho_g\le 0.125$ \\
\> \> \> \> \> $R := 2R$ \\
\> \> \> \> end if \\
\> \> \> \> $\bxi := \bxi^{\rm TEST}.$ \\
\> \> \> end if \\
\> \> end if \\
\> \> if $\lambda\le {\sl tol}_1$ and $\Vert \Delta\bxi\Vert \le {\sl tol}_2$ \\
\> \> \> return $\bxi$, $R$ \\
\> \> end if \\
\> end loop\\
\end{tabbing}
\end{minipage}}
\end{center}
\caption{Minimization algorithm (trust-region method)}
\label{fig:primalonly}
\end{figure}
The routine to compute a single step of the trust-region method
by finding the correct Lagrange multiplier $\lambda$
appears in Fig.~\ref{fig:primalonly_sub} and is standard
(see \cite{NocedalWright}). The test for positive definiteness as
well as the computation of the direction is carried out with
sparse Cholesky factorization. The function
$q(\lambda)$ appearing in this procedure is
$$q(\lambda)=\frac{1}{R} - \frac{1}{\Vert N^{1/2}(H+\lambda N)^{-1}\g\Vert};$$
the correct multiplier $\lambda$ should satisfy either $\lambda=0$
or $q(\lambda)=0$, i.e.,
$\Vert N^{1/2}(H+\lambda N)^{-1}\g\Vert = R$.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\fbox{\begin{minipage}{\dimexpr\textwidth-2\fboxsep-2\fboxrule\relax}
\begin{tabbing}
+\=++\=++\=++\=++\=++\=++\=++\=\kill
\> FUNCTION $\texttt{computeDeltaXi}(H,N,\g, R)$ \\
\> $\lambda_{\rm LOW}:= 0; \quad \lambda_{\rm HIGH}:=\infty; \quad \lambda:=0$ \\
\> loop \\
\> \> if $\lambda_{\rm HIGH}-\lambda_{\rm LOW}<{\sl tol}_3$ \\
\> \> \> Switch to hard-case method (see \cite{NocedalWright}). \\
\> \> end if\\
\> \> $G := H + \lambda N.$ \\
\> \> if $G$ is positive definite \\
\> \> \> $\Delta \bxi := -G^{-1}\g$ \\
\> \> \> $\delta := (\Delta\bxi^TN\Delta\bxi)^{1/2} - R;$ \\
\> \> \> if $|\delta|/R < {\sl tol}_4$ or ($\delta\le 0$ and $\lambda\le{\sl tol}_1$) \\
\> \> \> \> return $\Delta\bxi$ \\
\> \> \> end if \\
\> \> \> if $\delta > 0$ \\
\> \> \> \> $\lambda_{\rm LOW} := \lambda.$ \\
\> \> \> else \\
\> \> \> \> $\lambda_{\rm HIGH} := \lambda.$ \\
\> \> \> end if \\
\> \> \> {\sl PosDef} := {\sl true}; $\lambda := \lambda - q'(\lambda)/q(\lambda).$ \\
\> \> else \\
\> \> \> $\lambda_{\rm LOW} := \lambda.$ \\
\> \> \> {\sl PosDef} := {\sl false}. \\
\> \> end if \\
\> \> if {\sl PosDef} == {\sl false} or $\lambda <\lambda_{\rm LOW}$ or $\lambda>\lambda_{\rm HIGH}$ \\
\> \> \> if $\lambda_{\rm HIGH}==\infty$ and $\lambda == 0$ \\
\> \> \> \> $\lambda := 1$; \\
\> \> \> else if $\lambda_{\rm HIGH}==\infty$ and $\lambda > 0$ \\
\> \> \> \> $\lambda := 2\lambda$; \\
\> \> \> else \\
\> \> \> \> $\lambda := (\lambda_{\rm LOW} +\lambda_{\rm HIGH})/2 $ \\
\> \> \> end if \\
\> \> end if \\
\> end loop \\
\end{tabbing}
\end{minipage}}
\end{center}
\caption{Subroutine of trust-region method to find one step $\Delta\bxi$}
\label{fig:primalonly_sub}
\end{figure}
\section{Computation of energy balance}
\label{sec:energy_balance}
In this section, we describe the terms that enter into the
energy balance used in two of the computational experiments
of Section~\ref{sec:compexp} in order to validate the method.
The energy balances are computed at half-steps between the main
time steps since this is where the displacements are computed
by the implicit midpoint rule. We note that energy balance
computations for initially rigid cohesive fracture
have been used in the previous literature, e.g., by Molinari et al.\ \cite{Molinari},
to derive results on convergence behavior.
Kinetic energy is evaluated using quadrature of
$$\frac{1}{2}\int_\Omega \rho \dot{u}^2\,dV.$$
The value for $\dot u$ for use in this integral
is taken to be the midpoint of the velocities evaluated at two consecutive
time-steps. Strain energy is evaluated using quadrature
on the first term of \eqref{eq:twoterm} applied to the displacements
at the midpoint of a time step.
For a conservative model, cohesive energy would be evaluated using
quadrature on the second term of \eqref{eq:twoterm}. However, recall that we
have introduced the damage variable $\d$, so the calculation
is more complicated and is described in the caption of
Fig.~\ref{fig:frac_en}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=drawg_energy1.eps,height=4cm}
\epsfig{file=drawg_energy2.eps,height=4cm}
\end{center}
\caption{Plot of the computation of cohesive energy. The
figure in the left considers the case $\delta<d$, where
$\delta$ is the current opening displacement and $d$ is
the damage value at an interface Gauss point. The
figure on the right considers $\delta>d$. Note that
in a continuous-time model, one would never have
$\delta>d$. In our computations, however, the update to $d$ lags
one time-step behind the computation of $\delta$. The lightly shaded area in both
figures indicates the energy that can be
recovered if the interface unloads. In the plots of the
next section, this is denoted as ``fracture energy.'' The darkly shaded
area indicates dissipated energy due
to irreversibility.
The total cohesive energy associated with the Gauss
point is therefore the sum of the two areas.}
\label{fig:frac_en}
\end{figure}
The stored energies just described must be balanced against the work
done on the models. The first source of work is from the traction
and body forces (the last two terms of \eqref{eq:twoterm}).
Since our examples do not involve either traction or
body forces, we omit a detailed discussion of these terms,
but their computation is relatively straightforward.
The work done by
moving displacement (i.e., velocity) boundary conditions
is computed as follows. The objective
function $f(\u;\s_0)$ is written down as in \eqref{eq:primbar2},
except that all functions are written in terms of $\u$
(the vector of all DOFs) instead of $\x$ (the vector
of unconstrained DOFs). Next, the gradient with respect
to $\u$ is computed at the minimizer for the
final value of $\mu$.
The gradient entries corresponding to the
constrained DOFs will in general not vanish because
the objective function is not minimized with respect
to them. In fact, the gradient entries are exactly
the reaction forces for those DOFs.
Therefore, the work due to displacement constraints during
a single time-step, that is, from one half-time-step to the next,
is evaluated as follows. One computes the inner
product of the time-average of these forces (average between
the current half-time-step and the previous) and the distance
traveled by each such DOF between the current and
previous half-time-step.
Finally, work done by contact boundary conditions is
also obtained as an inner product.
One multiplies the contribution to the force balance
from the derivative of the contact barrier term
that appears in $\nabla_\u f(\u;\s_0)$ by the distance
traveled. Time-averages are used as in the last paragraph.
Note that although the coefficient $\mu$ in front of the
barrier term may vanish, the corresponding term of the
gradient does not vanish as $\mu\rightarrow 0$ but instead
tends to a constant value; this is a well-known aspect
of interior-point theory.
\section{Computational experiments}
\label{sec:compexp}
In this section we describe three computational experiments.
Experiment 1 involves
impact of a metal striker on a compact compression specimen
(CCS). This application demonstrates the ease in which convex
constraints can be included in the computation. This problem
involves three contact surfaces detailed in the next paragraph.
The CCS is made of
PMMA of $\mbox{height}\times\mbox{width} = 51\mbox{mm}\times 46\mbox{mm}$.
Its initially undeformed configuration is depicted in
Fig.~\ref{fig:ccsorig}. It is initially in contact with two steel bars
(left and right bar), both of which are
stationary. Before contact, the striker
is moving in the positive $x$ direction at 25 m/s, and
a gap exists between the striker and left bar.
This computation simulates an experiment
by Rittel and Maigre \cite{MRC:23:475}.
The striker and the left bar,
the left bar and the specimen, and finally the specimen and
the right bar are all contact surfaces.
We model contact in each of the three surfaces
via inequalities between $x$-coordinates of matching
nodes of the two sides of the surface. Refer to Fig.~\ref{fig:ccsorig}.
In our formalism, these inequalities are presented as $E\x\ge\a$
in \eqref{eq:mainprob}. Note that prevention of
interpenetration between neighboring bulk elements is
modeled as a different set of linear inequalities in \eqref{eq:mainprob}, namely,
the inequalities $(s_1)_{e,\iota}\ge 0$.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{0.1in}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=ccsorig1.eps, height=8cm} \\
\epsfig{file=ccsorig2.eps, height=5cm}
\end{center}
\vspace{0.1in}
\caption{Initial geometry and mesh of the striker and CCS specimen
(Experiment 1).
The entire mesh is shown on top with each
part (striker, left bar, CCS, right bar) in a different
color; the initial gap between
the striker and left bar is not discernable at this
scale. A close-up of the CCS initial mesh appears on the bottom.}
\label{fig:ccsorig}
\end{figure}
No boundary conditions are applied, i.e., all boundaries are
unconstrained and traction-free.
The initial mesh of the CCS contains $1765$ nodes
and $820$ element (quadratic triangles). After duplication
of nodes to create interface elements, the number of
nodes is $6\cdot 820=4920$.
The mesh near the fracture zone
is an isoperimetric ``pinwheel'' mesh \cite{pinwheel1} transformed by
a nonlinear coordinate transformation, as depicted in
Figure~\ref{fig:ccsorig}. Isoperimetric meshes have the property
that in the limit of mesh refinement, all possible crack orientations
are represented in the mesh, so they are well suited for computations
in which determining the crack path is part of the problem.
(Other techniques have been proposed
for representing many possible orientations
in a mesh, e.g., adaptive splitting of polygonal elements
by Leon et al.\ \cite{Paulino}.)
The three metal bars (striker, left bar, and right bar)
are modeled with quadratic triangles.
No interface
elements are introduced in the three steel bars.
The final model
contains 6137 nodes and 1380 quadratic triangles.
The hyperelastic model
used in the CCS is nonlinear
plane stress,
whose material parameters are $c_1$ and $\beta$ (see \eqref{eq:knowles}).
These are obtained from the reported
$E$ and $\nu$ according to the formulas $c_1=E/(4(1+\nu))$,
$\beta=\nu/(1-2\nu)$ \cite{KnowSter1983}.
The striker is isotropic linearly elastic.
The time step is $3$ microseconds. The simulated crack path after 40
time steps (120 simulated microseconds)---refer to
Fig.~\ref{fig:ccsredlines}---is similar
to experimental results in \cite{MRC:23:475}.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{0.1in}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=ccs_redlines.eps, height=5cm}
\end{center}
\vspace{0.1in}
\caption{Damaged interfaces after 40 time steps (120 microseconds
of simulated time) in Experiment 1.}
\label{fig:ccsredlines}
\end{figure}
The test was run on a 2.6GHz Intel Xeon E5-2690 running Linux.
The algorithm was coded in the Julia \cite{Julia2017} programming
language, version 1.1.0. The core computing kernel is sparse
Cholesky factorization, which uses Julia's implementation of
SuiteSparse \cite{DavisBook}.
The code is not parallelized yet. The computation time for 40 time
steps was 2 hours.
\begin{table}[htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llrrrr}
\hline
Property & Symbol & PMMA & Steel & Concrete & Mortar \\
& & (Exper.~1) &(Exper.~1)&(Exper.~2) & (Exper.~3) \\
\hline
Young modulus & $E$ & 5.76 GPa & 200 GPa & 38 GPa & 5.98 GPa\\
Poisson ratio & $\nu$ & 0.42 & 0.3 & 0.18 & 0.22\\
Density & $\rho$ & 1180 kg/m$\mbox{}^3$ & 8050 kg/m$\mbox{}^3$ &--- & ---\\
Critical traction & $\sigma_c$ &105 MPa & --- & 3 MPa & 3 MPa\\
Mixity & $\beta^{\rm MIX}$ & 2.0 & --- & 1.5 & 1.0 \\
Critical energy \\
release rate & $G_c$ & 352 Pa$\cdot$m & --- & 69 Pa$\cdot$m & 2280 Pa$\cdot$m\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Material properties used in computational experiments.}
\label{tab:matprop}
\end{table}
We also tracked energy balance. The technique used
to measure energy balance was described in Section~\ref{sec:energy_balance}.
Because the optimization problem is solved at the
midpoint of timesteps in the implicit midpoint rule used herein, we
evaluate the energy balance at time-step midpoints.
However, not all the variables are evaluated at time-step midpoints, so interpolations
must be used. Therefore, we would not expect exact energy balance because the
different terms involve different approximation assumptions.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
{\epsfig{file=ccs_energy_balance_1.eps,height=5cm}} \\
(a) Energy balance of CCS \\
{\epsfig{file=ccs_energy_balance_2.eps,height=5cm}} \\
(b) Energy balance of left bar
\end{center}
\caption{Energy balances for the CCS (Experiment 1); ``KE'' stands for
kinetic energy, ``SE'' stands for strain energy, and
``FE'' stands for fracture energy. Refer
to Section~\ref{sec:energy_balance} for an explanation of
how the energy and work contributions were computed.
In the top figure, if energy were exactly
conserved, the blue and black curves would coincide.
In the bottom figure, the curves do coincide. The
energy balance for the left bar indicates that it
vibrates after the impact.}
\label{fig:ccs_energy}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:contactsurfdispl}
compares the horizontal displacement of the left contact
surface of the CCS from the computation versus an experimental
measurement \cite{rittelpriv}.
The comparison is imprecise because only a single
number was recorded per time step by the experiment. On the other hand, the
computation indicates that the left contact surface of the CCS bends
inward, and therefore its horizontal displacement depends on
the vertical coordinate of the measurement.
To account for this, we compare the
average computed horizontal displacement over the entire
contact surface to the
experimental measurement. Note that the time-coordinate of the
experiment was shifted by hand to match the start time of the
computation since the experimental data did not identify
the time value when the striker collides with the left bar.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=ccs_contactsurf_displ.eps, height=5cm}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of experimentally measured displacement of the
CCS left contact surface with the displacement computed by the
method (Experiment 1). The latter is averaged over the contact surface.}
\label{fig:contactsurfdispl}
\end{figure}
Experiment 2 exhibits the performance of the method
in the quasistatic (slow loading) regime. In this problem, taken
from Galvez et al.\ \cite{Galvez}, a beam of
concrete 15 cm $\times$ 67.5 cm, plane stress, with an initial
centered slit is
subjected to a moving displacement boundary condition
concentrated at an off-center point. The problem set-up is
described in more detail in Fig.~\ref{fig:galv1}.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{0.1in}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=galvezfig1.eps, height=3.8cm}
\end{center}
\vspace{0.1in}
\caption{Experiment 2: quasistatic test of concrete beam. The beam is supported
at two asymmetric points of its base and has an initial vertical slit.
The point B is loaded quasistatically. The point A is referred to
in Fig.~\ref{fig:galv_load_defl} below.}
\label{fig:galv1}
\end{figure}
A depiction of the configuration after 26 load steps is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:galv_final}. The number of elements is
$3168$ and the number of nodes (after duplication)
is $19,008$. This computation required 17 hours.
(The amount would be greatly reduced if we had inserted interface
elements only in the zone where crack propagation is known to occur i.e.,
above and to the right of the initial slit, whereas in fact our mesh
has cohesive interfaces at every interelement boundary.)
The crack path roughly matches the experiment in \cite{Galvez},
although we were not trying to accurately reproduce the path in this
experiment because we did not use a pinwheel or other special mesh.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=plotdamage_galvez_exag50.eps, height=7.0cm}
\end{center}
\caption{Final configuration of concrete beam after 25 steps.
The displacements are exaggerated by a factor of 50
for better visualization.}
\label{fig:galv_final}
\end{figure}
An energy balance was also computed for the Galvez experiment; the
results are reported in Fig.~\ref{fig:galv_energybalance}.
It is interesting to compare the energy balance in Experiment 1 versus
Experiment 2. In Experiment 1, most of
the work on the CCS becomes kinetic energy of the CCS. Part
becomes strain energy, but the strain energy is partly released as it is
transformed first to cohesive energy and then dissipated. In Experiment 2,
there is no kinetic energy (the problem is
quasistatic), so the energy of the load first builds up the strain
energy, which is then released as cohesive energy, and then soon after
the fracture energy is dissipated.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=galg_energy_plots.eps, height=7.0cm}
\end{center}
\caption{Energy balance for Experiment 2. Refer to the caption
of Fig.~\ref{fig:ccs_energy} for further information.
The last two curves are indistinguishable (coincident). Thickness has
been normalized to 5cm to correspond to the experiment.}
\label{fig:galv_energybalance}
\end{figure}
In addition, a load-displacement curve was plotted since this data
is available experimentally. The result of this computation
appears in Fig.~\ref{fig:galv_load_defl}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=galvez_load_defl.eps, height=5.0cm}
\end{center}
\caption{A plot of the load (reaction force) at point B
versus the vertical deflection of point A (experiment 2).
The green curve represents the data from our computation. The experimental
envelope from Galvez et al.\ \cite{Galvez} is represented
by gray curves. Thickness has
been normalized to 5cm to correspond to the experiment.}
\label{fig:galv_load_defl}
\end{figure}
Experiment 3 is
also a quasistatic experiment involving a concrete mortar plate with three
holes and a notch illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:threeholediagram}.
Pins that fit into the top and bottom holes
pull the holes vertically apart at a rate
$0.1$ mm/s. This is modeled as velocity boundary conditions constraining
both $x$- and $y$-coordinates of all points on the boundaries of these two holes.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=threeholediagram.eps, height=7.0cm}
\end{center}
\caption{Experiment 3 involves
a 65mm$\times$120mm concrete plate with three holes and a 10mm-long
horizontal notch on the left edge. The plate is loaded quasistatically
by pins that pull the top and bottom holes vertically apart.}
\label{fig:threeholediagram}
\end{figure}
Ambati et al.\ \cite{Ambati2015}
present a computational result using their phase-field method
to determine the load-displacement relationship (displacement of the top
pin versus force on the top pin). Their result shows two peaks in
the load, the first at slightly more than 0.5 mm and the second at
slightly less than 2 mm.
Our load-displacement plot is presented in Fig.~\ref{fig:threehole_load_disp}.
This computation required six hours per parameter choice. The load was applied at an incremental
rate of 0.1 mm per step.
We were
unable to reproduce the second peak with the material parameters shown in
Table~\ref{tab:matprop}. We hypothesize the following
phenomenological explanation for the second peak.
After the crack propagates to the large central hole, the body
behaves elastically (i.e., the remaining reverse C-shaped piece
flexes elastically) until a second crack starts on the right of the big hole.
Our computational experiment, however, shows that the second crack on the
right of the big hole is mostly formed by time the first crack reaches
the big hole, so no elastic behavior is observed after the first crack
reaches the big hole.
The phenomenological explanation in the previous paragraph suggests that
our method could obtain the second peak if we increase $\sigma_c$,
thus delaying the nucleation of the second crack. We tested this
hypothesis by raising $\sigma_c$ by a factor of 20
(to $6.0\cdot 10^7$ Pa) and by a factor of 40 (to $1.2\cdot 10^8$ Pa). Note
that these numbers are significantly higher than the usual reported
critical stress for concrete mortar. With these modified values
of $\sigma_c$ we indeed observed a second peak as in Fig.~\ref{fig:threehole_load_disp},
but even at
$\sigma_c=1.2\cdot 10^8$ the displacement at the position
of the second peak falls well short of 2mm.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=three_load_defl.eps, height=5.0cm} \\
(a) \\
\epsfig{file=threehsc_load_defl.eps, height=5.0cm} \\
(b) \\
\epsfig{file=threevhsc_load_defl.eps, height=5.0cm} \\
(c) \\
\end{center}
\caption{Load-displacement curve for Experiment 3 with three
different values of the material parameter $\sigma_c$.
Higher values of $\sigma_c$ are able to reproduce
the double peaks reported in Ambati et al. \cite{Ambati2015}.}
\label{fig:threehole_load_disp}
\end{figure}
The phase-field method used in the Ambati computation does not have
$\sigma_c$ as a material parameter.
The discussion in the previous paragraph raises the question of what value of
$\sigma_c$ corresponds to the Ambati
computation.
Some authors (see, e.g., eq. (27) of Borden et al.~\cite{borden2012}) have proposed
that the length-regularization parameter in phase-field models is linked to $\sigma_c$.
Experiment 3 may provide an
example for future investigation of the connection between length-regularization
in such phase-field methods and $\sigma_c$ in cohesive models. A phase-field
regularized cohesive model that involves $\sigma_c$ as a material parameter and
frees previous implementations of phase-field method from the above limitation
has been recently proposed in Geelen et al.~\cite{Dolbow2}.
The crack-paths for all three values of $\sigma_c$ are shown Fig.~\ref{fig:threehole_crackpath} as well as the laboratory experimental path.
The first part of the crack path is sensitive to $\sigma_c$ but the second
part is not.
\begin{figure}
$$
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfig{file=three_crackpath_arxiv.eps, height=3.5cm} &
\epsfig{file=threehsc_crackpath_arxiv.eps, height=3.5cm} &
\epsfig{file=threevhsc_crackpath_arxiv.eps, height=3.5cm}
\\
\mbox{(a)} & \mbox{(b)} & \mbox{(c)}
\end{array}
$$
\caption{Crack-path in Experiment 3 for three different values of
$\sigma_c$.}
\label{fig:threehole_crackpath}
\end{figure}
A fourth computational experiment not reported here
was a branching dynamic crack model
used frequently in the literature (see, e.g., Borden et al.\ \cite{borden2012})
in which a rectangular specimen with a horizontal
notch is subject to vertical traction loading. This traction load causes a horizontal
crack to propagate from the notch.
After a small distance
of horizontal propagation, the crack
branches, yielding a crack with a tilted ``Y'' shape.
We found that our method produced
a branch with the correct
shape, but the straight part of the crack was too long compared to other computations
in the literature. We subsequently
observed that the branch started at the correct position
when the method was re-run with a very small time step,
requiring a simulation that ran for nearly
a week.
This is a limitation not of our method specifically but rather of all methods based
on implicit time-step rules. In problems in which the time step must be small
enough to capture highly dynamic and unstable behavior, implicit
time-stepping is generally not recommended. Refer to the recent
paper \cite{HirmandPapouliaBlockCD} by the second and third authors
for an explicit time-stepping method that uses energy principles similar
to those herein.
\section{Summary and conclusions}
\label{sec:conc}
An interior-point method for initially rigid cohesive fracture
is proposed. A key technical step to make this method possible
is the replacement of an equation relating the effective opening
displacement to the coordinate entries of the opening displacement
by an inequality constraint.
The specific optimization models introduced herein are as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item
Model \eqref{eq:optmodeldisc} is the fundamental optimization
problem that introduces all the
energy terms into the objective and the constraints relating
the bulk-node displacements $\x$ to opening displacements $\s_0$.
\item
Model \eqref{eq:mainprob} is identical to
\eqref{eq:optmodeldisc} except for replacing an equality
constraint with an inequality constraint that yields
a mathematically equivalent optimization problem (i.e., same optimizers).
This replacement makes the model amenable to an interior-point method.
\item
Model \eqref{eq:primbar} replaces the conic inequality constraints
in \eqref{eq:mainprob} with self-concordant barrier functions in
the objective
as is the usual practice in the development of an interior-point
method. As the barrier parameter $\mu>0$ tends to 0, a solution
to \eqref{eq:mainprob} is recovered from the solution to \eqref{eq:primbar}.
\item
Model \eqref{eq:primbar2} is mathematically equivalent to
\eqref{eq:primbar}; the modification is that substitution has
been used to eliminate the equality constraints. The main
work of the code is the solution of \eqref{eq:primbar2}.
\item
Model \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0} is the artificial problem
solved in Phase I to obtain an initial feasible solution to
\eqref{eq:primbar2}. This model introduces the artificial
variable $t$.
\item
Model \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI} further develops
\eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0} to obtain an initial feasible
solution in which all elements are non-inverted even in the
presence of moving displacement boundary conditions. This
is accomplished by changing variables from $\x$ (unconstrained
boundary DOFs) to $\u$ (all boundary DOFs). The boundary
conditions are represented by equality constraints on $\u$, but
\eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI} enforces these equality constraints
as inequalities involving the artificial variable $t$ to
ensure that a feasible starting point exists for a known
solution $\u$ with no inverted elements.
\end{itemize}
A summary of the computational procedures presented is as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item
The top-level procedure appears in Fig.~\ref{fig:toplevel}. Its loop
is over time-steps or load steps. It also maintains and updates
the damage variables. In addition, on every third
step it recomputes the matrices used in regularizing the
trust-region method.
\item
The two main loops of the interior-point method
appear in Fig.~\ref{fig:solvermainprob}. The first loop
is Phase I in which \eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0} is solved
in order to obtain a feasible starting point for
\eqref{eq:primbar2}. The second loop is Phase II
in which \eqref{eq:primbar2} is solved for a decreasing
sequence of $\mu$'s.
\item
The solver for a specific instance of either
\eqref{eq:primbar2phaseI0} or \eqref{eq:primbar2}
(i.e., for one particular value of $M$ or $\mu$)
is a trust-region method, which is
detailed in Fig.~\ref{fig:primalonly} and
Fig.~\ref{fig:primalonly_sub}. The trust-region
method is necessary due to the nonconvexity of the
energy functional; it replaces the Newton loop that would
be present in a conventional convex interior
point method.
\end{itemize}
Computational tests show that
the method is practical for quasistatic and moderately fast
dynamic problems and can easily encompass additional
conic inequality constraints.
\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors thank M.~Ambati for helpful discussion regarding Experiment 3.
The authors thank the referees for their careful reading and valuable
suggestions for revising the paper.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec1}
The hydrogen-dominant class of supernovae (SNe) designated as SNe~II, are the fate of the majority of massive stars ($\gtrsim$~8~M$_\odot$) which ensue from the gravitational collapse of the iron core in the red supergiant (RSG) stage \citep{2009MNRAS.395.1409S, 2015PASA...32...16S}. SNe II are characterized by the presence of Balmer lines in their early spectra \citep{1941PASP...53..224M}, and those with abundant hydrogen either exhibit a plateau (P) or a linearly declining phase (L) in their light curve which lasts for about 100 days, before plummeting into the radioactive tail phase \citep{1979A&A....72..287B}. Three other subtypes exist: Type IIn, IIb and the 1987A-like, but hereafter we will mainly discuss SNe IIP and IIL conjointly as SNe~II. Direct evidence for RSG as progenitor of SNe~II are proclaimed from fortuitous detection of the progenitor in pre-explosion images, which corroborated with the theoretical predictions of \cite{1971Ap&SS..10...28G, 1976ApJ...207..872C, 1977ApJS...33..515F}. The initial mass range, however, is constrained between 7-18~M$_\odot$ from the pre-explosion images, that raised the \textquoteleft RSG problem\textquoteright{} \citep{2009MNRAS.395.1409S, 2015PASA...32...16S}, as RSGs more massive than 18~M$_\odot$ are known to exist observationally. This is further substantiated by the higher progenitor mass yields from hydrodynamical modelling of the SN observables (e.g. \citealt{2017MNRAS.464.3013P,2018MNRAS.479.2421D} and references therein). But ejecta masses of SNe~II estimated from hydrodynamical modelling of light curve may not be robust and unique, as indicated in recent simulation of SNe~II explosions by \cite{2019A&A...625A...9D}.
The remarkable feature of the SNe II population is the continuity in diversity. Despite the prominent dispersion in the observed properties of SNe~II, which is apparent from the range of peak magnitudes ($-$14 $\gtrsim$ M$_B$ $\gtrsim$ $-$18; \citealt{1994A&A...282..731P}), plateau luminosities ($-$15 \textgreater~M$_V$ \textgreater~$-$18; \citealt{2003ApJ...582..905H}) and ejecta velocities (1500 \textless~v$_{ph}^{50}$ \textless~9600 km s$^{-1}$; \citealt{2017ApJ...850...89G}), a continuum in the properties has been noted \citep{2014ApJ...786...67A,2015ApJ...799..208S}. The progenitor and explosion properties, such as the radius of the progenitor, the mass of hydrogen envelope and the synthesized $^{56}$Ni mass, most likely gives rise to the continuity. External factors, such as the presence of a dense circumstellar (CS) shell in proximity to the progenitor star at the time of explosion could also be responsible for the observed continuum in the properties of SNe II \citep{2017ApJ...838...28M}.
The spectra of SNe II exhibits broad P~Cygni lines, which seems to disfavour the possibility of a major contribution of circumstellar interaction (CSI) of ejecta in powering these explosions, unlike SNe IIn, which are characterised by narrow emission lines of hydrogen. However, the interaction in SNe~II can be hidden below the photosphere, and not be seen in narrow lines (e.g. iPTF14hls, \citealt{2018MNRAS.477...74A}), and still contribute to the luminosity. A contribution of interaction to the luminosity, with spectra bereft of narrow lines, is also possible for certain shallow wind density profiles \citep{2012ApJ...747..118M}. The spectra of low-luminosity ($-$14~\textgreater~M$_V^{max}~$\textgreater~$-$15.5) class of SNe II (e.g. SN~2005cs) exhibit weak absorption features superimposed on a dominant blue continuum lasting up to $\lesssim$ 30~d post explosion \citep{2014MNRAS.439.2873S}, owing to the underenergetic nature of the explosion. However, normal luminosity SNe showing weak absorption component (e.g. LSQ13fn, \citealt{2016A&A...588A...1P}) are most likely the terminal explosion of a sub-solar metallicity progenitor \citep{2013MNRAS.433.1745D}.
Despite the surge in the number of studies undertaken for individual as well as samples of SNe II, a number of issues remain inconclusive, such as the source of the observed diversity in their photometric and spectroscopic properties. Dust formation at late times and CSM forged in the latest stages of the evolution can considerably tweak the observed properties of the explosion. To enrich our understanding of the inhomogeneous class of SNe II, detailed studies of these events particularly the deviant objects are important.
In this paper, we present the photometric and spectroscopic analysis of a Type II SN, SN~2015an, discovered by Berto Monard (Bronberg Observatory) in the galaxy IC~2367 on 2015 September 13.15~UT (JD 2457278.65) at an unfiltered magnitude of 15.2~mag. The classification spectrum was procured by the Las Cumbres Observatory (LCO) Supernova Key Project on 2015 September~26.7~UT \citep{2015ATel.8102....1H}, nearly two weeks from discovery, with the robotic FLOYDS instrument mounted on the Faulkes Telescope South (FTS). The spectrum exhibited a striking blue continuum and a significantly low H$\alpha$ expansion velocity ($\sim$ 5000~km~s$^{-1}$). The predominance of blue continuum in spectra up to two weeks past discovery is generally observed in low-luminosity SNe, however, the expansion velocity of H$\alpha$ and the luminosity of SN~2015an are comparatively higher than the low-luminosity events (see Figs.~\ref{abs_lc} \& \ref{fig:vel_comp}). This led to its classification as a peculiar SN II. The details of SN~2015an and its host galaxy IC~2367 are given in Table~\ref{tab:sn15an_IC2367_detail}.
\input{Table_SN2015an_details}
The Virgo infall distance to the galaxy IC~2367 is 30.7~$\pm$~0.7~Mpc, where we have used the recessional velocity of the galaxy v$_{Vir}$~=~2259~$\pm$~3~km~s$^{-1}$ from HyperLeda \citep{2014AA...570A..13M} and Hubble constant H$_0$~=~73.48~$\pm$~1.66~km~s$^{-1}$~Mpc$^{-1}$ \citep{2018ApJ...855..136R}. We used the expanding photosphere method (EPM) to estimate the distance to SN~2015an (details in Sect. \ref{dist}), which yielded 29.8~$\pm$~1.5~Mpc. The weighted mean of the two estimations is 30.5$\pm$0.6~Mpc, which we have adopted as distance to SN~2015an in this paper. EPM also estimates the explosion epoch to be 2457268.5 $\pm$ 1.6 d (2015~September~03~UT) which we will refer to as 0~d.
The Galactic reddening E(B$-$V)$_{MW}$ in the line of sight of IC~2367 is 0.0875 $\pm$ 0.0012 mag, obtained from the extinction dust maps of \cite{2011ApJ...737..103S}. In our best resolution optical spectra, we do not detect the absorption features due to interstellar Na~{\sc i}~D lines from the Galaxy. From a set of best SNR spectra, we constructed a composite spectrum following the prescription in \cite{2015A&A...582A...3G} to determine the limiting equivalent width (EW) of Na~{\sc i}~D absorption feature at the redshift of the host galaxy. Gaussian profile of varying EWs were fitted to the Na~{\sc i}~D absorption line in the stacked spectrum and plausibly a weak Na~{\sc i}~D line with EW of 0.2~\AA{} could be discerned. This corresponds to a host galaxy reddening of \textless 0.02 mag (using eqn (9) of \citealt{2012MNRAS.426.1465P}). The weak Na~{\sc i}~D feature indicates negligible reddening contribution from the host, which is in agreement with the remote location of the SN from the main body of its host galaxy. Consequently, we infer that the total reddening is arising only from the Galactic component, that is E(B $-$ V)$_{tot}$ = 0.0875 $\pm$ 0.0012 mag and is used in the rest of our analysis.
The paper is structured as follows. Sect.~\ref{sec2} gives details of the data and reduction procedure. We investigate the photometric and spectroscopic properties of SN~2015an in Sect.~\ref{sec4} and Sect.~\ref{sec5}, respectively. The distance derived using the expanding photosphere method is elaborated in Sect.~\ref{dist}. The modelling of the bolometric light curve using semi-analytic methods is discussed in Sect.~\ref{sec7}. Finally, we examine the overall properties of SN~2015an in Sect.~\ref{sec8} and present a short summary of the paper in Sect.~\ref{sec9}.
\section{SN 2015an: Photometry and Spectroscopy}
\label{sec2}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4,clip, trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}]{test_15an_SN.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{SN 2015an in IC 2367, star ID for local standards have been marked.}
\label{fig:local}
\end{figure}
\input{Table_instruments}
\input{Table_local_stds}
The photometric campaign of SN~2015an was triggered on the day of its discovery using instruments equipped with broadband $BVRI$ and $g^\prime$$r^\prime$$i^\prime$$z^\prime$ filters as listed in Table \ref{tab:details_instrument_detectors}. The photometric observations continued up to 261~d from explosion. The pre-processing of the images including bias and flat-field corrections were carried out in IRAF\footnote{IRAF stands for Image Reduction and Analysis Facility distributed by the National Optical Astronomy Observatories which is operated by the Association of Universities for research in Astronomy, Inc., under cooperative agreement with the National Science Foundation.} environment and cosmic rays were cleaned using the {\sc l.a.cosmic} routine \citep{2001PASP..113.1420V}. Owing to the remoteness of SN 2015an from its host galaxy nucleus (at a deprojected radial distance of 13.9~kpc), we performed the point spread function photometry using {\sc daophot~ii} \citep{1987PASP...99..191S} to derive the instrumental magnitudes. The LCO photometry was carried using \texttt{lcogtsnpipe} designed by Stefano Valenti (see details in \citealt{2016MNRAS.459.3939V}). The instrumental magnitudes were calibrated using the standard magnitudes of 12 local standard stars in the SN field obtained from the AAVSO Photometric All-Sky Survey (APASS\footnote{https://www.aavso.org/apass}) catalog. The local standards are marked in Fig. \ref{fig:local} and their magnitudes are listed in Table \ref{tab:local}. The calibrated SN magnitudes, thus obtained, are listed in Table~\ref{photometry}.
\input{Table_UBVRI}
The spectroscopic observations of SN~2015an commenced with the acquisition of the classification spectrum, followed by 18 epochs of observations (observation log in Table~\ref{tab:spectra_log}) up to 158~d from explosion with the LCO telescopes. The FLOYDS spectrograph at the Faulkes Telescope North and South (FTN and FTS) gives a wavelength coverage of 3200-9000~\AA{} with a resolution ranging from 400-700.
The 1D wavelength and flux calibrated spectra extraction were carried out using the \texttt{floydsspec} pipeline\footnote{https://www.authorea.com/users/598/articles/6566}. The calibrated spectra were scaled with a factor derived by matching the photometric and spectroscopic continuum flux, thereby correcting for the slit losses. Finally the spectra were corrected for the heliocentric redshift of the host galaxy.
\input{Table_spectra_log}
\section{Light Curve Analysis}
\label{sec4}
The early light curve (LC) of SN~2015an rises to a peak in the $r^\prime$ and $i^\prime$ bands, while the bluer bands are in the early cooling phase as shown in the top panel of Fig~\ref{fig:lc}. The peak of the redder bands are estimated following the procedure in \cite{2015MNRAS.451.2212G}, where the peak is estimated by fitting a phenomenological function introduced by \cite{Bazin09} to the LC (see eqn. 1 of the paper). The best fit of the functional form is shown in the inset of the top panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:lc}. The rise to maximum from explosion in the $r^\prime$ and $i^\prime$ bands are 16.6 $\pm$ 3.7~d and 25.2 $\pm$ 5.1~d respectively. The multi-band LC changes slope around 55~d since explosion, when the $Vr'i'$ LCs transits to the plateau phase, while $Bg'$ LCs are in a relatively steeper declining phase. The plateau lasts for around 120~d, followed by a sharp fall in brightness after which the SN enters the exponentially declining phase powered by the emission from the decay of $^{56}$Co $\rightarrow$ $^{56}$Fe.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.36, clip, trim={1.8cm 1.8cm 0.65cm 3.9cm}]{SN2015an_LC.pdf}
\caption{$Top~Panel:$ $Bg'Vr'i'$ light curves of SN 2015an offset by a constant value in magnitude in different bands. In the inset plot, the fits to estimate the rise time in the $r'i'$ bands are shown. $Bottom~Panel:$ The fits to the overall decline rate post-maximum up to the fall-off from plateau ($s_{50V}$), early cooling phase ($s_1$), the recombination phase ($s_2$), the radioactive tail phase ($s_{tail}$) and the best-fit to the $V$-band light curve using the function from \citet{2016MNRAS.459.3939V} are shown.}
\label{fig:lc}
\end{figure}
\input{Table_slopes}
We performed a linear fit to the $V$-band light curve to estimate the initial steeper decline ($s_1$ = 0.78$\pm$0.02~mag/50~d) and the second shallower decline ($s_2$ = 0.62$\pm$0.02~mag/50~d) before the light curve falls off from the plateau. An overall decline rate, $s_{50V}$ including both these regions (15 to 120~d) is also fitted. We used eqn 1 of \cite{2016MNRAS.459.3939V} to derive other LC parameters such as the drop in magnitude from the plateau to the tail phase ($a_0$), the duration of the transition phase (typically 6 $\times$ $w_0$), the time from explosion to the transition point from the plateau to the tail phase ($t_{PT}$) and the slope of the radioactive tail phase ($p_0$). The best fit parameters are summarized in Table \ref{tab:slopes} and the best fits are shown in the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:lc}.
\cite{2014ApJ...786...67A} found the average decline rates for a SNe II sample to be $s_1$=1.32$\pm$0.75 and $s_2$ = 0.64$\pm$0.47 mag/50~d. The decline rates ($s_1$ \& $s_2$) of SN~2015an suggests that this event is consistent with slowly declining SN~II \citep{2014ApJ...786...67A}, while the \cite{2014MNRAS.445..554F} criterion of classifying events with $s_{50V}$\textgreater 0.5 as IIL, places SN~2015an ($s_{50V}$ = 0.74 mag/50~d) under the linearly declining SNe~II. The magnitude drop ($a_0$) of SN~2015an, 2.30$\pm$0.05~mag, lies in the range of 1-2.6~mag as suggested for SNe~II in \cite{2016MNRAS.459.3939V}.
\input{Table_IIP_sample}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5, width=0.5\textwidth, clip, trim={0.4cm 0.6cm 1.2cm 2.1cm}]{abs_magV_n.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of absolute $V$-band light curves of SN~2015an with other Type II SNe. The magnitudes are corrected for distance and reddening as listed in Table \ref{parameter_SNIIP_sample}. The radioactive decay line assuming full trapping of photons is shown with a dashed line. The dash-dotted lines depicts the range of slopes of Type IIP and IIL SNe as presented in \citet{2014MNRAS.445..554F}. The grey lines are the low-order legendre fits to the light curve of low-luminosity SNe (M$_V$ \textgreater{} $-$15.5~mag) from \citet{2014ApJ...786...67A}}
\label{abs_lc}
\end{figure}
In order to discern the position of SN~2015an in the SNe~II diversity, a sample of events is assembled, to be used as reference and listed in Table \ref{parameter_SNIIP_sample}. The reference sample is composed of -- SN~1987A: the II-pec SN, SN~2005cs representing the low-luminosity events, SN~2009N: a member of the intermediate luminosity events, SN~2009bw: a luminous and long plateau SN IIP, SN~2013by: a prototypical IIL, SN~2013ej: a fast declining IIP/L, LSQ13fn: a SN IIP exhibiting several peculiar characteristics and SN~2017eaw: a prototypical IIP. We have compared the absolute magnitude of SN~2015an with that of the reference sample and low-luminosity SNe (M$_V$ \textgreater{} $-$15.5~mag) from \cite{2014ApJ...786...67A} in Fig.~\ref{abs_lc}, and we see that SN~2015an stands among the brighter SNe II, with an absolute magnitude at 50~d, M$_V^{50}$ = $-$16.83$\pm$0.04~mag, similar to SN~2017eaw. In Fig.~\ref{abs_lc}, the range of slopes possible for the sub-types IIP and IIL from the study of \cite{2014MNRAS.445..554F} is shown with dash-dotted lines and it is clear that the LC of SN~2015an conforms to the IIL class.
The ($B-V$)$_0$ colour evolution of SN~2015an is shown in Fig.~\ref{color_lc}, along with the sample of 57 SNe II from \cite{2018MNRAS.476.4592D}. The blue stars are the members of the sub-sample composed of events which are located far away from the host galaxy nuclei and exhibit inconspicuous Na~{\sc i}~D absorption. For a comparison, we also plot the colours of LSQ13fn, which are at the bluer end. Clearly, SN~2015an falls on the bluer edge of the sample, displaying an evolution typical of SNe II. The $(B-V)_0$ colour becomes redder rapidly at early times when the temperature drops quickly following a power law in time, until the commencement of the recombination phase at around 55~d. Since the temperature variation is not much apparent in the plateau phase, colour changes slowly in this phase.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5, width=0.45\textwidth, clip, trim={0.4cm 0.4cm 0.45cm 0.35cm}]{color_BV.pdf}
\caption{The (B-V)$_0$ colour evolution of SN~2015an compared with a sample of SNe II from \citet{2018MNRAS.476.4592D} (shown in grey) and a subset of this sample with negligible host extinction (shown with blue stars). The colour evolution of SN~LSQ13fn is also shown, which falls at the bluer end. All the (B-V) colours are corrected only for Galactic reddening.}
\label{color_lc}
\end{figure}
The $^{56}$Ni mass is estimated from the tail bolometric luminosity following \cite{2003ApJ...582..905H} using the tail $V$-band magnitudes. The tail luminosity ($L_t$) obtained from the V-band magnitudes using the bolometric correction factor given in \cite{2003ApJ...582..905H} at 5 epochs -- 158.2, 160.7, 161.7, 162.7 and 164.2~d are 6.11$\pm$0.49~$\times$~10$^{40}$, 6.82$\pm$0.55 $\times$ 10$^{40}$, 6.70$\pm$0.54 $\times$ 10$^{40}$, 5.69$\pm$0.46 $\times$ 10$^{40}$ and 5.75$\pm$0.46 $\times$ 10$^{40}$~erg~s$^{-1}$ respectively, which corresponds to a mean $^{56}$Ni mass of 0.021 $\pm$ 0.010~M$_\odot$. The $^{56}$Ni mass of SNe~2013ej and 2017eaw with similar plateau magnitudes (M$_V^{50}$=$-$16.61 and $-$16.85~mag, respectively) as SN~2015an are 0.018 and 0.045~M$_\odot$, respectively. Thus SN~2015an is more similar to the linearly declining SN~2013ej than the slowly declining SN~2017eaw. The $^{56}$Ni yield of SN~2009N (0.020~M$_\odot$) is the same as SN~2015an, however, the former is an intermediate luminosity SN, with a much lower plateau magnitude ($-$15.59~mag).
\section{Spectral Analysis}
\label{sec5}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.2,width=0.7\textwidth, clip, trim={8cm 5cm 10cm 9cm}]{scaled_spectra2015an.pdf}
\caption{The spectral evolution of SN~2015an from 23.8~d to 158.4~d is shown. The spectra are corrected for redshift and Galactic extinction. The conspicuous blue continuum in the early spectra are fitted with a blackbody model to estimate the temperature during these phases. The absorption dips bluewards of the H$\alpha$ profile are marked as \textquoteleft A' and \textquoteleft B'.}
\label{scaled_spectra}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5, width=0.52\textwidth,clip, trim={1.8cm 0.4cm 1.0cm 1.3cm}]{model_Ha_Hb.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Evolution of H$\alpha$, H$\beta$ emission line profiles during the photospheric phase. The {\sc syn++} model fits to the spectra are shown with grey solid lines. The Si~{\sc ii} (\textquoteleft B\textquoteright{}) and high velocity (HV) features (\textquoteleft A\textquoteright{}) are conspicuous up to the 50 d spectrum and are shown with dashed lines.}
\label{fig:vel_space}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.60,clip, trim={0.8cm 0.0cm 1.2cm 1.4cm}]{velocity_lines.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Line velocity evolution of H$\alpha$ , H$\beta$ , He {\sc i}, Fe {\sc ii}, Sc {\sc ii}, Ca {\sc ii} NIR, Na {\sc i} D and Si {\sc ii} lines. The velocities are estimated from the absorption minima of these profiles.}
\label{fig:vel_lines}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{scaled_spectra} shows the spectral evolution of SN 2015an from 23.8 to 158.4~d after explosion. The blue continuum in SN~2015an persists longer, up to 42.6~d, than other normal SNe~II. Line identifications were made following \citet{2002PASP..114...35L}. The continuum is fitted with a blackbody function to determine the temperature (shown with solid lines for the first 7 epochs). The temperature is around 8800~K at 28.8~d and then gradually drops to 5600~K at 68.6~d and remains nearly constant afterwards. Prominent H$\alpha$ and weak He~{\sc i}~$\lambda$5876 feature can be discerned in the earliest spectrum. While H$\alpha$ grows with time, the He {\sc i} feature disappears after the 28.8~d spectrum. The Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda\lambda\lambda$4094, 5018, 5169 and Ca {\sc ii} H\&K emerge in the 28.8~d spectrum, weak features of Sc~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$6245 and Ca~{\sc ii}~NIR triplet becomes detectable from the 42.6 d spectrum, the Na~{\sc i~d} and Ba~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$6142 features becomes conspicuous from the 60.6 d spectrum and the O {\sc i} $\lambda$7774 lines becomes visible from the 68.6~d spectrum. Fe~{\sc ii} and Sc~{\sc ii} remains visible up to 130.6~d, however the Ba~{\sc ii} and O~{\sc i} lines becomes undetectable after the 105.6~d spectrum. Most of these metal lines disappears in the last two spectra (150.6 and 158.4~d), except Na~{\sc i~d} and Ca~{\sc ii}~NIR triplet.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=1.00, width=0.5\textwidth,clip, trim={0.0cm 0.0cm 0.0cm 0.0cm}]{velocity_compare_guitierrez.pdf}
\caption{A comparison of the velocity of SN~2015an to SNe~2005cs, LSQ13fn and the mean velocity (grey) of 122 IIP/IIL SNe \citep{2017ApJ...850...90G} for H$\alpha$ (top panel), H$\beta$ (middle panel) and Fe II ($\lambda$5169; bottom panel). The light grey regions represent the standard deviations of the mean velocities of the sample.}
\label{fig:vel_comp}
\end{figure}
The evolution of H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ lines from 23.8 to 60.6~d is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:vel_space} in the velocity domain and centered at the rest wavelengths of these lines along with the {\sc syn++} \citep{2011PASP..123..237T} fits. The emission peak of H$\alpha$ is shifted by $\sim$ 1100~km~s$^{-1}$ in these phases. Two absortion dips on the blue side of the H$\alpha$ absorption component is visible from the 23.8~d spectrum until 42.6~d and hardly detectable in the 60.6~d spectrum. Such features have been reported at both early and late photospheric epoch in a number of SNe II, and has been termed \textquoteleft cachito\textquoteright{} \citep{2017ApJ...850...89G}. In case of a non-evolving feature, the dip is interpreted to be high velocity (HV) component of H$\alpha$, which usually appears in the late photospheric phases and an evolving component is thought to be originating from Si~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$6355, which typically appears in the early phases. However, rarely these two features have been observed at coeval epochs. For SN~2015an, the feature \textquoteleft A\textquoteright{} does not evolve with time, while the feature \textquoteleft B\textquoteright{} shows an evolving velocity similar to the metal lines (see Fig. \ref{fig:vel_lines}), and hence we identify the feature \textquoteleft A\textquoteright{} as the HV component of H$\alpha$ and the feature \textquoteleft B\textquoteright{} as Si {\sc ii} $\lambda$6355. This is further confirmed by the {\sc syn++} models fitted to the 23.8 to 60.6~d spectra, where we used a constant HV component ($\sim$8500~km~s$^{-1}$) in addition to the evolving normal velocity component, to reproduce the H$\alpha$ absorption component. While the HV feature is apparent in H$\alpha$, it is inconspicuous in H$\beta$, which is possibly due to the low opacity of H$\beta$ in the circumstellar wind \citep{2007ApJ...662.1136C}, producing rather a broadened absorption feature of H$\beta$.
The velocity evolution of the discernible ions as measured from the shift in the absorption minima from the rest wavelength of these lines are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:vel_lines}, along with the feature identified as Si {\sc ii} $\lambda$6355. The He {\sc i} line detected in the two earliest spectra has the highest expansion velocity ($\sim$ 6890 and 6250~km~s$^{-1}$ at 23.8 and 28.8~d, respectively) among the ions. The H$\alpha$ and H$\beta$ velocities are nearly similar up to 40~d, and higher than the velocities of the metal lines, suggesting its formation in the outer higher velocity layer of the ejecta. The remarkable characteristic of SN~2015an is, however, the low expansion velocity of H~{\sc i} (5250$\pm$260~km~s$^{-1}$ at 50~d) as compared to SNe~II family (median H$\alpha$ velocity at 50~d post-explosion: 7300~km~s$^{-1}$, \citealt{2017ApJ...850...89G}) with a nearly flat evolution.
\subsection{Comparison with other SNe II}
\subsubsection{Velocity and temperature evolution}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5, clip, trim={0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm}]{temp.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the temperature evolution of SN~2015an estimated by fitting a blackbody to the photometric and spectroscopic fluxes with a collection of SNe II from \citet{2018MNRAS.473..513F}.}
\label{temp_comp}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1.0, width=1.0\textwidth,clip, trim={3.2cm 0.3cm 3.5cm 2.1cm}]{Gut_comp.pdf}
\caption{The pEW of the prominent features in the 50~d spectra of SN~2015an are plotted against the H$\alpha$ velocity estimated from the shift in the absorption minima at 50~d (marked with $\bigstar$) and compared with the sample of \citet{2017ApJ...850...90G}. The low-luminosity SNe ($-14$ \textgreater{} M$_V^{max}$ \textgreater $-$15.5) are shown in red. SNe~2002gd, 2008bm, 2008br, 2009aj and 2009au, with small pEW of H$\alpha$ and low H$\alpha$ expansion velocity, similar to SN~2015an are marked with \textquoteleft$\times$\textquoteright.}
\label{fig:pEW_vel}
\end{figure*}
Fig.~\ref{fig:vel_comp} shows the H$\alpha$, H$\beta$ and Fe {\sc ii} 5169 velocity evolution of SNe~2005cs, LSQ13fn and 2015an overplotted on the estimated mean velocities of the 122 IIP/L SNe from \cite{2017ApJ...850...90G}. The H$\alpha$ velocity of SN~2015an lies in the lower edge of the velocity range of SNe~II, with significantly low velocity ($\sim$5500~km~s$^{-1}$) at early phases as compared to the median velocity of the sample ($\sim$7900~km~s$^{-1}$). The H$\alpha$ velocity of LSQ13fn falls outside the range of velocities of SNe II in the sample, but is still higher than the low-luminosity SN~2005cs by $\sim$800~km~s$^{-1}$ and $\sim$1700~km~s$^{-1}$ at early (\textless 30~d) and late phases (\textgreater 40~d), respectively. The H~{\sc i} line velocities of SN~2015an does not vary much and shows a nearly flat evolution. Nevertheless, the H$\beta$ and Fe~{\sc ii} velocity evolution of SN~2015an matches with the mean velocity evolution of the sample, except in the early phase (\textless 30~d), where the velocity of H$\beta$ falls on the lower limit of the mean velocity.
The temperature evolution of SN~2015an, obtained by performing blackbody fit to the SED constructed from photometric and spectroscopic fluxes, is shown in Fig.~\ref{temp_comp}. The grey points depicts the evolution of temperature of a collection of 29 SNe II from \cite{2018MNRAS.473..513F}. Initially the temperature of SN~2015an (14600~K at 12.8~d) is higher than other SNe II at similar phases. The temperature of the sample at $\sim$13~d varies in the range of 6580 to 10840~K with a median temperature of $\sim$9000~K. Later than 40~d, when the SN enters the recombination phase, the temperature of SN~2015an is $\sim$7400~K still around 1000~K higher than the median temperature ($\sim$6500~K) of the sample. The blue (B-V) colour and the excess blue flux in the early spectra corroborates with the high temperature of SN~2015an in the early phase.
\subsubsection{Comparison of plateau spectra}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8,clip, trim={3.5cm 1.5cm 13cm 3cm}]{spectra_comp_50d.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of mid-plateau spectrum (42.6 d) of SN 2015an with other SNe from the reference sample.}
\label{fig:spec_comp}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4,clip, trim={1.5cm 2.0cm 0cm 3.5cm}]{spectra_comp_50d_model.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{{\it Top Panel:} Comparison of a mid-plateau spectrum (42.6 d) of SN~2015an with the 0.4~Z$_\odot$ model spectrum of \citet{2013MNRAS.433.1745D}. {\it Bottom Panel:} The evolution of the pEW of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018 of SN~2015an is shown with dashed lines. The black line is the mean pEW of a sample of 119 SNe~II from \citet{2016A&A...589A.110A} and the shaded region shows the standard deviation about the mean. The time evolution of the pEWs of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018 of the four distinct metallicity models of \citet{2013MNRAS.433.1745D} is shown with thick lines.}
\label{fig:spec_comp_mod}
\end{figure}
SN~2015an displays some peculiar characteristics, in addition to the usual properties of SNe~II, thereby necessitating the cognizance of the status of SN~2015an in the SNe~II population before heading for the comparison with a sample of events. To this aim, we plotted the pseudo-equivalent widths (pEW) of the prominent lines vs H$\alpha$ velocity at 50~d of SN~2015an along with a sample of 122 SNe~II from \cite{2017ApJ...850...90G} in Fig.~\ref{fig:pEW_vel}. This SN~II sample exhibits a range of H$\alpha$ expansion velocities (1500~\textless~v$_{H\alpha}$~\textless~9600~km~s$^{-1}$) and pEWs of lines, presumably linked to the diversity in the explosion energies, progenitor radius and metallicity of SNe~II. As noted in \cite{2017ApJ...850...90G}, the H$\alpha$ velocity exhibits the strongest positive correlation with the pEW of the emission component of H$\alpha$ and the absorption component of H$\beta$ and negative correlation with pEW of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$4924 and Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018. In panel (a), SN~2015an lies at the lower left corner (small pEW and low v$_{H\alpha}$), along with SNe~2002gd, 2008br, 2008bm, 2009aj and 2009au, clearly far off from the majority of SNe~II. However, in panels (b) and (c), SN~2015an seems to fall in the trend of a positive correlation of expansion velocity with pEW of H$\alpha$ emission component and H$\beta$ absorption component, respectively. In the case of Fe~{\sc ii} $\lambda\lambda\lambda$4924,5018,5169 (panels (d), (e) and (f)), SN~2015an lies intermediate to that of majority of SNe II and the four SNe on the left. Out of the five SNe from the lower left corner in panel (a), SNe 2008bm, 2009au and 2009aj shows unusually low velocities for their brightness and narrow emission lines at early phases, indicative of CSI at play. So, for comparison, we use the $\sim$45~d dereddened and de-redshifted spectra of SNe 2008bm, 2009aj and 2009au along with that of the low-luminosity SN~2005cs, the Type IIP SN~LSQ13fn and the Type IIL SN~2014G. The spectra of SN~2015an obtained on 42.6~d and the comparison sample are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:spec_comp}. While SN~2005cs shows well-developed metal lines, all other SNe exhibit comparatively weaker metal lines. The continuum of SN~2015an matches well with that of SN~LSQ13fn and neither of them has a conspicuous Na~{\sc i}~D line at this phase, as compared to the other SNe. The SNe displaying weaker metal lines has enhanced continuum flux bluewards of 5200~\AA, compared to SNe~2005cs and 2014G except SN~2009au.
\cite{2014MNRAS.440.1856D} suggested that the SN progenitor metallicity plays a crucial role in the evolution of metal lines in the photospheric phase in that the SNe with low progenitor metallicity exhibit weaker metal features. \cite{2013MNRAS.433.1745D} simulated model spectra by evolving a 15~M$_\odot$ ZAMS star up to the pre-SN stage at different metallicities (0.1, 0.4, 1.0, 2.0~Z$_\odot$). Comparing the 42.6~d spectrum of SN~2015an with these models we found the best match with 0.4 Z$_\odot$ model spectrum (pEW of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018 in the 42.6~d spectrum of SN~2015an is 11.0~\AA{} and that of the model spectrum at 41.1~d is 10.6~\AA), which is overplotted on the spectrum of SN~2015an in the top panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:spec_comp_mod}. Moreover, using a sample of 119 host H~{\sc ii} regions \cite{2016A&A...589A.110A} estimated the oxygen abundances and found a positive correlation between the host H~{\sc ii} region oxygen abundance and pEW of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018. In the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:spec_comp_mod}, the time evolution of the mean pEW of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018 of the sample of SNe~II from \cite{2016A&A...589A.110A} is shown along with its standard deviation (the black line and the shaded region), over which the thick solid lines are the time evolution of the pEW of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018 in the different metallicity models of \cite{2013MNRAS.433.1745D}. The pEW measurements of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018 in the spectra of SN~2015an is shown with a dashed line which traces the evolution of the 0.4~Z$_\odot$ model and is lower than the mean pEW of the sample.
\section{Distance}
\label{dist}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.55, width=0.44\textwidth,clip, trim={0.4cm 0.4cm 0.4cm 0.3cm}]{EPM_15an_D05_BV.pdf}
\caption{Distance determination with the EPM for SN 2015an, using \citet{2005A&A...439..671D} prescription for the dilution factors and the $BV$ observations. The distance and the explosion epoch are obtained from the best fit.}
\label{fig:EPM}
\end{figure}
We implement the EPM to estimate the distance from early photometric and spectroscopic observations as outlined in \cite{2018MNRAS.479.2421D}. The EPM rests on the assumption that the ejecta is homologously expanding and radiating as a diluted blackbody. Thus, the colour temperature (T$_c$) and the angular radius ($\theta$) were obtained by fitting diluted blackbody function to the spectral energy distribution constructed from the observed magnitudes, where the dilution factors were adopted from \citet{2005A&A...439..671D}. Moreover, the filter response function needs to be convolved with the model blackbody function, to eliminate its effect from the observed broadband magnitudes. The convolved function can be expressed as a function of T$_c$ and the coefficients were adopted from \cite{2001ApJ...558..615H}. The photospheric velocities (v$_{ph}$) were estimated from the minima of the absorption profile of H$\alpha$ in the first epoch (13.6~d from discovery) and Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5169 in the rest of the epochs (up to $\sim$ 50~d from discovery).
The distance and the time of explosion $t_0$ can then be estimated from the slope and y-intercept, respectively, of the following expression:
\begin{equation}
t =D(\theta/v_{ph})+t_0
\end{equation}
The linear fit to the data is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:EPM} and the distance and explosion epoch estimates from the fit are 29.8~$\pm$~1.5~Mpc and 2457268.5 $\pm$ 1.6 d (2015~September~03~UT), respectively.
\section{Semi-analytical Modelling of the bolometric light curve}
\label{sec7}
To generate the observed bolometric light curve, first the observed fluxes were corrected for distance and reddening using the values given in Table~\ref{tab:sn15an_IC2367_detail}. Then SED at different epochs was constructed encompassing the fluxes from the UV to the IR wavelengths. Due to the unavailability of UV and IR data, we extrapolated the SED constructed in the optical bands, approximating it as a blackbody, to the UV and IR bands, following the same prescription as used in the direct integration method in \cite{2017PASP..129d4202L}. At late phases, a linear extrapolation is performed in the UV regime. The decline rate of the radioactive tail in the bolometric light curve is found to be 0.0140~mag/d which is steeper than 0.0098~mag/d, indicating incomplete trapping of the $\gamma$-rays produced by the radioactive decay of $^{56}$Co $\rightarrow$ $^{56}$Fe.
We used semi-analytical modelling of \cite{2014A&A...571A..77N,2016A&A...589A..53N} to model the bolometric light curve of SN~2015an. To synthesize the fast initial decline and the late phase of SNe II, this model invokes a two component structure of ejecta, where a massive core is surrounded by a low mass envelope.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.0, width=0.53\textwidth,clip, trim={0.7cm 13.3cm 0.2cm 2.9cm}]{nagy_Vinko.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The observed bolometric LC of SN~2015an and the best fit two component analytical model of \citet{2016A&A...589A..53N}.}
\label{nagy}
\end{figure}
We used a constant density profile for the core and a power law density profile for the envelope. The opacity values for the core and the shell are kept fixed to the average opacity recommended for SNe IIP ($\kappa_{core}$=0.2~cm$^2$ g$^{-1}$ and $\kappa_{shell}$=0.38~cm$^2$ g$^{-1}$, \citealt{2018ApJ...862..143N}). The estimated best fit parameters are the initial radius (2.7$\times$10$^{13}~$cm$\sim$388~R$_\odot$), ejecta mass M$_{ej}$ (12~M$_\odot$) and total energy (1.8~foe). Assuming the remnant mass to be 1.5-2.0~M$_\odot$, the minimum ZAMS mass of the progenitor is 14~M$_\odot$. The best-fit model is over-plotted on the bolometric LC in Fig.~\ref{nagy} and the parameters for the core and the shell are listed in Table~\ref{Nagy}. In the top panel of Fig.~\ref{Efin_Mej}, the total energy of SN~2015an (E$_{tot}$ = E$_{kin}$+E$_{th}$) is plotted against the ejecta mass, along with that derived for other SNe using hydrodynamic modelling \citep{2013A&A...555A.145U,2017MNRAS.464.3013P} and SNEC models \citep{2018ApJ...858...15M}. SN~2015an falls in the trend of the positive correlation between the two parameters. In the bottom panel of Fig.~\ref{Efin_Mej}, the $^{56}$Ni mass is plotted against E$_{tot}$, where we find that compared to its energy, the $^{56}$Ni mass yield should have been higher.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.0, width=0.5\textwidth,clip, trim={0.4cm 0.55cm 0.2cm .2cm}]{Efin_Mej_Ni.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The total explosion energies of SNe (E$_{tot}$ = E$_{kin}$+E$_{th}$) are plotted against the ejecta masses and the ejected $^{56}$Ni masses of a sample of SNe from \citet{2013A&A...555A.145U,2017MNRAS.464.3013P,2018ApJ...858...15M}}
\label{Efin_Mej}
\end{figure}
\input{Table_Nagy_par}
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec8}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.0, width=1.0\textwidth,clip, trim={0.4cm 0.4cm 0.2cm 0.3cm}]{Mv50_Mni_vph50.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The collocation of SN~2015an in the correlation plots among absolute magnitude at 50~d (M$_I^{50}$), the photospheric velocity at 50 d (v$_{ph,50}$), $^{56}$Ni mass, H$\alpha$ velocity offset from emission peak at 30~d and the decline rate of the V-band light curve in plateau phase (s$_2$) in mag/100d is shown along with the sample of SNe~II from \citet{2003ApJ...582..905H,2006ApJ...645..841N,2014MNRAS.439.2873S, 2014MNRAS.441..671A,2015A&A...580L..15P,2016MNRAS.459.3939V, 2018MNRAS.480.2475S}. The shaded region shows the 3$\sigma$ confidence interval, while the dotted and dashed line shows the 1 and 3$\sigma$ prediction limits, respectively. For each panel, n is the number of events, r is the Pearson correlation coefficient, and P is the probability of detecting a correlation by chance.}
\label{cor_plots}
\end{figure*}
As discussed above, SN~2015an exhibits some peculiar features in addition to the regular properties of SNe~II. The H$\alpha$ expansion velocity of SN~2015an in the early phases is comparatively lower than other SNe~II of similar luminosity. High velocity component of H$\alpha$ is conspicuous at the early phases, which is not commonly observed in early SN~II spectrum. Moreover, the persistence of the excess in flux bluewards of 5200~\AA{} up to $\sim$ 43~d, is also atypical of SNe~II. We discuss below these properties of SN~2015an and its possible implications.
\subsection{Collocation of SN~2015an in the SN~II parameter space}
In Fig.~\ref{cor_plots}, we use samples of SNe II from recent studies to discern the position of SN~2015an in the SN~II diversity. The regression line for the literature sample, excluding SNe~LSQ13fn and 2015an, is shown in grey, the shaded region gives the 3$\sigma$ confidence interval for the regression coefficients and the dotted and dashed lines are the 1$\sigma$ and 3$\sigma$ prediction interval, respectively, for the regression model. The Pearson correlation parameters listed in the figure are also estimated using the literature samples.
In panel (a) of Fig.~\ref{cor_plots}, the expansion velocity of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5169 and absolute magnitude in the $I$-band of SN~2015an (obtained by converting the $i$-band magnitude to $I$-band magnitude using the transformation equation in \cite{2006A&A...460..339J}) at 50~d are shown, along with that of SN~LSQ13fn and using the sample of \cite{2006ApJ...645..841N} and \cite{2015A&A...580L..15P}. SN~LSQ13fn lies outside the 3$\sigma$ prediction band, which implies that this event has a much lower expansion velocity as compared to its luminosity. SN~2015an, on the other hand, is fainter than SN~LSQ13fn by $\sim$0.4~mag and with an expansion velocity higher by 600~km~s$^{-1}$ than SN~LSQ13fn, manages to settle itself right over the 3$\sigma$ prediction limit.
In Fig. (b), the absolute magnitude in $V$-band at 50~d is plotted against the logarithm of $^{56}$Ni mass for a sample of SNe from the literature \citep{2003ApJ...582..905H, 2014MNRAS.439.2873S, 2016MNRAS.459.3939V, 2018MNRAS.480.2475S}. Both SNe~LSQ13fn and 2015an lies just outside the 1$\sigma$ prediction limit but well within the 3$\sigma$ prediction interval.
In Fig. (c), the photospheric velocity is plotted against the logarithm of $^{56}$Ni mass for a sample of SNe \citep{2003ApJ...582..905H, 2014MNRAS.439.2873S, 2018MNRAS.480.2475S}. In this case, we find both SNe~LSQ13fn and 2015an lie within the 1$\sigma$ prediction interval.
In Fig. (d), the emission peak velocity offset of H$\alpha$ at 30~d is plotted against the decline rate in the plateau phase (s$_2$) using the sample from \cite{2014MNRAS.441..671A}, where the faster declining SNe have higher offsets. This is expected as faster declining SNe has a steeper ejecta density structure, enhancing the occultation of the receding part of the ejecta, thereby shifting the emission peak to the bluer wavelengths. With a decline rate ($s_2$) of 1.24$\pm$0.04~mag/100~d, the emission peak of H$\alpha$ in SN~2015an has a velocity offset smaller by about 1000~km~s$^{-1}$ than the mean offset of the sample, possibly due to its low expansion velocity.
Thus, the normal luminosity of SN~2015an in conjunction with its lower expansion velocity and lower $^{56}$Ni mass yield, suggests the existence of an external source boosting the luminosity of this event, most likely the interaction between the ejecta and CSM.
\subsection{Early Circumstellar Interaction}
For SN~2015an, we do not have any spectrum in the first three weeks after explosion. The first spectrum obtained on $\sim$23.8~d is dominated by blue continuum. Moreover, a notch bluewards of the H$\alpha$ absorption feature is clearly discernible up to 42.6~d spectrum (Fig.~\ref{fig:vel_space}). This feature is identified as the high velocity feature (HV) of H$\alpha$ at 8500~km~s$^{-1}$ considering its non-evolving nature and further substantiated in the {\sc syn++} modelling. The HV feature is attributed to the excitation of the outer recombined part of the ejecta with X-rays from the reverse shock as a result of the interaction of ejecta and circumstellar material \citep{2007ApJ...662.1136C}. SN~2015an also shows bluer colour and higher temperature, in comparison to a sample of SNe II at coeval epochs (Figs.~\ref{color_lc}, \ref{temp_comp}), which also indicates an interaction of SN ejecta with a nearby CSM, converting the ejecta kinetic energy to thermal energy.
The HV feature, however, is not apparent in the early phase of most SNe II. The appearance of this feature in SN~2015an at early times may be attributed to the low expansion velocity of hydrogen. A low velocity ejecta will take longer time to cover the nearby CSM. Once the CSM is traversed by the ejecta, the HV feature is expected to diminish. It may again reappear as the ejecta becomes transparent, depending on the density of the CSM.
\subsection{Low metallicity progenitor}
The other remarkable feature of SN~2015an is the presence of weak metal lines in the photopheric phase, particularly Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda\lambda$5018,5169. \cite{2013MNRAS.433.1745D} showed that metallicity plays a crucial role in metal line formation in SN spectra, during the recombination phase, when the photosphere essentially samples the outer H envelope, that is relatively less affected by mixing or nuclear burning. While the pEW of the H~{\sc i} line will be dependent on both the CSI and metallicity, as CSI will broaden the absorption component and shallow H~{\sc i} lines are expected to form from a higher metallicity ejecta, the metal lines will be solely affected by the metallicity of the progenitor. Moreover, the excess of flux bluewards of 5200~\AA{} in SN~2015an, in comparison to other SNe II (such as SNe~2005cs and 2014G) at coeval epochs, indicates a less efficient line blanketing in SN~2015an. These properties suggest a low-metallicity progenitor for SN~2015an. The progenitor metallicity can potentially affect the colour of SNe II as well. The sample study of host H~{\sc ii} region of SNe II to obtain metallicity estimates by \cite{2016A&A...589A.110A}, suggests a strong correlation of the pEW of Fe~{\sc ii}~$\lambda$5018 with metallicity. We found SN~2015an to match best with the 0.4~Z$_\odot$ metallicity model of \cite{2013MNRAS.433.1745D}. This indicates that SN~2015an possibly originated from a sub-solar metallicity progenitor. Furthermore, since metallicity gradients in galaxies are found to be radially decreasing outwards \citep{1999PASP..111..919H}, the location of SN~2015an at a deprojected radial distance of 13.9~kpc, suggests a lower metallicity environment for the progenitor of SN~2015an.
Finally, it is worth noting that some atypical features of SN~2015an, such as its higher photospheric temperature and persistence of blue spectrum later than usual, is related to the explosion time. Since we do not have early spectra of SN~2015an (obtained within two weeks of discovery), we could not impose strong pre-explosion constraints. If SN~2015an was discovered soon after explosion (than our adopted explosion epoch corresponding to 10~d before discovery), then the temperature and colour of SN~2015an would become more similar to normal SNe~II. Nevertheless, a spectrum of SN~II with a dominant blue continuum two weeks past discovery and normal luminosity in concurrence with low expansion velocity of H$\alpha$, as in case of SN~2015an, is unusual.
\section{Summary}
\label{sec9}
In this paper, we present the photometric and spectroscopic analysis of SN~2015an in the galaxy IC~2367. The striking feature of SN~2015an is its low H$\alpha$ expansion velocity in the early phases as compared to its brightness. The absolute magnitude of SN~2015an at 50~d is M$_V^{50}$ = $-$16.83$\pm$0.04~mag, which places this event among the brighter SNe~II. The slope of the $V$-band light curve in the first 50~d is 0.78$\pm$0.02 mag, which is steeper than the slowly declining SNe~II. The colour evolution of SN~2015an follows the same trend as SNe~II family, however, this event is bluer in comparison to the rest of the sample. The Ni mass derived from the tail luminosity is 0.021$\pm$0.010~M$_\odot$.
The spectra of SN~2015an is apparently similar to the SNe~II population with prominent H~{\sc i} P~Cygni profiles, however the metal lines are comparatively weaker and the blue continuum lasts longer than typical SNe~II. High velocity features have also been identified in the early spectra of SN~2015an, suggesting a possible role of CSI. The temperature derived from the photometric and spectroscopic SEDs is relatively higher than SNe~II in the early phases, implying the conversion of the kinetic energy of ejecta to thermal energy in the ejecta-CSM interaction. The weak metal lines and the blue continuum is possibly associated with the metallicity of the progenitor, as sub-solar metallicity progenitor produces weaker metal lines \citep{2013MNRAS.433.1745D}.
We used the expanding photosphere method and derived a distance of 29.8$\pm$1.5~Mpc to SN~2015an, which is in accord with the Virgo infall distance. The explosion parameters derived from the best fit semi-analytic model generated using the prescription of \cite{2016A&A...589A..53N} to the bolometric light curve yielded a total ejecta mass of $\sim$12~M$_\odot$, a total explosion energy of 1.8 foe and an initial radius of 388~R$_\odot$. The estimated initial radius is small as compared to other RSGs, and hence SN~2015an was expected to show faster cooling with a rapid transition from the early cooling phase to the plateau phase and a redder continuum. We infer that the combined effect of ejecta-circumstellar interaction and a low-metallicity progenitor is giving rise to the peculiar properties of SN~2015an.
Furthermore, it becomes apparent that CSI is not only important for Type IIn or some IIL, but also low-velocity SNe~II may have some interaction.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Thomas de Jaeger, J. P. Anderson, C. P. Guti$\grave{e}$rrez and V. P. Utrobin for sharing data. This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. We acknowledge the usage of the HyperLeda data base (http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr). DAH, CM, and GH were supported by NSF-1313484. This work makes use of data obtained by the LCO network. Research by SV is supported by NSF grants AST-1813176. SBP and KM acknowledges BRICS grant DST/IMRCD/BRICS/Pilotcall/ProFCheap/2017(G) for the present work. SBP and KM also acknowledge
the DST/JSPS grant, DST/INT/JSPS/P/281/2018. KM acknowledges the support from Department of Science and Technology (DST), Govt. of India and Indo-US Science and Technology Forum (IUSSTF) for the WISTEMM fellowship and Dept. of Physics, UC Davis where a part of this work was carried out.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{s:intro}
Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$, $d\ge 2$, be a bounded open set. For $\alpha\in (0,2)$ set $k(x,y)=c(d,\alpha)|x-y|^{-d-\alpha}$, $x,y\in {\mathbb R}^d$, where $c(d,\alpha)$ is a positive constant. Consider the symmetric bilinear form
\begin{equation}\label{e:form-hat}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v):= \frac12 \iint_{({\mathbb R}^d\times {\mathbb R}^d)\setminus (D^c\times D^c)}(u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx\, ,
\end{equation}
where $u,v:{\mathbb R}^d\to {\mathbb R}$. This form has recently attracted quite some interest, cf.~\cite{BGPR17, DRV17, FKV15, MSW19, Voi} where different question related to the form were studied.
In particular, \cite{DRV17} introduces a new ''non-local normal derivative''
\begin{equation}\label{e:non-local-derivative}
{\mathcal N} u(x)=\int_D (u(x)-u(y))k(x,y)\, dy,\qquad x\in {\mathbb R}^d\setminus \overline{D}\, ,
\end{equation}
with the aim to solve the Neumann problem
$$
\left\{\begin{array}{rl}
(-\Delta)^{\alpha/2}u=f & \textrm{in } D, \\
{\mathcal N} u=0 & \textrm{in }{\mathbb R}^d\setminus \overline{D},
\end{array}\right.
$$
for the fractional Laplacian $(-\Delta)^{\alpha/2}$, as well as the corresponding heat equation with homogeneous Neumann conditions.
The authors offer the following probabilistic interpretation of the Neumann heat equation:
\emph{
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] The solution $u(x,t)$ of the Neumann heat equation is the probability distribution of the position of a particle moving randomly inside $D$.
\item[(2)] When the particle exits $D$, it immediately comes back into $D$.
\item[(3)] The way in which it comes back inside $D$ is the following: If the particle has gone to $x\in {\mathbb R}^d\setminus D$, it may come back to any point $y\in D$, the probability
density of jumping from $x$ to $y$ being proportional to $k(x,y)$.
\end{itemize}
}
In view of the fact that the variational structure of the Neumann problem involves the symmetric bilinear form $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)$
where $u$ and $v$ are functions defined on all of ${\mathbb R}^d$ (and not only on $D$), the above probabilistic interpretation is somewhat ambiguous. One goal of this note is to construct two stochastic processes, one living on ${\mathbb R}^d$, the other on $D$, which might fit the intended interpretation. To be more precise, for $x\in D^c$, let $\mu(x):=\int_D k(x,y)dy$, define the measure $m(dx):={\mathbf 1}_D(x)dx +{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}(x)\mu(x)dx$, and set ${\mathcal F}:=\{u\in L^2({\mathbb R}^d,m(dx)), \widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)<\infty\}$. We will show that $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a quasi-regular Dirichlet form on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d,m(dx))$, hence there is a Markov process $Y$ on ${\mathbb R}^d$ (more precisely, on ${\mathbb R}^d\setminus \partial D$) properly associated with $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$. The behavior of $Y$ can be described as follows: starting in $D$, the process moves as the isotropic stable process until the first exit time from $D$. At the exit time, it jumps out of $D$ according to the kernel $k(x,y)$. It sits at the exit point $y$ for an exponential time with mean one, then jumps back to $D$ according to probability distribution $k(y,x)/k(y)$ and starts afresh. By deleting the part of this process which lives in $D^c$, we get a process with state space $D$.
The other goal of the note is to look at the corresponding Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator. In the context of the Laplace operator, the classical Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator can be roughly described as follows: take a function $\phi$ defined on the boundary $\partial D$ (for simplicity, here we do not specify the function space that $\phi$ belongs to). Let $u$ be the solution of the Dirichlet boundary value problem (for the Laplacian) with the boundary value $\phi$. Let $\psi$ be the normal derivative of $u$. The mapping $\phi\mapsto \psi$ is called the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator. There exists a substantial amount of literature on the classical Dirichlet-to-Neumann problem, the results depending on the roughness of the domain and the appropriate function spaces, see for example \cite{AtE11, AtE17, tEO13, tEO17} for the functional-analytic approach and \cite{BV17} for a probabilistic approach. In this note, we solve the Dirichlet-to-Neumann problem for non-local operators, both probabilistically and analytically, and show that the problem is simpler than the one for local operators. In view of the non-locality of the underlying operator (such as the fractional Laplacian), the boundary $\partial D$ is replaced by the exterior $\overline{D}^c$ and the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator is the mapping between functions defined on $\overline{D}^c$. In the analytic approach, we define the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator on $L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$. For the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator (related to the fractional Laplacian) on different function spaces we refer to \cite{GSU17}. Another closely related research is \cite{FJ01, JS99} where the authors study functions spaces and Dirichlet forms of subordinate reflected diffusions on the closure $\overline{D}$ of a (smooth) open set $D$ in the Euclidean space. They obtain a Weyl decomposition which is the key to construction of a Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator. Their methods of using the spectral synthesis techniques are close in spirit to our approach.
Organization of the paper: in the next section we introduce the singular kernel $k(x,y)$ which generalizes $|x-y|^{-d-\alpha}$ and recall the relevant function spaces based on this kernel. Then we briefly discuss the Dirichlet problem for the corresponding non-local operator and define the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator in an analytic way. In Section \ref{s:dirichlet-form} we prove that $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a quasi-regular Dirichlet form on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d,m(dx))$, explain the behavior of the corresponding process $Y$ with state space ${\mathbb R}^d$ and argue that its trace on $D^c$ gives a probabilistic interpretation of the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator. In the last section, starting from $Y$, we construct a stochastic process $Z$ with the state space $D$ and calculate its bilinear form. This last process fits the description from \cite{DRV17} that \emph{when the particle exits $D$, it immediately comes back into $D$.} Finally, in the appendix, we provide an alternative construction of the process $Y$ and compute its bilinear form.
\section{Preliminaries on function spaces}\label{s:prelim}
In this section we introduce the singular kernel as the L\'evy density of the underlying stochastic process $X$. We also recall several function spaces related to the process $X$ (or the kernel) that were studied in \cite{FKV15} (see also \cite{DRV17}). Instead of the fractional Laplacian, we will work with a more general non-local operators, in fact generators of isotropic L\'evy processes.
Let $(X_t, {\mathbb P}_x)$ be a L\'evy process on ${\mathbb R}^d$, $d\ge 2$, with the characteristic exponent $\Phi$ of the form
$$
\Phi(\xi)=\int_{{\mathbb R}^d\setminus \{0\}} (1-e^{i\langle \xi, x\rangle}-i\langle \xi, x\rangle \mathbf{1}_{\{|x|< 1\}})\nu(dx),
$$
that is ${\mathbb E}_x[e^{i\langle \xi, X_t-x\rangle}]=e^{-t\Phi(\xi)}$. Here $\nu(dx)$ is the L\'evy measure of $X$, i.e., $\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}(1\wedge |x|^2)\nu(dx)<\infty$. We will assume that $\nu$ has a strictly positive non-increasing radial density (with respect to Lebesgue measure): $\nu(dx)=j(|x|)dx$ with $j:(0,\infty)\to (0, \infty)$ non-increasing. We introduce the \emph{symmetric} kernel $k(x,y):=j(|x-y|)$, $x,y\in {\mathbb R}^d$.
Let $D\subset {\mathbb R}^d$ be a bounded open set such that the Lebesgue measure of its boundary $\partial D$ is zero. Recall the following function spaces:
\begin{eqnarray*}
W^{k,2}({\mathbb R}^d)&=&\{v:{\mathbb R}^d\to {\mathbb R};\ v\in L^2({\mathbb R}^d), \iint_{{\mathbb R}^d\times {\mathbb R}^d}(v(x)-v(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy \, dx<\infty\},\\
W^{k,2}_{D}({\mathbb R}^d)&=&\{v\in W^{k,2}({\mathbb R}^d); \ v=0 \text{ a.e.~on }D^c\},\\
V^{k,2}(D)&=&\{v:{\mathbb R}^d\to {\mathbb R};\ v_{|D}\in L^2(D), \iint_{D\times {\mathbb R}^d}(v(x)-v(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy \, dx<\infty\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
In \cite[Definition 2.1]{FKV15} these spaces were denoted by $H({\mathbb R}^d; k)$, $H_{D}({\mathbb R}^d; k)$ and $V(D; k)$ respectively.
For $u,v\in W^{k,2}({\mathbb R}^d)$ set
$$
{\mathcal E}(u,v):= \frac12 \iint_{{\mathbb R}^d\times {\mathbb R}^d}(u(x)-u(y)(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx\, .
$$
Then $({\mathcal E}, W^{k,2}({\mathbb R}^d))$ is the regular Dirichlet form corresponding to the $L^2$-semigroup of the process $X$. Moreover,
$$
\|u\|_{W^{k,2}({\mathbb R}^d)}:=\left(\|u\|_{L^2({\mathbb R}^d)}^2+{\mathcal E}(u,u)\right)^{1/2}
$$
is a Hilbert norm on $W^{k,2}({\mathbb R}^d)$.
By symmetry of $k(x,y)$ we have
$$
\int_{D}\int_{D^c}(u(x)-u(y)(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx = \int_{D^c}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y)(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx .
$$
Let
$$
{\mathcal E}^{D}(u,v):= \frac12 \iint_{D\times D}(u(x)-u(y)(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx\, ,
$$
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)&:=& \frac12 \iint_{({\mathbb R}^d\times {\mathbb R}^d)\setminus (D^c\times D^c)}(u(x)-u(y)(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx \label{e:form-whEE}\\
&=&{\mathcal E}^{D}(u,v)+\int_{D}\int_{D^c}(u(x)-u(y)(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx \, .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In case $k(x,y)=c(d,\alpha)|x-y|^{-d-\alpha}$, \cite[(3.1), (3.2)]{DRV17} introduces the space $H^s_{D, 0}$ of functions $u:{\mathbb R}^d\to {\mathbb R}$ such that $\|u\|_{L^2(D)}^2+\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)<\infty$ with the corresponding norm. It is easy to see that $H^s_{D, 0}=V^{k,2}(D)$ in our notation. Denote the corresponding norm by
$$
\|u\|_{V^{k,2}(D)}:=\left (\|u\|_{L^2(D)}^2+\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)\right)^{1/2}.
$$
Clearly, this is an inner product norm. It is proved in \cite[Proposition 3.1]{DRV17} that $(V^{k,2}(D), \\ \|\cdot \|_{V^{k,2}(D)}) $ is a Hilbert space. Although $k(x,y)=c(d,\alpha)|x-y|^{-d-\alpha}$ in \cite{DRV17}, the proof carries over to $k(x,y)$ as in our setting. Moreover, the proof shows that if $(u_n)_{n\ge 1}$ is a Cauchy sequence in $(V^{k,2}(D), \ \|\cdot \|_{V^{k,2}(D)})$, then a subsequence converges a.e.~in ${\mathbb R}^d$.
Let
$$
V^{k,2}_{D}(D):=\{u\in V^{k,2}(D);\ u=0 \text{ a.e.~in }D^c\}=W^{k,2}_{D}({\mathbb R}^d)\, .
$$
Then $V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$ is a closed subspace of $(V^{k,2}(D), \ \|\cdot \|_{V^{k,2}(D)})$. Indeed, let $(u_n)_{n\ge 1}\subset V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$ and $u=\lim_{n\to \infty}u_n$ in $(V^{k,2}(D), \ \|\cdot \|_{V^{k,2}(D)})$. Then there is subsequence of $(u_n)$ which converges a.e.~in ${\mathbb R}^d$ to $u$. Hence, $u=0$ a.e.~in $D^c$, i.e.~$u\in V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$.
Let $u\in L^2_{D}({\mathbb R}^d):=\{v\in L^2({\mathbb R}^d); v=0 \text{ a.e.~on }D^c\}$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)&=&{\mathcal E}^D(u,u)+\int_D\int_{D^c}(u(x)-u(y))^2k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\\
&\ge &\int_D u(x)^2\left(\int_{D^c}k(x,y)\, dy\right)dx \ge \int_Du(x)^2 \left(\int_{B(x, \mathrm{diam}(D))^c}j(|x-y|)\, dy\right)dx\\
&\ge &c \int_D u(x)^2\, dx\, ,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $c>0$ is a constant not depending on $x\in D$.
Therefore, for any $u\in L^2_{D}({\mathbb R}^d)$, and in particular for any $u\in V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$, we have that
$$
\|u\|_{L^2(D)}^2\le c^{-1} \widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)<\infty\, .
$$
For $u\in V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$, let $\|u\|_{V^{k,2}_{D}(D)}^2:=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)$. The above inequality shows that $(V^{k,2}_{D}(D),\\ \|\cdot\|_{V^{k,2}_{D}(D)})$ is a Hilbert space and the norm $\|\cdot\|_{V^{k,2}_{D}(D)}$ is equivalent to $\|\cdot\|_{V^{k,2}(D)}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:functional}
For $u\in V^{k,2}(D)$, let $F:V^{k,2}_{D}(D)\to {\mathbb R}$ be defined by $F(v):=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)$, $v\in V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$.
Then there exists a unique $u_0\in V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$ such that $F(v)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u_0,v)$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} We have that
$$
|F(v)|=|\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)|=|{\mathcal E}(u,v)|\le {\mathcal E}(u,u)^{1/2}{\mathcal E}(v,v)^{1/2}={\mathcal E}(u,u)^{1/2}\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(v,v)^{1/2}={\mathcal E}(u,u)^{1/2}\|v\|_{V^{k,2}_{D}(D)}.
$$
This shows that $F$ is a continuous linear functional on the Hilbert space $(V^{k,2}_{D}(D), \|\cdot\|_{V^{k,2}_{D}(D)})$. Hence, there exists a unique $u_0\in V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$ such that $F(v)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u_0,v)$. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Given $\phi :D^c\to {\mathbb R}$, we extend it to all of ${\mathbb R}^d$ by letting $\phi(x)=0$ for $x\in D$. Assume that such extended $\phi\in V^{k,2}(D)$. This is equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{e:aux}
\int_{D}\int_{D^c}\phi(x)^2 k(x,y)\, dx\, dy =\int_{D^c}\phi(x)^2 \int_{D} k(x,y)\, dy\, dx<\infty\, .
\end{equation}
Define $\mu:D^c\to [0,\infty]$ by
$$
\mu(x):=\int_{D}k(x,y)\ dy\, ,\qquad x\in D^c\, ,
$$
and note that for $x\in \overline{D}^c$, we have $\mu(x)<\infty$. Indeed, this is clear since for $x\in \overline{D}^c$, $y\in D$, it holds that $|x-y|\ge \mathrm{dist}(x,\partial D)$, hence $\mu(x)\le j(\mathrm{dist}(x,\partial D))|D|$. For $x\in \partial D$, it will usually be the case that $\mu(x)=\infty$. Let $L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$ be the usual $L^2$ space with the inner product given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\phi, \chi)_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}&:=&\int_{D^c}\phi(x)\chi(x) \mu(x)\, dx=\int_{\overline{D}^c}\phi(x)\chi(x) \mu(x)\, dx\\
&=&\int_{D^c}\int_{D}\phi(x)\chi(x)k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Extend $\phi\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$ to $D$ by letting $\phi(x)=0$, $x\in D$. Then we may regard $L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$ as a (closed) subspace of $V^{k,2}(D)$ and
$$
\|\phi\|^2_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(\phi, \phi)\, .
$$
We would like to have a sort of a converse, namely that if $u\in V^{k,2}(D)$, then $u \mathbf{1}_{D^c}\in V^{k,2}(D)$. Note that
\begin{equation}\label{e:u-restricted}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u \mathbf{1}_{D^c}, u \mathbf{1}_{D^c})=\int_{D^c}\int_{D}(u \mathbf{1}_{D^c}(x)-u \mathbf{1}_{D^c}(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx=\int_{D^c}u(x)^2\mu(x)\, dx\, .
\end{equation}
Since the right-hand side need not be finite for $u\in V^{k,2}(D)$, we introduce another function space. Let $m(dx)=\mathbf{1}_{D}(x)dx+\mathbf{1}_{D^c}(x)\mu(x)dx$. Since it may happen that $\int_{D^c}\mu(x)dx=\infty$ (e.g., if $k(x,y)=|x-y|^{d+\alpha}$ for $1<\alpha<2$), the measure $m(dx)$ need not be a Radon measure.
Set
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathcal F}&:=&\{u\in V^{k,2}(D): \int_{D^c}u(x)^2 \mu(x)\, dx<\infty\}\\
&=&\{u:{\mathbb R}^d\to {\mathbb R}: u\in L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx)), \widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)<\infty\}\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
For $u\in {\mathcal F}$ define
$$
\|u\|^2_{{\mathcal F}}:=\|u\|_{V^{k,2}(D)}^2+\int_{D^c}u(x)^2\mu(x)\, dx =\|u\|^2_{L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))}+\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)\, .
$$
Then $({\mathcal F}, \|\cdot\|_{{\mathcal F}})$ is a Hilbert space. Indeed, the norm is clearly an inner product norm. Suppose that $(u_n)_{n\ge 1}$ is a Cauchy sequence in $({\mathcal F}, \|\cdot\|_{{\mathcal F}})$. Then it is a Cauchy sequence in $(V^{k,2}(D), \|\cdot \|_{V^{k,2}(D)})$. Hence, there exists $u\in V^{k,2}(D)$ such that $\|u_n-u \|_{V^{k,2}(D)}\to 0$. Moreover, a subsequence of $(u_n)$ converges to $u$ a.e.~in ${\mathbb R}^d$, hence also $m$-a.e. Further, $({u_n}_{|D^c})$ is a Cauchy sequence in $L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$, hence converges to some $v\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$. Since a subsequence converges to $u$ $m$-a.e., we see that $v=u_{|D^c}$ $m$-a.e. This proves that $u=\lim_{n\to \infty} u_n$ in $({\mathcal F}, \|\cdot\|_{{\mathcal F}})$. Therefore, the following result holds true.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:function-space}
\begin{itemize}
\item [(i)] $({\mathcal F}, \|\cdot\|_{{\mathcal F}})$ is a Hilbert space;
\item[(ii)] If $u\in {\mathcal F}$, then $u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}$ and $u\mathbf{1}_{D}$ are also in ${\mathcal F}$;
\item[(iii)] If $\phi\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$, then $\phi$ extended to be zero on $D$ is in ${\mathcal F}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} (ii) If $u\in {\mathcal F}$, then $u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}\in {\mathcal F}$ by \eqref{e:u-restricted}. It follows that $u\mathbf{1}_{D}=u-u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}\in {\mathcal F}$. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\section{Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator}\label{s:d-to-n}
We start this section by recalling the exterior value Dirichlet problem.
Let
$$
{\mathcal L} u(x):= \text{P.V.} \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}(u(x)-u(y))k(x,y)\, dy=\lim_{\epsilon \to 0}\int_{|y-x|>\epsilon}(u(x)-u(y))k(x,y)\, dy\, .
$$
Consider the following exterior value Dirichlet problem (cf.~\cite[Definition 2.5 (D)]{FKV15}). Let $\phi\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$. A function $u\in V^{k,2}(D)$ is a solution of
\begin{equation}\label{e:dp}
\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
{\mathcal L} u=0 & \text{ in }D\, ,\\
u=\phi & \text{ on }D^c\, ,
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
if $u-\phi\in W^{k,2}_{D}({\mathbb R}^d)=V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$ and ${\mathcal E}(u, v)=0$ for all $v\in W^{k,2}_{D}({\mathbb R}^d)$. Since for $v\in W^{k,2}_{D}({\mathbb R}^d)$ it holds that $v=0$ a.e.~on $D^c$, this last condition can be written as $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)=0$.
It is shown in \cite[Theorem 3.5 and Theorem 4.4]{FKV15} that there exists a unique solution $u\in V^{k,2}(D)$ of the above Dirichlet problem. Moreover, since $u=\phi$ a.e.~on $D^c$, we see that in fact $u\in {\mathcal F}$. Further, it is also shown in \cite[(3.3)]{FKV15} that there exists $C>0$ such that
$$
\|u\|_{V^{k,2}(D)}\le C \|\phi\|_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}\, .
$$
In particular
\begin{equation}\label{e:u-phi}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)^{1/2} \le C\|\phi\|_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}\, .
\end{equation}
Let
$$
{\mathcal F}_{D}:=\{u\in {\mathcal F}:\, u=0 \ m-\text{a.e.~in }D^c\},
$$
and note that ${\mathcal F}_{D}=V^{k,2}_D(D)$.
Define now the following simple trace operator. For $u\in {\mathcal F}$ let $\mathrm{Tr}(u):=u_{|D^c}$. Then $\mathrm{ker\,Tr}={\mathcal F}_{D}$. Next we define the space of harmonic functions in $D$ (with respect to the non-local operator ${\mathcal L}$). Let
\begin{eqnarray*}
H(D)&:=&\{u\in {\mathcal F};\ {\mathcal E}(u,v)=0 \text{ for all }v\in \mathrm{ker\ Tr}\}\\
&=&\{u\in {\mathcal F}; \ \widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)=0 \text{ for all }v\in {\mathcal F}_{D}\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Note that $H(D)$ is a closed subspace of ${\mathcal F}$. This is a consequence of the continuity of the form ${\mathcal E}$, cf.~\cite[Lemma 2.4]{FKV15}.
We also note that the solution $u\in {\mathcal F}$ of \eqref{e:dp} is in $H(D)$.
Further, ${\mathcal F}_{D}\cap H(D)=\{0\}$. Indeed, if $v$ is in the intersection, then $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(v,v)=0$. Since $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(\cdot, \cdot)$ is a norm on ${\mathcal F}_{D}$, it follows that $v=0$.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:decomposition}
It holds that
$$
{\mathcal F}={\mathcal F}_{D}\oplus H(D)
$$
in the sense that any $u\in {\mathcal F}$ can be uniquely decomposed as $u=v+w$ with $v\in {\mathcal F}_{D}$, $w\in H(D)$ and $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(v,w)=0$.
Moreover, $\mathrm{ker \, Tr}({\mathcal F})=\mathrm{ker \, Tr}(H(D))$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} By Lemma \ref{l:functional}, there exists a unique $v\in {\mathcal F}_{D}$ such that $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u, \psi)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(v, \psi)$ for all $\psi\in {\mathcal F}_{D}$. Let $w:=u-v\in {\mathcal F}$. Then for any $\psi \in {\mathcal F}_{D}$ we have $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(w,\psi)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,\psi)-\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(v,\psi)=0$. Uniqueness follows from the fact that ${\mathcal F}_{D}\cap H(D)=\{0\}$. The last assertion follows from $\mathrm{ker \, Tr} ({\mathcal F}_{D})=\{0\}$.
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
For $u\in {\mathcal F}$, let
$$
{\mathcal N} u(x):=\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))k(x,y)\, dy\, ,\qquad x\in \overline{D}^c\, ,
$$
cf.~\cite[(1.2)]{DRV17} where (up to a constant) ${\mathcal N}$ is called a \emph{non-local normal derivative}. Let
$$
\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}u(x):=\frac{{\mathcal N} u(x)}{\mu(x)}=\frac{\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))k(x,y)\, dy}{\int_{D}k(x,y)\, dy}\, , \qquad x\in \overline{D}^c\, ,
$$
be the normalized non-local normal derivative, see \cite[(3.8)]{DRV17}.
We continue by constructing the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator.
Let $\phi, \chi:D^c \to {\mathbb R}$ and assume that $\phi, \chi\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$. Let $u,v\in {\mathcal F}$ be the corresponding solutions of the Dirichlet problem \eqref{e:dp}. Since $u-\phi\in W^{k,2}_{D}({\mathbb R}^d)$, we see that $\mathrm{Tr}(u)=\phi$, and similarly, $\mathrm{Tr}(v)=\chi$. Moreover, $u,v\in H(D)$ .
Define the form ${\mathcal C}:L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)\times L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)\to {\mathbb R}$ by
$$
{\mathcal C}(\phi, \chi)={\mathcal C}(\mathrm{Tr}(u), \mathrm{Tr}(u)):={\mathcal E}(u,v)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)\, .
$$
By using \eqref{e:u-phi} in the second inequality below, we see that
$$
|{\mathcal C}(\phi, \chi)|=|\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)|\le \widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)^{1/2}\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(v,v)^{1/2}\le C^2 \|\phi\|_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}\|\chi\|_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}\, .
$$
This show that the linear functional $\chi\mapsto {\mathcal C}(\phi, \xi)$ is bounded on $L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$. Hence, there exists $\psi\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$ such that ${\mathcal C}(\phi, \chi)=(\psi, \chi)_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}$. Define the operator $N:L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)\to L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$ by $N\phi=\psi$. Since
$$
|(N\phi, \chi)|_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}=|{\mathcal C}(\phi, \chi)|\le C^2 \|\phi\|_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}\|\chi\|_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}\, ,
$$
we see that the operator $N$ is bounded. Thus, we have proved the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}\label{p:d-to-n}
There exists a \emph{bounded} operator $N:L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)\to L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$ such that
$$
(N\phi, \chi)_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}={\mathcal C}(\phi, \chi)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)\,
$$
for all $\phi, \chi\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$.
\end{proposition}
We call $N$ \emph{the Dirichlet-to-Neumann} operator. This is in accordance with the definition of the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator in the classical setting of the Laplacian, cf.~\cite[p.9]{AtE17}. Another justification is provided by the following observation. Write $v=v\mathbf{1}_{D^c}+v\mathbf{1}_{D}=v_1+v_2$. Then (since $v_1=0$ on $D$ and $v_1=\chi$ on $D^c$),
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v_1)} \nonumber \\
&=&\int_{D^c}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))(v_1(x)-v_1(y))k(x,y)\, dy\, dx \nonumber \\
&=&\int_{D^c} \chi(x) \int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))k(x,y)\, dy\, dx \nonumber \\
&=&\int_{\overline{D}^c} \chi(x) \int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))k(x,y)\, dy\, dx \nonumber \\
&=&\int_{\overline{D}^c} \chi(x) {\mathcal N} u(x)\, dx
=\int_{D^c} \widetilde{{\mathcal N}}u(x)\chi(x) \mu(x)\, dx =(\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}u, \chi)_{L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)}\, .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
This shows that $N\phi=\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}u$.
\section{The Dirichlet form and the corresponding process}\label{s:dirichlet-form}
In this section we show that $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a quasi-regular Dirichlet form on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$ and investigate the corresponding Markov process. Recall that $m(dx)=\mathbf{1}_{D}(x)dx+\mathbf{1}_{D^c}(x)\mu(x)dx$ (and need not be a Radon measure on Borel subsets of ${\mathbb R}^d$),
$$
{\mathcal F}=\{u:{\mathbb R}^d\to {\mathbb R}: u\in L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx)), \widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)<\infty\}\, ,
$$
and $\|u\|_{{\mathcal F}}^2=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)+\|u\|^2_{L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))}$. Let us introduce the standard notation in the theory of Dirichlet forms,
$$
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}_1(u,v):=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)+\langle u, v\rangle_{L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx)}\, ,\qquad u,v\in {\mathcal F}\, ,
$$
so that $\|u\|_{{\mathcal F}}^2=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}_1(u.u)$.
Further note that
$$
{\mathcal F}_{D}=\{u\in {\mathcal F}:\, u=0 \ m-\text{a.e.~in }D^c\}
$$
is equal to $V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$ and $\|\cdot \|_{{\mathcal F}}$ restricted to ${\mathcal F}_{D}$ is equal to $\|\cdot \|_{V^{k,2}(D)}$ restricted to $V^{k,2}_{D}(D)$ (and both are equivalent to $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(\cdot, \cdot)$). Let $X^{D}$ be the process $X$ killed upon exiting $D$, $(P_t^{D})_{t\ge 0}$ the corresponding $L^2(D, dx)$ semigroup, and $({\mathcal C}^{D}, {\mathcal D}({\mathcal C}^{D}))$ the Dirichlet form. Recall from \cite[Theorem 4.4.3]{FOT} that ${\mathcal D}({\mathcal C}^{D})=\{u\in W^{k,2}({\mathbb R}^d): u=0 \textrm{ a.e.~on }D\}=V_D^{k,2}(D)={\mathcal F}_D$ and that $({\mathcal C}^{D}, {\mathcal F}_D)$ is a regular Dirichlet form. For $u,v\in {\mathcal F}_D$ we have
$$
{\mathcal C}^D(u,v)={\mathcal E}^D(u,v)+\int_D u(x)v(x)\kappa(x)\, dx
$$
where
$$
\kappa(x)=\int_{D^c}k(x,y)\, dy \, ,\qquad x\in D\,
$$
is the killing function. Also, let
$$
{\mathcal C}^D_1(u,v):={\mathcal C}^D(u,v)+\langle u, v\rangle_{L^2(D,dx)}\, , \qquad u,v \in {\mathcal F}_D\, .
$$
\begin{remark}
{\rm
(i) Let $u\in {\mathcal F}$. Then by Lemma \ref{l:function-space}, $u\mathbf{1}_{D}, u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}\in {\mathcal F}$. Moreover, $u\mathbf{1}_{D}\in {\mathcal F}_D$ while $u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}\in L^2(D^c,\mu(x)dx)$. This show that every $u\in {\mathcal F}$ can be written as a sum of two functions, one from ${\mathcal F}_D$, the other from $L^2(D^c,\mu(x)dx)$. Clearly, such a decomposition is unique. Hence we can write ${\mathcal F}={\mathcal F}_D\oplus L^2(D^c,\mu(x)dx)$. Note that this decomposition is different than the one from Lemma \ref{l:decomposition}.
\noindent
(ii) Note that by Fubini's theorem
$$
\int_{D^c}\mu(y)\, dy=\int_{D^c}\int_D k(x,y)\, dy\, dx= \int_D \kappa(x)\, dx\, .
$$
This shows that the measure $m(dx)$ is finite if and only if the killing function $\kappa$ is integrable.
}
\end{remark}
Let $u,v\in {\mathcal F}$ and recall from Lemma \ref{l:function-space} that $u\mathbf{1}_{D}, v\mathbf{1}_{D}, u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}, v\mathbf{1}_{D^c}\in {\mathcal F}$. First note that
$$
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u\mathbf{1}_{D}, v\mathbf{1}_{D})={\mathcal E}^D(u,v)+\int_D\int_{D^c}u(x)v(x)k(x,y)\ dy\, dx={\mathcal C}^D(u,v)\, .
$$
We rewrite $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)$ now as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)&=&\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u\mathbf{1}_{D}+u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}, v\mathbf{1}_{D}+v\mathbf{1}_{D^c})\\
&=&\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u\mathbf{1}_{D}, v\mathbf{1}_{D})+\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}, v\mathbf{1}_{D^c})+\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u\mathbf{1}_{D}, v\mathbf{1}_{D^c})+\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u\mathbf{1}_{D^c}, v\mathbf{1}_{D})\\
&=&{\mathcal C}^D(u,v)+\int_{D^c}u(x)v(x)\mu(x)\, dx -\int_D\int_{D^c}\big(u(x)v(y)+u(y)v(x)\big)k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
More importantly, we have that
\begin{eqnarray}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)&=&{\mathcal E}^D(u,u)+\int_D\int_{D^c}(u(x)-u(y))^2\, dy\, dx\nonumber\\
&\le &{\mathcal E}^D(u,u)+2\int_D\int_{D^c} (u(x)^2+u(y)^2)\, dy \, dx\nonumber\\
&=&{\mathcal E}^D(u,u) +2\int_D u(x)^2\kappa(x)\, dx+2\int_{D^c}u(y)^2 \mu(y)\, dy \nonumber\\
&\le & 2\left({\mathcal C}^D(u,u)+ \int_{D^c}u(x)^2 \mu(x)\, dx)\right) .\label{e:df-estimate}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{proposition}\label{p:dirichlet-form}
$(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a Dirichlet form on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$.
\end{proposition}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} Clearly, $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$ is a symmetric bilinear form. Next, we argue that ${\mathcal F}$ is dense in $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$. Let $u\in L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$ and write $u=u{\mathbf{1}}_D+u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}$. The function $u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}$ is already in ${\mathcal F}$, cf.~Lemma \ref{l:function-space} (iii). Next consider $u{\mathbf{1}}_D\in L^2(D, dx)$. Since ${\mathcal D}({\mathcal C}^{D})={\mathcal F}_D$ is dense in $L^2(D, dx)$, there exists a sequence $(u_n)_{n\ge 1}\subset {\mathcal F}_D$ such that $u_{|D}=\lim_n u_n $ in $L^2(D; dx)$. Extend $u_n$ to all of ${\mathbb R}^d$ by setting $u_n(x)=0$ for $x\in D^c$. Then $u_n+u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}\in {\mathcal F}$ and converges to $u$ in $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$.
Further, since $({\mathcal F}, \|\cdot\|_{{\mathcal F}})$ is a Hilbert space, the form $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is closed. Finally, let $v$ be a normal contraction of $u\in {\mathcal F}$. Then $|v(x)-v(y)|\le |u(x)-u(y)|$ for all $x,y\in {\mathbb R}^d$, and thus clearly $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(v,v)\le \widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)<\infty$, hence normal contraction operates on $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\begin{remark}
{\rm Note that the Dirichlet form $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a special case of \cite[Example 1.2.4]{FOT}. Indeed, let
$$
j(x,dy)=\frac12 {\mathbf 1}_D(x)k(x,y)dy +\frac12 {\mathbf 1}_{D^c}(x){\mathbf 1}_D(y)\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}dy\, .
$$
Then $j(x,dy)$ satisfies (j.1), (j.2) and (j.3) from \cite[Example 1.2.4]{FOT}. Further, if $J(dx, dy):=j(x,dy)m(dx)$, then $J(dx,dy)$ is a symmetric measure and
$$
J(dx,dy)={\mathbf 1}_D(x)k(x,y)dy \, dx +{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}(x){\mathbf 1}_D(y) k(x,y) dy\, dx\, .
$$
Hence
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\iint_{{\mathbb R}^d\times {\mathbb R}^d}(u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y))J(dx, dy)}\\
&=&\frac12 \iint_{({\mathbb R}^d\times {\mathbb R}^d)\setminus (D^c\times D^c)}(u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y))k(x,y)dy\, dx=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Since ${\mathcal F}$ is dense in $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$ (see the proof above), it follows from \cite[Example 1.2.4]{FOT} that $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a Dirichlet form.
}
\end{remark}
Next we will show that the form $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is quasi-regular. For all unexplained notions (such as nests and quasi-continuity) we refer the reader to \cite{CF}.
\begin{theorem}\label{t:qrdf}
The form $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a quasi-regular Dirichlet form on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$.
\end{theorem}
\proof For a closed subset $F\subset {\mathbb R}^d$, let ${\mathcal F}_F:=\{u\in {\mathcal F}:\, u=0 \text{ $m$-a.e on }{\mathbb R}^d\setminus F\}$. We check that the three properties of \cite[Defintion 1.3.8.]{CF} are satisfied.
\noindent
(i) First we show that there exists an $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$-nest $(F_j)_{j\ge 1}$ of compact sets. Since $({\mathcal C}^D, {\mathcal F}_D)$ is a regular Dirichlet form, there exists a ${\mathcal C}^D$-nest $(A_j)_{j\ge 1}$ of compact subset of $D$. This means that $\bigcup_{j\ge 1} {\mathcal F}_{A_j}$ is dense in ${\mathcal F}_D$ with respect to ${\mathcal C}^D_1(\cdot, \cdot)$. Next, let $(B_j)_{j\ge 1}$ be an increasing sequence of compact subsets of $\overline{D}^c$ such that $\bigcup_{j\ge 1}B_j=\overline{D}^c$. For any $u\in L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$, we have that $u{\mathbf 1}_{B_j}\in {\mathcal F}_{B_j}$. Further, since ${\mathbf 1}_{\overline{D}^c\setminus B_j^c}\rightarrow {\mathbf 1}_{\partial D}=0$ $m$-a.e., by the dominated convergence theorem we get $\|u-u{\mathbf 1}_{B_j}\|_{L^2(D^c, m(dx))}=\|u{\mathbf 1}_{\overline{D}^c\setminus B_j^c}\|_{L^2(D^c, m(dx))}\rightarrow 0$. Set $F_j:=A_j\cup B_j$, $j\ge 1$. Then $F_j$ is a compact subset of ${\mathbb R}^d$. For $u\in {\mathcal F}$ and $\epsilon>0$ we can find $j\ge 1$, $v\in {\mathcal F}_{A_j}$ and $w\in {\mathcal F}_{B_j}$ such that ${\mathcal C}^D_1(u{\mathbf 1}_D-v,u{\mathbf 1}_D-v)<\epsilon$ and $\langle u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}-w, u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}-w\rangle_{L^2(D^c, m(dx))}<\epsilon$. Then $v+w\in {\mathcal F}_{F_j}$ and by \eqref{e:df-estimate}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\widehat{{\mathcal E}}_1(u-(v+w), u-(v+w))}\\
&=&\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u-(v+w), u-(v+w))+\langle u-(v+w), u-(v+w)\rangle_{L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))}\\
&\le &2\left({\mathcal C}^D(u{\mathbf 1}_D-v,u{\mathbf 1}_D-v)+\langle u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}-w, u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}-w\rangle_{L^2(D^c, m(dx))}\right)\\
& & +\langle u-(v+w), u-(v+w)\rangle_{L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))}\\
&\le &4\epsilon\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
This proves that $(F_j)_{j\ge 1}$ is an $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$-nest of compact sets. Note also that $\bigcap_{j\ge 1}({\mathbb R}^d\setminus F_j)=\partial D$ implying that $\partial D$ is $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$-polar.
\noindent
(ii) Since $({\mathcal C}^D, {\mathcal F}_D)$ is a regular Dirichlet form, $C_c(D)\cap {\mathcal F}_D$ is ${\mathcal C}^D_1(\cdot, \cdot)$-dense in ${\mathcal F}_D$. On the other hand, $C_c(\overline{D}^c)$ is dense in $L^2(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$. For $v\in C_c(D)\cap {\mathcal F}_D$, we denote by the same letter the function on ${\mathbb R}^d$ extended to be zero on $D^c$. Similarly, for $w\in C_c(\overline{D}^c)$, the same letter denotes the function on ${\mathbb R}^d$ extended to be zero on $D$. Let ${\mathcal G}:=\{u:\, u=v+w, v\in C_c(D)\cap {\mathcal F}_D, w\in C_c(\overline{D}^c)\}$. Each function in ${\mathcal G}$ is continuous, and therefore $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$-quasi-continuous. Moreover, ${\mathcal G}$ is dense in $({\mathcal F}, \widehat{{\mathcal E}}_1)$. Indeed, for $u\in {\mathcal F}$ and $\epsilon >0$, there exist $v\in C_c(D)\cap {\mathcal F}_D$ such that ${\mathcal C}^D_1(u{\mathbf 1}_D-v, u{\mathbf 1}_D-v)<\epsilon$, and $w\in C_c(\overline{D}^c)$ such that $\langle u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}-v, u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}-v\rangle_{L^2(D^c, m(dx))}<\epsilon$. By \eqref{e:df-estimate}, analogously as in part (i), we get that $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}_1(u-(v+w),u-(v+w))\le 4\epsilon$.
\noindent
(iii) Let $(A_j)_{j\ge 1}$ be an increasing sequence of compact subsets of $D$ such that $A_j\subset \mathrm{int}(A_{j+1})$ and $\bigcup_{j\ge 1}A_j=D$. Similarly, let $(B_j)_{j\ge 1 }$ be an increasing sequence of compact subsets of $\overline{D}^c$ such that $B_j\subset \mathrm{int}(B_{j+1})$ and $\bigcup_{j\ge 1}B_j=\overline{D}^c$. Let $v_j\in C_c(D)\cap {\mathcal F}_D$ such that $v_j=1$ on $A_j$ and $v_j=0$ on $D\setminus A_{j+1}$. Similarly, let $w_j\in C_c(\overline{D}^c)$ such that $w_j=1$ on $B_j$ and $w_j=0$ on $D^c\setminus B_{j+1}$. Then $u_j:=v_j+w_j$ is continuous on ${\mathbb R}^d$ and $u_j\in {\mathcal F}$. Thus $(u_k)_{k\ge 1}$ is a family of continuous (hence $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$-quasi-continuous) functions which clearly separates the points of ${\mathbb R}^d\setminus \partial D$. Since $\partial D$ is $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$-polar, the third property is verified. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\begin{remark}\label{r:not-regular}
{\rm
It is easy to see that $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ need \emph{not} be a regular Dirichlet form. Indeed, the measure $m(dx)$ need not be a Radon measure which by itself prevents $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ to be regular. Moreover, if the form were regular, then by \cite[Remark 1.3.11.]{CF}, ${\mathcal F}\cap C_c({\mathbb R}^d)$ would separate the points of ${\mathbb R}^d$ (here $C_c({\mathbb R}^d)$ are continuous functions with compact support). But note that if $u\in {\mathcal F}\cap C_c({\mathbb R}^d)$, then also $u{\mathbf 1}_{D^c}\in {\mathcal F}$, meaning that $\int_{D^c}u(x)^2 \mu(x)\, dx<\infty$. Since $\lim_{x\to \partial D, x\in \overline{D}^c}\mu(x)=+\infty$ (and $u$ is continuous), in case when $m(D^c)=\infty$, this forces $u(x)=0$ for every $x\in \partial D$. Therefore, ${\mathcal F}\cap C_c({\mathbb R}^d)$ does not separate points in $\partial D$. On the other hand, by the general theory, cf.~\cite[Theorem 1.4.3]{CF}, $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is quasi-homeomorphic to a regular Dirichlet form on a locally compact separable metric space $E$. It is easy to identify the space $E$ and the form: we take $E:={\mathbb R}^d\setminus \partial D=D\cup \overline{D}^c$, the disconnected union of open sets $D$ and $\overline{D}^c$, and the form is given by the essentially same formula as $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$:
$$
\widetilde{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)=\iint_{E\setminus (\overline{D}^c\times \overline{D}^c)} (u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y))k(x,y)\, dy \, dx, \qquad u,v\in \widetilde{{\mathcal F}},
$$
where
$$
\widetilde{{\mathcal F}}=\{u:E\to {\mathbb R}:\, \widetilde{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)<\infty\}.
$$
Then $(\widetilde{{\mathcal E}}, \widetilde{{\mathcal F}})$ is a regular Dirichlet form on $L^2(E, m_{|E})$.
}
\end{remark}
Since $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a quasi-regular Dirichlet form on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$ we can state the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{t:process-existence}
There exists a Hunt process $Y=(Y_t, {\mathbb Q}_x)$ on ${\mathbb R}^d\setminus \partial D$ properly associated with $(\widetilde{{\mathcal E}}, \widetilde{{\mathcal F}})$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent{\bf Proof.} We deduce from \cite[Theorem 1.5.2.]{CF} that there exists an $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$-polar set $N\subset {\mathbb R}^d$, and an $m$-symmetric, $m$-tight special Borel standard process $Y=(Y_t, {\mathbb Q}_x)$ on ${\mathbb R}^d\setminus N$ that is properly associated with $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$. By inspecting the proof of \cite[Theorem 1.5.2.]{CF} and using Remark \ref{r:not-regular}, we can conclude that $N=\partial D$ and that $Y$ is a Hunt process on ${\mathbb R}^d\setminus \partial D$ properly associated with $(\widetilde{{\mathcal E}}, \widetilde{{\mathcal F}})$. {\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
Let $\zeta$ denote the lifetime of $Y$.
It is easy to see that the part process of $Y$ on $D$ is precisely $X^D$, the underlying process $X$ killed upon exiting $D$, and that the part process of $Y$ on $\overline{D}^c$ is the process that sits at its starting point for an exponential amount of time (of parameter 1) and then it dies. The behavior of $Y$ is described as follows: starting from $x\in D$, $Y$ moves as the underlying process $X$ until $\tau_D^Y=\inf\{t>0:\, Y_t\notin D\}$, the first exit time from $D$. If $\tau_D^Y<\zeta$, then $Y$ jumps out of $D$ according to the kernel $k(Y_{\tau_D^Y-}, Y_{\tau_D^Y})$ and $y:=Y_{\tau_D^Y}\in \overline{D}^c$. Then $Y$ sits at $y$ for an exponential amount of time (of parameter 1) and then jumps back to $D$ according to the probability distribution $k(y,x)/\mu(y)$. Once in $D$, the process starts afresh.
We argue now that under a certain weak assumption, the lifetime $\zeta$ of $Y$ is infinite. Indeed, assume that ${\mathbb P}_x(X_{\tau_D^X}\in \partial D)=0$ for every $x\in D$, i.e., when $X$ exits $D$ it does so by jumping into $\overline{D}^c$. Sufficient conditions for this to hold can be found in \cite{Mil75, Szt00, SV08}. Then also $Y_{\tau_D^Y}\in \overline{D}^c$ and $Y$ spends an exponential time (of parameter 1) in $\overline{D}^c$ before coming back. This will be repeated infinitely many time and since the exponential sitting times are independent, the lifetime has to be infinite.
In the appendix we give an alternative construction of the process $Y$ and verify that the corresponding bilinear form is indeed $\widehat{{\mathcal E}}$.
\begin{remark}
{\rm
It has been proved in \cite[Lemma 2.20]{Voi} (when $k(x,y)=|x-y|^{-d-\alpha}$) that in case of a smooth open set $D$, $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, {\mathcal F})$ is a regular Dirichlet form on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d, dx)$. This means that the corresponding Hunt process $\widetilde{Y}$ can start from any point of $\partial D$. Away from the boundary $\partial D$, $\widetilde{Y}$ behaves like a time-changed process $Y$.
}
\end{remark}
In the remaining part of this section we look at the trace process of $Y$ on $\overline{D}^c$ and revisit the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator. Let
$$
B_t:=\int_0^t \mathbf{1}_{(Y_s\in \overline{D}^c)}ds\, ,\qquad \qquad \sigma_t:=\inf \{s>0:\, B_s>t \},
$$
and let $W_t:=Y_{\sigma_t}$ be the trace process. This process is a continuous-time Markov chain in $\overline{D}^c$ which sits at the point $x$ an exponential time with mean one, and then jumps to the point $z$ according to the jump distribution $p(x,z)dz$ that we are now going to compute. Let $P_{D}(y,z)$, $y\in D$, $z\in D^c$ be the Poisson kernel of $X$. Then clearly, $P_{D}(y,z)dz$ is the exit distribution of $Y$ from $D$. Let
$$
T_{D}:=\inf\{t>0:\, Y_t\in D\}\, .
$$
Then
$$
{\mathbb Q}_x(Y_{T_{D}}\in dy)=\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}\, dy\, ,
$$
and hence
$$
p(x,z)=\int_{D}{\mathbb Q}_x(Y_{T_{D}}\in dy) P_{D}(y,z)=\int_{D}\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)} P_{D}(y,z)\, dy\, .
$$
In order to identify $p(x,z)$, let $\phi:\overline{D}^c\to [0,\infty)$ be a measurable function. We probabilistically solve the exterior value Dirichlet problem with the exterior data $\phi$. Thus, let
$$
u(y):=\int_{D^c}P_{D}(y,z)\phi(z)\, dz\, ,\quad y\in D\, ,
$$
be the harmonic extension. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\psi(x)&:=&\int_{\overline{D}^c}p(x,z)\phi(z)\, dz=\int_{\overline{D}^c}\phi(z)\int_{D}\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}P_{D}(y,z)\, dz\, dy\\
&=&\int_{D}\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}\int_{D^c}P_{D}(y,z)\phi(z)\, dz=\int_{D}\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}u(y)\, dy .
\end{eqnarray*}
Let $Q\phi:=\psi$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{e:i-Q}
(I-Q)\phi(x)=\phi(x)-\int_{D}\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}u(y)\, dy =\int_{D}(\phi(x)-u(y))\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}\, dy=\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}u(x)=N\phi(x)\, .
\end{equation}
Thus, $I-Q=N$ is the Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator. In other words, the operator $-N$ is the infinitesimal generator of the trace process.
Recall that $m(dx)=\mathbf{1}_D(x)dx+\mathbf{1}_{D^c}(x)\mu(x)dx$. Then $m_{|\overline{D}^c}$ is the symmetrizing measure for the kernel $p$: $p(x,dz)m(dx)=p(z,dx)m(dz)$. Indeed, denote the Green function of $D$ with respect to $X$ by $G_{D}$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
p(x,z)\mu(x)&=&\int_{D}k(x,y)P_{D}(y,z)\, dy=\int_{D}k(x,y)\int_{D}G_{D}(y,w)k(w,z)\, dw\, dz\\
&=&\int_{D}k(z,w)\int_{D}G_{D}(w,y)k(y, x)\, dy\, dw =p(z,x)\mu(z)\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
We end this section by recovering \cite[Corollary 5.2]{BGPR17}. By \eqref{e:i-Q},
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)&=&\int_{D^c}\widetilde{{\mathcal N}}u(x)\phi(x)\, dx=\int_{D^c}\left(\phi(x)-\int_{D^c}p(x,z)\phi(z)\, dz\right)\phi(x)\mu(x)\, dx\\
&=&\iint_{D^c\times D^c} \phi(x)^2\mu(x)p(x,z)\, dz \, dx - \iint_{D^c\times D^c} \phi(x)\phi(z)\mu(x)p(x,z)\, dz \, dx\\
&=&\frac12 \iint_{\overline{D}^c\times \overline{D}^c}(\phi(x)-\phi(z))^2 \mu(x)p(x,z)\, dz\, dx.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore we have,
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathcal E}(u,u)&=&\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,u)+\frac{1}{2}\iint_{\overline{D}^c\times \overline{D}^c}(u(x)-u(y))^2k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\\
&=&\frac12 \iint_{\overline{D}^c\times \overline{D}^c} (\phi(x)-\phi(y))^2\left(\mu(x)p(x,y)+k(x,y)\right)\, dy\, dx.
\end{eqnarray*}
\section{The process $Z$}
Now we transform the process $Y$ so that the resulting process lives only in $D$. This new process corresponds to the description in \cite{DRV17} of a process that after it jumps from $D$ immediately returns to $D$.
Let $C_t:=\int_0^t 1_{(Y_s\in D)}\, ds$ be the time $Y$ spends in $D$ until the fixed time $t$. Then $C$ is a positive continuous additive functional whose support is $D$ (cf.~\cite[(5.1.21)]{FOT}).
Let $\tau_t:=\inf\{s>0:\, C_s>t\}$ be the right-continuous inverse of $C$. Define the new process $Z=(Z_t)_{t\ge 0}$ by $Z_t:=Y_{\tau_t}$. This construction amounts to deleting from the path of $Y$ the part that $Y$ spends in $\overline{D}^c$. The process $Z$ is a right Markov process with the state space $D$ (cf.~\cite[p.175]{CF}). For a non-negative Borel function $u$ on ${\mathbb R}^d$, let
$$
Hu(x):={\mathbb E}_x[u(Y_{T_{D}}), T_{D}<\infty]=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
u(x), & x\in D, \\
\int_{D}\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}u(y)\, dy, & x\in \overline{D}^c,\\
0, &x\in\partial D\, .
\end{array}\right.
$$
Further, let
$$
\left\{ \begin{array}{l}
\widecheck{{\mathcal F}}=\{\phi\in L^2(D, dx):\, \phi=u \text{ a.e.~on } D \text{ for some }u\in {\mathcal F}_e\}\\
\widecheck{{\mathcal E}}(\phi, \phi)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(Hu, Hu):\, \phi\in \widecheck{{\mathcal F}}, \phi=u \text{ a.e.~on } D, u\in {\mathcal F}_e\, .
\end{array} \right.
$$
Here ${\mathcal F}_e$ denotes the extended Dirichlet space.
By \cite[Theorem 5.2.2. and Theorem 5.2.7]{CF} $(\widecheck{{\mathcal E}},\widecheck{{\mathcal F}})$ is a quasi-regular Dirichlet form and the process $Z$ is properly associated with it. Moreover, if we regard $(\widehat{{\mathcal E}}, \widehat{{\mathcal F}})$ as a regular Dirichlet form $(\widetilde{{\mathcal E}}, \widetilde{{\mathcal F}})$ on $L^2({\mathbb R}^d\setminus \partial D, m_{|{\mathbb R}^d\setminus \partial D})$, then it follows from \cite[Theorem 6.2.1]{FOT}, that $(\widecheck{{\mathcal E}},\widecheck{{\mathcal F}})$ is in fact a regular Dirichlet form on $L^2(D,dx)$.
We compute now $\widecheck{{\mathcal E}}(\phi, \phi)$. For simplicity, let
$$
\widehat{k}(x,y):=\int_{D^c}\frac{k(x,z)k(z,y)}{\mu(z)}\, dz\, ,\quad x,y\in D\, ,
$$
and note that for any $x\in D$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\int_D \widehat{k}(x,y)\, dy&=&\int_D \int_{D^c}\frac{k(x,z)k(z,y)}{\mu(z)}\, dz\, dy=\int_{D^c}\frac{k(x,z)}{\mu(z)}\left(\int_Dk(z,y)\, dy\right)dz \nonumber\\
&=&\int_{D^c}k(x,z)\, dz=\kappa(x)\, .\label{e:k-hat-integral}
\end{eqnarray}
Hence $\widehat{k}$ is an integrable kernel.
We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\widecheck{{\mathcal E}}(\phi, \phi)&=&\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(Hu, Hu)\\&=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(Hu(x)-Hu(y))^2k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D}\int_{D^c}(Hu(x)-Hu(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D}u(x)^2\int_{D^c}k(x,y)\, dy\, dx \\
& & -2\int_{D}u(x)\int_{D^c}Hu(y)k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D^c}Hu(y)^2 \int_{D}k(x,y)\, dx\, dy\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D}u(x)^2 \kappa(x)\, dx\\
& & -2\int_{D}u(x)\int_{D^c}\left(\int_{D}\frac{k(y,z)}{\mu(y)}u(z)\, dz\right)k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D^c}\left(\int_{D}\frac{k(y,z)}{\mu(y)}u(z)\, dz\right)^2 \mu(y)\, dy\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D}u(x)^2 \kappa(x)\, dx\\
& & -2\int_{D}\int_{D}\left(\int_{D^c} \frac{k(x,y)k(y,z)}{\mu(y)}\, dy\right) u(x)u(z)\, dz\, dx \\
& & +\int_{D^c}\frac{1}{\mu(y)}\left(\int_{D}k(y,z)u(z)\, dz\right)\left(\int_{D}k(y,x)u(x)\, dx\right)\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D}u(x)^2 \kappa(x)\, dx\\
& & -2\int_{D}\int_{D}u(x)u(z)\widehat{k}(x,z)\, dz\, dx +\int_{D}\int_{D}u(x)u(z)\widehat{k}(x,z)\, dz\, dx\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(\phi(x)-\phi(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D}\phi(x)^2 \kappa(x)\, dx -\int_{D}\int_{D}\phi(x)\phi(y)\widehat{k}(x,y)\, dy\, dx\\
&=&{\mathcal C}^{D}(\phi, \phi)-\int_{D}\int_{D}\phi(x)\phi(y)\widehat{k}(x,y)\, dy\, dx\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Note that the calculation above shows that
$$
\int_{D}\phi(x)^2 \kappa(x)\, dx -\int_{D}\int_{D}\phi(x)\phi(y)\widehat{k}(x,y)\, dy\, dx=\int_{D}\int_{D^c}(Hu(x)-Hu(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\ge 0\, .
$$
Moreover, by use of \eqref{e:k-hat-integral} we have that
$$
\int_{D}\int_{D}\phi(x)^2 \widehat{k}(x,y)\, dy \, dx =\int_{D}\int_{D}\phi(x)^2 \int_{D^c}\left(\frac{k(x,z)k(z,y)}{\mu(z)}\, dz\right)dy\, dx=\int_{D}\phi(x)^2 \kappa(x)\, dx\, ,
$$
implying
$$
\int_{D}\phi(x)^2 \kappa(x)\, dx -\int_{D}\int_{D}\phi(x)\phi(y)\widehat{k}(x,y)\, dy\, dx=\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(\phi(x)-\phi(y))^2\widehat{k}(x,y)\, dy\, dx\, .
$$
Therefore, we finally have that
$$
\widecheck{{\mathcal E}}(\phi, \phi)=\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(\phi(x)-\phi(y))^2 (k(x,y)+\widehat{k}(x,y))\, dy\, dx\, .
$$
\section{Appendix: An alternative construction of the process $Y$}\label{s_appendix}
In this appendix we give an alternative construction of the process $Y$ and compute the bilinear form. The process $Y$ in $D$ behaves like $X$, once it jumps outside $D$, sits at the landing point $x$ for an exponential time, returns to $D$ according to the normalized measure $k(x,y)dy$, and then starts afresh.
Let $X=(X_t, {\mathbb P}_x)$ be the isotropic L\'evy process in ${\mathbb R}^d$ introduced in Section \ref{s:prelim}, and let $\tau=\tau_{D}=\inf\{t>0: X_t\notin D\}$ be the first exit time from $D$. According to \cite[Theorem 10.3, p.305]{Dy65}, the \emph{stopped} process $X^{\tau}$ is a standard process. Since its lifetime is infinite, $X^{\tau}$ is in fact a Hunt process. Define
$$
A_t:=\int_0^t \mathbf{1}_{(X^{\tau}_s\in \overline{D}^c)}\, ds\, ,\qquad \qquad M_t:=e^{-A_t}\,
$$
Then $M=(M_t)$ is a continuous strong multiplicative functional, cf.~\cite[III (3.11)]{BG68}. Moreover, if $(R_n)$ is an increasing sequence of stopping times converging to $R$, then $M_{R_n}\to M_R$ a.s.~on $\{R<\infty\}$, cf.~\cite[III (3.14)]{BG68}. Let $\widehat{X}=(\widehat{X}_t, \widehat{{\mathbb P}}_x)$ be the canonical subprocess of $X^{\tau}$ corresponding to $M$, cf.~\cite[III 3.]{BG68}. By \cite[III (3.16 Corollary)]{BG68}, $\widehat{X}$ is a Hunt process. Note that the lifetime $\zeta$ of $\widehat{X}$ is finite almost surely. We see that $\widehat{X}$ is the process that behaves as $X$ while in $D$. If the first exit from $D$ is in $\overline{D}^c$ (which happens a.s.), then $\widehat{X}$ sits at the exit place $X_{\tau}$ for an exponential time with mean one, and then it dies. If the exit place is on $\partial D$ (which will be the case ${\mathbb P}_x$-a.s. for a regular point $x\in \partial D$ ), then $\widehat{X}$ sits at the exit point forever. Also, if $X$ starts at a regular point $x\in \partial D$, then $\widehat{X}$ stays at $x$ forever.
Now we use the piecing out procedure from \cite{INW66}. The \emph{instantaneous distribution} $\mu(\omega, dy)$ is defined by
$$
\mu(\omega, dy):=\frac{\mathbf{1}_{D}(y)k(\widehat{X}_{\zeta-}(\omega), y)dy}{k(\widehat{X}_{\zeta-}(\omega))}\, .
$$
That is, once $\widehat{X}$ is killed it reappears at $y\in D$ according to the normalized jumping kernel $k(x,y)$ (where $x=\widehat{X}_{\zeta-}$, $y\in D$). Let $Y=(Y_t, {\mathbb Q}_x)$ be the process constructed in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{INW66} by the piecing out procedure. The lifetime of the process $Y$ is infinite. (This is clear because $\widehat{X}$ will be resurrected infinitely many times, and the sum of independent exponential random variables, each with mean 1, is infinite.) Moreover, the lifetime $\zeta$ of $\widehat{X}$ is a totally inaccessible stopping time. Therefore, according to \cite[Corollary of Proposition 4.2]{INW66}, $Y$ is a Hunt process.
In the remaining part of this appendix we compute the bilinear form of the Hunt process $Y$. For a bounded measurable $u:{\mathbb R}^d\to R$ let $Q_t u(x):={\mathbb Q}_x u(Y_t)$, $t\ge 0$ be the semigroup of $(Y_t, {\mathbb Q}_x)$.
Recall that $X^{D}$ is the process $X$ killed upon exiting $D$, $(P_t^{D})_{t\ge 0}$ the corresponding $L^2(D, dx)$ semigroup, $({\mathcal C}^{D}, {\mathcal D}({\mathcal C}^{D}))$ the Dirichlet form, and ${\mathcal D}({\mathcal C}^{D})={\mathcal F}_D$.
The killing function $\kappa:D\to [0,\infty) $ was defined as
$$
\kappa(x):=\int_{D^c}k(x,y)\, dy, \quad x\in D\, .
$$
Then for $u\in {\mathcal D}({\mathcal C}^{D})={\mathcal F}_D$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathcal C}^{D}(u,u)&=\frac12 &\int_{D}\int_{D} (u(x)-u(y))^2 k(x,y)\, dy\, dx +\int_{D}\kappa(x)u(x)^2\, dx\\
&=& {\mathcal E}^{D}(u,u)+\int_{D}u(x)^2\left(\int_{D^c}k(x,y)\, dy\right)\, dx\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{proposition}\label{p:bilinear-Y}
Let $u,v:{\mathbb R}^d\to {\mathbb R}$ be bounded function such that $u_{|D}\in C(D)\cap {\mathcal F}_D$, $v_{|D}\in {\mathcal F}_D$, $u_{|D^c}\in L^2(D^c,\mu(x)dx)$ and $v_{|D^c}\in L^1(D^c, \mu(x)dx)$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{e:bilinear-Y}
\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}(u(x)-Q_t u(x))v(x)\, m(dx)=\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)\, .
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\noindent{\bf Proof.}
Clearly, $u\in L^2({\mathbb R}^d, m(dx))$.
Recall that $T_{D}=\inf\{t>0:\, Y_t\in D\}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{e:distribution-of-YT}
{\mathbb Q}_x(Y_{T_{D}}\in dy)=\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}\, dy=:n(x,y)\, dy\, .
\end{equation}
Under ${\mathbb Q}_x$, $x\in \overline{D}^c$, $T_D$ has an exponential distribution with mean 1. Thus for $x\in \overline{D}^c$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathbb Q}_x u(Y_t)&=&{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t<T_{D}]+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge T_{D}]\\
&=&u(x){\mathbb Q}_x(t<T_D)+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge T_{D}]\\
&=&e^{-t}u(x)+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge T_{D}]\, ,
\end{eqnarray*}
hence
\begin{equation}\label{e:uxinOmega-c}
u(x)-Q_t u(x)=u(x)(1-e^{-t})-{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge T_{D}]\, .
\end{equation}
By \eqref{e:distribution-of-YT} and the fact that $(Y_{T_{D}+t})_{t\ge 0}$ is independent of $T_{D}$, we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge T_{D}]&=&\left(\int_{D}\frac{k(x,y)}{\mu(x)}{\mathbb Q}_y(u(Y_t))\, dy\right){\mathbb Q}_x(t<T_{D})\\
&=&(1-e^{-t}) \int_{D}{\mathbb Q}_y(u(Y_t)) n(x,y)\, dy\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
By the assumption on $u$ and $v$ ($u_{|D}$ bounded and continuous, $v_{|D^c}\in L^1(\mu(x)dx)$), the use of the dominated convergence theorem below is justified, and we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:Omega-c-part2}
\lefteqn{\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}\int_{D^c}v(x) {\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge T_{D}]m(dx)}\nonumber \\
&=&\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1-e^{-t}}{t}\int_{D^c} v(x)\int_{D}n(x,y){\mathbb Q}_y(u(Y_t))\, dy\, \mu(x)dx\nonumber \\
&=&\int_{D^c}v(x)\int_{D}n(x,y)\mu(x)u(y)\, dy \, dx=\int_{D^c}\int_{D}v(x)u(y)k(x,y)\, dy \, dx \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Further,
\begin{equation}\label{e:Omega-c-part1}
\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1-e^{-t}}{t}\int_{D^c}u(x)v(x) m(dx)=\int_{D^c}u(x)v(x)\mu(x) \, dx= \int_{D^c}\int_{D}u(x)v(x) k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\, .
\end{equation}
It follows from \eqref{e:uxinOmega-c}-- \eqref{e:Omega-c-part1} that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:limit-xinOmega-c}
\lefteqn{\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}\int_{D^c}(u(x)-Q_t u(x))v(x)\, m(dx)}\nonumber \\
&=&\int_{D^c}\int_{D}u(x)v(x) k(x,y)\, dy\, dx -\int_{D^c}\int_{D}v(x)u(y)k(x,y)\, dy \, dx \nonumber \\
&=&\int_{D}\int_{D^c}u(y)v(y) k(x,y)\, dy\, dx -\int_{D}\int_{D^c}u(x)v(y)k(x,y)\, dy \, dx
\end{eqnarray}
Now assume that $x\in D$ and let $\tau_D=\inf\{t>0: \, X_t\notin D\}$. Then we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\mathbb Q}_x u(Y_t)&=&{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t<\tau_{D}]+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}]\\
&=&{\mathbb E}_x[u(X_t), t<\tau_{D}]+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}]\\
&=&P_t^{D}u(x)+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}]\, ,
\end{eqnarray*}
hence
\begin{equation}\label{e:uxinOmega}
u(x)-Q_t u(x)=u(x)-P_t^{D} u(x)-{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}]\, .
\end{equation}
Since $u_{|D}, v_{|D}\in {\mathcal F}_D={\mathcal D}({\mathcal C}^{D})$, we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:limit-xinOmega-1}
\lefteqn{\lim_{t\to 0}\int_{D}(u(x)-P_t^{D}u(x))v(x)\, dx ={\mathcal C}^{D}(u,v)}\nonumber \\
& =&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx \\
& &+ \int_{D}u(x)v(x)\left(\int_{D^c}k(x,y)\, dy\right)\, dx\, .
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, we consider ${\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}]$. Let $\mathbf{e}$ be an independent exponential random variable as in the construction of the process $\widehat{X}$ (i.e., $\mathbf{e}$ is the waiting time in $D^c$ before jumping back to $D$). Then
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:xinOmega-aux}
\lefteqn{{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}]={\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), \tau_{D}\le t <\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}, t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]} \nonumber \\
&=& {\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_{\tau_{D}}), \tau_{D}\le t <\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}] \nonumber \\
&=& {\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_{\tau_{D}}), \tau_{D}\le t] -{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_{\tau_{D}}),t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}] \nonumber \\
&=& {\mathbb E}_x[u(X_{\tau_{D}}), \tau_{D}\le t] -{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_{\tau_{D}}),t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]+{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]
\end{eqnarray}
Note that
$$
{\mathbb Q}_x (\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}\le t)=\int_0^te^{-s}{\mathbb Q}_x(\tau_{D}+s\le t)\, ds
=e^{-t}\int_0^t e^s\ {\mathbb Q}_x(\tau_{D}\le s)\, ds\, .
$$
Hence, by right-continuity of $s\mapsto {\mathbb Q}_x(\tau_{D}\le s)$ and the fact that ${\mathbb Q}_x(\tau_{D}\le 0)=0$, we get
\begin{equation}\label{e:limit-exp}
\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}{\mathbb Q}_x (\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}\le t)=\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}e^{-t}\int_0^t e^s\ {\mathbb Q}_x(\tau_{D}\le s)\, ds=0\, .
\end{equation}
Since $u$ is bounded, \eqref{e:limit-exp} implies that
\begin{equation}\label{e:limit-xinOmega-2}
\limsup_{t\ge 0} \frac{1}{t}\big| {\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]\big| \le \|u\|_{\infty}\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}{\mathbb Q}_x (\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}\le t)=0\, ,
\end{equation}
and, similarly,
\begin{equation}\label{e:limit-xinOmega-3}
\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t} {\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_{\tau_{D}}), t\ge\tau_{D}+\mathbf{e}]=0\, .
\end{equation}
In order to handle the term ${\mathbb E}_x[u(X_{\tau_{D}}), \tau_{D}\le t] $ we will use the compensation formula
$$
{\mathbb E}_x\sum_{0<s\le t\wedge \tau_D} F(X_{s-}, X_s)={\mathbb E}_x \int_0^{t\wedge \tau_D} \int_{{\mathbb R}^d}F(X_s, y)k(X_s,y)\, dy\, ds
$$
with $F(x,y)=\mathbf{1}_{D}(x)\mathbf{1}_{D^c}(y)u(y)$. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{{\mathbb E}_x[u(X_{\tau_{D}}), \tau_{D}\le t] ={\mathbb E}_x\sum_{0<s\le t\wedge \tau_D} F(X_{s-}, X_s)}\\
&=&{\mathbb E}_x \int_0^{t\wedge \tau_D} \int_{D^c}\mathbf{1}_{(X_s\in D)}u(y)k(X_s,y)\, dy \, ds\\
&=&\int_0^t \int_{D^c} {\mathbb E}_x(\mathbf{1}_{(X_s\in D, s< \tau_D)}k(X_s,y))u(y)\, dy\, ds\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
Since for $x\in D$ and $y\in D^c$, $\lim_{s\to 0}{\mathbb E}_x[\mathbf{1}_{(X_s\in D, s<\tau_D)}k(X_s,y)]=k(x,y)$, we get that
\begin{equation}\label{e:limit-xinOmega-4}
\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}{\mathbb E}_x[u(X_{\tau_{D}}), \tau_{D}\le t]=\int_{D^c}u(y)k(x,y)\, dy\, .
\end{equation}
Now it follows from \eqref{e:limit-xinOmega-2}-\eqref{e:limit-xinOmega-4} that
\begin{equation}\label{e:limit-xinOmega-5}
\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}\int_{D}{\mathbb Q}_x[u(Y_t), t\ge\tau_{D}] v(x)\, dx = \int_{D}\int_{D^c}v(x)u(y)k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\, .
\end{equation}
Now \eqref{e:uxinOmega}, \eqref{e:limit-xinOmega-1} and \eqref{e:limit-xinOmega-5} imply that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e:limit-xinOmega}
\lefteqn{\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}\int_{D}(u(x)-Q_t u(x))v(x)\, dx=\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx} \nonumber \\
& & + \int_{D}\int_{D^c}u(x)v(x) k(x,y)\, dy\, dx -\int_{D}\int_{D^c}v(x)u(y)k(x,y)\, dy\, dx\, .
\end{eqnarray}
Putting together \eqref{e:limit-xinOmega-c} and \eqref{e:limit-xinOmega} we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\lim_{t\to 0}\frac{1}{t}\int_{{\mathbb R}^d}(u(x)-Q_t u(x))v(x)\, m(dx)}\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int_{D}\int_{D}(u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx\\
& & +\int_{D}\int_{D^c} (u(x)-u(y))(v(x)-v(y)) k(x,y)\, dy \, dx =\widehat{{\mathcal E}}(u,v)\, .
\end{eqnarray*}
{\hfill $\Box$ \bigskip}
\bigskip
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgements:}
I am grateful to Tom ter Elst for several useful discussions about the classical Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator and for the hospitality at the University of Auckland where this project was initiated. Thanks are also due to Renming Song for a helpful input related to the proof of Proposition \ref{p:bilinear-Y}, and Moritz Kassmann and Guy Fabrice Foghem Gounoue for a number of suggestions.
\bigskip
\noindent
\vspace{.1in}
\begin{singlespace}
\small
|
\section{Introduction}
To have particles with similar magnetic moment, shape and size, but different anisotropy, a possible experimental approach is to use $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ magnetite nanoparticles as a base system, and to dope them with e.g. $Mn$ or $Co$. In this way, a large variation in the anisotropy constant $K$ is expected while maintaining similar values of the other characteristic parameters. However, from the theoretical point of view, a puzzling question arises regarding the magnetic anisotropy of the system. Consider for example the $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ series as a function of $x$, which has cubic \textit{negative} anisotropy constant $K_{C}^{-}<0$ on the $x=0$ extreme of the series (corresponding to $Fe_{3}O_{4}$), but cubic \textit{positive} anisotropy $K_{C}^{+}>0$ on the other extreme $x=1$ (i.e. for $CoFe_{2}O_{4}$). The question is, what happens for intermediate compositions? What would be the \textit{effective} anisotropy of the Co-doped $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ nanoparticles? The magnetic anisotropy is a key magnetic parameter, particularly for nano-scaled materials at the single-domain range, as it determines the dynamical behaviour\cite{Livesey2018, Serantes2010}, efficiency of the magnetic torque \cite{Chantrell1983,Serantes2018}, or stability of ordered assemblies\cite{Serantes2009,Arora2019}. Thus, controlling the anisotropy is essential for a broad range of applications as diverse as magnetic recording\cite{Richter2012, Aas2013}, hyperthermia \cite{Conde-Leboran2015,Ruta2015}, or magnetic refrigeration\cite{vonRanke2008, Serantes2012}. In the following we will develop in this context the \textit{effective} anisotropy from a single-particle (\textit{macrospin} approximation) approach. The article is organized as follows: in Section \ref{the_idea} we introduce our simple idea to treat this problem; essentially, to approximate the effective anisotropy as dependent on the amount of $Co$-doping (see Figure \ref{fig:figure_1}). Then, in Section \ref{the_model} we describe the computational model used to study the problem. The results are reported and analysed in Section \ref{results}, which contains 2 subsections: firstly, in \ref{ideal_case} we analyse the role of the symmetry of the anisotropy, for the ideal case in which $|K_{C}^{-}|=|K_{C}^{+}|$; then, in \ref{real_case} the real $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ case is presented. Finally, Section \ref{conclusions} presents some conclusions and a summary of the work.
\onecolumngrid
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width = 0.8\textwidth]{Fig1.png}
\caption{Schematic illustration of the evolution of the effective anisotropy landscape of $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ nanoparticles as a function of the $Co$-content $x$. The bars for $x=0$ and $x=1$ represent the relative magnitudes of the anisotropy in each case. }
\label{fig:figure_1}
\end{figure}
\twocolumngrid
\section{The phenomenological idea}\label{the_idea}
For simplicity, we can envisage a nanoparticle small enough that the magnetic behaviour of the atomic moments is dominated by exchange. In this case, magnetic properties are appropriately described by the \textit{macrospin} approximation -i.e. the particle behaves as a large \textit{supermoment}. For such a nanoparticle, what would be the effect on the net anisotropy of having some $Fe$ sites replaced with $Co$? Here we assume firstly that $Co^{2+}$ cations displace octahedral $Fe^{2+}$ sites\cite{Slonczewski1958}. Further we assume that, since the anisotropy is a local property, to a first approximation we postulate the coexistence of both types of anisotropies. Then it follows that the net anisotropy is the volume weighted average of the anisotropies of the sites with $Fe^{2+}$ and $Co^{2+}$ cations.
To test this idea we developed a simple theoretical approach in which a positive cubic-anisotropy contribution directly proportional to the $Co$-doping fraction appears onto the cubic-negative anisotropy of the base $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ material. A systematic analysis and characterisation of the resulting magnetic properties of the model is carried out in general terms, and then applied to a particular case: the heating properties of $Co$-doped $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ magnetite nanoparticles as reported experimentally by Fantechi \textit{et al.}\cite{fantechi2015}. Finally, the intriguing possibility that a small $Co$-doping can lead to a decrease of the particle effective anisotropy is analyzed.
Assuming that the particles are sufficiantly small that the inner magnetic moments behave coherently, it seems reasonable to consider that the contribution of every magnetic moment will have a direct influence on the \textit{global} behaviour of the magnetic \textit{supermoment}. Thus, knowing that doping $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ with $Co$ adds a positive cubic anisotropy contribution\cite{Marcano2018}, our phenomenological approach gives that the effective particle anisotropy is, in first approximation, proportional to the volume weighted $Co$ and $Fe$ fractions as
\begin{equation}\label{combined_cubic_energies}
K_{C}=K_{C}^{Fe_{3}O_{4}}\cdot\left({1-x}\right)+K_{C}^{CoFe_{2}O_{4}}\cdot{x} ,
\end{equation} with the nominal bulk anisotropies of $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ and $CoFe_{2}O_{4}$ given by $K_{C}^{Fe_{3}O_{4}}=-1.1\cdot{10^4} J/m^3$ and $K_{C}^{CoFe_{2}O_{4}}=2.0\cdot{10^5} J/m^3$, respectively. It is important to emphasize here that while our approach might appear similar to other works tailoring the effective anisotropy by combining soft and hard magnetic materials (e.g. in core/shell geometry, considering the contributions from the different layers to be additive \cite{Zhang2015, Carriao2016}), the essence of the current work is however completely different. What is crucial here is introducing the mixed anisotropies of the $Co$ and $Fe$ at the atomic level which allows fine-tuning of the anisotropy magnitude and easy-axis orientation, to the best or our knowledge not considered in other approaches. The condition of additivity of the properties arises naturally as a consequence of the uniform magnetisation imposed by the nanoparticle dimensions.
As mentioned in the Introduction section, the simulated particle properties will be based on $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ with progressive $Co$ doping. For the sake of simplicity we have assumed that the saturation magnetisation does not vary significantly with $Co$ content\cite{Byrne2013}, considering it to have a constant value of $M_{S}=480 emu/cm^3$ for all cases. This reasonable assumption allows us to specifically concentrate on the role of the anisotropy. To ensure fully coherent magnetisation reversal we have focused on relatively small spherical nanoparticles of diameter $d=8.5 nm$; the same values as reported by Fantechi \textit{et al.}\cite{fantechi2015}.
\section{Computational model}\label{the_model}
Given the small size of the particles, well below the single-domain threshold, we model them as large macrospins with coherent rotation of the inner magnetic moments, as often assumed in theoretical studies of very small magnetic nanoparticles\cite{Serantes2012,Ruta2015,Livesey2018}. Thus, the free energy of each particle \textit{i} is governed by the Zeeman and anisotropy energies as
\begin{equation}\label{cubic_energy}
E_{i}=\vec{\mu_{i}}\cdot{\vec{H}}+K_{C}\left({\alpha^2\beta^2+\beta^2\gamma^2+\gamma^2\alpha^2}\right),
\end{equation}
with $\abs{\vec{\mu_{i}}}=M_{S}V_{i}$, where $M_{S}$ is the saturation magnetisation and $V_{i}$ is the particle volume; $\vec{H}$ is the applied magnetic field; $K_{C}$ is the cubic anisotropy constant and $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ are the cosine directors. The system is considered monodisperse in size, so that the only difference between particles is the orientation of the anisotropy axes and magnetic moment.
The dynamical magnetic response of the particles to the applied magnetic field is described by the Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation using the OOMMF software package\cite{oommf}. In general the results will consist of simulating $M(H)$ hysteresis loops, both in the quasistatic limit (considering major loops) at zero temperature ($T=0$); and under rapidly time-varying AC fields (at room temperature) as used in magnetic hyperthermia experiments. The quasistatic simulations were carried out by means of energy minimization; for the dynamical calculations we used the Oxs Extension Module \textit{thetaevolve}\cite{oommf-thetaevolve}, to account for thermal effects. It must be noted that to avoid considerations regarding dispersion of particle parameters (size\cite{Munoz-Menendez2015}, anisotropy\cite{Munoz-Menendez2017}, etc), we have for the sake of simplicity assumed in all calculations perfectly monodisperse systems. In this regard, given the relatively small particle sizes of the target experiment\cite{fantechi2015}, of about $8.5 nm$ in diameter - thus with a likely significantly bigger heating performance for the larger particles\cite{Munoz-Menendez2015, Munoz-Menendez2016}, we used the following characteristic size. The simulated size $d_{simul}$ was chosen as the average mean value of each experimental case, $<d_{exp}>$, plus $1.5$ times the corresponding standard deviation ($\sigma$) of each sample, i.e. $d_{simul}=<d_{exp}>+1.5\sigma_{exp}$ to account for the higher weighting of larger particles.
\section{Results and discussion}\label{results}
To study the properties of the simple approach described by \eqref{combined_cubic_energies}, we shall simulate the magnetic properties of nanoparticles of different $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ compositions as a function of the $x$-fraction of $Co$ content. However, based on the large difference between the respective anisotropy constants of $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ and $CoFe_{2}O_{4}$ (thus with an expected much higher influence of the $K_{C}>0$ contribution), for illustrative purposes we will consider at first the ideal case of the anisotropy evolving between $K_{C}^{-}$ (x=0.0) and $K_{C}^{+}$ (x=1.0), with $|K_{C}^{-}|=|K_{C}^{+}|$. Later, the realistic case of the transition between $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ and $CoFe_{2}O_{4}$ alloys will be considered.
Thus, for now we will just consider the effective anisotropy $K_{C}^{eff}$ of the ideal situation described by
\begin{equation}\label{combined_NEG_POS-ideal}
K_{C}^{eff}=K_{C}^{-}\cdot\left({1-x}\right)+K_{C}^{+}\cdot{x},
\end{equation}
where $K_{C}^{-}=-1.1\cdot{10^4} J/m^3$ and $K_{C}^{+}=1.1\cdot{10^4} J/m^3$. By doing so the colors depicted in Figure \ref{fig:figure_1} correspond to the same energy scale, thus making easy to discern the effect of the combined anisotropies. It is important to keep in mind that the different energy geometries are shown for illustrative purposes; otherwise the same geometry with inter-exchanged color scheme would be enough to resemble both positive and negative anisotropy energies.
\subsection{Ideal case: from $K_{C}^{-}$ to $K_{C}^{+}$, with $\lvert{K_{C}^{-}}\rvert=\lvert{K_{C}^{+}}\rvert$}\label{ideal_case}
Firstly, we have simulated the hysteresis loops of the reference cases corresponding to pure $K<0$ and $K>0$ (i.e. extreme cases $x=0$ and $x=1$). Typical hysteresis loops for various angles of field direction are shown in Figure \ref{fig:figure_2}, for two different rotation cross-sections: parallel to the XZ plane ($\varphi=\ang{0}$), and rotated ($\varphi=\ang{15}$) around the Z direction.
\onecolumngrid
\begin{figure}[ht]
\includegraphics[width = 0.6\columnwidth]{Fig2.pdf}
\caption{Hysteresis loops corresponding to the extreme cases $x=0$ ($K_{C}<0$, top panel) and $x=1$ ($K_{C}>0$, bottom panel), for the ideal case $|K_{C}^{-}|=|K_{C}^{+}|$ (as described by equation \eqref{combined_NEG_POS-ideal}). For each case the loops correspond to rotation within the XZ plane ($\varphi=\ang{0}$; left panel) or at $\varphi=\ang{15}$ around the Z direction (right panel), to show the different symmetries throughout the loop. The magnetisation switching can be a one- or a two-step process (switching fields $H_{S1}$, $H_{S2}$).}
\label{fig:figure_2}
\end{figure}
\twocolumngrid
The results displayed in Figure \ref{fig:figure_2} are similar -but of opposite trends- for both signs of anisotropy. Depending on the orientation between field and anisotropy easy axes, the magnetisation will undergo one or two switching events, and also exhibit different area and coercivity. For example, hysteresis loops for field variation along $\theta=\ang{0}$ have a strong dependence on the sign of the anisotropy. For $K>0$ the magnetisation starts in an easy direction giving a square loop and large coercivity, whereas for $K<0$ the magnetisation starts in a hard direction resulting in a rounded loop with reduced area and coercivity.
Having shown and analyzed the known extreme cases of $x=0$ and $x=1$, we now proceed in a similar way (simulation of angular-dependent hysteresis loops) for mixed-anisotropy compositions as described by equation \eqref{combined_NEG_POS-ideal}. To compare the different cases we have focused on the angular-dependence of the switching fields ($H_{S}$), for the same illustrative cases of $\varphi=\ang{0}$ and $\varphi=\ang{15}$ of Figure \ref{fig:figure_2}. The results are summarized in Figure \ref{fig:figure_3}.
\onecolumngrid
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width = 1.0\columnwidth]{Fig3.png}
\caption{Angular dependence of the switching fields (as described in Figure \ref{fig:figure_2}, for different fractions of positive and negative anisotropy constants. Top and bottom panels for each doping case correspond, respectively, to the $\varphi=\ang{0}$ and $\varphi=\ang{15}$ cases described in Figure \ref{fig:figure_2}. The yellow-orange drawings stand for the corresponding energy landscape of each $x$ fraction, with the close small bar illustrating the different energy scales.}
\label{fig:figure_3}
\end{figure}
\twocolumngrid
The first main feature observed in Figure \ref{fig:figure_3} is that while the overall shape of the $H_{S}$ \textit{vs.} $\theta$ is quite similar for all $x$ cases, the absolute values rapidly decrease and tend to zero close to the $50\%$ composition (note that the choice of $x=0.48$ and $x=0.52$ was made specifically to illustrate this observation).
The second main relevant aspect observed in Figure \ref{fig:figure_3} is that the apparent symmetry in the magnetic properties around the $x=0.50$ value observed for the case $\varphi=\ang{0}$ does not hold for the case of $\varphi=\ang{15}$. This is due to the different symmetry of the energy landscapes of the $K_{C}<0$ and $K_{C}>0$ cases (with 6 or 8 easy directions, respectively), which results in energy barriers of $K_{C}V/12$ or $K_{C}V/4$, respectively\cite{Yanes2007}. In order to weight the relative importance of such differences and considering the likely random orientation of a real sample in space, we have simulated the average properties of a system with randomly distributed easy axis directions for this ideal situation described by Eq. \eqref{combined_NEG_POS-ideal}. The results are displayed in Figure \ref{fig:figure_4}.
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width = 1.0\columnwidth]{Fig4.pdf}
\caption{Main panel: $M(H)$ hysteresis loops (corresponding to a randomly dispersed system), for various illustrative $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ compositions; inset: detailed evolution of the coercive field, $H_{c}$, and remanence, $M_{r}$, as a function of $x$.}
\label{fig:figure_4}
\end{figure}
The main panel within Figure \ref{fig:figure_4} shows various hysteresis loops, including the theoretically well known extreme cases of pure $K_{C}<0$ ($x=0$) and $K_{C}>0$ ($x$=1). A detailed analysis of those indicates that the theoretical values of coercive field ($H_{c}$) and remanence ($M_{r}$) are well reproduced: for $K_{C}<0$ we obtain $H_{c}=0.20H_{K}$, where $H_{K}=2K/M_{S}$, and $M_{r}=0.87M_{S}$; and $K_{0}>0$ we find $H_{c}=0.32H_{K}$ and $M_{r}=0.82M_{S}$, as theoretically described by Usov \textit{et al.}\cite{Usov1997}. Such good agreement adds further support to our numerical results.
Regarding the combination of anisotropies, two main characteristics are observed: on the one hand, $H_{C}$ shows a markedly linear initial decrease until reaching zero at about $x=0.5$, followed by a subsequent increase (also essentially linear, but of different slope); the extreme values in both cases correspond to the theoretical ones reported by Usov \textit{et al.}\cite{Usov1997} described earlier on. Since the coercive field is directly proportional to the anisotropy (no shape or interparticle interactions are present) this means that the approach predicts that \textit{the combination of opposite-symmetry anisotropies may lead to the cancellation of the effective total anisotropy}. We shall come back to this aspect later on. On the other hand and regarding the remanence, we also observed a two-regime behaviour but it this case of completely different features: $M_{R}$ is a bi-valued constant with the threshold at $x=0.5$, reaching the corresponding extreme cases for smaller and larger values as reported previously.
\subsection{The real $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ case: from $K_{C}^{-}=-1.1\cdot{10^4} J/m^3$ to $K_{C}^{+}=2.0\cdot{10^5} J/m^3$}\label{real_case}
Now that we have already analyzed the general properties demonstrated be the simple approach summarized by Eq. \eqref{combined_NEG_POS-ideal}, we investigate the behavior of the real $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ system as described by Eq. \eqref{combined_cubic_energies}. As mentioned in the Introduction, our goal is to study the hyperthermia performance of the $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ particles reported by Fantechi \textit{et al.}\cite{fantechi2015}. Thus, we simulated dynamic hysteresis loops for the experimental particle properties under the same field conditions, assigning to the effective anisotropy the value obtained from Eq. \eqref{combined_cubic_energies}. Some representative dynamical curves are shown in Figure \ref{fig:figure_5}, where also the quasistatic curves of the $x=0.0$ and $x=1.0$ limit cases are displayed for illustrative purposes.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 1.0\columnwidth]{Fig5.png}
\caption{Top panel: quasistatic $M(H)$ curves of the extreme cases of the series. Bottom panel: several dynamic $M(H)$ loops corresponding to the experimental conditions reported in Ref. \cite{fantechi2015} (frequency 183 kHz; field amplitude 12 kA/m; temperature 300 K).}
\label{fig:figure_5}
\end{figure}
The results displayed in Figure \ref{fig:figure_5} show that while a large difference depending on the composition is observed in the quasistatic curves (top panel), for the dynamical conditions (bottom panel) the curves become apparently very similar. However, the numerical evaluation of the hysteresis loop area of the dynamical loops indicate that there are in fact substantial differences. The loop area is used to estimate the \textit{Specific Absorption Rate} (SAR), i.e. the heating capability of the particles, usually defined as $SAR=area\times{frequency}$. The corresponding SAR values are summarized in Figure \ref{fig:figure_6}, showing good agreement between experiments and simulations. Such good agreement undoubtedly provides strong support to the simple effective anisotropy macrospin approach proposed here.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 1.0\columnwidth]{Fig6.png}
\caption{Comparison between the experimentally measured $SAR$ values reported in Ref. \cite{fantechi2015} (black dots), and the ones obtained from the simulations (blue triangles).}
\label{fig:figure_6}
\end{figure}
Having said that, the question posed in view of Figure \ref{fig:figure_4} still holds: would it be possible to lower the (already quite small) anisotropy of $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ nanoparticles by doping with Co? This intriguing question is answered in Figure \ref{fig:figure_7}, which suggests that a small $Co$-doping (of about $5\%$) would lead to a suppression of the effective anisotropy.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width = 1.0\columnwidth]{Fig7.pdf}
\caption{Predicted $Co$-doping dependence of the coercive field for $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ nanoparticles according to Eq. \eqref{combined_cubic_energies}.}
\label{fig:figure_7}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}\label{conclusions}
We have considered theoretically, under the \textit{macrospin} approximation, the evolution of the effective magnetic anisotropy of the $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ series as a function of $x$, from the extreme cases of negative cubic-anisotropy of $Fe_{3}O_{4}$, to the positive cubic-anisotropy of $CoFe_{2}O_{4}$. Our phenomenological model assumes the $Co$-doping to result in an increasing $K_{C}>0$ contribution onto the $K_{C}<0$ $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ parent phase, which changes continuously both the magnitude and the symmetry of the net anisotropy. On this basis we have developed a simple model for the effective anisotropy of the macrospin in which $K_{C}<0$ and $K_{C}>0$ coexist in combination, directly proportional to the fraction of $Co$ present in the $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ phase. Applying this model to an experimental study on hyperthermia performance of $Co_{x}Fe_{3-x}O_{4}$ nanoparticles \cite{fantechi2015} we obtain a remarkably good agreement, which suggests that our simple assumptions may be reasonable. Interestingly, a side conclusion of our approach is that it predicts that a small $Co$-doping would lead to a decrease, and even the disappearance of the effective anisotropy, a quite unexpected result. It is the subject of future work to investigate such an intriguing possibility. However, we note that this may be complicated to demonstrate experimentally due to the required conditions, in particular it would be necessary to achieve highly spherical samples to remove shape-anisotropy effects, which for such small anisotropy could be very relevant and even dominate over the magnetocrystalline contribution\cite{Usov2010}).
\section{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge the Centro de Supercomputacion de Galicia (CESGA) for the computational resources. This research was partially supported by the Conseller\'ia de Educaci\'on Program for Development of a Strategic Grouping in Materials (AeMAT) at the Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (ED431E2018/08, Xunta de Galicia). D.S. also acknowledges Xunta de Galicia for financial support under the I2C Plan. Financial support of an International Exchanges grant (IE160535) of the Royal Society is gratefully acknowledged.
|
\section{Cooling a system with a single fridge qubit}
In nature, gapped physical systems cool down to a state with high overlap to the ground state when interacting with a bath that is cold and large, under the condition of ergodicity.
We define the bath \emph{cold} if its temperature $T_\tB$ is small compared to the ground state gap $\Delta_\tS$ of the system to be cooled, $k_\text{B}T_\tB \ll \Delta_\tS$.
Ergodicity is intended as the lack of symmetries that prevent excitations to be transferred from the system to the bath, or that reduce the size of the accessible bath Hilbert space.
Given a system with Hamiltonian $H_{\mathrm{S}}$ and eigenstates $H_{\mathrm{S}}|E_j\rangle=E_j|E_j\rangle$, energy conservation implies that the bath must have states at energies $E_j-E_0$ to allow de-excitation of the eigenstates $E_j$.
This is typically achieved by having a bath with a continuous or near-continuous low-energy spectrum [Fig.~\ref{fig:level-scheme}(a)].
The bath need not cool all states immediately to the ground state.
Instead, a bath typically absorbs single quanta of energy $\epsilon=E_i-E_f$ that correspond to local excitations of the system $|E_i\rangle \to |E_f\rangle$, at a rate given by Fermi's golden rule:
\begin{align}
&\frac{d P_{\mathrm{i}\rightarrow \mathrm{f}}}{dt}=\frac{2}{\hbar}\int_0^\infty d\epsilon\,|\langle E_f,\epsilon|H_{\mathrm{C}}|E_i,0\rangle|^2\,\rho_B(\epsilon)\nonumber\\
&\hspace{1cm}\times\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}\frac{\sin[(E_i-E_f-\epsilon)\,t]}{E_i-E_f-\epsilon}\label{eq:fgr1}\\
&=\frac{2\pi}{\hbar}\,|\langle E_f,\epsilon|H_{\mathrm{C}}|E_i,0\rangle|^2\,\rho_B(E_i-E_f)\label{eq:fgr2},
\end{align}
where $H_{\mathrm{C}}$ is the coupling between the system and the bath, and $\rho_B$ is the density of states of the bath.
This requires the bath to be large enough to prevent reexcitation of these states as the system continues cooling.
In other words, the bath must have a large Hilbert space compared to the one of the system.
This ensures that, at equilibrium, most of the entropy is distributed in the bath.
To represent such a large bath with an ancillary register on a quantum device would be impractically costly.
In this work, we approximate the presence of a much larger bath with a single ancilla qubit [Fig.~\ref{fig:level-scheme}(b)], with bath Hamiltonian $H_{\mathrm{B}}=\epsilon\,Z/2$.
The coupling between the bath and the system takes the form $H_{\mathrm{C}}=\gamma X\otimes V_S/2$, where $\gamma$ is the coupling strength, and $V_S$ a \emph{coupling term} that acts on the system alone.
A key advantage of the digital approach is that we are free to choose $V_S$ as desired to optimize the cooling protocols.
The Hamiltonian of the entire system and bath then takes the form
\begin{equation}
H=H_{\mathrm{S}}+H_{\mathrm{B}}+H_{\mathrm{C}},\label{eq:full_ham}
\end{equation}
This has an immediate problem, as the bath can only absorb a single quantum of energy $\epsilon$, but we may circumvent this by periodically resetting the ancilla qubit to $\ket{0}$.
The non-unitary reset in effect extracts energy and entropy from the ancilla to a much larger external bath (the experimenter's environment).
For this reason we call the ancilla qubit a `fridge' qubit.
The non-unitarity introduced in the process is necessary to dissipate entropy, allowing to prepare the ground state from an arbitrary starting state.
As the time between resets is finite, the $t\rightarrow\infty$ limit in Eq.~\eqref{eq:fgr1} is no longer justified and energy is no longer conserved.
This is both a blessing and a curse --- we need not precisely guess the energy gap $\Delta =E_i-E_f$ of the transition that we need to de-excite, but we run the risk of reheating the system at each cooling round.
Balancing these competing factors is key to the successful design of QDC protocols.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering{
\import{./}{level-scheme}}
\caption{
The de-excitation of the system transition $\ket{E_1}_\tS \to \ket{E_0}_\tS$ mediated by: \textbf{(a)} a continuous-spectrum natural bath, where an excitation $\ket{\epsilon}_\tB$ at energy $\epsilon$ is produced, and \textbf{(b)} a single-qubit digital fridge, which can be excited if $\epsilon = \Delta $.
}
\label{fig:level-scheme}
\end{figure}
\section{De-exciting a single transition: the 1+1 model}
In order to design some basic protocols for QDC, we turn to a toy `1+1' model.
We take a single-qubit system with Hamiltonian $H_{\mathrm{S}}=\Delta\,Z/2$, and couple it to a single fridge qubit with coupling term $V_S=X$.
Although this model is simple, it can for instance represent a pair of levels being targetted for cooling in a much larger quantum system. We will make use of this interpretation when extending these cooling protocols in section \ref{sec:Scalable_QDC}.
\subsection{Elementary approaches to digital cooling: strong and weak-coupling \label{sec:known_gap_cooling}}
Let us first assume $\Delta$ is known, in which case resonant cooling ($\epsilon=\Delta$) can be seen to be the most effective choice of $\epsilon$.
With this fixed, the transition probabilities after time $t$ may be calculated analytically to be
\begin{equation}
P_{1\rightarrow 0}=\sin^2\left(\frac{\gamma}{2} t\right)
,
P_{0\rightarrow 1}=\frac{\gamma^2\sin^2(t\Omega)}{4\Omega^2},
\end{equation}
where $\Omega=\sqrt{\gamma^2/4+\epsilon^2}$.
We wish to maximise the cooling probability $P_{1\rightarrow 0}$ while minimizing the reheating probability $P_{0\rightarrow 1}$ by optimizing the remaining free parameters: the coupling strength $\gamma$ and the cooling time $t$.
To maximize the cooling rate $P_{1\rightarrow 0}=1$, we must set
\begin{equation}
t=\pi \gamma^{-1}.\label{eq:coupling_time}
\end{equation}
We assume this constraint throughout this paper. This goes beyond the perturbative regime $\gamma t \ll 1$ in which Eq.~\eqref{eq:fgr1} is formulated.
However, we can take two very different approaches to minimize reheating, based on strong or weak coupling.
The weak-coupling approach is based on the observation that the off-resonant transition $P_{0\rightarrow 1}$ is bounded by $\gamma^2/4\Omega^2$.
As such, we may suppress reheating to an arbitrary level by choosing sufficiently small $\gamma$.
The time-cost for Hamiltonian simulation of $e^{iHt}$ scales at best linearly in $t$~\cite{Berry2007efficient}, so this implies one may obtain the ground state with failure probability $p$ in time $O(p^{-1})$, regardless of the initial state of the qubit.
The strong-coupling approach consists of tuning $\gamma$ so that $\Omega t=\pi$, which is achieved when $\gamma=\frac{2}{\sqrt{3}}\epsilon$.
This fixes the reheating exactly to $0$, guaranteeing the qubit to be in the ground state in the shortest possible time, but at the cost of requiring fine-tuning.
Unlike in analog quantum simulation, digital devices cannot exactly implement the dynamics of the Hamiltonian in Eq.~\eqref{eq:full_ham}, and must approximate it digitally instead.
A common approach to such digitization is that of the Suzuki-Trotter expansion~\cite{Trotter,Suzuki}, which we now explore for the two cooling paradigms.
We apply the (first-order) expansion of the coupled system-bath evolution with Trotter number $M$,
\begin{align} \label{eq:trotter}
&e^{-i(H_{\mathrm{S}}+H_{\mathrm{B}}+H_{\mathrm{C}})\,t}\nonumber\\&\hspace{0.5cm}\sim e^{-iH_{\mathrm{C}}\frac{t}{M+1}}\left[e^{-i(H_{\mathrm{S}}+H_{\mathrm{B}})\frac{t}{M}}e^{-iH_{\mathrm{C}}\frac{t}{M+1}}\right]^M.
\end{align}
If we restrict to the subspace containing the states involved in the cooling transition $\ket{10}_{\tS\tF}\to\ket{01}_{\tS\tF}$, at resonant cooling we have $H_{\mathrm{S}} + H_{\mathrm{B}} \propto \mathbb{1}$.
Thus, the Trotterized evolution behaves exactly like the continuous one with regards to the cooling transition.
We study reheating probabilities as a function of t for different values of $M$ in the weak-coupling regime.
We observe (Fig.~\ref{fig:trotter}) that the digitized evolution approximates well the behavior of the continuum limit whenever $t\Omega/\pi \lesssim M$ (i.e. for the first $M$ Rabi oscillations with pulse $\Omega$).
For longer times $t\Omega\pi \gtrsim M$, the first-order Trotter approximation fails, leading to reheating rates far larger than in the continuum limit.
This allows us to define a practical choice of $M$ to avoid reheating due to digitization.
For the weak-coupling case, we choose $M\geq 2 \sqrt{1+\epsilon^2/\gamma^2}$, which sets the working point $t=\pi\gamma^{-1}$ before the $M/2$ Rabi oscillation.
However, in the strong-coupling case $t\,\Omega/\pi = \sqrt{3}$, which implies that a single step is sufficient.
Indeed, digitized cooling with probability $1$ and no reheating can be realized by a \emph{bang-bang} approach (inspired by similar approach in variational methods~\cite{Yang2016,Bapat2018}). This consists in defining the evolution as in Eq.~\eqref{eq:trotter} with $M=1$, as long as the coupling strength is adjusted to $\gamma = 2 \epsilon$.
With this choice, the digitized evolution implements resonant Ramsey interference on the cooling transition $\ket{10}_{\tS\tF}\to\ket{01}_{\tS\tF}$ and anti-resonant Ramsey interference on the reheating transition $\ket{00}_{\tS\tF}\to\ket{11}_{\tS\tF}$.
The short depth of the circuit that implements this bang-bang cooling approach makes it attractive for near-term applications. Note, that for the $N$-qubit $H_{\mathrm{S}}$ the digital implementation of the unitary $\exp\left[-iH_{\mathrm{S}} t\right]$ may require further Trotterization, bringing additional costs and errors. For the sake of simplicty, in this work we will ignore these and use expansion Eq.~\eqref{eq:trotter} also in section \ref{sec:Scalable_QDC}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{P-trotter}
\caption{
Effects of Trotterization on cooling and reheating probabilities as a function of the coupling time $t$, for different numbers of Trotter steps $M$ per cooling cycle.
Vertical dotted lines indicate the $M$-th reheating oscillation, at which point the Trotter approximation fails.
}
\label{fig:trotter}
\end{figure}
A key difference between the two approaches to digital cooling is in their behavior off-resonance, i.e.~when the energy gap is mistargetted or not precisely known.
For the bang-bang approach, detuning reduces the cooling efficiency while symmetrically boosting reheating [Fig.~\ref{fig:detuning}(a)].
The wide resonance peak around zero detuning makes this approach ideal to quickly cool transitions which energy is known up to a small error.
In the weak-coupling approach the resonance peak becomes sharper and the reheating gets more suppressed as the coupling is made smaller [Fig.~\ref{fig:detuning}(b)], approaching the energy conservation limit.
Detuning makes cooling inefficient, but thanks to the arbitrarily low reheating this weak-coupling cooling can be iterated while changing $\epsilon$ to try to match the transition energy, without destroying the cooling effect.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{P-detuning}
\vspace{-2em}
\caption{
Effect of fridge-system detuning $\delta = \Delta - \epsilon$ on the cooling (solid) and reheating (dashed lines) probabilities for \textbf{(a)} the bang-bang cooling approach, and \textbf{(b)} the weak-coupling cooling approach, where colors indicate different couping strengths.
}
\label{fig:detuning}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Common symmetries and the coupling alternation method \label{sec:common_symmetries}}
For a complex Hamiltonian, we may not have full information on the system eigenbasis.
Therefore, common symmetries $S$ between the system Hamiltonian $H_\tS$ and the coupling operator $V_\tS$ (i.e., $\left[S,H_\tS\right]=\left[S,V_\tS\right]=0$) may arise that compromise the cooling procedure.
In the 1+1 qubit model we can simulate this by considering the system Hamiltonian $H_\tS=h\,\vec{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma}$, characterized by a random unit vector $\vec{n}$.
For any given coupling operator $V_\tS$, there is a risk that $[H_\tS, V_\tS]\approx 0$.
When this is the case, the off-diagonal elements of $V_\tS$ in the system eigenbasis are zero, and no cooling occurs.
To prevent this, we alternate between different coupling terms $V^i_\tS\in\{X_\tS,Y_\tS,Z_\tS\}$ during the cooling protocol, as no non-trivial Hamiltonian can commute with all such coupling terms.
The effectiveness of this scheme is demonstrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:XYZ-spheres}: the probability of failure of the weak coupling approach ($t\,\epsilon=10$) is reduced to below $3\%$ for all choices of $\vec{n}$ after the third cooling step iteration.
(Similar results are seen for the strong-coupling approach.) The strategy of alternating between $X$, $Y$ and $Z$ coupling terms becomes useful in what follows for our $N$-qubit protocols, where potential common symmetries between $V_\tS$ and $H_\tS$ are hard to control.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{P-XYZ-faircomparison}
\caption{ \label{fig:XYZ-spheres}
Probabilities $P_{1\to0}$ of transitioning from $\ket1$ to $\ket0$ after three iterations of the weak-coupling ($t\,\epsilon = 10$) cooling procedure, with coupling potentials $V^i_\tS=X, X, X$ (left), $V^i_\tS=X, Y, X$ (center), $V^i_\tS=X, Y, Z$ (center),
on a system qubit with Hamiltonian $H_\tS=h\,\vec{n}\cdot\vec{\sigma}$ and known energy splitting $h$.
The orientation of the unit vector $\vec{n}$ is represented on spherical surfaces.
The average, standard deviation and minimum of $P_{1\to0}$ are shown above each panel.
}
\end{figure}
\section{Scalable QDC protocols \label{sec:Scalable_QDC}}
We now look to use the insight obtained for cooling in the 1+1 toy model to develop QDC schemes for larger systems.
The sub-additivity of entropy places a rough lower bound on the number of cooling steps required to cool an $N$-qubit system.
This limits the entropy $\Delta S_\tS$ that the system can transfer to the fridge qubit before the non-unitary reset to $\Delta S_\tS \geq -\Delta S_F \geq -1$ bit.
If we demand the ability to cool an arbitrary state, a DQC protocol must also be able to cool the maximally-mixed state, which has entropy $S_S = N$.
We then require $N$ repetitions of an optimal coupling-and-reset step to reach the pure ground state (which has entropy $S_S=0$).
This can be obtained in the simple example of cooling $N$ non-interacting qubits with known energies, by simply repeating the protocols of the $1+1$ model.
However, this cannot be generalised to arbitrary strongly-correlated systems, as cooling is complicated by irregular and unknown energy gaps and coupling terms between eigenstates.
This is to be expected, as preparing ground states of arbitrary Hamiltonians is a known QMA-hard problem~\cite{kempe2006complexity}.
However, as cooling is a physically-motivated process, we hope QDC to be able to achieve polynomial scalings for systems of physical interest, and focus for the rest of the work on exploring this thesis.
In the rest of this text, we introduce two scalable QDC protocols for $N$-qubit systems: the strong-coupling-based BangBang protocol and the weak-coupling-based LogSweep protocol.
These extend and generalize the two approaches we established for the 1+1 toy model of section~\ref{sec:known_gap_cooling}.
Each protocol iterates over a sequence of \emph{cooling steps}, each of which consists of coupling the fridge qubit to part of the system for a short time evolution, and then resetting the fridge qubit to its ground state.
The protocols differ in the choice of coupling strengths $\gamma_i$, coupling terms $V_S^i$ and fridge energies $\epsilon_i$ at each $i$-th cooling step.
[The coupling time for each cooling step is fixed by Eq.~\eqref{eq:coupling_time}.]
\subsection{The BangBang protocol}
For a local Hamiltonian, one may approximate the gap between locally coupled eigenstates, which in turn allows one to estimate the energy to target in a single-shot cooling step.
In perturbation theory, the rate of a transition between eigenstates $\ket{E_i}\to\ket{E_j}$ depends on the matrix element of the coupling $V_S$:
\begin{equation}
V_{(ij)} := \bra{E_{i}} V_S \ket{E_{j}} = \frac{\bra{E_{i}} [H_{\mathrm{S}},V_S] \ket{E_{j}}}{E_{i}-E_{j}}.
\end{equation}
If $V_S$ is local and bounded, $[H_{\mathrm{S}},V_S]$ is as well, so the matrix element $V_{(ij)}$ will be bounded proportionally to $(E_{i}-E_{j})^{-1}$.
The matrix element is additionally bounded by $\lVert V \rVert$; this bound is achieved approximately when $E_i-E_j$ falls below the maximum off-diagonal element of $[H,V]$ in any basis, which we define with the notation $\lVert[H, V]\rVert_\perp$:
\begin{equation}
\lVert O \rVert_\perp
= \max_{\langle\phi\vert\psi\rangle = 0}\!\bra{\phi} O \ket{\psi}
= \max_{\ket{\Phi}, \ket{\Psi}}\!\frac{\bra{\Phi} O \ket{\Phi} - \bra{\Psi} O \ket{\Psi}}{2}.
\end{equation}
We use this energy scale to set the fridge energy:
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_i = \lVert[V_\tS^i, H_\tS]\rVert_\perp \label{eq:bang_bang_fridge_energy}
\end{equation}
for any coupling potential $V_\tS^i$.
This way, the maximum-energy transitions accessible by $V_S$ are on resonance, while smaller energy ones (which are less important for cooling) still have a higher probability of cooling than of reheating [see Fig.~\ref{fig:detuning}(a)].
This defines the BangBang protocol: we iterate over coupling to each qubit, with $\epsilon_i$ fixed by Eq.~\eqref{eq:bang_bang_fridge_energy}.
As this protocol does not attempt to suppress reheating, we choose a single coupling $V_S=Y_n$ for the $n$-th qubit, instead of iterating over $V_S=X_n,Y_n,Z_n$ (as was suggested in Sec.\ref{sec:common_symmetries}).
We repeat the entire procedure $R$ times, resulting in a total of $RN$ cooling steps.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{
\includegraphics[width=.85\columnwidth]{P-energy_guess}}
\caption{
Change in energy expectation value for the application of a single cooling step to the maximally mixed state of a $N=8$ qubit transverse field Ising chain Eq.~\eqref{eq:ising}, depending on the fridge energy $\epsilon$.
The coupling potential is $V_\tS=Y_3$, the Pauli $Y$ on the third qubit.
The relation $B^2+J^2=1$ fixes the energy scale.
}
\label{fig:energyguess}
\end{figure}
To test the BangBang protocol, we study the cooling of a $N$-qubit transverse-field Ising chain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ising}
H_\tS = \sum_{i=0}^N B X_i + \sum_{i=0}^{N-1} J Z_i Z_{i+1} .
\end{equation}
The relative coupling strength $J/B$ dictates whether the system is in the paramagnetic ($J/B\ll1$), ferromagnetic ($J/B\gg1$), or critical ($J/B\sim 1$) phases.
This ability to simply tune between three phases of matter with significantly different physical properties make the TFIM a good benchmark model to investigate the ability of different QDC schemes in various scenarios.
We first demonstrate that our choice for the fridge energy Eq.~\eqref{eq:bang_bang_fridge_energy} is appropriate.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:energyguess}, we plot the effect of a single cooling step on the maximally-mixed state.
We observe that cooling is maximized around where Eq.~\eqref{eq:bang_bang_fridge_energy} is satisfied for all phases of the TFIM.
We find this behaviour to hold for all other (local) choices of coupling potential $V_S$ used in this work, as predicted.
We next turn to the ability of the BangBang protocol to prepare an approximation $\rho$ to the true ground state $|E_0\rangle$, as measured by the ground state fidelity
\begin{equation}
F=\mathrm{Trace}[|E_0\rangle\langle E_0| \rho].\label{eq:fidelity}
\end{equation}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:bangbang}(a), we plot how $F$ evolves with each cooling step when starting from the maximally-mixed state (solid lines).
We see that in the paramagnetic and ferromagnetic phases this is brought to a steady state with significant but imperfect ground state overlap, as the refrigeration power balances out with unwanted reheating.
To verify convergence, we simulate pure reheating of the true ground state (dashed lines), and observe that this converges similarly to the steady state.
In the paramagnetic regime, this convergence is achieved with one cooling step per site, for a total of $N$ cooling steps ($R=1$).
By contrast, in the ferromagnetic regime we require closer to $N^2$ cooling steps ($R=N$).
The BangBang protocol performs significantly worse in the critical regime.
This is to be expected, as in this regime the spectrum is no longer banded, and excitations are not as uniform as in the paramagnetic or ferromagnetic regimes.
The steady-state fidelity [Fig.~\ref{fig:bangbang}(b)] decays slowly with the increasing size of the system, but it still manages to achieve high overlap at $N\sim10$ Ising chains (far from criticality).
Given the low cost of the protocol, we suggest that this is of particular interest for near-term experiments, and may be further refined by other cooling protocols, (or methods such as quantum phase estimation) in the long term.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{P-bangbang}
\caption{
Simulations of BangBang protocol applied to a $N$ qubit transverse Ising chain. The coupling potentials are $V_\tS^i = Y_i$.
\textbf{(a)} Overlap with the ground state manifold of the state of the qubit register during the application of the protocol, for $N=5$,
with initial state $\rho_0$ the maximally mixed state (solid lines) or the system ground state (dashed lines).
\textbf{(b)} Overlap with the final state after the full $N^2$-steps protocol ($R=N$), depending on the size of the system $N$.
}
\label{fig:bangbang}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The LogSweep protocol \label{sec:LogSweep}}
Refrigeration at weak-coupling suppresses reheating, but only allows for the cooling of transitions within a narrow energy band [as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:detuning}(a)].
We may take advantage of this in a larger system, where a wide range of energy gaps are present, by sweeping the fridge energy $\epsilon_j$ from high to low as we iterate over cooling steps.
As we are less worried about reheating at the beginning of the protocol, we may choose a larger cooling linewidth $\delta_j=t_j^{-1}=\pi\,\gamma_j$ here, which then requires us to sweep over fewer fridge energies.
This allows us to give a logarithmic gradation of the target band of fridge energies $(E_{\min},E_{\max})$ to sweep over in the LogSweep protocol.
For a fixed \emph{gradation number} $K$, we set
\begin{equation} \label{eq:logsweepepsilon}
\epsilon_j = E_\text{min}^{ \frac{j-1}{K-1} } E_\text{max}^{ 1 - \frac{j-1}{K-1} },
\end{equation}
and choose $\gamma_j$ in agreement with the condition $\epsilon_{j+1}+\delta_{j+1} = \epsilon_j - \delta_j$.
As we wish for a controlled cooling protocol, we further iterate the couplings $V_S$ over $\{X_n,Y_n,Z_n\}$ for each qubit $N$ (cf. Sec.\ref{sec:common_symmetries}), for a total of $3NK$ cooling steps.
The number of Trotter steps $M_j$ for each cooling step is chosen following section~\ref{sec:known_gap_cooling}, but taking into consideration that the true transition energy can be off-resonant with $\epsilon_j$ and as high as $E_\text{max}$.
We find that a good balance between avoiding reheating and minimizing circuit length may be found by setting
\begin{equation}
M_j = 2\sqrt{1+ \frac{(\epsilon_j/2+E_\text{max}/2)^2}{\gamma_j^2}}.
\end{equation}
We first test the LogSweep protocol as applied to the 1+1 model defined in Sec.~\ref{sec:known_gap_cooling}, with the system gap $\Delta$ now taking an unknown value between $E_\text{min}$ and $E_\text{max}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:logsweep}).
We desire that an the full protocol remain efficient, both in the cooling of transitions $\Delta\sim\epsilon_j$ at each $j$, and in the minimization of reheating during latter steps.
As demonstrated by the black dashed curve in Fig.~\ref{fig:logsweep}, when $E_\text{max}/E_\text{min}=5$ this can be achieved well with only $K\approx5$ steps.
However, the bandwidth of single cooling steps grows smaller as $E_{\min}\rightarrow 0$, implying that the required $K$ would blow up in this limit.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{P-logsweep}}
\caption{
Choices of energies $\epsilon_j$ and linewidths $\delta_j$ (bars at the top of the graph showing $\epsilon_j\pm\delta_j$) for a $K=5$ LogSweep protocol applied to the model introduced in section~\ref{sec:known_gap_cooling} with an unknown $\Delta\in \left(E_\text{min}=1, E_\text{max}=5\right)$.
Colored lines show cooling (dashed) and reheating (solid lines) probabilities for each $j$-th step alone, the dashed black line shows the cooling probability after sequential application of the 5 steps.
}
\label{fig:logsweep}
\end{figure}
We now investigate the performance of the LogSweep protocol on different phases of the transverse-field Ising model.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:logsweep-2}(a), we plot the fidelity of the prepared state $\rho$ to the ground state $|E_0\rangle$ [Eq.~\eqref{eq:fidelity}], as a function of the gradation number $K$, starting from the maximally mixed state.
We observe polynomial convergence to the ground state in both the critical and the strong-coupling phase, attaining an error of $1-F=\epsilon$ in approximately $O(\epsilon^{-1})$ cooling steps.
(As we require more Trotter steps at low energy, the computational complexity to attain an error $\epsilon$ scales as $O(\epsilon^{-2})$.)
For the paramagnetic chain, we find that the protocol fails to converge as a function of $K$.
We interpret this by noting that the local excitations of the paramagnetic chain (to which the fridge couples directly thanks to the local Pauli coupling potentials) have well-defined and regular energies.
This implies that a finer energy gradation does not help with matching the energies of more transitions.
Instead, finer gradation results in an over-compression of the linewidths, which hinders some cooling paths.
We observe a similar trend to the BangBang protocol in the fidelity of the LogSweep protocol with the chain length $N$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:logsweep-2}(b)].
In the critical and strong-coupling phases, this may be in turn counteracted by increasing the gradation number $K$ (at the cost of increased run-time).
Unfortunately, the small system sizes studied prevent an estimation of the resulting scaling with $N$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{P-logsweep-scaling}
\caption{
Fidelity to the ground state after application of the LogSweep protocol to the maximally mixed state of a N-qubit Ising chain in different phases,
as \textbf{(a)} a function of the energy gradation number $K$, for fixed $N=7$, and \textbf{(b)}
as a function of the system size $N$, for fixed $K=40$.
The coupling potentials $V_\tS^i$ are all single-qubit Pauli operators $X_{i'},Y_{i'},Z_{i'}$.
$E_\text{min}$ and $E_\text{max}$ are chosen as the ground state gap and as the maximum energy of any transition $\max_i\left\lVert[H_\tS, V_\tS^i]\right\rVert_\perp$.
}
\label{fig:logsweep-2}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we investigated how cooling can be simulated on a digital quantum computer, and demonstrated that this can be exploited for the design of scalable algorithms for preparing ground states of $N$-qubit systems.
We identified how one can meet many of the fundamental challenges that the digital approach to cooling raises and use the leverage offered exclusively by digital quantum hardware, namely the freedom of choice in the coupling strength and fridge energy.
We laid out a general approach of simulating a cold bath with a single ancilla qubit, which is iteratively coupled to various locations in the system and reset periodically to extract entropy and energy.
We studied how to digitize the system-fridge coupling simulation without causing additional reheating, and how to avoid symmetries which produce non-ergodic behavior that hinders cooling.
By tuning coupling parameters beyond the perturbative regime described by Fermi's golden rule, efficient cooling of targeted transitions can be realized.
Following these principles we proposed two protocols for preparing approximate ground states of $N$-qubit systems --- the BangBang protocol and the LogSweep protocol.
The BangBang protocol operates in the regime of strong coupling and extreme digitization, thus requiring a short circuit depth. It relies on analytical estimates of transition energies, and gives best results for systems with banded energy spectra.
The LogSweep protocol, on the contrary, operates at weak coupling and ensures vanishing Trotter error, while systematically scanning the energy spectrum to match transitions resonantly.
We studied numerically how these protocols perform when applied to short quantum Ising chains in different regimes, and we showed that the BangBang protocol efficiently cools the system in the paramagnetic and in the ferromagnetic regime, while the LogSweep protocol shows good performance in the critical and ferromagnetic regime.
The introduction of quantum digital cooling opens future research directions related to the characterization of proposed protocols, their optimization, and their extension beyond ground state preparation.
A study of the effect of noise on currently proposed QDC protocols, and the optimization of such protocols for noise resilience, are in order to establish their applicability on near-term devices.
Applying QDC to more complex physical systems, in areas such as quantum spin liquids, many-body localization and quantum chemistry, would bring new challenges to the protocol construction.
A thorough study of the role in the cooling process played by the symmetries and locality of coupling could lead to the design of more optimized protocols.
Furthermore, various extensions to the QDC protocols proposed in this work can be suggested.
In a parallelized version of QDC, the use of multiple fridge qubits coupled to various locations in the system might allow to trade space complexity for time complexity.
A modification in the fridge reset paradigm might allow a QDC-like algorithm to prepare Gibbs thermal states, which are useful e.g.~for semi-definite programming \cite{Brandao2017quantum}.
A variationally-optimized QDC protocol might be devised, that can efficiently prepare a state in the ground state manifold of some Hamiltonian starting from an arbitrary initial state --- differently from the variational quantum eigensolver \cite{peruzzo2014variational} which requires the preparation of a fiducial state at every iteration.
The principles of QDC might inspire a new class of efficient non-unitary quantum algorithms, where non-unitary operations are mediated by a single ancillary qubit, with possible application e.g.~in the simulation of open quantum system dynamics.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors would like to thank C.W.J.~Beenakker for support and advice during this project, B.~Tarasinksi, X.~Bonet Monroig and M.~Pacholski for useful criticism on the manuscript. This research was funded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO/OCW) under the NanoFront and StartImpuls programs, and by Shell~Global~Solutions~BV.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
While the Higgs interaction is the only source of {\it lepton
universality\/} violations within the Standard Model (SM), the
observation of neutrino masses implies that at least one form of
beyond-SM modification exists, specifically in the lepton sector. The
factorization of QCD dynamics from electroweak interactions in the SM
allows amplitudes for semileptonic decays to be expressed as the
familiar product of hadron ($H^{\mu\nu}$) and lepton ($L^{\mu\nu}$)
tensors at leading order:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:matel}
|\mathcal{M}_{\bar{b}\rightarrow\bar{c} \, \ell^+ \nu_\ell}|^2=
\frac{L_{\mu\nu}H^{\mu\nu}}{q^2-M_W^2}+\mathcal{O}(\alpha,G_F)\,.
\end{equation}
Heavy-hadron semileptonic decay rates (both full and differential)
producing distinct lepton flavors differ only due to factors of
lepton mass that arise from kinematic and chirality-flip factors.
Such dependences can be removed in a variety of
ways~\cite{Colangelo:2018cnj,Ivanov:2016qtw,Tran:2018kuv,
Bhattacharya:2015ida,Bhattacharya:2016zcw,Jaiswal:2017rve,
Bhattacharya:2018kig,Cohen:2018vhw,Becirevic:2019tpx}. Measurements
from BaBar, Belle, and LHCb of the ratios
$R(D^{(*)})$~\cite{Lees:2012xj,Lees:2013uzd,Huschle:2015rga,
Abdesselam:2019dgh,Sato:2016svk,Aaij:2015yra,Hirose:2016wfn,
Aaij:2017uff,Aaij:2017deq,Hirose:2017dxl} of the heavy-light meson
decays $B \! \rightarrow \! D^{(*)}\ell\nu$, with $\ell \! = \!
\tau$ to $\ell \! = \! \mu$, exhibit a combined 3.1$\sigma$
discrepancy from the HFLAV-suggested SM values~\cite{Amhis:2016xyh},
which average~Refs.~\cite{Bigi:2016mdz,Bernlochner:2017jka,
Bigi:2017jbd,Jaiswal:2017rve}. Recently, the LHCb collaboration has
measured $R(J/\psi)$~\cite{Aaij:2017tyk}, which is within
1.3$\sigma$~\cite{Cohen:2018dgz} of the SM prediction. These results,
including lattice-determined and theoretically computed values of
$R(H_c)$, are compiled in Table~\ref{tab:models}.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:models}Existing results for $R(H_c)$ from
experiment, predictions from lattice QCD alone, and theoretical
values including additional inputs.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}
{c| c c c}
\hline\hline
$H_c$ & $R_{\rm exp}$ & $R_{\rm lat}$ & $R_{\rm theory}$\\
\hline
$D$&0.340(27)(13)~\cite{Lees:2012xj,Lees:2013uzd,Huschle:2015rga,
Abdesselam:2019dgh}&0.300(8)~\cite{Aoki:2019cca,Na:2015kha,
Lattice:2015rga}&0.299(3)~\cite{Amhis:2016xyh}\\
$D^*$&0.295(11)(8)~\cite{Lees:2012xj,Lees:2013uzd,Huschle:2015rga,
Sato:2016svk,Aaij:2015yra,Hirose:2016wfn,Aaij:2017uff,Aaij:2017deq,
Hirose:2017dxl,Abdesselam:2019dgh}&--&
0.258(5)~\cite{Amhis:2016xyh}\\
$D_s$&--&0.2987(46)~\cite{McLean:2019qcx}&--\\
$\Lambda_c$&--&0.3328(74)(70)~\cite{Detmold:2015aaa}&
0.324(4)\cite{Bernlochner:2018kxh}\\
$J/\psi$&0.71(17)(18)~\cite{Aaij:2017tyk}&
[0.20,0.39]~\cite{Cohen:2018dgz}&--\\
$\eta_c$&--&0.30(4)~\cite{Berns:2018vpl,Murphy:2018sqg}&--\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In the future, it would be useful to consider other semileptonic
decays. Run III of LHCb may open the opportunity to measure
$R(D_s^{(*)})$~\cite{Cerri:2018ypt}. A determination of $R(\eta_c)$
would be exciting. However, $R(\eta_c)$ is substantially harder to measure
than $R(J/\psi)$ for a few reasons, foremost of which is the absence of a
clean $\eta_c$ decay process with a substantial branching fraction
(analogous to $J/\psi\rightarrow\mu^+\mu^-$) for reconstructing the
$\eta_c$; this leads to large backgrounds. Additionally, the transition
from excited charmonium states to $\eta_c$ is poorly understood, which
further complicates the extraction of signals~\cite{BHHJ}.
In order to fully leverage all of these experimental results, it is
necessary to have rigorous predictions from the SM for
all of these ratios. Even setting aside the very interesting issue of
lepton universality, determining hadronic form factors is important in
its own right, as each such function represents a wealth of information
about nonperturbative QCD. Form factors are not completely
unconstrained, however. They must satisfy well-known
model-independent constraints that follow from bedrock principles of
quantum field theory, specifically unitarity and the complex
analyticity of their Green's functions as functions of momentum
variables at all values, except when a resonance, particle-creation
threshold, or other special kinematic configuration is realized. In
the case of semileptonic decays, the form factors can be parametrized
as a product of known functions representing resonant poles and other
nonanalytic structures in the corresponding Green's function, times a
Taylor series in a conformal variable that tracks the momentum
transfer; the Taylor coefficients are
constrained in magnitude by unitarity. This is the {\it BGL
parametrization\/}~\cite{Boyd:1995cf,Boyd:1997kz} (see
Ref.~\cite{Grinstein:2015wqa} for a brief review of its historical
antecedents).
The constraint of unitarity in model-independent approaches such as
the BGL parametrization has historically been underutilized, because
fits to experiment typically consider only a single exclusive process
({\it e.g.}, $B \! \to D^* \! \ell \nu$). However, each exclusive
channel appearing in the two-point Green's function for $b \! \to \!
c$ currents positively contributes to the unitarity bound,
and therefore a simultaneous fit including multiple processes
provides stronger constraints on each of the individual
processes~\cite{Boyd:1997kz,Bigi:2017jbd,Jaiswal:2017rve}.
The purpose of this work is to perform a global analysis within the
BGL parametrization of lattice-QCD data for seven exclusive hadronic
$b\rightarrow c$ processes: $B \! \to \! \{D,D^*\}$, $B_s \! \to \!
\{D_s,D_s^{*}\}$, $B_c \! \to \! \{ J/\psi, \eta_c \}$, and $\Lambda_b \!
\to \! \Lambda_c$. We obtain the corresponding transition form
factors. These form factors are computed directly from the SM and
obtained within quantifiable bounds. Thus, they can be used to make
reliable predictions from the SM that can directly confront
experiment. We use them to compute three types of observables: the
semileptonic decay ratios $R(H_c)$, the $\tau$ polarization
$P_{\tau}(H_c)$, and the vector-meson longitudinal polarization
fraction $F^{H_C}_L$.
The analysis presented here is essentially model independent. We do
not use {\it ad hoc\/} model assumptions about the physical
mechanisms dominating the form factor, beyond accepting the SM to
identify allowed functional forms of the form factors. Rather, we
use as input {\it ab initio\/} Monte Carlo calculations of QCD from
the lattice as our principal input. Such data is quite limited: not
all of the relevant form factors have been computed, and those that
have are computed at a limited number of momentum-transfer values.
The BGL parametrization using the unitarity bound allows us to
extend our knowledge of the form factors to other momentum transfers,
and to do so in such a way that the errors can be quantified. We can gain
information about form factors that have not been directly computed
on the lattice from those that have by exploiting emergent symmetries
of QCD that become valid as the quark masses become large.
There are, of course, errors associated with truncating the series in
BGL parametrization and truncating the expansion in the inverse
heavy-quark mass. Fortunately, one has {\it a priori\/} estimates of
their size, which allows for reliable SM predictions without
invoking additional model dependence. However, some judgment is
required in estimating their sizes quantitatively. We have
therefore made very conservative estimates in order to ensure that
our predicted bounds are reliable enough so that the experimental
measurements provide meaningful tests of the SM.
The lattice data that provides the input for the analysis has both
statistical and systematic errors. The statistical errors can be
easily incorporated into our bounds. In some cases the major
systematic errors have been well-explored and estimated reliably, and
can also be incorporated in a straightforward way. However, in some
cases the only available lattice calculations do not provide
estimates for some of the major systematic errors. In these cases,
we add a systematic error in by hand, and do so in a very
conservative manner, by assuming larger-than-realistic errors.
Thus, while the analysis is model independent, it does involve some
{\it ad hoc\/} judgment in the assignment of systematic errors. As
this was done quite conservatively, the principal effect is to make
the error bounds for our final results larger than they otherwise
would be. These effects can, of course, be mitigated by the constant
improvement in the treatment of errors in lattice simulations.
We begin in Sec.~\ref{sec:sm} with a discussion of the $V \! - \! A$
weak-interaction structure of the SM responsible for semileptonic
decays and the form factors under investigation. In
Sec.~\ref{sec:hqss} we explain how heavy-quark symmetries can be used
to obtain relations between the form factors of heavy-light systems
and heavy-heavy meson systems. The lattice results used in this work
are discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:lat}\@. Section~\ref{sec:da} presents
the dispersive-analysis framework utilized to constrain the form
factors as functions of momentum transfer. The results of our
analysis are presented in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}, and we conclude in
Sec.~\ref{sec:con}.
\section{Structure of $\langle H_c|(V-A)^\mu| H_b
\rangle$}\label{sec:sm}
Since the first-principles calculation of the leptonic tensor
$L^{\mu\nu}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:matel}) is straightforward in the SM, the
computation of semileptonic decay rates reduces to parametrizing
exclusive components $\langle H_c|(V-A)^\mu|H_b\rangle$ of the
hadronic tensor in terms of transition form factors. The tensor
structure is expressed in terms of the hadron momenta, $P^\mu$ for
$H_b$ (with mass $M \! \equiv \! M_{H_b}$) and $p^\mu$ for $H_c$
(with mass $m \! \equiv \! M_{H_c}$), and additionally the
polarization $\epsilon^\mu$ of the $H_c$ if it is a vector meson, or
heavy-quark spinors $u_{b,c}$ if $H_{b,c}$ are baryons. The only
functional dependence of the form factors arises through
the squared momentum transfer to the leptons, $t \! = \! q^2 \! \equiv
\! (P-p)^2$. The various cases of phenomenological interest are now
outlined.
\subsection{$B\rightarrow D, \ B_s\rightarrow D_s, \ B_c^+\rightarrow
\eta_c$}
If both $H_{b,c}$ are pseudoscalar mesons, then only two independent
Lorentz structures, and hence two independent form factors, are
possible:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\langle H_c(p)|(V-A)^\mu|H_b(P)\rangle} & & \nonumber \\
& = & f_+(t) (P+p)^\mu+f_- (t) (P-p)^\mu \, .
\label{eq:hadme}
\end{eqnarray}
Indeed, the parity invariance of strong interactions precludes the
current $A^\mu$ from providing a nonzero contribution to
Eq.~(\ref{eq:hadme}). In this work, we exchange $f_-(t)$ for the
combination
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:f0}
f_0(t) \equiv (M^2-m^2)f_+(t) +tf_-(t) \, .
\end{equation}
With this definition, one sees that $(M^2-m^2)f_+(0)=f_0(0)$, a
constraint upon two otherwise independent form factors that we will
impose when fitting the functions. This normalization of $f_0$
differs by a mass-dependent prefactor from that used in
lattice-QCD
calculations~\cite{Colquhoun:2016osw,ALE,Aoki:2019cca,Na:2015kha,
Lattice:2015rga,McLean:2019qcx}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:convert}
f_0(t)=(M^2-m^2)f_0^{\rm lat}(t) \, .
\end{equation}
The differential decay rate for this semileptonic decay process is
\begin{align}
\label{eq:difcof}
\frac{d\Gamma}{dt}=\frac{G_F^2|V_{cb}|^2}{192\pi^3M^3}
\frac{k}{t^{5/2}}(t-m_\ell^2)^2[4&k^2t(2t+m_\ell^2)|f_+|^2\nonumber\\
&+3m_\ell^2|f_0|^2]\, .
\end{align}
where, in terms of the spatial momentum $\bm{p}$ of $H_c$ in the $H_b$
rest frame,
\begin{equation} \label{eq:kdef}
k \equiv M \sqrt{\frac{\bm{p}^2}{t}}
= \sqrt{\frac{(t_+-t)(t_--t)}{4t}} \, ,
\end{equation}
in which we have, in turn, introduced two important kinematic values,
$t_{\pm} \equiv (M\pm m)^2$.
\subsection{$B\rightarrow D^*, \ B_s\rightarrow D_s^*, \ B_c^+
\rightarrow J/\psi$}
Transition form factors of a pseudoscalar meson $H_b$ to a vector
meson $H_c$ have been parametrized in a variety of ways in
the literature. Here, we begin with a set~\cite{Wirbel:1985ji} of
vector [$V(t)$] and axial-vector [$A_i(t)$] form factors frequently
used in lattice-QCD and model calculations:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}\label{eq:hadme2}
\langle H_c(p,\epsilon)|(V-A)^\mu|H_b(P)\rangle=&
\frac{2i\epsilon^{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}}{M+m}
\epsilon^{*}_{\nu}p_{\rho}P_{\sigma}V(t)-(M+m)
\epsilon^{*\mu}A_1(t)\nonumber\\
&+\frac{\epsilon^{*}\cdot q}{M+m}(P+p)^\mu A_2(t)
+2m\frac{\epsilon^{*}\cdot q}{q^2}q^{\mu}A_3(t)
-2m\frac{\epsilon^{*}\cdot q}{q^2}q^{\mu}A_0(t) \, ,
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
where $q^\mu \! \equiv \! (P-p)^\mu$.
Only four of these five form factors are independent:
demanding that only $A_0(t)$ couples to timelike virtual $W$
polarizations ($\propto q^\mu$) requires
\begin{equation}\label{eq:a3}
A_3(t)=\frac{M+m}{2m}A_1(t)-\frac{M-m}{2m}A_2(t) \, .
\end{equation}
Requiring the cancellation of $1/q^2$ terms in Eq.~(\ref{eq:hadme2})
as $q^2 \! = \! t \! \to \! 0$ imposes the additional constraint
$A_3(0) \! = \! A_0(0)$.
A different decomposition, in which the virtual $W$ and vector meson
$H_c$ are described by their helicity states, turns out to be more
useful for the dispersive analysis. Here, one exchanges the form
factors $V, A_0, A_1, A_2$ for the set $g, f, \mathcal{F}_1,
\mathcal{F}_2$. They are related by
\begin{eqnarray}
g&=&\frac{2}{M+m} V \, , \nonumber\\
f&=&(M+m)A_1 \, , \nonumber\\
\mathcal{F}_1&=&\frac{1}{m}\left[-\frac{2k^2 t}{M+m} A_2
-\frac{1}{2}(t-M^2+m^2)(M+m)A_1\right] \, , \nonumber\\
\mathcal{F}_2&=&2A_0 \, . \label{eq:FFrelns}
\end{eqnarray}
$\mathcal{F}_{1,2}$, are proportional to
the conventionally defined~\cite{Richman:1995wm} helicity amplitudes
$H_{0,t}$, respectively, while the other two helicity amplitudes
$H_\pm$ are linear combinations of $V$ and $A$ form factors, $H_\pm
(t) \! = \! f(t) \mp k \sqrt{t} g(t)$, where $k$ is defined in
Eq.~(\ref{eq:kdef}).
At $t \! = \! t_-$, the middle two expressions of
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:FFrelns}) reduce to an additional constraint,
$\mathcal{F}_1(t_-)=(M-m)f(t_-)$. In this basis, the previously
noted constraint $A_3(0) \! = \! A_0(0)$ becomes
$\mathcal{F}_1(0)= \frac 1 2 (M^2-m^2)\mathcal{F}_2(0)$. The
differential decay rate for the semileptonic decay in this basis
reads
\begin{align}
\label{eq:difcofvec}
\frac{d\Gamma}{dt}=&\frac{G_F^2|V_{cb}|^2}{192\pi^3M^3}
\frac{k}{t^{5/2}}\left(t-m_\ell^2\right)^2\nonumber\\&
\times \left\{ \left(2t+m_\ell^2\right)\left[2t|f|^2+
|\mathcal{F}_1|^2+2k^2t^2|g|^2\right] \right.
\nonumber\\& \left. \phantom{xxxx}+3m_\ell^2k^2t|\mathcal{F}_2|^2
\right\} \, .
\end{align}
\newline
\subsection{$\Lambda_b\rightarrow \Lambda_c$}
In the case of heavy-baryon transitions, the states of the
spin-$\frac 1 2$ baryons are represented by spinors $u_{b,c}$. Here,
there are two form factors for both the vector and axial-vector
currents:
\begin{align}
\langle \Lambda_c(p)|V^\mu|\Lambda_b(P)\rangle& \! = \! \bar{u}_c(p)\left[
F_1\gamma^\mu
+F_2v^\mu \! + \! F_3 \, v'^{\mu}\right]u_b(P) \, , \nonumber\\
\langle \Lambda_c(p)|A^\mu|\Lambda_b(P)\rangle& \! = \! \bar{u}_c(p)\left[
G_1\gamma^\mu \!
+ \! G_2v^\mu \! + \! G_3v'^{\mu}\right] \! \gamma_5u_b(P) \, ,
\nonumber \\
\end{align}
where the kinematical variables relevant to the heavy-quark limit
(see Sec.~\ref{sec:hqss}) are the baryon 4-velocities, $v^\mu \!
\equiv \! P^\mu/M_{\Lambda_b}$ and $v^{\prime \mu} \! \equiv \! p^\mu
/M_{\Lambda_c}$. The differential decay rate is then
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\frac{d\Gamma}{dt}=\frac{G_F^2|V_{cb}|^2}{192\pi^3M^3}
\frac{k}{t^{5/2}}\left(t-m_\ell^2\right)^2 \big\{ &
(t_--t)(2t+m_\ell^2) [2t|F_1|^2 +|H_V|^2]+3m_\ell^2(t_+-t)|F_0|^2
\nonumber\\
+&(t_+-t)(2t+m_\ell^2)[2t|G_1|^2 \! +|H_A|^2]+3m_\ell^2(t_--t)|G_0|^2
\big\} \, ,
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
where the form factors in helicity basis read
\begin{align}
H_V= \, &(M+m)F_1+\frac{1}{2}(t_+-t)\left(\frac{F_2}{M}+\frac{F_3}{m}
\right) \, , \nonumber\\
H_A= \, &(M-m)G_1-\frac{1}{2}(t_--t)\left(\frac{G_2}{M}+\frac{G_3}{m}
\right) \, , \nonumber\\
F_0= \, &(M-m)F_1+\frac{1}{2M}(t+M^2-m^2)F_2\nonumber\, , \\&
\phantom{xxxxxxxxx}-\frac{1}{2m}(t-M^2+m^2)F_3\nonumber\, , \\
G_0= \, &(M+m)G_1-\frac{1}{2M}(t+M^2-m^2)G_2\nonumber\, , \\&
\phantom{xxxxxxxxx}+\frac{1}{2m}(t-M^2+m^2)G_3 \, . \label{eq:BaryFF}
\end{align}
As in the meson case, these form factors satisfy exact constraints at
special kinematic points. Specifically, $H_A(t_-) \! = \! (M-m)
G_1(t_-)$, $(M+m) F_0(0) \! = \! (M-m) H_V(0)$, and $(M-m) G_0(0) \!
= \! (M+m) H_A(0)$. This basis differs from that used in the
lattice-QCD calculations of Ref.~\cite{Detmold:2015aaa} only by
mass-dependent prefactors:
\begin{align}
F_0&=(M-m)f_0^{\rm lat} \, , \nonumber\\
H_V&=(M+m)f_+^{\rm lat} \, , \nonumber\\
F_1&=f_\perp^{\rm lat} \, , \nonumber\\
G_0&=(M+m)g_0^{\rm lat} \, , \nonumber\\
H_A&=(M-m)g_+^{\rm lat} \, , \nonumber\\
G_1&=g_\perp^{\rm lat} \, .
\end{align}
\section{Heavy-Quark Symmetries}\label{sec:hqss}
The physics of heavy-light hadrons ($Q \bar q$ or $Q \bar q \bar q^\prime)$
is simplified by the emergence of
additional symmetries in the limit $m_Q \! \to \! \infty$. Operators
distinguishing between heavy quarks of different spin orientation and flavor are
suppressed by $1/m_Q$, and produce a vanishingly small effect upon
physical amplitudes in the heavy-quark limit. All transition form
factors between two hadrons with a single heavy quark and the same
light-quark content are proportional to a single, universal
Isgur-Wise function, $\xi(w)$~\cite{Isgur:1989vq,Isgur:1989ed} for
mesons or $\zeta(w)$ for baryons~\cite{Mannel:1990vg}. They are
naturally expressed $w$, which is the dot
product of the initial and final heavy-light hadron 4-velocities,
$v^\mu \! \equiv \! P^\mu / M$ and $v'^\mu \! \equiv \! p^\mu / m$,
respectively, and fully contains the information about $t$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:wdef}
w \equiv v \cdot v' = \gamma_m = \frac{E_m}{m} =
\frac{M^2 + m^2 - t}{2Mm} \, .
\end{equation}
The zero-recoil point, where the final hadron $m$ is created at rest
in the rest frame of the initial hadron $M$, satisfies $t \! = \! t_-
\! \equiv \! (M \! - \! m)^2$, corresponding to $w \! = \! 1$. From
the middle expressions of Eq.~(\ref{eq:wdef}), one notes that $w$ is
the Lorentz factor $\gamma_m$ of $m$ in the $M$ rest
frame. The maximum value of $w$ in a given semileptonic process
occurs when the momentum transfer $t$ through the virtual $W$ to the
lepton pair---the total energy-squared of the leptons in their rest
frame---assumes its smallest possible value, $t \! = \! m_\ell^2$.
Heavy-quark symmetry encodes a physical picture
in which a heavy-light hadron is described by a nearly static
color-fundamental source with spin-independent interactions
(the heavy quark $Q$), to which the matter associated with light degrees
of freedom (light-quarks and gluons) is bound.
In weak decays with $Q\rightarrow Q^\prime$, the
zero-recoil (Isgur-Wise) point corresponds to a situation in which $Q$
spontaneously transforms to $Q^\prime$ at rest, but the decay
otherwise leaves the light degrees of freedom undisturbed. The
overlap between the initial and final light-quark wave functions is
complete, so that $\xi(1) \! = \! 1$ or $\zeta(1) \! = \! 1$ at the
zero-recoil (Isgur-Wise) point. Thus, in the heavy quark limit one
obtains an absolute normalization for the form factors; in the meson
case~\cite{Isgur:1989vq,Isgur:1989ed,Boyd:1997kz}, all the form
factors are proportional to $\xi(w)$:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:iw}
f_+&=\frac{1}{2}\mathcal{F}_2=\frac{1+r}{2\sqrt{r}}\xi \, ,
\nonumber \\
f_0&=\mathcal{F}_1=M^2\sqrt{r}(1-r)(1+w)\xi \, , \nonumber\\
g&=\frac{1}{M\sqrt{r}}\xi \, , \nonumber\\
f&=M\sqrt{r}(1+w) \xi \, ,
\end{align}
while in the baryon case~\cite{Mannel:1990vg}, all the form factors
are proportional to $\zeta(w)$:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:iwbary}
F_0&=H_A=M(1-r)\zeta \, , \nonumber \\
F_1& = G_1 = \zeta \, , \nonumber \\
H_V&=G_0 = M(1+r)\zeta \, ,
\end{align}
where $r \! \equiv \! m/M$. All of these results are corrected by
effects of $\mathcal{O}(\Lambda_{\rm QCD}/m_{Q^\prime})$.
Due to the lack of lattice data for $g,\mathcal{F}_1,\mathcal{F}_2$,
we use the relations of Eq.~(\ref{eq:iw}) for $f_+,f_0,$ and $f$ to
obtain $\xi_{(s)}(w)$ for each of the $B_{(s)}\rightarrow D_{(s)}$
processes from the existing lattice data. To establish a first
approximation for an allowed region, we parametrize $\xi_{(s)}(w)$ by
\begin{equation}
\xi_{(s)}(w)=\xi_{(s)}(1)-\rho^2(w-1)+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2(w-1)^2.
\end{equation}
In our analysis we have included an additional systematic error of
20\% to account for violations of Isgur-Wise scaling. We sample
three synthetic points from $\xi_{(s)}(w)$ for each form factor. For
$B\rightarrow D$, the synthetic points are restricted to the same
range $w<1.16$ for $B\rightarrow D$ as the lattice data. For
$B_s\rightarrowD_s$, where lattice results have been computed in the
full $w$ range, we restrict the synthetic points to the
near-zero-recoil range of $w<1.04$.
In decays of the types $B_c^+ \! \rightarrow \! J/\psi(\eta_c) \, \ell^+
\nu_\ell$, the spectator $c$ quark can no longer be
considered light (and indeed is the same species as the final heavy
quark). These cases are more complicated;
the heavy-quark limit differs from the heavy-light case in two important
ways~\cite{Jenkins:1992nb}. First, the
heavy-quark kinetic-energy operators for $\bar b$ and $\bar c$ quarks,
while both scaling as $1/m_Q^{(\prime)}$, differ for the two flavors
(thus breaking the heavy-quark flavor symmetry), but still provide
leading-order corrections to the dynamics of the state due to the
presence of the heavy spectator $c$: {\it e.g.}, the Bohr radii of
$B_c$ and $J/\psi (\eta_c)$ are significantly different. Second, the
spectator $c$ receives a momentum transfer due to the transition
$\bar{b} \! \to \! \bar{c}$ of the same order as the momentum imparted
to the $\bar{c}$. Thus, the heavy-flavor symmetry due to the
replacement of $\bar b$ with $\bar c$ does not leave the spectator
degrees of freedom invariant, meaning that one cannot obtain a
normalization of the form factors at the zero-recoil point based
purely upon symmetry.
Even though the heavy-flavor symmetry obtained from replacing $\bar b$
with $\bar c$ is lost, the $\bar{b}$ and $\bar{c}$ quarks retain
separate heavy-quark spin symmetries, as does the heavy spectator $c$.
In addition, since the valence quarks are heavy
these systems are better described using nonrelativistic dynamics
than are heavy-light systems. Indeed, $w_{\rm max} \approx 1.3$ for
$B_c^+ \! \rightarrow \! J/\psi(\eta_c)$, a sufficiently modest value that
suggests information obtained near the zero-recoil point remains
phenomenologically useful. The six meson form factors of
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:hadme}) and (\ref{eq:FFrelns}) are related by the spin
symmetries to a single, universal function that
Ref.~\cite{Jenkins:1992nb} calls $\Delta$, and
Ref.~\cite{Kiselev:1999sc} calls $h$. However, as emphasized in
Ref.~\cite{Jenkins:1992nb}, the form factors only approach $\Delta(w)$
near the zero-recoil point, and its normalization there is not fixed
by symmetry to assume a special value, like $\xi(1) \! = \! 1$.
A central feature of Ref.~\cite{Jenkins:1992nb} is the use of the
trace formalism of Ref.~\cite{Falk:1990yz} to compute the relative
normalization between the six meson form factors ({\it i.e.}, to
obtain the correct multiple of $\Delta$ for each tensor structure)
near the zero-recoil point. To be specific, ``near'' in this sense
means kinematic configurations in which the spatial momentum transfer
to the spectator $q$ is no larger than its mass $m_q$. This
calculation was generalized in
Refs.~\cite{Kiselev:1999sc,Kiselev:2002vz} using NRQCD to consider a
small-recoil limit ($w \! \to \! 1$) in which the four-velocities of
$\bar b$ and $\bar c$ are nevertheless unequal ({\it i.e.}, the
spectator receives a momentum transfer at leading order in NRQCD).
These relations were used in
Refs.~\cite{Cohen:2018dgz,Berns:2018vpl,Murphy:2018sqg} to constrain
the $B_c^+ \! \rightarrow \! J/\psi \, (\eta_c)$ form factors at zero recoil.
In this work, we extend the relations
of Refs.~\cite{Kiselev:1999sc,Kiselev:2002vz} by deriving the
leading-order NRQCD relations between the form factors and $\Delta$
at non-zero recoil. While these relations are expected to receive
large corrections away from $w=1$, we use them to construct ratios of
derivatives of form factors at $w=1$. To proceed, we start with the
trace formalism of Ref.~\cite{Falk:1990yz}:
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\langle \{J/\psi,\eta_c\}|\bar{b}\Gamma c|B_c^+\rangle=-\sqrt{Mm}\text{Tr}\left[
\frac{1+\slashed{v}_{cs}}{2}B_c^+\gamma_5\frac{1-\slashed{v}_b}{2}\Gamma
\frac{1-\slashed{v}_{c}}{2}\left(J/\psi^{\dag\mu}\gamma_{\mu}+\eta_c^\dag\gamma_5
\right)\right]\Delta \, ,
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
where $v_{cs},v_{b},v_c$ are the velocities of the spectator $c$
quark, decaying $b$ quark, and final-state $c$ quark respectively.
These velocities are related in the heavy-quark limit to those of the
mesons by $v_b\rightarrow\tilde{v}_1$, $v_c\rightarrow\tilde{v}_2$, and $v_{cs}
\rightarrow -\tilde{v}_3=\frac{1}{2}(v_1+v_2)$, where
\begin{align}
\tilde{v}_1^\mu=v_1^\mu+\theta\left(v_1-v_2\right)^\mu \, , \nonumber\\
\tilde{v}_2^\mu=v_2^\mu+\omega\left(v_2-v_1\right)^\mu \, ,
\end{align}
with $\theta \! \equiv \! \frac{m_3}{2m_1}$ and $\omega \! \equiv \!
\frac{m_3}{2m_2}$. One can then use the trace formalism to obtain the
$w$-dependent generalizations of the constants defined in
Refs.~\cite{Kiselev:1999sc,Kiselev:2002vz}. Starting with the tensor
definitions
\begin{eqnarray}
\langle \eta_c (v_2) | V^\mu | B_c^+ (v_1) \rangle & \equiv &
\sqrt{m_{\eta_c} m_{B_c}} \left( c^P_1 v^\mu_1 + c^P_2 v^\mu_2 \right)
\Delta , \nonumber \\
\langle J/ \! \psi (v_2) | V^\mu | B_c (v_1) \rangle & \equiv &
\sqrt{m_{J/\psi} m_{B_c}} i c_V \varepsilon^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta}
\epsilon^{* \mu} v_{1 \alpha} v_{2 \beta} \Delta , \nonumber \\
\langle J/ \! \psi (v_2) | A^\mu | B_c (v_1) \rangle & \equiv &
\sqrt{m_{J/\psi} m_{B_c}} \left[ c_\epsilon \epsilon^{*\mu} + c_1 (
\epsilon^* \cdot v_1 ) v^\mu_1 \right. \nonumber \\ & & \left.
\hspace{5.5em}+ c_2 ( \epsilon^* \cdot v_2 ) \right] \Delta ,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{align}
c^P_1&=1+\theta-\omega-\frac{\omega}{2}(1+\theta)(w-1) \, ,
\nonumber\\
c^P_2&=1-\theta+\omega-\frac{\theta}{2}(1+\omega)(w-1) \, ,
\nonumber\\
c_V&=-1-\theta-\omega \, , \nonumber\\
c_\epsilon&=2-\frac{\omega+\theta+2\theta\omega-2}{2}(w-1) \, ,
\nonumber\\
c_1&=\frac{(3+2\theta)\omega}{2} \, , \nonumber\\
c_2&=-1 -\frac{\omega}{2} -\theta(1+\omega) \, ,
\end{align}
we construct the Isgur-Wise-like relations for the heavy-heavy
systems:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:hhdelta}
f_+&=\sqrt{r} \, \frac{c^P_1+c^P_2r^{-1}}{2}\Delta \, , \nonumber\\
f_0&=M^2\sqrt{r}[(1-wr)c^P_1 + (w-r)c^P_2 ]\Delta
\, , \nonumber\\
g&=-\frac{c_V}{M\sqrt{r}}\Delta \, , \nonumber\\
f&=M\sqrt{r}c_\epsilon\Delta \, , \nonumber\\
\mathcal{F}_1&=M^2\sqrt{r}[(w-r) c_\epsilon +(r c_1+c_2)(w^2-1)]
\Delta \, , \nonumber\\
\mathcal{F}_2&=\frac{c_\epsilon+ (1-wr)c_1 + (w-r)c_2} {\sqrt{r}}
\Delta \, .
\end{align}
These relations reproduce the standard Isgur-Wise
results~\cite{Isgur:1989vq,Isgur:1989ed,Boyd:1997kz} of
Eq.~(\ref{eq:iw}) in the limit $\theta,\omega \! \rightarrow \! 0$, and
they reduce to the relations of Refs.~\cite{Kiselev:1999sc,
Kiselev:2002vz} when $w \! \to \! 1$. Terms that break these
relations should be $\mathcal{O}(m_c/m_b, \, \Lambda_{\rm QCD}/m_c)
\approx30\%$, and, in our analysis we conservatively allow for up to 50\% violations.
We use these relations in our analysis to fix both the relative
normalization between form factors and their slopes at zero recoil.
These results are obtained by constructing ratios from
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:hhdelta}) after solving for $\Delta(w=1)$ and
$d\Delta/dw|_{w=1}$.
\section{Lattice QCD Results}\label{sec:lat}
This work we uses the existing lattice-QCD
results for $b\rightarrow c$ form factors as input to our global
analysis. These results have been
produced by a number of different groups, and the determinations of
the various form factors have been performed at varying numbers of
momentum-transfer values $t$ and with varying treatments of
uncertainties. In this section we summarize the lattice results
used in our analysis.
The best current results are those for $B \! \rightarrow \! D$ form
factors. The form factors $f_+$ and $f_0$ have been computed by two
groups~\cite{Na:2015kha,Lattice:2015rga}, including a complete
treatment of all sources of error. We use the
results of~\cite{Lattice:2015rga} alone in the final results, having
found that the larger uncertainties of \cite{Na:2015kha} mean that
they provide no significant additional constraint.
For the case of $B_s\rightarrow D_s$, a single group has produced
results for $f_+$ and $f_0$ at non-zero recoil with a complete error
treatment~\cite{McLean:2019qcx}. The baryonic process
$\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c$ has been computed in Ref.~\cite{Detmold:2015aaa}
on only one lattice volume, but their results include a 1.5\%
systematic uncertainty for finite-volume effects, and given a quantified error
estimate, we can include this lattice data in our analysis.
The heavy-heavy process $B_c^+ \! \rightarrow \! \eta_c$ has also only been
computed by one group~\cite{Colquhoun:2016osw,*ALE}, with an
incomplete treatment of errors. It was computed on a single lattice
volume, so finite-volume effects are potentially worrying. To account for
possible large finite-volume effects, in the analysis we included
an additional 20\% systematic error.
In the process $B_c^+ \! \rightarrow \! J/\psi$, the two form factors $g$
and $f$ have been reported at non-zero recoil by one group on one
lattice volume~\cite{Colquhoun:2016osw,*ALE}. For these form
factors, we also include an additional 20\% systematic error. For
the other two form factors, $\mathcal{F}_1$ and $\mathcal{F}_2$, no
results have been presented.
For the final two processes $B\rightarrow D^*$ and $B_s\rightarrow
D_s^*$, only the zero-recoil value of $f$ [which is exactly related to
$\mathcal{F}_1$ at zero recoil, see above Eq.~(\ref{eq:difcofvec})] has
been computed. In the case of $B\rightarrow D^*$, $f(t_-)$ has been
computed by two groups~\cite{Bailey:2014tva,Harrison:2017fmw}, and
here we take the FLAG value~\cite{Aoki:2019cca}. For $B_s \!
\rightarrow \! D_s^*$, we include the recent result of
Ref.~\cite{McLean:2019sds}. In addition to the lack of non-zero
recoil data, no results for $g$ and $\mathcal{F}_2$ at any points are
available.
The presentation of these results in the literature is also varied.
For some, only a functional form is presented; in such cases, we
resample the form factors at a fixed number of $t$ values, using the
full error estimates and correlation matrices. Other form factors are
presented at fixed values of $t$; in such cases, we sample the form
factors at the given $t$ values.
\section{Dispersive Relations}\label{sec:da}
This work employs the model-independent form-factor parametrization
of Boyd, Grinstein, and Lebed (BGL)~\cite{Boyd:1997kz,
Grinstein:2015wqa}, which rests on the twin principles of analyticity
and unitarity of particular two-point Green's functions. While
originally applied to the form factors of heavy-light semileptonic
decays, this parametrization was extended to heavy-heavy systems in
Refs.~\cite{Cohen:2018dgz,Berns:2018vpl} (using a slightly different
set of free parameters to simplify the computation). The essential
ingredients are summarized here.
The two-point momentum-space Green's function $\Pi_J^{\mu \nu}$ of a
vectorlike quark current, $J^\mu \equiv \bar Q \Gamma^\mu Q^\prime
\,$, can be expanded in a variety of ways~\cite{Boyd:1994tt,
Boyd:1995cf,Boyd:1995tg,Boyd:1995sq,Boyd:1997kz}.
For our purpose it is
convenient is to break $\Pi_J^{\mu \nu}$ into spin-1 ($\Pi_J^T$) and
spin-0 ($\Pi_J^L$) pieces~\cite{Boyd:1997kz}. The functions
$\Pi^{L,T}_J$ are divergent in perturbative QCD (pQCD), and require
subtractions in order to be rendered finite. After performing the
minimum necessary numbers of subtractions for each function, one
obtains the finite dispersion relations:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:chilt}
\chi^L_J (q^2) \equiv \frac{\partial \Pi^L_J}{\partial q^2} & = &
\frac{1}{\pi} \int_0^\infty \! dt \, \frac{{\rm Im} \,
\Pi^L_J(t)}{(t-q^2)^2} \, , \nonumber \\
\chi^T_J (q^2) \equiv \frac 1 2 \frac{\partial^2 \Pi^T_J}{\partial
(q^2)^2} & = & \frac{1}{\pi} \int_0^\infty \! dt \, \frac{{\rm Im}
\, \Pi^T_J(t)}{(t-q^2)^3} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Since $q^2$ remains as a free parameter in these equations, one may
select its value in order to obtain the tightest possible
phenomenological constraints (which requires that $q^2$ is as close to
the region of hadronic masses as possible), but still require that
$\chi^{\vphantom\dagger}_{J}(q^2)$ can be computed to good accuracy using pQCD (whose
asymptotic regime is the deep-Euclidean limit, $q^2 \! \to \!
-\infty$). The parametric requirement for the latter condition is
$(m_Q + m_{Q^\prime}) \Lambda_{\rm QCD} \ll (m_Q + m_{Q^\prime})^2 \!
- \! q^2$, which is clearly satisfied by $q^2 \! = \! 0$ for any
process in which either or both of $Q$, $Q^\prime$ is heavy compared
to $\Lambda_{\rm QCD}$, as is true for all cases considered here.
$\chi^{\vphantom\dagger}_J (q^2=0)$ has been computed to two-loop
pQCD order, including leading nonperturbative vacuum
condensates~\cite{Generalis:1990id,Reinders:1980wk,Reinders:1981sy,
Reinders:1984sr,Djouadi:1993ss,Bigi:2016mdz}.
Unitarity requires that each of the functions ${\rm Im} \, \Pi_J$
admits an expansion over all hadronic states $X$ that couple to the
vacuum through the current $J^\mu$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:FullPi}
{\rm Im} \, \Pi^{T,L}_J (q^2) = \frac 1 2 \sum_X (2\pi)^4 \delta^4
(q - p_X) \left| \left< 0 \! \left| J \right| \! X \right> \right|^2
\, .
\end{equation}
Since every nontrivial term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:FullPi}) is positive, one
may truncate the sum on X after any number of states, insert the sum
into Eqs.~(\ref{eq:chilt}), and obtain a strict inequality based upon
unitarity. While typically these inequalities have been employed for
single states $X$, they clearly become stronger when more states $X$
are included~\cite{Boyd:1997kz,Bigi:2017jbd,Jaiswal:2017rve}, which
is a key ingredient of our analysis here. Our set of $X$ includes
only below-threshold $B_c^{(*)}$ poles and the two-body channels
discussed above. Additional branch points corresponding to the
thresholds of processes such as $B_c \pi \pi$ occur at lower $t$
values, but their contributions to the dispersive bounds are expected
to be small due to OZI suppression, closeness to the $B^{(*)}D$
thresholds that are already taken into account, or both.
For the purposes of this work, the first physically significant
two-body production threshold occurs at $t \! = \! t_{\rm bd} \!
\equiv \! (M_{B^{(*)}} \! \! + \! M_{D})^2$, depending upon which
component of the two-point function is being considered (see
Table~\ref{tab:poles}). $t_{\rm bd}$ thereby represents the lowest
significant branch point in the two-point function.
Analyticity properties of the Green's function are incorporated by
a conformal mapping of the complex-$t$ plane with a cut beginning at
the branch point $t \! = \! t_*$ to the unit disk in a complex
variable $z$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:zdef}
z(t;t_0) \equiv \frac{\sqrt{t_* - t} - \sqrt{t_* - t_0}}
{\sqrt{t_* - t} + \sqrt{t_* - t_0}} \, ;
\end{equation}
the two edges of the branch cut in $t$ are mapped to the
unit circle $C$ in $z$.
The parameter $t_0$ is free at this stage; we later optimize this
choice [Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Ndefn})--(\ref{eq:zmaxminopt})] to improve the
convergence of the Green's function in the variable $z$.
The importance of allowing a branch point $t_*$ that does not
necessarily equal $t_+$ becomes apparent in processes for which $t_+$
lies well above the lowest significant branch point for the
two-point function. Such an effect is especially significant for
baryon decays such as $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c$ and
$\Lambda_b\rightarrow p$. Previous studies that automatically set
$t_* \! = \! t_+$~\cite{Boyd:1995tg,Boyd:1997kz} can introduce branch
cuts ({\it e.g.}, for $B^{(*)}D^{(*)}$ pairs) inside the unit circle
$C$ defined by $|z| \! = \! 1$. The purpose of the BGL
parametrization being to eliminate all significant
nonanalytic behavior below-$t_*$, there are two choices: either model
the strength of the branch cut (which requires both knowledge of the
branch point and the function along the cut) and use this information
to loosen the strength of the bounds, or instead set
$t_* \! = \! t_{\rm bd}$ (as is done here). With this latter choice,
$t_* \! < \! t_+$ is no longer the threshold relevant to the physical
process, but it is the location of an important branch cut in the
two-point function to which the process contributes. Nevertheless,
for all heavy-quark systems, one finds that the semileptonic decay
region $m_\ell^2\leq t\leq t_-$ lies substantially below
$t_{\rm bd}$, and therefore the BGL bounds are not strongly affected.
With this choice, the bounds obtained by inserting
Eq.~(\ref{eq:FullPi}) into Eqs.~(\ref{eq:chilt}) amount to an integral
over the unit circle $|z| \! = \! 1$ of an integrand containing the
form factor $F_i$ of interest multiplied by the known {\it outer
functions\/} $\phi_i(t;t_0)$, which incorporate information about
kinematics and changes-of-variable. (These functions are tabulated
for the cases of interest in
Refs.~\cite{Cohen:2018dgz,Berns:2018vpl}.) The only significant
nonanalytic features remaining within the unit circle $|z| \! = \! 1$
are simple poles corresponding to $B_c^{(*)}$ states. Each such a
pole at a known location $t \! = \! t_s$ can effectively be removed
from the integrand through multiplication by $z(t;t_s)$ (a {\it
Blaschke factor}). In the $b \! \to \! c$ processes of interest here,
the masses corresponding to the $B_c^{(*)}$ poles that
must be removed in this analysis are collected in
Table~\ref{tab:poles}, organized by the $J^P$ channel to which each
one contributes ($1^- \, \{f_+, \, g, F_V,H_V\}$; $1^+ \, \{f, {\cal
F}_1, G_1, H_A\}$; $0^+ \, \{f_0, F_0\}$; $0^- \, \{{\cal F}_2,
G_0\}$). These masses have either been measured at the
LHC~\cite{Aaij:2016qlz,Sirunyan:2019osb} (boldface) or are derived
from very recent model calculations~\cite{Eichten:2019gig}.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:poles}All $B_c$-state masses lying below the
thresholds $t \! = \! t_{\rm bc}$ (for which ``Lowest pair''
indicates the states whose masses enter into $t_{\rm bc}$) for the
$J^P$ channels relevant to this study. Numbers in bold are masses
measured at the LHC.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}
{l c c c}
\hline\hline
Type & $J^P$&Lowest pair & $M$ [GeV]\\
\hline
Vector & $1^-$&$BD$&6.3290, 6.8975, 7.0065\\
\hline
Axial & $1^+$ &$B^*D$&6.7305, 6.7385, 7.1355, 7.1435\\
\hline
Scalar&$0^+$&$BD$&6.6925, 7.1045\\
\hline
Pseudoscalar&$0^-$&$B^*D$&\textbf{6.2749(8)}, \textbf{6.8710(16)}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Denoting the product of Blaschke factors for all poles with $|z| \!
< \! 1$ as $P_i$, the unitarity bound for the form factor $F_i$
expressed entirely in terms of the conformal variable $z$ reads
\begin{equation} \label{eq:FFrelnz}
\frac{1}{2\pi i} \sum_i\oint_C \frac{dz}{z}
| \phi_i(z) P_i(z) F_i(z) |^2 \le 1 \, .
\end{equation}
Since the product $\phi_i(z) P_i(z) F_i(z)$ is an analytic function
inside the unit circle $|z| \! = \! 1$, one may write
\begin{equation} \label{eq:param}
F_i(t) = \frac{1}{|P_i(t)| \phi_i(t;t_0)} \sum_{n=0}^\infty a^i_{n}
z(t;t_0)^n\, .
\end{equation}
Inserting Eq.~(\ref{eq:param}) into Eq.~(\ref{eq:FFrelnz}), one finds
that the unitarity bound can be compactly written as a constraint on
the Taylor-series coefficients $a^i_n$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:coeffs}
\sum_{i;n=0}^\infty (a^i_{n})^2 \leq 1 \, .
\end{equation}
Equations~(\ref{eq:param}) and (\ref{eq:coeffs}) are the essence of
the BGL pa\-rametrization. Every functional form for $F_i(t)$ that
respects analyticity and unitarity, as expressed by
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:chilt}) and (\ref{eq:FullPi}), can be expressed in terms
of a set of Taylor coefficients $a^i_{n}$ that satisfy the sum rule
Eq.~(\ref{eq:coeffs}).
As in Ref.~\cite{Cohen:2018dgz}, the generalization of the location
of the branch point from $t_+$ to $t_{\rm bd}$ means that slightly
more complicated functions of the mass parameters appear in the
analysis. Reprising this previous notation, we define
\begin{align}
r \equiv &\frac{m}{M} , \phantom{xxx}\delta \equiv \frac{m_\ell}{M}
, \nonumber\\
\beta \equiv &\frac{M_{B^{(*)}}}{M} , \phantom{xx}\Delta \equiv
\frac{M_{D}}{M} , \nonumber\\
\kappa \equiv &(\beta+\Delta)^2-(1-r)^2 , \nonumber\\
\lambda \equiv &(\beta+\Delta)^2-\delta^2 , \label{eq:newparams}
\end{align}
and the free parameter $t_0$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:zdef}) is replaced by a
parameter $N$:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Ndefn}
N \equiv \frac{t_{\rm bd} - t_0}{t_{\rm bd} - t_-} \, .
\end{equation}
Computing the kinematical range for the semileptonic process given in
terms of $z$ is then straightforward. The minimal (optimized)
truncation error is achieved when $z_{\rm min} = -z_{\rm max}$, which
occurs when $N \! = \! N_{\rm opt} = \sqrt{\frac{\lambda}{\kappa}}$.
At this point, one obtains
\begin{equation} \label{eq:zmaxminopt}
z_{\rm max} = -z_{\rm min} = \frac{\lambda^{1/4} \! -\kappa^{1/4}}
{\lambda^{1/4} \! +\kappa^{1/4}}\, .
\end{equation}
One finds that the semileptonic decay processes under consideration
do not exceed $z_{\rm max}\approx0.03$. If instead $t_{\rm bd}$ is
set equal to $t_+$, then Eqs.~(\ref{eq:newparams}) reduce to
$\Delta\rightarrow r$, $\beta\rightarrow 1$, and $\kappa \! \to \!
4r$, and all of the expressions reduce to those given in
Ref.~\cite{Grinstein:2015wqa}.
\section{Results}\label{sec:results}
The global analysis of the $b\rightarrow c$ hadronic form factors
relies upon a number of constraints. They are summarized here for
the convenience of the reader:
\begin{itemize}
\item The $n\leq2$ coefficients $a_n^{i}$ in each channel are
constrained by $\sum_{n,i}(a_n^{i})^2\leq 1$
[Eq.~(\ref{eq:coeffs})].
\item The form factors satisfy the exact kinematic relations below
Eq.~(\ref{eq:f0}), above Eq.~(\ref{eq:difcofvec}), and below
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:BaryFF})]:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{F}_1(t_-)&=M(1-r)f(t_-) \, , \nonumber\\
\mathcal{F}_1(0) \! &= \! \frac 1 2 M^2(1-r^2)\mathcal{F}_2(0) \, ,
\nonumber\\
f_+(0)&=M^2(1-r^2)f_0(0) \, , \nonumber\\
H_A(t_-)&=M(1-r)G_1(t_-) \, , \nonumber\\
M(1+r)F_0(0)&=M(1-r)H_V(0) \, \nonumber\\
M(1-r)G_0(0)&=M(1+r)H_A(0) \, .
\end{align}
\item $B_{(s)} \! \rightarrow \! D_{(s)}^*$ form factors are taken
to be consistent with the form factor $\xi_{(s)}(w)$ derived from
$B_{(s)} \! \rightarrow \! D_{(s)}$, once an
additional 20\% systematic error is included
to account for violations of Isgur-Wise scaling.
\item $B_{(s)} \! \rightarrow \! D_{(s)}^*$ form factors are maximal
at the zero-recoil point $t \! = \! t_-$, since the universal form
factor $\xi_{(s)}$ represents an overlap matrix element between
initial and final states. This condition is implemented via the
constraints $F_i(t_-) \! \geq \! F_i(0)$ and $\frac{d F_i}{d t}
\big|_{t_-} \! \geq \! 0$, where $F_i$ represents any of the form
factors.
\item The normalizations and slopes of the $B_c^+\rightarrow \! \{J/\psi,
\eta_c\}$ form factors $f_+,g \, (\propto \! V),\mathcal{F}_1,
\mathcal{F}_2$ are required to be consistent at zero recoil [via
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:hhdelta})] to within 50\% with the results for $f_0,f \,
(\propto \! A_1)$ computed from lattice QCD\@.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{bdff_plot}
\caption{\label{fig:latff1}$B\rightarrow D$ form factors: $f_+(q^2)$
(red circles) and $f_0(q^2)/M^2(1-r^2)$ (blue triangles)
from~\cite{Lattice:2015rga}. The colored bands are the
one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$) best-fit regions obtained from our
global dispersive analysis.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{bdstff_plot}
\caption{\label{fig:latff2}$B\rightarrow D^*$ form factors:
$A_1(q_{\rm max}^2)$ (blue triangle) from \cite{Aoki:2019cca}. The
colored bands are the one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$) best-fit
regions obtained from our global dispersive analysis. $\mathcal{F}_1$
has been divided by $\frac{1}{2}M^2(1-r^2)$.}
\end{figure}
We perform the constrained multivariable fit by first randomly
sampling $q^2$ values of the form factors for which lattice data is
known. If correlations have been reported by the lattice QCD groups,
they are implemented in the sampling. The preliminary HPQCD results
for $B_c^+\rightarrow\{J/\psi,\eta_c\}$ report only statistical error. To
account for the unknown systematics like finite-volume and
discretization effects, we include in quadrature an additional systematic
error $f_{lat}=20\%$ (as a percentage of the form factor at each
point). Lines of best fit are then computed from the collection of
sampled points using a least-squares procedure. The resulting form
factors, exhibited with one-$\sigma$ bands, are presented in
Figs.~\ref{fig:latff1}--\ref{fig:latff8}. The $a_n^i$ for the form
factors can be found in Table~\ref{tab:coef}. Of particular note,
our theoretical values for the form factors are consistent with those
of the two processes $B\rightarrow D^{(*)}$ for which experimental
data has been obtained~\cite{Aubert:2009ac,Glattauer:2015teq,
Dey:2019bgc}.
In interpreting these $1\sigma$ bands, it is important to recall
that this analysis includes statistical errors from the lattice
studies for which the notion of ``$1\sigma$'' is well defined.
However, the analysis also includes systematic errors for which,
strictly speaking, it is not. Moreover, in assigning systematic
error associated with limited lattice data for which systematic
errors had not been carefully studied, or due to truncation errors in
the theory, we have been quite conservative. Thus, one might
reasonably expect the SM result to fall within these bands with a
higher probability than had the bands been entirely due to
statistical errors.
From Table~\ref{tab:coef}, it is possible to investigate the
convergence of BGL expansion. All the $a_2$ coefficients are
consistent with zero at $1.2\sigma$, suggesting that each series is
rapidly converging; additional parameters are unnecessary at the
present precision of lattice data. This lack of precision also
allows for the $a_2$ parameters to fluctuate substantially, such that
in a given fit each one can typically be $\mathcal{O}(0.1)$, and
therefore contribute significantly to the dispersive bounds of
Eq.~(\ref{eq:coeffs}).
With this observation, one would expect the dispersive bounds to be
saturated, similar to the results of~\cite{Cohen:2018dgz} in which
the dispersive bound for the unknown form factor $\mathcal{F}_2$ was
saturated. Fitting all seven processes together,
Eq.~(\ref{eq:coeffs}) is typically saturated for all four channels
($T, L$; $V, A$). However, this result occurs not only because the
$a_2$ parameters are not well constrained. Surprisingly,
Table~\ref{tab:coef} shows that for the two $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c$ form
factors $F_0,G_0$, the $a_1$ coefficients are $\mathcal{O}(0.5)$.
Each one of them saturates about 25\% of the dispersive bound. This
result suggests that the inclusion of baryonic channels into the
dispersive approach is particularly powerful.
In the case of $G_0$, there are additional benefits beyond providing
such a large contribution toward saturation. In the $0^-$ channel,
only the $G_0$ and $\mathcal{F}_2$ form factors contribute. At
present, no lattice results for any $\mathcal{F}_2$ exist. Given
that $\mathcal{F}_2$ form factors contribute significantly only to
$\tau$ decays, this uncertainty is a sizeable fraction of the
uncertainty in our predictions of $R(H_c)$. The large contribution of
$G_0$ to the dispersive bound reduces this error. These dual
benefits from including $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c$ should motivate future
efforts to obtain lattice results for form factors of other baryonic
processes, {\it i.e.}, $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c^*$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{bsdsff_plot}
\caption{\label{fig:latff3}$B_s\rightarrow D_s$ form factors:
$f_+(q^2)$ (red circles) and $f_0(q^2)/M^2(1-r^2)$ (blue triangles)
from~\cite{McLean:2019qcx}. The colored bands are the
one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$) best-fit regions obtained from our
global dispersive analysis.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{bsdsstff_plot}
\caption{\label{fig:latff4}$B_s\rightarrow D_s^*$ form factors:
$A_1(q_{\rm max}^2)$ (blue triangle) from \cite{McLean:2019sds}.
The colored bands are the one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$)
best-fit regions obtained from our global dispersive analysis.
$\mathcal{F}_1$ has been divided by $\frac{1}{2}M^2(1-r^2)$.}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:coef}The BGL coefficients $a_n^{i}$ of this $N=2$
analysis. The full correlation matrix between the coefficients can
be found in the supplemental material.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}
{l l| c c c}
\hline\hline
$b\rightarrow c$ & $F_i$ & $a_0^{i}$ $[\times10^2]$ & $a_1^{i}$
$[\times10^2]$& $a_2^{i}$ $[\times10^2]$\\
\hline
\input{coef.tex}
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In the case of $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c$, sufficient lattice data exists so
that the constraint of heavy-quark symmetries is not required to fix
the form factors. Therefore, we can use our results in that process
to investigate how well the HQET relations are satisfied. While
higher-order terms are known~\cite{Bernlochner:2018kxh}, we consider
the leading-order relations in which the six form factors are all
proportional to an Isgur-Wise function $\zeta(w)$, which is typically
expanded in powers of $w-1$ as
\begin{equation}
\zeta(w)=\zeta(1)-\rho^2(w-1)+\frac{1}{2}\sigma^2(w-1)^2.
\end{equation}
In this expansion, our results for the coefficients of the Taylor
series are found in Table~\ref{tab:lblc}. One can see that our
results, despite suggesting corrections to the HQET relations, are
consistent with the sum-rule bounds: $\rho^2\geq0$ and $\sigma^2\geq
\frac{3}{5}\left[\rho^2+(\rho^2)^2\right]$~\cite{LeYaouanc:2008pq}.
In the final two rows of Table~\ref{tab:lblc}, we compute a pair of
averages of the coefficients. The first, $\zeta_{\rm AVG}$, is simply
an average of parameters from all six form factors together, and would
represent a best-fit phenomenological value for $\zeta(w)$. The last
row ($\zeta_{w \to 1}$) instead averages over only $H_A$ and $G_1$.
This average is of interest because only these two form factors
contribute appreciably to the differential decay rate of
$\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c\mu^-\bar{\nu}_{\mu}$, the process measured by the
LHCb Collaboration~\cite{Aaij:2017svr}. In that work, assuming the
same leading-order HQET relations and the static approximation, LHCb
extracted the values $\rho^2=1.63(11)$ and $\sigma^2=2.16(34)$ from
the decay $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c\mu^-\bar{\nu}_{\mu}$. Good agreement is
found between the LHCb results and those of $\zeta_{\rm AVG}$. But if
these results were used to make predictions far from $w\rightarrow 1$,
or for $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c\tau^-\bar{\nu}_{\tau}$, then the other form
factors begin to contribute appreciably, and a systematic error would
be introduced because their corresponding coefficients differ
dramatically from those of $\zeta_{w \to 1}$.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:lblc}HQET expansion parameters for
$\Lambda_b\rightarrow \Lambda_c$ obtained from this analysis. $\zeta_{\rm AVG}$
indicates the values of the Isgur-Wise function obtained by averaging
all of the form factors, while $\zeta_{w\rightarrow 1}$ is obtained
by averaging only over the form factors $H_A,$ $G_1$ that contribute
significantly at zero recoil.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}
{l | c c c}
\hline\hline
$F_i(q^2)$ & $F_i(1)$ & $\rho^2$ & $\sigma^2$\\
\hline
$H_V$&1.12(4)&2.5(3)&5.6(1.8)\\
$F_1$&1.51(7)&3.3(5)&8.0(1.8)\\
$F_0$&0.97(4)&1.8(3)&3.6(6)\\
$H_A$&0.90(3)&1.7(3)&3.4(1.8)\\
$G_1$&0.90(3)&1.82(18)&4.0(8)\\
$G_0$&1.02(4)&2.2(3) & 4.8(6)\\
\hline
$\zeta_{\rm AVG}$&1.1(3)&2.2(7)&4(2)\\
\hline
$\zeta_{w\rightarrow1}$&0.90(3)&1.7(2)&3.6(1.4)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Using the computed form factors, we extract three observables of
experimental interest, and present the results in
Table~\ref{tab:results}. The first is the semileptonic decay ratio:
\begin{equation}
R(H_c)=\frac{\Gamma(H_b\rightarrow H_c \tau {\nu}_\tau)}
{\Gamma(H_b\rightarrow H_c \mu {\nu}_\mu)}.
\end{equation}
For those $R(H_c)$ for which existing theoretical values exist, we
find good agreement. This result is to be expected, given that all
the theoretical values rely at least in part upon the same
lattice-QCD data used here. Beyond these checks, we have produced
two new SM predictions, those of $R(J/\psi)=0.25(3)$ and
$R(D_s^*)=0.20(3)$, which can be compared to the upcoming LHCb
results of Runs II and III\@. We find that the $R(J/\psi)$ prediction is within $1.8\sigma$ of
the current LHCb result of
$0.71(17)(18)$~\cite{Aaij:2017tyk}.
The second observable is the polarization of the $\tau$ lepton, given
by
\begin{equation}
P_\tau(H_c) \equiv \frac{\Gamma^+-\Gamma^-}{\Gamma^++\Gamma^-} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma^{\pm}$ are the decay rates of a $\tau$ with fixed
helicity $\lambda=\pm$. Only $P_\tau(D^*)=-0.38(60)$ has been
measured~\cite{Hirose:2016wfn,Hirose:2017dxl} and our value
$-0.51(15)$ agrees within uncertainties. For the other processes, we
present predictions for comparison with future measurements.
The final observable we compute is the fractional longitudinal
polarization of the decaying vector meson:
\begin{equation}
F_L^{H_c} \equiv \frac{\Gamma^0}{\Gamma} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma^{0}$ is the decay rate of a vector $H_c$ with helicity
$\lambda \! = \! 0$. In the case of the $D^*$, this quantity has
been measured to be $F_L^{D^*}=0.60(9)$~\cite{Abdesselam:2019wbt},
which is within $1.6\sigma$ of our result and other existing SM
values~\cite{Huang:2018nnq,Bhattacharya:2018kig}.
\begin{table}
\caption{\label{tab:results}Results of our dispersive analysis for
the semileptonic decay ratio $R(H_c)$, $\tau$ polarization
$P_\tau(H_c)$, and the (vector) $H_c$ polarization fraction
$F_L^{H_c}$.}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}
{l| c c c}
\hline\hline
$b\rightarrow c$ & $R(H_c)$ & $P_\tau(H_c)$& $F_L^{H_c}$\\
\hline
$B\rightarrow D$&0.298(6)&0.325(4)&---\\
$B\rightarrow D^*$&0.252(14)&--0.51(5)&0.45(3)\\
$B_s\rightarrow D_s$&0.300(5)&0.323(18)&---\\
$B_s\rightarrow D_s^*$&0.20(3)&--0.49(5)&0.44(5)\\
$\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c$&0.332(10)&--0.308(15)&---\\
$B_c^+\rightarrow\eta_c$&0.30(5)&0.33(11)&---\\
$B_c^+\rightarrowJ/\psi$&0.25(3)&--0.47(5)&0.46(4)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lblcff_plot}
\caption{\label{fig:latff5}$\Lambda_b\rightarrow \Lambda_c$ form
factors: $H_V(q^2)/M(1+r)$ (red circles), $F_1(q^2)$ (blue
triangles), and $F_0(q^2)/M(1-r)$ (green squares)
from~\cite{Detmold:2015aaa}. The colored bands are the
one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$) best-fit regions obtained from our
global dispersive analysis.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{lblcff_plot2}
\caption{\label{fig:latff6}$\Lambda_b\rightarrow \Lambda_c$ form
factors: $H_A(q^2)/M(1-r)$ (red circles), $G_1(q^2)$ (blue
triangles), and $G_0(q^2)/M(1+r)$ (green squares)
from~\cite{Detmold:2015aaa}. The colored bands are the
one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$) best-fit regions obtained from our
global dispersive analysis.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{eta_ff_plot}
\caption{\label{fig:latff7}$B_c^+\rightarrow \eta_c$ form factors:
$f_+(q^2)$ (red circles) and $f_0(q^2)/M^2(1-r^2)$ (blue triangles)
from the HPQCD Collaboration~\cite{Colquhoun:2016osw,ALE}. The
interior bars represent the statistical uncertainty quoted by
HPQCD\@. The exterior bars represent the result of including our
$f_{\rm lat} \! = \! 20\%$ systematic uncertainty. The colored bands
are the one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$) best-fit regions obtained
from our global dispersive analysis.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{bcjpsiff_plot}
\caption{\label{fig:latff8}$B_c^+\rightarrow J/\psi$ form factors:
$V(q^2)$ (red circles) and $A_1(q^2)$ (blue triangles) from the HPQCD
Collaboration~\cite{Colquhoun:2016osw,ALE}. The interior bars
represent the statistical uncertainty quoted by HPQCD\@. The
exterior bars represent the result of including our
$f_{\rm lat} \! = \! 20\%$ systematic uncertainty. The colored bands
are the one-standard-deviation ($1\sigma$) best-fit regions obtained
from our global dispersive analysis. $\mathcal{F}_1$ has been
divided by $\frac{1}{2}M^2(1-r^2)$.}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion and Conclusion}\label{sec:con}
In this work we have presented model-independent predictions of the
$b\rightarrow c$ hadronic transition form factors for the processes,
$B \! \to \! \{D,D^*\}$, $B_s \! \to \! \{D_s,D_s^{*}\}$, $B_c \! \to
\! \{ J/\psi, \eta_c \}$, and $\Lambda_b \! \to \! \Lambda_c$, using a
coupled global analysis. From these form factors, Standard-Model
values for $R(H_c)$ ($\tau$-$\mu$ ratio), $P_\tau(H_c)$ ($\tau$
polarization), and $F^{H_c}_L$ ($H_c$ longitudinal component) were
computed. Also obtained, for the first time using this approach, are
$R(D_s^*)=0.20(3)$ and $R(J/\psi)=0.25(3)$. The near-term outlook for
higher-statistics measurements from BELLE and LHCb, coupled with new
lattice results, promise to reduce the uncertainty on the
experimental and theoretical values dramatically, allowing for a
refinement of the investigation of the charged-current anomalies.
Additionally, new measurements like $R(D_s^{(*)})$ can be compared to
our results to provide complementary constraints.
We have also derived nonzero recoil relations between the heavy-heavy
meson form factors $B_c \! \to \! \{ J/\psi, \eta_c \}$ and the
Isgur-Wise-like form factor $\Delta$ at leading order in NRQCD\@.
These results allow constraints on the slopes of unknown lattice form
factors at $w=1$ to be obtained. Furthermore, these relations can be
used as the basis of phenomenological models for the form factors.
The dominant sources of uncertainty in this analysis arise from the
form factors for which no lattice data has been reported, all of
which are in the $P\rightarrow V$ processes. Upcoming results for
$B\rightarrow D^*$~\cite{Vaquero:2019ary} and $B_c^+\rightarrowJ/\psi$
promise to provide insight into these form factors. The global
analysis could also benefit from the inclusion of new processes.
Given the large fractional saturation of the unitarity bounds by
$\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c$, the inclusion of $\Lambda_b\rightarrow\Lambda_c^*$ could be
particularly fruitful once such data is available.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by the U.S.\ Department of Energy under
Contract No.\ DE-FG02-93ER-40762 (T.D.C.\ and H.L.) and the National
Science Foundation under Grant No.\ PHY-1803912 (R.F.L.). H.L.\
acknowledges the hospitality of Arizona State University, where part
of this work was performed.
\end{acknowledgments}
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{Introduction}
With increasing capability of 3D sensing hardware, it is now easy to capture 3D data in many scenarios. Compared with 2D images, 3D data provides richer information about the environment. 3D data is in general view-independent and captures 3D structure, making it possible to incorporate geometry information in scene understanding tasks.
Learning-based approaches~\cite{3dshapenet, 3DSemanticSegmentationWithSubmanifoldSparseConvNet, pointnet, pointnet2, sgpn, voxelnet, pointrcnn} were proposed to solve various 3D vision problems, e.g., shape classification, scene semantic/instance segmentation, and 3D object detection. Unlike 2D images, in which pixel grids are regular with object color information, 3D object data scatters, with most space actually not occupied.
Therefore, directly voxelizing 3D scenes and extending deep neural network operations from 2D to 3D is inefficient. Several voxel-based methods, such as Submanifold Sparse Convolution~\cite{3DSemanticSegmentationWithSubmanifoldSparseConvNet} and O-CNN~\cite{ocnn}, improve the 3D convolution efficiency. However, since voxelization is accompanied by loss of information, high-resolution 3D models are needed to uphold the data precision, even though it unavoidably costs large memory and computation resource.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{figure/simple_framework3_crop.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Simple illustration of our framework. The point and edge branches work together to predict the semantic labels. Self-connected edges and edge directions are omitted.}\vspace{-0.05in}
\label{fig_simple_framework}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{figure}
From another perspective, PointNet~\cite{pointnet} directly processes 3D points in a network, only considering regions covered by the 3D points. PointNet++~\cite{pointnet2} further adopts a hierarchical encoder-decoder structure to consider local regions, which downsamples point clouds in layers first and gradually interpolates them to the original resolution.
This framework just utilizes weak connection between each point and its local context, since point features are extracted independently by the multi-layer perceptrons (MLP).
In segmentation tasks, it is commonly known that local context is crucial for labeling the semantic categories. This motivates us to further explore the semantic relation between points and their local contextual neighbors to extract more discriminative features for 3D semantic scene labeling.
\vspace*{-10pt}
\paragraph{Our Contributions}
To explore the semantic relation between points in a local region and utilize the contextual information, we explicitly build edges between points and their contextual neighbors and establish a hierarchical edge branch with an auxiliary edge loss, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig_simple_framework}.
Specifically, besides the encoder-decoder point branch as in PointNet++, our new edge branch accepts point features from different layers and progressively produces edge features, which are then fed to point branch for fusing information in local graphs.
For each point, the corresponding edge features provide local intrinsic geometric and regional semantic information to enhance point representation.
Instead of building isolated graphs for points in each layer, we design a hierarchical graph construction process to gradually take point features at different layers into the edge branch. Edge features of adjacent layers are connected by an operator, named ``edge upsample''.
Consequently, edges on full-resolution point cloud encode multi-layer features, providing comprehensive data for final prediction.
We regularize the final edge features considering semantic consistency of the two connected points, which helps increase the discrimination ability between inter- and intra-category feature pairs, implicitly pulling points with the same semantic label closer in the feature space.
The decent performance of our method compared with all existing point-based neural networks on the large-scale scene labeling datasets,~\ie, Stanford Large Scale 3D Indoor Space (S3DIS)~\cite{s3dis} and ScanNet~\cite{scannet}, manifests the effectiveness of our framework.
\section{Related Work}
\subsection{3D Representation}
To process 3D data, one typical approach is to store the data in volume grids and adopt 3D convolutions~\cite{3dshapenet, voxnet, volumetric_multiview}.
Since most voxels are unoccupied, Submanifold Sparse Convolution Network~\cite{3DSemanticSegmentationWithSubmanifoldSparseConvNet} defines a sparse convolution operation to process spatially-sparse 3D data.
OctNet~\cite{octnet}, on the other hand, represents the data using unbalanced octrees and defines network operations on these octrees to enable deeper neural networks without sacrificing the precision.
Similarly, O-CNN~\cite{ocnn} uses an octree to enable 3D CNN on high-resolution 3D data.
Another approach is to use multi-view 2D images, to which 2D convolutions~\cite{mvcnn, volumetric_multiview} can be directly applied. However, these approaches overlook the geometric structure in objects and scenes, especially the view-occluded 3D structures.
Other methods~\cite{tangent_conv, pan2018convolutional} consider 3D object surface and apply convolutions on it for semantic analysis.
\subsection{Point-based Deep Neural Network}
PointNet~\cite{pointnet} is the first deep neural network to directly process 3D point coordinates, with MLPs and max-pooling for extracting features. Since max-pooling is a global operation on all the points, PointNet lacks local region understanding.
PointNet++~\cite{pointnet2} further applies a hierarchical structure and uses $k$-NN followed by max-pooling to capture regional information.
Since it aggregates local features simply via a max-pooling, regional information is not yet fully utilized.
Recently, much effort has been made for effective local feature aggregation.
SPLATNet~\cite{splatnet} maps points into a high-dimensional sparse lattice and performs convolution on it. RSNet~\cite{huang2018recurrent} projects features of unordered points into an ordered sequence of feature vectors and applies Recurrent Neural Network
layers to model local dependency. PointCNN~\cite{pointcnn} explores convolution on point clouds and addresses the point ordering issue by permuting and weighting input points and features with the $\mathcal{X}$-Conv operator.
Besides, methods of~\cite{edgefilter, spectralconv, pointconv, dgcnn, continuousconv} explore local context based on graphs.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.97\linewidth]{figure/architecture5_crop.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-1mm}
\caption{Overall architecture. $N$ denotes the number of points in the original point cloud. The subscript of $N$ is the layer index. Larger indices indicate layers with more points. $C$ denotes the number of point feature channels. $K$ denotes the number of edge feature channels. $E$ denotes the edge set. The edge feature is encoded from the coarsest layer 0, and is gradually refined with the point features from later layers. Edge features in different layers also participate in the corresponding point modules to provide contextual information. }
\label{fig_framework}
\vspace{-1mm}
\end{figure*}
\vspace{-3mm}
\paragraph{Graph-based Methods}
ECC~\cite{edgefilter} organizes point clouds as graphs and uses graph convolutions to dynamically learn weights to combine local features.
DGCNN~\cite{dgcnn} proposes the EdgeConv module to generate edge features that describe the connection between a point and its nearest neighbors.
PointWeb~\cite{pointweb} further connects every point pairs in a local region to obtain more representative region features.
KCNet~\cite{kcnet} creates $k$-nearest neighbor graphs and applies kernel correlation to learn local structures over point neighborhood.
PCCN~\cite{continuousconv} and PointConv~\cite{pointconv} connect each point with its $k$-nearest neighbors and extend the convolution operation from regular grids to irregular point clouds by adaptively projecting the relative position of two points to a convolution weight. Compared to PCCN, PointConv additionally considers point distribution density.
Spectral Graph Convolution~\cite{spectralconv} performs graph convolution after a graph Fourier transform.
Superpoint Graph (SPG)~\cite{spg} splits the point cloud into geometrically-homogeneous partitions and builds a super-point graph, followed by a graph neural network to produce semantic labels.
In our work, we also propose a graph for point cloud processing, and yet focus particularly on exploring the semantic relation between points and their contextual neighbors for semantic segmentation through explicit edges.
The key distinction of our method from other graph-based frameworks is that instead of fixing the graph and point resolution (e.g., PCCN~\cite{continuousconv} and KCNet~\cite{kcnet}) or building independent graphs at each scale (e.g., PointConv~\cite{pointconv}, PointWeb~\cite{pointweb} and ECC~\cite{edgefilter}), our graph is \emph{hierarchically constructed}. We construct an edge branch, in which we fuse multi-scale point features and propagate edge features over multiple scales to enable longer distances of message passing hierarchically over edges without large memory overhead.
Moreover, we propose edge loss aiming to encode the edges with exact semantic consistency information and increase the discrimination power among point features with different categories.
With meaningful edge features, we further feed edge features into each scale of the point branch to offer contextual information. To pass messages via edges, PointConv~\cite{pointconv} and PCCN~\cite{continuousconv} adaptively learn weights from edges to fuse point features, while KCNet~\cite{kcnet} defines a point-set kernel and kernel correlation to aggregate local features along edges. Different from these methods, our approach concatenates each point feature with the max-pooled corresponding edge features. Our approach requires less parameters to learn and preserves the distinctiveness of individual point features (Section~\ref{sec_edge_usage} provides more discussions).
\section{Our Approach}
We design a hierarchical edge branch collaborating with the point prediction branch for point cloud semantic segmentation, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_framework}.
We progressively enlarge the graph, upsample edge features, and accept point features in different layers to refine the edge features. Edge features in different layers then provide extra contextual information for point feature learning. The final edge features are regularized with semantic consistency of their two-end points, which serve as auxiliary supervision for point features.
In this section, we first introduce the new edge branch, covering especially the interaction between point and edge branches, in Section~\ref{sec_edge_branch}.
Then the hierarchical graph construction framework, which enables integration of different-layer information for edge prediction is described in Section~\ref{sec_hierarchical_graph}. Section~\ref{sec_loss} depicts the loss regularizing both category prediction of each point and semantic-consistency prediction of each edge.
\subsection{Edge Branch}
\label{sec_edge_branch}
Given a point cloud with $N$ points $\mathcal{P} = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_N\}$, we construct a directed graph $G = (V, E)$, where $V = \mathcal{P}$ and $E$ includes the edges that connect each point to its contextual points. Here, $G$ is hierarchically constructed in a coarse to fine manner.
We denote the graph in layer $L$ as $G_L$. A larger $L$ indicates a layer with more points, and layer $0$ is the coarsest layer with the least points. The detailed graph construction process is depicted later in Section~\ref{sec_hierarchical_graph}. Here, we first introduce the constitution of edge branch and how it interacts with the point branch.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_framework}, for the point branch, we follow PointNet++~\cite{pointnet2} to create a hierarchical encoder-decoder structure with previous features in point encoder connected to the corresponding point decoder layers through skip-connection, thus passing detailed low-level information. The point cloud is downsampled and then upsampled in the process. Meanwhile, we construct an edge branch with consecutive edge modules, taking both features from the corresponding point module and the previous edge module.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{figure/edge_module4_crop.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{(a) Architecture of the \textit{Edge Module}. (b) \textit{Edge Encoder} block in (a). $K_L$ and $C_L$ represent the channel numbers in edge and point features in layer $L$, respectively. For simplicity, we only illustrate the edge encoding process for a single edge in (b). Edge features for all the edges in $E_L$ constitute $\mathbb{H}_{E_L}$.}
\label{fig_edge_module}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{figure}
The procedure is to extract edge features from the coarsest layer to grab high-level information with the largest receptive field, and progressively fuse point features from finer layers into edges, in parallel with the point decoding stage. Point features from the encoder layers are also used in the process, along with
skip-connection to the corresponding decoder layers.
Although both abstract global features from the coarser layers and detailed information from finer layers are important, the most essential data for edge prediction is from the last layer with the most refined point features. With this consideration, edge features are encoded in a coarse-to-fine manner, making point features in the finest layer fused at last. The hierarchical edge features are also fed to the corresponding point modules to provide additional contextual information.
\subsubsection{Edge Module}
\label{sec_edge_encoder}
At the decoding stage,
for layer $L$, we denote the graph as $G_L = (V_L, E_L)$ and the number of points as $N_L$.
The edge module accepts the $L$-layer point features $\mathbb{F}_{V_L}$ and $(L-1)$-layer edge features $\mathbb{H}_{E_{L-1}}$ as arguments and returns the edge features in layer $L$. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_edge_module}(a), the edge module is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{H}_{E_L} = M_{encoder}(\mathbb{F}_{V_L}, M_{upsample}(\mathbb{H}_{E_{L-1}})),
\end{equation}
where $M_{encoder}$ denotes the edge encoder and $M_{upsample}$ is the edge upsampling module, which maps edge features in graph $G_{L-1}$ to graph $G_{L}$. The graph construction and edge upsampling process will be described in Section~\ref{sec_hierarchical_graph}.
For each edge $e_{i, j} = (p_i, p_j) \in E_L$, its edge feature at layer $L$ is written as
\begin{equation}
H_{i, j}^{L} = M_{encoder}(F_i^{L}, F_j^{L}, H_{i, j}^{L-1\to L}),
\end{equation}
where $F_i^{L}$ and $F_j^{L}$ are the point features of $p_i$ and $p_j$, respectively.
$H_{i, j}^{L-1\to L}$ is the edge feature upsampled from layer $L-1$ to layer $L$.
As illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig_edge_module}(b), $M_{encoder}$ for a single edge can be expanded as
\begin{equation}
H_{i, j}^{L} = f_{ext}^{(1)}([f_{ext}^{(2)}(f_{edge}(F_i^{L}, F_j^{L})), \text{ }H_{i, j}^{L-1\to L}]),
\end{equation}
where $[\cdot, \cdot]$ represents concatenation.
The feature extractor $f_{ext} : \mathbb{R}^{n} \to \mathbb{R}^{m}$ can be any differentiable function. In our implementation, we apply MLP as $f_{ext}$. The edge function $f_{edge} $ takes the two point features it connects as input and outputs a feature for the edge. We formulate $f_{edge}$ as
\begin{equation}
f_{edge}(F_i^{L}, F_j^{L}) = [(p_j - p_i),\text{ } F_j^{L},\text{ } F_i^{L}] ,
\end{equation}
where $[\cdot, \cdot, \cdot]$ concatenates the three elements, and $p_i, p_j$ here represent 3D point coordinates. The two point features are concatenated for completely preserving information of the two points. Also, we provide $(p_j - p_i)$ to indicate the relative position between the two points. Other implementations of $f_{edge}$ are discussed in the experiment part.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{figure/point_module3_crop.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Architecture of the \textit{Point Module}. $K_L$ denotes the channel number of the $L$-layer edge features, while $C_L$ denotes the channel number of the $L$-layer point feature.}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{fig_point_module}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Incorporation of Edges in Point Prediction}
\label{sec_interaction}
For layer $L$, every point in graph $G_L$ links to other contextual points. So corresponding edges are expected to pass the contextual information back to the point. To this end, the edge features with respect to point $p_i$ are operated by max-pooling as a region guidance. Let $E_L(p_i)$ denote the set containing all edges starting from $p_i$, the corresponding set of edge features is
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{H}_{E_L(p_i)} = \{H_{i, j}^{L} | (p_i, p_j) \in E_L(p_i)\}.
\end{equation}
The point feature $F_i^{L}$ is then updated by
\begin{equation}
(F_i^{L})_{new} = [F_i^{L}, \text{ } \mbox{MaxPool}(\mathbb{H}_{E_L(p_i)} )].
\end{equation}
Fig.~\ref{fig_point_module} gives an illustration of the process.
By incorporating edge information in point features, we enlarge the message passing range. The local region feature provided by the edges allows the point feature extractor to see farther in each layer.
Additional contextual information including intrinsic geometry and semantic relation in the local region is incorporated in the region feature to benefit segmentation.
We experiment with other schemes for message passing. Section~\ref{sec_edge_usage} gives more discussions.
By helping feature extraction in the other branch, point and edge features become more powerful in final prediction.
\subsection{Hierarchical Graph Construction}
\label{sec_hierarchical_graph}
Instead of building graphs separately at each layer, we build the graph hierarchically, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_graph_construct}. By designing the ``edge upsample'' operation with each edge aware of associated edges in previous layer, we enlarge the receptive field and enable longer-range message passing for edges.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{figure/graph_construct2_crop.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-1mm}
\caption{Hierarchical Graph Construction. The graph is initialized in the coarsest layer and is progressively enlarged by considering both point coordinates in the current layer and the graph in previous layer.}
\label{fig_graph_construct}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Graph Initialization}
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig_graph_construct}, the graph is initialized in the coarsest layer (layer 0).
The initial graph $G_0$ is constructed by connecting each point with its nearest $k_0$ points.
Mathematically, $G_0 = (V_0, E_0)$ is formulated as
\begin{equation} \small
\begin{aligned}
\begin{cases}
V_0 &= \mathcal{P}_0, \\
E_0 &= \{(p_i, p_j) | \text{ } p_i \in \mathcal{P}_0, \text{ } p_j \in N_{k_0}(p_i)\},
\end{cases}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{P}_0$ is the point set in layer 0, which is downsampled from the original point set with farthest point sampling (FPS) in encoding layers. $N_{k_0}(p_i)$ is the set of the $k_0$-nearest neighbors of point $p_i$, including itself.
\subsubsection{Hierarchical Architecture}
Along with the decoding process of point features, we gradually enlarge the graph and enrich the edge features with more details. The process is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig_graph_construct}.
\vspace{-0.12in}
\paragraph{Graph Construction of Layer $L$}
Consider two adjacent layers $L-1$ and $L$ with vertices $V_{L-1}$ and $V_{L}$ as the point set in that layer, respectively.
The graph $G_L$ is constructed by first finding the $k_L$ nearest neighbors for each point in $V_{L}$.
Let $G_{L}^{(0)}=(V_L, E_L^{(0)})$ denote such initial $L$-layer graph. For each edge $e_{i, j} = (p_i, p_j) \in E_L^{(0)}$, we consider the set consisting of possible neighboring edges in layer $L-1$ as
\begin{equation}
E_{ne}^{L-1}(e_{i, j}) = \{(p'_i, p'_j) | \text{ }p'_i \in N_k^{L-1}(p_i), \text{ }p'_j \in N_k^{L-1}(p_j)\}, \nonumber
\end{equation}
where $N_k^{L-1}(p_i) \subseteq V_{L-1}$ is the $k$-nearest neighbors of $p_i \in V_L$ in layer $L-1$. $p_i$ is included in $N_k^{L-1}(p_i)$ if $p_i \in V_{L-1}$.
We then check whether edges in $E_{ne}^{L-1}(e_{i, j}) $ exist in $E_{L-1}$ -- the edge set of $G_{L-1}$. If edge $e_{i, j}$ connects two distant points, for which even in the coarser layer $L-1$ there is no connection between the two corresponding regions, we do not take the edge into consideration in layer $L$. Hence, if $E_{ne}^{L-1}(e_{i, j}) \cap E_{L-1} = \O$, edge $e_{i, j}$ is discarded from $E_L^{(0)}$. Following this principle, the final graph $G_L = (V_L, E_L)$ has an edge set of
\begin{equation} \small
E_L = \bigcup_{p_i \in V_L} E_L(p_i), \nonumber
\end{equation}
where $E_L(p_i)$ (edges starting from $p_i$) is expressed as
\begin{equation} \small
E_L(p_i) = \{ (p_i, p_j) | p_j \in N_{k_L}(p_i), \text{ }E_{ne}^{L-1}(e_{i, j}) \cap E_{L-1} \neq \O\}.\nonumber
\end{equation}
Note that at least $e_{i, i}$ is reserved in $E_L(p_i)$ in some extreme cases.
\vspace{-0.12in}
\paragraph{Edge Upsampling}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.99\linewidth]{figure/edge_upsample6_crop.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Demonstration of \textit{edge upsampling}. Points in layer $L-1$ (blue ones) also exist in layer $L$. Self-connected edges are omitted. For edge $e_{i, j}$ in layer $L$, we propagate edge features in layer $L-1$ by finding its neighboring edges in $E_{L-1}$ and interpolating features of these edges. Red arrows represent edges in $G_{L-1}$ for interpolation, which denote intersection of $E_{L-1}$ (blue arrows) and $E_{ne}^{L-1}(e_{i, j})$ (yellow arrows). }
\vspace{-3mm}
\label{fig_edge_upsample}
\end{figure}
In PointNet++~\cite{pointnet2}, point feature of $p_i$ in layer $L$ is propagated from layer $L-1$ by interpolating feature values of its $k$ nearest neighbors in layer $L-1$ as
\begin{equation}
F_i^{L-1 \to L} = f_{interp}^p(\{F_j^{L-1} | \text{ }p_j \in N_k^{L-1}(p_i) \}).
\end{equation}
We similarly propagate edge features in layer $L-1$ to layer $L$ as
\begin{equation}\small
H_{i, j}^{L-1\to L} = f_{interp}^e(\{ H_{i', j'}^{L-1} | \text{ }(p_{i'}, p_{j'}) \in E_{ne}^{L-1}(e_{i, j}) \cap E_{L-1}\}).\nonumber
\end{equation}
A demonstration is given in Fig.~\ref{fig_edge_upsample}.
The interpolation weights are based on the inverse distance of the two pairs of end points. For $H_{i', j'}^{L-1}$, the weight is formulated as
\begin{equation}
w_{i', j'} = \frac{1}{(\| p_i - p_{i'} \|^t + \epsilon)\cdot(\| p_j - p_{j'} \|^t + \epsilon)},
\end{equation}
where $p_{i'}, p_{j'} \in V_{L-1}$, $p_i, p_j \in V_{L}$ represent point coordinates, $\epsilon = 1e-8$ and $t$ is set to 2. The weights are then normalized as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_normal}
w_{i', j'}^n = \frac{w_{i', j'}}{\sum_{(p_{i''}, p_{j''}) \in E_{ne}^{L-1}(e_{i, j}) \cap E_{L-1}}w_{i'', j''}} .
\end{equation}
\subsection{Loss Function}
\label{sec_loss}
We optimize the point and edge branches jointly with the combined loss on the two branches as
\begin{equation}
L = \lambda_1 L_{point} + \lambda_2 L_{edge},
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ adjust the ratio of the two losses.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\small
\resizebox{0.9\linewidth}{!}{%
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.5pt}
\begin{tabular}{ l | l l l | c c c c c c c c c c c c c}
\toprule[1.0pt]
Methods & OA & mAcc & mIoU & ceiling & floor & wall & beam & column & window & door & table & chair & sofa & bookcase & board & clutter \\
\hline
PointNet~\cite{pointnet} & - & 48.98 & 41.09 & 88.80 & 97.33 & 69.80 & 0.05 & 3.92 & 46.26 & 10.76 & 58.93 & 52.61 & 5.85 & 40.28 & 26.38 & 33.22\\
SegCloud~\cite{segcloud} & - & 57.35 & 48.92 & 90.06 & 96.05 & 69.86 & 0.00 & 18.37 & 38.35 & 23.12 & 70.40 & 75.89 & 40.88 & 58.42 & 12.96 & 41.60\\
PointCNN~\cite{pointcnn} & 85.91 & 63.86 & 57.26 & 92.31 & 98.24 & 79.41 & 0.00 & 17.60 & 22.77 & 62.09 & 74.39 & 80.59 & 31.67 & 66.67 & 62.05 & 56.74\\
SPGraph~\cite{spg} & 86.38 & 66.50 & 58.04 & 89.35 & 96.87 & 78.12 & 0.00 & 42.81 & 48.93 & 61.58 & 84.66 & 75.41 & 69.84 & 52.60 & 2.10 & 52.22\\
PCCN~\cite{continuousconv} & - & 67.01 & 58.27 & 92.26 & 96.20 & 75.89 & 0.27 & 5.98 & 69.49 & 63.45 & 66.87 & 65.63 & 47.28 & 68.91 & 59.10 & 46.22\\
\hline
Our Method & \textbf{87.18} & \textbf{68.30} & \textbf{61.85} & 91.47 & 98.16 & 81.38 & 0.00 & 23.34 & 65.30 & 40.02 & 75.46 & 87.70 & 58.45 & 67.78 & 65.61 & 49.36 \\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{Semantic segmentation results evaluated on S3DIS Area 5. Most methods do not perform well on the ``beam'' category, which has few points (0.029\%). \label{tab:s3disresult}
}
\end{table*}
\vspace{-0.12in}
\paragraph{Point Loss}
The final point features are followed by an MLP to produce point-wise semantic predictions. We further use the final edge predictions as weights to aggregate point scores and get refined point predictions. Cross entropy loss is applied to constrain the point predictions.
\vspace{-0.12in}
\paragraph{Edge Loss}
The edge features in the final graph $G$ are regularized by the edge labels, which represent whether the two-end points of the edge are in the same category or not. The label for edge $e_{i, j} = (p_i, p_j) \in E $ is set as
\begin{equation}
l_{i, j}^{e} =
\left \{
\begin{array}{lr}
1, &\text{if }l_i^p = l_j^p \\
0, &\text{if } l_i^p \neq l_j^p
\end{array}.
\right.
\end{equation}
where $l_i^p$ and $l_j^p$ are the point semantic labels of $p_i$ and $p_j$.
An MLP is adopted to produce the per-edge prediction. Binary cross entropy loss is chosen for the edge loss as
\begin{equation}\footnotesize
L_{edge} = - \frac{1}{|E|}\sum_{e_{i, j} \in E} ( l_{i, j}^e \log(pred_{i, j}^e) + \alpha (1 - l_{i, j}^e) \log (1 - pred_{i, j}^e)),
\end{equation}
where $pred_{i,j}^e$ is the edge prediction for $e_{i,j}$, and $\alpha$ balances the two kinds of edges, as there are more intra-class edges than inter-class ones considering the local neighborhood.
The final edge feature for each edge can be deemed as a function on features of the two regions centered at the two-end points. Information from different layers are taken into account.
More details are preserved by encoding at last. Hence, the edge loss guides the edge encoder to seek difference between the intra- and inter-class feature pairs, and implicitly serves as auxiliary supervision for point features. It increases the discrimination power among point features in different categories. Also, with the edge supervision, more exact contextual information is passed to points via edges to enhance point features.
\section{Experiments}
We conducted experiments on two representative and challenging large-scale scene labeling datasets,~\ie, S3DIS~\cite{s3dis} and ScanNet v2~\cite{scannet}, with ablation analysis presented on the ScanNet v2 val set and S3DIS Area 5.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\resizebox{0.99\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{@{\hspace{0.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{0.8mm}}c@{\hspace{0.0mm}}}
\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Input} &
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot00.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot03.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=31mm, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot06.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area5/snapshot06.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area5/snapshot00.png}\\
\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Ground Truth} &
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot01.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot04.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=31mm, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot07.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area5/snapshot07.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area5/snapshot01.png}\\
\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Ours} &
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot02.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot05.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=31mm, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area6/snapshot08.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area5/snapshot08.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, height=0.13\linewidth]{figure/area5/snapshot02.png}\\
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace{5pt}
\caption{Visualization of the semantic segmentation results on the S3DIS dataset.}
\label{fig:s3dis}
\vspace*{-1mm}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Implementation Details}
The point branch contains an encoder with four down-sampling layers and a decoder with four upsampling layers.
The numbers of points, $N_0, N_1, N_2, N_3, N_4=N$, in the decoder are
16, 64, 256, 1,024, and 4,096, respectively. The edge branch has five blocks with $k$ (number of nearest neighbors) set to $4, 6, 10, 14, 16$ from layer 0 to 4. $k$ is chosen as 3 for point and edge feature interpolation.
The whole network was trained in an end-to-end manner using the SGD optimizer with batch size 16 and base learning rate 0.05. For S3DIS, we train the network for 100 epochs and decay the rate by 0.1 for every 25 epochs. For ScanNet, we train the network for 120 epochs and decay the rate by 0.1 for every 30 epochs. The momentum and weight decay are set to 0.9 and 0.0001 respectively.
\subsection{Datasets}
\paragraph{S3DIS}
The dataset~\cite{s3dis} has 6 areas with a total of 271 rooms.
Each room is provided as points with RGB information.
Each point has a semantic label from 13 categories of floor, window, door, etc.
In each training iteration, we randomly sample blocks in the training areas, with 4,096 points randomly selected per block. We set the block size as $0.8m \times 0.8m$ with $0.1m$ padding.
Also, we represent each point as a 9D vector with $XYZ$, $RGB$, and normalized position in room.
All points in the test areas are used in evaluation.
Two settings are adopted~\cite{segcloud, spg, pointcnn}: (i) splitting Area 5 as the test set and using others for training; and (ii) adopting 6-fold cross validation, with each of the 6 areas taking as the test set once.
\vspace{-0.12in}
\paragraph{ScanNet v2}
The dataset has 1,613 scans with a train/validation/test split of 1,201/312/100. Excluding the `unannotated' points, each point in the scans has a label from 20 categories of wall, shower curtain, etc. To prepare the input data, we follow previous work~\cite{pointnet2} to randomly sample blocks in rooms and sample 4,096 points per block.
Again, we use $0.8m \times 0.8m$ block size and $0.1m$ padding.
Here, each input point feature is a 6D vector ($XYZ$ \& RGB).
We evaluated on both the validation and test sets.
Since the semantic annotation for the test sets is not publicly available, we submitted our predictions to the official server to obtain the evaluation results.
\vspace{-0.12in}
\paragraph{Evaluation Metric}
It includes the class-wise mean of intersection over union (mIoU), class-wise mean of accuracy (mAcc) and point-wise overall accuracy (OA).
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{@{\hspace{0.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{1.0mm}}c@{\hspace{0.0mm}}}
\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Input} &
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot00.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot04.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot13.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot16.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot10.png}\\
\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Ground Truth} &
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot01.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot05.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot14.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot17.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot11.png}\\
\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Ours} &
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot02.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot06.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot15.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot18.png}&
\includegraphics[align=c, width=0.18\linewidth]{figure/scannet/snapshot12.png}\\
\end{tabular}
\vspace{5pt}
\caption{Visualization of the semantic segmentation results on the ScanNet v2 dataset.}
\label{fig:scannet}
\vspace*{-0mm}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Main Results}
Table~\ref{tab:s3disresult} lists quantitative results of different methods on S3DIS Area 5.
Compared to previous approaches, ours yields the highest scores in terms of all the three metrics. Specifically, our model yields mIoU 61.85\%, exceeding the former best by 3.58\%.
Table~\ref{tab:s3disresult2} shows the comparison among different architectures on 6-fold cross validation. Ours also reaches the first place for all the three items.
Table~\ref{tab_scannetv2} lists results of our framework and other point-based methods on ScanNet v2 test set.
All methods use only point clouds with RGB color as input without voxelization.
Our approach outperforms others by a large margin: 6.2\% higher in absolute mIoU and 11.2\% better relatively. Visual results are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:s3dis} and~\ref{fig:scannet}.
Our method segments objects even in complex scenes.
It is notable that several detailed structures are classified and segmented from the surroundings, manifesting the effectiveness of our method.
\begin{table}[t]
\small
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c c}
\toprule[1.0pt]
Methods & OA & mAcc & mIoU\\
\hline
PointNet~\cite{pointnet} & 78.5 & 66.2 & 47.6\\
RSNet~\cite{huang2018recurrent} & - & 66.45 & 56.47\\
SPGraph~\cite{spg} & 85.5 & 73.0 & 62.1\\
PointCNN~\cite{pointcnn} & 88.14 & 75.61 & 65.39\\
\hline
Our Method & \textbf{88.20} & \textbf{76.26} & \textbf{67.83}\\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-1mm}
\caption{Semantic segmentation results on the S3DIS dataset with 6-fold cross validation.}
\label{tab:s3disresult2}
\vspace*{-2mm}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{8pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ l | c }
\toprule[1.0pt]
Method & mIoU \\
\hline
PointNet++~\cite{pointnet2} & 33.9 \\
SPLATNet~\cite{splatnet} & 39.3 \\
PointCNN~\cite{pointcnn} & 45.8 \\
PointConv~\cite{pointconv} & 55.6 \\
\hline
Our Method & \textbf{61.8} \\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vspace{-1mm}
\caption{Semantic segmentation results on ScanNet v2 test set.}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{tab_scannetv2}
\end{table}
\subsection{Ablation Study}
For ScanNet v2, the models are trained on training set and evaluated on validation set. For S3DIS, the models are trained on Areas 1-4 \& 6 and evaluated on Area 5.
\vspace{-3mm}
\paragraph{Edge Function}
We explore different ways of incorporating point information into edges, including Subtraction, Summation, Hadamard product, `ConcatSub', and Concatenation. Here `ConcatSub' is defined as
\begin{equation}
f_{edge}(F_i^{L}, F_j^{L}) = [(p_j - p_i), \text{ } F_j^{L}, \text{ }(F_j^{L} - F_i^{L})].
\end{equation}
Table~\ref{tab:ablation_edgefunction} shows comparison of the results.
Overall, concatenation yields the best result due to preservation of most point information.
Summation, Subtraction, and Hadamard Product all cause information loss in the level of point features. `ConcatSub' achieves similar performance with Concatenation, since the two-point features can be restored in this type of operations.
\begin{table}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{7pt}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.9\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c c }
\toprule[1.0pt]
Methods & mIoU & mAcc & OA \\
\hline
Subtraction & 58.31 / 58.85 & 67.95 / 65.66 & 84.02 / 86.44 \\
Summation & 57.86 / 58.96 & 67.25 / 65.87 & 83.69 / 86.48 \\
Hadamard Product & 59.07 / 58.79 & 68.02 / 65.27 & 85.31 / 86.16 \\
ConcatSub & 63.09 / 59.37 & 71.82 / 66.19 & 86.12 / 86.53\\
\hline
Concatenation & \textbf{63.36} / \textbf{61.85} & \textbf{72.61} / \textbf{68.30} & \textbf{86.13} / \textbf{87.18} \\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{Ablation study results for edge function $f_{edge}$ on ScanNet v2 and S3DIS. The results are shown in format of ScanNet v2 / S3DIS. The ablation on two datasets share similar observation.\vspace{2mm}}
\label{tab:ablation_edgefunction}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5pt}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{0.9\linewidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c c }
\toprule[1.0pt]
Methods & mIoU & mAcc & OA \\
\hline
AdaAggre (w. softmax) & 56.44 & 66.17 & 83.06 \\
AdaAggre (w.o. softmax) & 55.01 & 64.12 & 82.67 \\
\hline
MaxPool + Concat & \textbf{63.36} & \textbf{72.61} & \textbf{86.13} \\
\bottomrule[1.0pt]
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{Ablation results for message passing by edges.}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{tab_ablation_edgepass}
\end{table}
\vspace{-3mm}
\paragraph{Message Passing by Edges}
\label{sec_edge_usage}
Besides the approach described in Section~\ref{sec_interaction}, we also experimented with another scheme which is inspired by graph convolution~\cite{kipf2016semi, velivckovic2017graph}, where the edge features are further encoded to form weights for the linked points. The point features are then updated as a weighted sum of the adjacent point features. We denote this scheme as adaptive aggregation (\textit{AdaAggre}) and test the two settings, with and without softmax, for the weights.
Table~\ref{tab_ablation_edgepass} lists the experimental results on ScanNet v2 validation set.
The performance gain for the graph-convolution-style methods is lower than max-pooling followed by concatenation. It may be because during the point decoding, it is not very helpful to mix point features in each local neighborhood.
Instead, the combined contextual feature reveals the relation of a point with its neighborhood. It can better preserve the point's own distinctiveness.
\vspace{-3mm}
\paragraph{Hierarchical Graph Construction and Edge Upsampling}
We build connection between edge features of adjacent layers by ``edge upsample''.
We also experimented on ScanNet dataset with removing hierarchical graph construction and
building the graph of each layer separately without edge upsampling.
The mIoU/mAcc/OA (\%) results are 57.01/66.52/83.57 respectively, much lower than our full framework with 63.36/72.61/86.13. The connected edge branch optimally incorporates the point features in different layers, enabling effective learning for the edge features.
\vspace{-1mm}
\section{Conclusion}
We have designed a hierarchical point-edge interaction network, in which an edge branch is proposed to work with the encoder-decoder point branch for point cloud semantic segmentation. The proposed hierarchical graph framework enables the edge branch to progressively integrate different-layer point features. Also, the generated edge features are incorporated into the point branch to provide contextual information. The final edge features are supervised by the semantic consistency of related points to implicitly regularize the point features. All these steps make semantic relationship with local context well utilized via edges.
With the high-quality point prediction results and generality of the framework applicable to different datasets, we believe the proposed method will broadly benefit 3D understanding in the community. In the future, we will explore multi-range edge construction to gather both close-range and long-distance contextual information.
\paragraph{Acknowledgments}
This project is supported in part by the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (CUHK 14203416 \& 14201918).
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee_fullname}
|
\section{Introduction}
Internet-of-things (IoT) has a great potential to impact our lives in the future by providing solutions related to multiple sectors of industry, smart homes, transportation, etc. It is predicted that there will be about 50 billion IoT devices by 2020 \cite{popli2019survey, feltrin2019narrowband}. The deployment of a large-scale IoT ecosystem requires the IoT devices (IoTDs) with a small physical size to be built from cost-efficient hardware components, which results in major challenges due to their limited battery life and computational capability. More importantly, IoT applications require flexibility in handling diverse latency requirements \cite{popli2019survey}. To address the limited battery life and computational capability, the computational task in an IoTD can be migrated to a more powerful server \cite{Kumar2013}, which is known as \textit{computation offloading} \cite{Kumar2013, she2019cross}. Furthermore, technologies like massive multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) \cite{ngo2013energy, luMIMOOverview2014, LISWaad2018} and cloud-radio-access-network (C-RAN) \cite{zhang2015CRAN, Barbarossa2013, Barbarossa2015, jointKim2019, liu2019TwoScale, li2018minmax, jointBckAcce2015} can be exploited to augment the process of computation offloading and manage the corresponding latency requirement imposed by the IoT applications.
Massive MIMO, characterized by the deployment of a huge number of antennas, is a key enabling technique for 5G wireless systems \cite{ngo2013energy, luMIMOOverview2014}. More recently, \textit{extra-large scale MIMO (xL-MIMO)} as a step further has received increasing research attention \cite{LISWaad2018, de2019non, amiriXtra2018, BeyondMIMO2018}. In XL-MIMO, a large antenna array in the order of hundreds and thousands is integrated into a large man-made structure, for example, walls of buildings in the residential rooms, airports, or large shopping malls, as a scaled-up version of the massive MIMO systems where the spatial dimension provides an additional degree of freedom to further enhance the performance of the massive MIMO systems \cite{Mar2014, de2019non}. In addition, xL-MIMO systems provide a better coverage with a line-of-sight (LOS) channel, which also simplifies the corresponding channel estimation \cite{LISWaad2018, amiriXtra2018, BeyondMIMO2018}. However, the implementation of such xL-MIMO systems is challenging due to the deployment complexity along with the increasing requirement for the baseband signal processing, which is proportional to the number of antenna elements.
C-RAN can be a potential technique to overcome the above challenges for the xL-MIMO systems. Specifically, C-RAN migrates the baseband signal processing to a baseband unit (BBU) that is equipped with a powerful server in the "cloud", while the radio frequency (RF) functionalities are implemented at the remote radio head (RRH) \cite{CRanSurvey2014}. By combining massive MIMO with C-RAN, the deployment complexity of the conventional massive MIMO systems can be greatly alleviated, since only analog components such as antennas and RF chains with a limited signal processing capability are required \cite{zhang2015CRAN, liu2019TwoScale}. However, moving the signal processing of a massive MIMO system from the RRH to the central BBU requires a huge amount of digitally sampled data to be transmitted over the fronthaul link. Therefore, it is necessary to compress the uplink data at the RRH to satisfy the capacity limit of the fronthaul link. Accordingly, in \cite{zhang2015CRAN}, the authors proposed a data compression method which reduces the dimension of the signals received across the multiple antennas through spatial filtering, followed by a uniform scalar quantization across the reduced dimension. To further reduce the cost and power consumption of the hardware components in a C-RAN system, hybrid analog-digital designs have subsequently been applied to the massive MIMO C-RANs \cite{jointKim2019, yu2016alternating, sohrabi2016hybrid, liu2019TwoScale}, where the number of RF chains at the RRH can be reduced.
Different from the wireless systems in \cite{zhang2015CRAN} and \cite{liu2019TwoScale} where the uplink communication has a high spectral efficiency requirement, the latency-constrained IoT applications pursue low data rates with a higher energy efficiency performance while meeting their stringent latency constraints. In this regard, computation offloading with the massive MIMO C-RAN can be leveraged by allocating the transmit power and computational resource at the BBU server to each IoTD while satisfying their latency requirement. While there have been studies on admission control and offloading strategies for computation offloading in a single-antenna wireless network in \cite{addOffload2018, offStrategy2019} and references therein, there are only a limited number of works in the literature that study the joint communication and computational resource allocation for computation offloading in a MIMO C-RAN \cite{Barbarossa2013, Barbarossa2015, li2018minmax}. In \cite{Barbarossa2013} and \cite{Barbarossa2015}, the offloading problems were formulated to minimize the total transmit power and energy consumption of the devices, respectively, while meeting the latency constraints. The computation offloading method proposed in \cite{li2018minmax} aimed to minimize the maximum latency of all the devices. Nevertheless, these works did not consider the compression and quantization of the received signal at the RRH as in \cite{zhang2015CRAN, liu2019TwoScale}, which can lead to infeasible data traffic for a capacity-limited fronthaul link. Moreover, the latency incurred at the capacity-limited fronthaul link in transferring the data from the RRH to the BBU can critically impede the execution of the computational tasks. Accordingly, the above mentioned drawbacks call for the joint design of the resource allocations, the compression and quantization strategies, especially for the latency-critical IoT applications.
Furthermore, the iterative nature of the solutions proposed in \cite{Barbarossa2013, Barbarossa2015, li2018minmax, zhang2015CRAN, liu2019TwoScale} are computationally demanding for real-time implementation, especially when the computational tasks have a stringent latency requirement. Recently, deep learning has become a promising tool in solving difficult wireless communication problems, such as resource allocation \cite{dong2019deep, pcDeep2018}, channel decoding \cite{decode2018} and channel estimation \cite{DeepUSVXu2019, DeepSVKim2018}, which can return a near-optimal solution with a low-complexity implementation. The main idea of deep learning is to treat a given computationally expensive algorithm as a "black box", and try to learn the policy obtained with the algorithm by using a \textit{deep neural network} (DNN) \cite{SunDeep2018, luong2019applications}. Specifically, the authors in \cite{SunDeep2018} have shown that the DNN can be trained to learn the non-linear mapping between the input and output of an algorithm, where the outputs obtained from running the algorithm offline can be used as labeled samples to train the DNN. Accordingly, the trained DNN only requires simple operations such as matrix-vector multiplications to obtain near-optimal solutions.
Motivated by the above, in this work we consider the computation offloading problem for the IoTDs in a massive MIMO C-RAN deployed in an indoor environment, where multiple receive antennas that are spread across one of the walls act as an xL-MIMO RRH. Specifically, the uplink signals, encoding the computation bits from the IoTDs, are firstly received at the xL-MIMO before spatial filtering. Subsequently, the filtered signals are quantized \cite{LiuJointPower2015} and transmitted to the BBU via a capacity-limited fronthaul link, where a baseband combiner corresponding to each IoTD extracts and forwards the respective signal to the BBU server. We focus on the minimization of the total transmit power of the IoTDs, while satisfying the latency requirement of their corresponding computational task. We summarize the main contributions of the paper below:
\begin{enumerate}
\item We establish a computation offloading optimization problem to minimize the total transmit power of the IoTDs by jointly optimizing the communication and computational resource allocation policy, the spatial filtering design at the xL-MIMO RRH, the number of quantization bits, and the baseband combiner design at the BBU, while satisfying the latency requirement of the corresponding computational tasks. Compared to \cite{Barbarossa2013} and \cite{Barbarossa2015} where the latency requirement only includes the transmission latency and computational latency, we further consider the fronthaul latency experienced in transferring the quantized bits from the xL-MIMO RRH to the BBU. This additional fronthaul latency couples with the transmission latency through the required number of quantization bits and makes our non-convex optimization problem fundamentally different from the existing works \cite{Barbarossa2013, Barbarossa2015, li2018minmax}, which is more challenging to solve.
\item To obtain a near-optimal solution for the formulated optimization problem, we introduce a two-stage design, where a hybrid spatial filtering (HSF) matrix at the xL-MIMO RRH is firstly obtained purely based on the channel state information (CSI). Subsequently, based on the effective channel and the obtained HSF matrix, a joint optimization on the residual variables at the BBU is implemented. For the joint optimization at the BBU, the proposed problem is divided into three sub-problems and solved via alternating optimization. To be more specific, the baseband combiner is obtained in a closed-form, the communication and computational resource allocation problem is solved by leveraging the successive inner convexification, and the optimization on the number of quantization bits is solved through a line-search method. Moreover, the proposed algorithm is shown to converge to a local optimal solution.
\item For practical implementation, we resort to deep learning for a low-complexity solution for the joint optimization at the BBU \cite{pcDeep2018, learningSurvey2019, decode2018, DeepUSVXu2019, DeepSVKim2018}. Specifically, we deploy a supervised learning method using the DNN, where the Adam optimizer \cite{kingma2014adam} is used to train the DNN with the solutions obtained from the complicated optimization algorithm. Finally, the numerical results demonstrate the superiority of the proposed joint optimization algorithm over the disjoint optimization procedures. Furthermore, the DNN based supervised learning is shown to be an effective low-complexity approach, which reduces the execution time by two orders of magnitudes.
\end{enumerate}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II describes the system model and introduces the formulated problem for the total transmit power minimization. In Section III, we present the proposed solution for the formulated problem, where the hybrid spatial filtering matrix at the xL-MIMO RRH is obtained locally followed by the joint optimization of the residual parameters at the BBU via alternating optimization, and finally discuss the low-complexity solution for the joint optimization based on the DNN method. Numerical results are presented in Section IV, and we conclude the paper in Section V.
\textit{Notations}: Bold upper-case letters $\mathbf{Y}$, bold lower-case letters $\mathbf{y}$ and letters $y$ denote matrices, vectors and scalars, respectively; $Y_{i,j}$ is the entry on the $i$-th row and $j$-th column of $\mathbf{Y}$; Transpose and conjugate transpose of $\mathbf{Y}$ are represented by $\mathbf{Y}^T$ and $\mathbf{Y}^H$, respectively; $\mathbf{Y}^\dagger$ is the Moore-Penrose pseudo inverse of $\mathbf{Y}$; ${\rm diag}\left(\left[y_1, \dots, y_n \right]^T\right)$ denotes a diagonal matrix with elements $y_i, \; i = 1, \dots, n$ on the diagonal; ${\rm vec}(\mathbf{Y})$ indicates vectorization; $\norm{\bf y}_2$ is the $\ell_2$ norm of the vector ${\bf y}$; $\mathbf{1}_M$ is the $M \times 1$ vector of ones; $\jmath$ is defined as $\jmath \triangleq \sqrt{-1}$, $|\cdot|$ returns the amplitude of a complex number; $\odot$, $\oslash$ and $\circ$ denote the Hadamard product, division and power, respectively; ${\bf I}$ is the identity matrix.
\section{System Model and Problem Formulation}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.375]{figSM0.pdf}
\caption{\small System model of the uplink xL-MIMO C-RAN serving $K$ IoTDS.}
\label{SM}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-2mm}
We consider the uplink of an xL-MIMO C-RAN that serves $K$ single-antenna IoTDs, as shown in Fig.~\ref{SM}. The xL-MIMO RRH consists of $N$ antennas uniformly distributed in a two-dimensional space along the $xz$-plane at $y = 0$ on the Cartesian coordinates. Accordingly, the locations of the $n$-th antenna of the xL-MIMO RRH and the $k$-th IoTD are defined as $\left(x_{n}^{M}, 0, z_{n}^{M} \right)$ and $\left(x_k, y_k, z_k \right)$, respectively. In this paper, we assume that the xL-MIMO RRH is equipped with $R = K \left(\ll N \right)$ RF chains such that there are enough spatial degrees of freedom to serve all the $K$ IoTDs \cite{liu2019TwoScale}. The xL-MIMO RRH is connected to the BBU\footnote{Note that the BBU can be shared among multiple xL-MIMO systems, thereby reducing the total cost of ownership (TCO) \cite{CRanSurvey2014}.}
via a digital error-free fronthaul link with a capacity of $C_F$ bits per second (bps). The BBU makes the resource allocation decisions and decodes the IoTDs’ symbols, followed by the processing of the computation bits at the BBU server.
We assume that all the IoTDs transmit over a quasi-static flat-fading channel, and the received signal at the xL-MIMO RRH is expressed as
\begin{equation}
{\bf y} = \sum_{k = 1}^K {\bf h}_k \sqrt{p_k} s_k + {\bf z},
\end{equation}
where $s_k$ is the transmitted symbol of the $k$-th IoTD such that $|s_k|^2 = 1$, $p_k$ is the corresponding transmit power, ${\bf h}_k \in \mathbb{C}^{N \times 1}$ is the channel vector between the $k$-th IoTD and the xL-MIMO RRH, and ${\bf z} \sim \mathcal{CN}(0, \sigma^2 {\bf I}_N)$ denotes the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN).
\vspace{-4mm}
\subsection{Channel Model}
Given that the IoTDs are deployed in an indoor environment, the IoTDs are reasonably close to the xL-MIMO RRH. Hence, the desired channel between an IoTD and each antenna of the xL-MIMO RRH is composed of both the deterministic LOS and non-line-of-sight (NLOS) components. Accordingly, the channel between the $k$-th IoTD and the xL-MIMO RRH is given by \cite{LISWaad2018}
\begin{equation}
{\bf h}_k = {\bm \kappa}_k^{L} {\bf h}^L_k + {\bm \kappa}_k^{NL} {\bf h}^{NL}_k,
\end{equation}
where ${\bf h}^L_k \in \mathbb{C}^{N \times 1}$ is the deterministic LOS component between the $k$-th IoTD and the xL-MIMO RRH, given by \cite{LISWaad2018}
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{equation}
{\bf h}^L_k = \left[l_{1,k}^L h_{1,k} , \dots, l_{N,k}^L h_{N,k} \right]^T,
\end{equation}
where $l_{n,k}^L = \frac{1}{\sqrt{4 \pi d_{n,k}^2}}$, $h_{n,k} = \exp\left(\frac{-j 2 \pi d_{n,k}}{\lambda} \right)$ and $d_{n,k} = \sqrt{\left(x_k - x_{n}^{M}\right)^2 + y_{k}^2 + \left(z_k - z_{n}^{M}\right)^2}$ are the attenuation factor in the free space, the channel gain and the distance between the $k$-th IoTD and the $n$-th antenna of the xL-MIMO RRH, respectively, with $\lambda$ denoting the carrier wavelength of the transmitted signal. The NLOS component ${\bf h}^{NL}_{k} \in \mathbb{C}^{N \times 1}$ between the $k$-th IoTD and the xL-MIMO RRH is defined as \cite{DeepUSVXu2019}
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{equation}
{\bf h}^{NL}_k = {\bm \Lambda}^{\frac{1}{2}}_k {\bf g}_k,
\end{equation}
with ${\bm \Lambda}_{k} \triangleq {\rm diag}\left(\left[d_{1,k}^{-\xi} \tau_{1,k}, \dots, d_{N,k}^{-\xi}\tau_{N,k} \right]^T \right) \in \mathbb{C}^{N \times N}$, where $d_{n,k}^{-\xi}$ and $\tau_{n,k}$ are the large-scale fading and the log-normal shadow fading between the $k$-th IoTD and the $n$-th antenna of the xL-MIMO RRH, respectively. $\xi$ is the path loss exponent and ${\bf g}_k \in \mathbb{C}^{N \times 1}$ models the small-scale fading, with each entry following $\mathcal{CN} \left(0,1 \right)$. Finally, ${\bm \kappa}_k^{L} \triangleq {\rm diag}\left( \left[ \sqrt{\frac{\kappa_{1,k}}{\kappa_{1,k}+1}}, \dots, \sqrt{\frac{\kappa_{N,k}}{\kappa_{N,k}+1}} \right]^T \right) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$ and ${\bm \kappa}_k^{NL} \triangleq {\rm diag}\left( \left[ \sqrt{\frac{1}{\kappa_{1,k}+1}}, \dots, \sqrt{\frac{1}{\kappa_{N,k}+1}} \right]^T \right) \in \mathbb{R}^{N \times N}$, where $\kappa_{n,k}$ denotes the Rician factor between the $k$-th IoTD and the $n$-th antenna of the xL-MIMO RRH.
\subsection{Uplink Signal Processing}
At the xL-MIMO RRH, we consider the spatial-compression-and-forward (SCF) scheme proposed in \cite{LiuJointPower2015,liu2019TwoScale, zhang2015CRAN} to balance between the information conveyed to the BBU and the data traffic over the fronthaul link. To reduce the hardware complexity, we employ the hybrid analog-digital filtering, where each antenna is only equipped with a phase shifter and the signals from $N$ antennas are filtered using an analog spatial filtering matrix ${\bf V}_{A} \in \mathbb{C}^{N \times R}$, followed by a digital spatial filtering matrix ${\bf V}_{D} \in \mathbb{C}^{R \times R}$. Accordingly, the received signal after the hybrid spatial filtering is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\bar{\bf y} &= {\bf V} {\bf y}, \\
&= {\bf V} \sum_{k = 1}^K {\bf h}_k \sqrt{p_k} s_k + {\bf V} {\bf z},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf V} \triangleq {\bf V}_D^H {\bf V}_A^H = \left[{\bf v}_1, \dots, {\bf v}_R \right]^T \in \mathbb{C}^{R \times N}$ denotes the HSF matrix. With the use of phase shifters, each entry of $\mathbf{V}_{A}$ satisfies the element-wise constant-modulus constraint, i.e., $\left|\left[{\bf V}_A \right]_{\left(i,j \right)} \right|= 1, \; \forall i,j$. In this paper, we assume that high-resolution ADCs are used at the xL-MIMO RRH such that the quantization error due to ADCs is negligible \cite{liu2019TwoScale}. Subsequently, a uniform scalar quantization is applied to each element of $\bar{{\bf y}} = [\bar{y}_{1}, \dots, \bar{y}_{R}]^T$, where each complex symbol $\bar{y}_{r}$ can be represented by its in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) part as
\begin{equation}
\bar{y}_{r} = \bar{y}^{I_r} + \jmath\; \bar{y}^Q_{r}, \; \forall r,
\end{equation}
where the I-branch symbol $\bar{y}^I_{r}$ and Q-branch symbol $\bar{y}^Q_{r}$ are both real Gaussian random variables with zero mean and variance $\left(\sum_{k = 1}^K p_k |{\bf v}_r^T {\bf h}_{k}|^2 + \sigma^2 \norm{{\bf v}_r}^2 \right)/2$ \cite{LiuJointPower2015}. After the uniform scalar quantization, the baseband quantized symbol of $\bar{\bf y}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\tilde{\bf y} &= \bar{\bf y} + {\bf e}, \\ &= {\bf V} \sum_{k = 1}^{K} {\bf h}_k \sqrt{p_k} s_k + {\bf V z} + {\bf e},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf e} \triangleq \left[e_{1}, \dots, e_{R} \right]^T$ denotes the additive quantization error vector for $\bar{\bf y}$. Each ${e}_r$ is Gaussian distributed with zero mean and variance $\varrho_r$, with $\varrho_r$ given by \cite{LiuJointPower2015}
\begin{equation}
\varrho_r=\begin{cases}
3 \left(\sum_{k=1}^K p_k \left|{\bf v}^T_{r} {\bf h}_{k} \right|^2 + \sigma^2 ||{\bf v}_{r}||^2 \right) 2^{-2 \varpi}, & \text{if $\varpi > 0$},\\
\infty, & \text{if $\varpi = 0$},
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\varpi$ denotes the number of bits that each RF chain uses to quantize $\bar{y}^I_{r}$ and $\bar{y}^Q_{r}$. As each $e_r$ is independent over $r$ due to the independent scalar quantization for each element of $\bar{\bf y}$, and therefore the covariance matrix of ${\bf e}$ is a function of ${\bf p} \triangleq \left[p_1, \dots, p_K \right]^T$, ${\bf V}$ and $\varpi$, given by
\begin{equation}
{\bf Q} ({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\varpi}) = \mathbb{E}[{\bf e} {\bf e}^H] = {\rm diag}\left(\left[\varrho_{1}, \dots, \varrho_r\right]^T\right).
\end{equation}
Subsequently, the quantized symbols are forwarded to the BBU via the fronthaul link. To mitigate the effects of the inter-IoTD interference and the quantization error, a linear baseband combiner ${\bf w}_k \triangleq \left[ w_{k,1}, \dots, w_{K,R}\right]^T \in \mathbb{C}^{R \times 1}$ is further applied to $\tilde{\bf y}$ before demodulating the symbol for the $k$-th IoTD, given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\hat{s}_k &= {\bf w}^H_k \tilde{\bf y}, \\
&= {\bf w}^H_k {\bf V} {\bf h}_k \sqrt{p_k} s_k + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K {\bf w}^H_k {\bf V} {\bf h}_j \sqrt{p_j} s_j + {\bf w}^H_k {\bf V} {\bf z} + {\bf w}^H_k {\bf e}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Accordingly, the SINR for the $k$-th IoTD is expressed as
\begin{equation}
\gamma_k\left({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\bf W}, \varpi \right) = \frac{p_k \left| {\bf w}^H_k {\bf V} {\bf h}_k \right|^2}{\sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K p_j \left|{\bf w}^H_k {\bf V} {\bf h}_j \right|^2 + \sigma^2 \norm{{\bf w}^H_k {\bf V}}^2 + {\bf w}^H_k {\bf Q}({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\varpi}) {\bf w}_k},
\end{equation}
where ${\bf W} \triangleq \left[{\bf w}_1, \dots, {\bf w}_K \right]$.
\subsection{Computation Offloading and Latency Model}
We assume that due to the limited computational capability at the IoTDs, all the computational tasks of the IoTDs have to be offloaded to the BBU. Accordingly, let the $k$-th IoTD's computational task $C_k$ be described by a tuple, defined as $\left(\omega_k,b_k,\mathcal{T}^{th}_k \right)$, where $\omega_k$ denotes the number of CPU cycles needed for computing $C_k$, $b_k$ represents the number of computation bits needed for $C_k$ and $\mathcal{T}^{th}_k$ is the maximum tolerable latency to execute $C_k$ \cite{Barbarossa2015}. In the case of offloading, the latency includes a) the transmission latency, b) the fronthaul latency, and c) the computational latency.
\subsubsection{Transmission latency $(\xi_{k}^{TL})$}
Given $\gamma_k\left({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\bf W}, \varpi \right),\;\forall k$, the transmission latency $\xi_k^{TL}$ is incurred during the transmission of the computation bits $b_k$ from the $k$-th IoTD to the xL-MIMO RRH. The latency for the transmission of $\log_2\left(1 + \gamma_k \left({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\bf W}, \varpi\right)\right)$ bits per second per Hertz is given by \cite{li2018minmax, Barbarossa2013, Barbarossa2015}
\begin{equation}
\xi^{TL}_k = \frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2\left(1 + \gamma_k\left({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\bf W}, \varpi \right)\right)},
\end{equation}
where $B_W$ is the total transmission bandwidth.
\subsubsection{Fronthaul latency $(\xi_k^{FL})$}
For $b_k$ computation bits corresponding to the $k$-th IoTD, we assume that the bits are encoded using the $M$-PSK modulation. Accordingly, $b_k$ bits are encoded into $\frac{b_k}{\log_2(M)}$ symbols which are transmitted from the $k$-th IoTD to the BBU through the xL-MIMO RRH. With $\varpi$ bits used to quantize both the real and imaginary part of each entry in $\bar{\bf y}$, a total of $2 R {\varpi}$ quantized bits are required across $R$ RF chains \cite{zhang2015CRAN, LiuJointPower2015}. Consequently, $\frac{b_k}{\log_2(M)}$ transmitted symbols of the $k$-th IoTD generate effective traffic of $\frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{\log_2(M)}$ bits for the fronthaul link. Hence, with a fronthaul link capacity of $C_F$, expressed in terms of bits per second, the fronthaul latency $\xi_k^{FL}$ for forwarding $b_k$ computation bits of the $k$-th IoTD from the xL-MIMO RRH to the BBU is given by \cite{li2018minmax}
\begin{equation}
\xi^{FL}_k = \frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)}.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Computational latency $(\xi_k^{CL})$}
The computational resources are shared among the $K$ IoTDs and are quantified by the computational rate $F_T$, expressed in terms of the number of CPU cycles per second \cite{Barbarossa2015, li2018minmax}. Let us denote by $f_k \geq 0$ the fraction of $F_T$ to be assigned to each IoTD. The rates $f_k$ are subject to the computational budget constraint, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k=1}^K f_k \leq F_T.
\end{equation}
Given the resource assignment $f_k$, the computational latency $\xi_k^{CL}$ incurred in executing $\omega_k$ CPU cycles for the computational task of the $k$-th IoTD is given by \cite{li2018minmax, Barbarossa2013, Barbarossa2015}
\begin{equation}
\xi_k^{CL} = \frac{\omega_k}{f_k}, \forall k.
\end{equation}
Finally, the expression for the overall latency $\xi_k$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\xi_k &= \xi_{k}^{TL} + \xi^{FL}_k + \xi_{k}^{CL}, \\
&= \frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2\left(1 + \gamma_k \left({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\bf W}, \varpi\right)\right)} +\frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)} + \frac{\omega_{k}}{f_k}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
{(16) clearly shows the interplay between the wireless transmission part and the computational part via the transmission and computational latency. Furthermore, a coupling between the transmission and fronthaul latency through the number of quantization bits $\varpi$ can also be observed from (16). For example, an increase in the quantization bits decreases the quantization error which reduces the transmission latency, while on the other hand, it increases the required number of bits transmitted to the BBU, thereby increasing the fronthaul latency. Therefore, the joint optimization of the communication and computational resource allocations along with the number of quantization bits for the computation offloading task is essential.
\subsection{Problem Formulation}
In this paper, we aim to minimize the total transmit power for the IoTDs, i.e., ${\bf 1}_K^T {\bf p}$, by jointly optimizing the communication resource ${\bf p}$, the HSF matrix ${\bf V}$, the baseband combiner ${\bf W}$ at the BBU, the number of quantization bits ${\varpi}$ and the computational resource ${\bf f} \triangleq \left[f_1, \dots, f_K \right]^T$. Accordingly, we aim to solve the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{P}_1: && \underset{\left\{{\bf V}, {\bf W}, {\bf p}, {\bf f}, {\varpi}\right\}}{\min} \;{\bf 1}_K^T {\bf p} \\
& \text{\it s.t.}
& & {\rm C_1}:\frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2\left(1 + \gamma_k\left({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\bf W}, \varpi \right)\right)} +\frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)} + \frac{\omega_{k}}{f_k} \leq \mathcal{T}_k^{th}, \; \forall k,\\
&&& {\rm C_2}: {\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} \leq F_T, \;{\rm C_3}: p_k \leq P_{k,max}, \; \forall k, \\
&&& {\rm C_4}: 2 B_W R {\varpi} \leq C_{F}, \; {\rm C_5}: {\varpi} \in \mathbb{Z}_{>0},\\
&&& {\rm C_6}: \left|\left[{\bf V}_A \right]_{\left(i,j \right)} \right|= 1, \; \forall i,j
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${\rm C_1}$ is the latency constraint for the $k$-th IoTD with the latency threshold denoted by $\mathcal{T}_k^{th}$, ${\rm C_2}$ is the computational resource constraint, ${\rm C_3}$ is the maximum power limits of the IoTDs, where $P_{k,max}$ denotes the maximum transmit power of each IoTD, ${\rm C_4}$ is the fronthaul capacity constraint \cite{Barbarossa2015, zhang2015CRAN, liu2019TwoScale}, ${\rm C_5}$ is the integer constraint for the number of quantization bits, and ${\rm C_6}$ is the element-wise constant-modulus constraint for the analog spatial filtering matrix.
\section{{Proposed solution for the Formulated Problem $\mathcal{P}_1$}}
In this section, we seek a feasible solution for $\mathcal{P}_1$, which is found to be non-convex due to 1) the coupling of variables between the transmission latency, the fronthaul latency and the computational latency, 2) the integer constraint for the quantization bit, and 3) the element-wise constant-modulus constraint for the analog spatial filtering matrix. Accordingly, to solve $\mathcal{P}_1$, we present a two-stage design, where the HSF matrix at the xL-MIMO RRH is obtained locally\footnote{Designing the HSF matrix locally at the xL-MIMO RRH reduces the signaling overhead between the the BBU and the xL-MIMO RRH.} based on the CSI, and a joint optimization on the residual variables at the BBU is subsequently implemented based on the effective channel and the obtained HSF matrix. Finally, we propose a low-complexity solution based on the deep learning framework to address the practical implementation of the considered joint optimization at the BBU.
\vspace{-4mm}
\subsection{HSF Design at the xL-MIMO RRH}
In this work, the HSF matrix is obtained by approximating the fully-digital spatial filtering (FDSF) matrix. To pursue a low-complexity solution, we select the matched filtering (MF) method as the FDSF, given by
\begin{equation}
{\bf V}_{FD} = {\bf H}^H,
\end{equation}
where ${\bf H} \triangleq \left[{\bf h}_1, \dots, {\bf h}_K \right]^T$. Another advantage of employing the MF approach is that ${\bf V}_{FD}$ tends to eliminate the effect of small-scale fading, resulting in a less frequent update of the communication and computational parameters at the BBU. Specifically, assuming the independence of each individual propagation path of the IoTDs and by leveraging the concept of channel hardening and law of large numbers \cite{ngo2013energy, LISWaad2018}, it can be shown that the effective channel at the BBU, given by ${\bf V}_{FD} {\bf H}$, tends to be independent of the small-scale fading, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
{\bf V}_{FD} {\bf H} &\xrightarrow[]{N \to \infty} {\rm diag}\left(\left[{ h}_{eff}^{1}, \dots, {h}_{eff}^{K} \right]^T\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where ${h}_{eff}^{k} \triangleq \sum_{n = 1}^N {\frac{\kappa_{n,k}}{\kappa_{n,k}+1}} \left|l_{n,k}^L h_{n,k} \right|^2 + {\frac{1}{\kappa_{n,k}+1} \left|d_{n,k}^{-\xi}\right|}, \; \forall k$. Accordingly, ${\bf V}_{FD}$ asymptotically decorrelates the signals from the IoTDs across the $K$ output dimensions. Subsequently, for a given FDSF matrix, the hybrid analog and digital spatial filtering matrix, i.e., $ {\bf V}_A$ and ${\bf V}_D$, are obtained by \cite{SVDlow2018}
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{equation}
{\bf V}_A = {\bf V}_{FD} \oslash \left|{\bf V}_{FD} \right|,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{{V}}_{D} = {\bf V}_A^{\dagger} {\bf V}_{FD}.
\end{equation}
Consequently, the HSF matrix is given by ${\bf V} = {\bf V}_D^H {\bf V}_A^H$.
\vspace{-2mm}
\subsection{Joint Optimization at the BBU}
Next, we propose to solve a joint optimization on the residual variables at the BBU based on the alternating optimization framework\footnote{Alternating optimization has been extensively used in applications such as image processing \cite{wang2008new}, robust learning \cite{jain2017non}, wireless signal processing \cite{zhang2015CRAN,liu2019TwoScale}, etc, where the optimization problem concerning two or more variables are solved by fixing one or group of the variables and optimizing over the others \cite{bezdek2002some, bezdek2003convergence, jain2013low}.}, which effectively removes the coupling between the transmission latency, the fronthaul latency and the computational latency. To be more specific, given the HSF matrix ${\bf V}$, $\mathcal{P}_1$ can be transformed into a joint optimization on ${\bf W}$, ${\bf p}$, ${\bf f}$ and ${\varpi}$, given by
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{P}_2: && \underset{
\left\{{\bf W}, {\bf p}, {\bf f}, {\varpi}\right\}}{\min} \; {\bf 1}_K^T {\bf p}\\
& \text{\it s.t.}
& & {\rm C_1}: \frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2\left(1 +\gamma_k\left({\bf p}, {\bf W}, \varpi \right)\right)} +\frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)} + \frac{\omega_{k}}{f_k} \leq \mathcal{T}_k^{th}, \; \forall k\\
&&& {\rm C_2}: {\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} \leq F_T, \; {\rm C_3}: p_k \leq P_{k,max}, \; \forall k, \\
&&& {\rm C_4}: 2 B_W R {\varpi} \leq C_{F}, \; {\rm C_5}: {\varpi} \in \mathbb{Z}_{>0}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It should be noted that the HSF matrix in (21) does not completely decorrelate the signals from the IoTDs due to the finite number of antennas at the xL-MIMO RRH, resulting in the inter-IoTD interference. This along with the quantization noise introduced by the subsequent quantizer may degrade the demodulation performance of the signals at the BBU. Hence, we further adopt a baseband combiner at the BBU to obtain the received symbols as close as possible to the original symbols. Consequently, following the minimum-mean-squared-error (MMSE) metric and for a given ${\bf p}$, ${\bf f}$ and $\varpi$, the optimal linear baseband combiner for $\mathcal{P}_2$ is given by \cite{zhang2015CRAN, liu2019TwoScale}
\begin{equation}
\bar{\bf w}_k = \left( \sum_{j = 1}^K p_j \left|{\bf V} {\bf h}_j \right|^2 + \sigma^2 {\bf I} + {\bf Q}({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\varpi}) \right)^{-1} {\bf V} {\bf h}_k.
\end{equation}
Based on the fact that
\begin{equation}
\bar{\bf w}_k^H {\bf Q}({\bf p}, {\bf V}, {\varpi}) \bar{\bf w}_k = \sum_{r = 1}^R \varrho_{r} \left|\bar{w}_{k,r} \right|^2 = 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{r = 1}^R \Xi_{r,k} \left({\bf p}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\bar{w}_{i,j}$ denotes the $j$-th element of $\bar{\bf w}_i$, $1 \leq i \leq K$, $1 \leq j \leq R$ and
\begin{equation}
\Xi_{r,k} \left({\bf p} \right) = 3 \left|\bar{w}_{k,r} \right|^2 \left(\sum_{j=1}^K p_j \left|{\bf v}^T_{r} {\bf h}_{j} \right|^2 + \sigma^2 ||{\bf v}_{r}||^2 \right), \; \forall l,
\end{equation}
and by defining $\alpha_{k,j} \triangleq \left| \bar{\bf w}^H_k {\bf V} {\bf h}_j \right|^2$, $\eta_k \triangleq \sigma^2 \norm{\bar{\bf w}^H_k {\bf V}}^2$, (12) can be expressed as a function of ${\bf p}$ and ${\varpi}$ as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\xi_k^{TL} \left({\bf p}, {\varpi} \right) &\triangleq \frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2 \left(1 + \frac{p_k \alpha_{k,k}}{\eta_k + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K p_j \alpha_{k,j} + 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{l=1}^R \Xi_{l,k} \left({\bf p} \right)} \right)}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Accordingly, $\mathcal{P}_2$ is transformed into a joint optimization on ${\bf p}$, ${\bf f}$, and ${\varpi}$, given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{P}_3: && \underset{\left\{{\bf p}, {\bf f}, {\varpi}\right\}}{\min} \; {\bf 1}_K^T {\bf p}\\
& \text{\it s.t.}
& & {\rm C_1}: \xi_k^{TL} \left({\bf p}, {\varpi} \right) +\frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)} + \frac{\omega_{k}}{f_k} \leq \mathcal{T}_k^{th}, \; \forall k\\
&&& {\rm C_2}: {\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} \leq F_T, \; {\rm C_3}: p_k \leq P_{k,max}, \; \forall k, \\
&&& {\rm C_4}: 2 B_W R {\varpi} \leq C_{F}, \; {\rm C_5}: {\varpi} \in \mathbb{Z}_{>0}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Based on the formulation, we discuss the feasibility of $\mathcal{P}_3$, as shown in Lemma 1 below.
\noindent
\textbf{\textit{Lemma 1:}} $\mathcal{P}_3$ admits a non-empty feasible set satisfying all the constraints in (27), if for $\mathcal{T}^{th}_k > 0, \; \forall k$, $\exists$ ${\bf p} \in \Psi \triangleq \left\{\bar{\bf {p}} \in \mathbb{R}^K_+ : \bar{\bf {p}} \preccurlyeq {\bf P}_{max} \right \}$ and ${{\varpi}} \in \mathcal{D} \triangleq \left\{\bar{\varpi} \in \mathbb{Z}_{>0}: \bar{\varpi} \leq \frac{C_{F}}{2 R B_W} \right\}$, where ${\bf P}_{max} \triangleq \left[P_{1,max}, \dots, P_{K,max} \right]^T$, the following sufficient and necessary conditions are satisfied:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
\xi_k^{TL} \left({\bf p}, {\varpi} \right) + \frac{2 b_k R {\varpi}}{C_F \log_2(M)} < \mathcal{T}^{th}_k, \; \forall k,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\sum_{k = 1}^K \frac{\omega_k}{{\mathcal{T}}_k^{th} - \xi_k^{TL} \left({\bf p}, {\varpi} \right) - \frac{2 B_W R \varpi}{C_F} } \leq F_T.
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
\textit{Proof}: The individual conditions in (28a) are necessary to ensure that each IoTD can transmit the computation bits to the BBU within the maximum tolerable latency. Subsequently, (28b) guarantees that the total computational resource available at the BBU is enough to assign the computational resource to each IoTD to execute their computational tasks while satisfying the corresponding latency requirement. $\blacksquare$
In what follows, we assume that $\mathcal{P}_3$ is feasible\footnote{The conditions in (28) can be enforced by a proper admission control strategy \cite{Barbarossa2013, addOffload2018}, or an appropriate choice of the fronthaul capacity or the BBU computational capability \cite{offStrategy2019}.} and present the corresponding solution. Accordingly, to solve $\mathcal{P}_3$, we first fix the number of quantization bits $\varpi$ in $\mathcal{P}_3$ and optimize ${\bf p}$ and ${\bf f}$ by solving the following sub-problem:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{P}_4: && \underset{\left\{{\bf p}, {\bf f}\right\}}{\min} \; {\bf 1}_K^T {\bf p} \\
& \text{\it s.t.}
& & {\rm C_1}: \frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2 \left(1 + \frac{p_k \alpha_{k,k}}{\eta_k + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K p_j \alpha_{k,j} + 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{l=1}^R \Xi_{l,k} \left({\bf p} \right)} \right)} + \frac{\omega_{k}}{f_k} \leq \bar{\mathcal{T}}_k^{th}, \; \forall k\\
&&& {\rm C_2}: {\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} \leq F_T, \; {\rm C_3}: p_k \leq P_{k,max}, \; \forall k, \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\mathcal{T}}_k^{th} \triangleq \mathcal{T}_k^{th} -\frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)}$. Subsequently, the number of quantized bits ${\varpi}$ is obtained through the following feasibility problem
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{P}_{5}: && {\text {Find}} \; \{\varpi\} \\
& \text{\it s.t.}
& & {\rm C_1}:\frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2 \left(1 + \frac{p_k \alpha_{k,k}}{ \tilde{\eta}_k + 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{r=1}^R \Xi_{r,k} \left({\bf p}\right)} \right)} + \frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)} &\leq \tilde{\mathcal{T}}_k^{th}, \; \forall k, \\
&&& {\rm C_2}: 2 B_W R \varpi \leq C_{F}, \; {\rm C_3}: \varpi \in \mathbb{Z}_{>0}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\mathcal{T}}^{th}_k \triangleq \mathcal{T}^{th}_k - \frac{\omega_{k}}{f_k}$ and $\tilde{\eta}_k \triangleq \eta_k + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K p_j \alpha_{k,j}$.
\subsubsection{Solution for the problem $\mathcal{P}_4$}
$\mathcal{P}_4$ is still non-convex and difficult to solve due to its constraint ${\rm C}_1$, which can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\underbrace{\frac{b_k}{B_W \log_2 \left(1 + \frac{p_k \alpha_{k,k}}{\eta_k + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K p_j \alpha_{k,j} + 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{r=1}^R \Xi_{r,k}\left({\bf p} \right)} \right)} +\frac{\omega_{k}}{f_k} - \bar{\mathcal{T}}_k^{th} }_{g_k\left({\bf p}, f_k \right)} \leq 0, \\
\Rightarrow &\underbrace{- \log_2 \left(1 + \frac{p_k \alpha_{k,k}}{\eta_k + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K p_j \alpha_{k,j} + 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{r=1}^R \Xi_{r,k}\left({\bf p} \right)} \right)}_{g^{'}_k\left({\bf p}\right): \; \text {non-convex}} + \underbrace{\frac{f_k b_k}{B_W f_k \bar{\mathcal{T}}_k^{th} - \omega_k}}_{g^{'}_k\left({f_k}\right): \;\text{convex}} \leq 0,\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
such that $g_k\left({\bf p}, f_k\right) = g^{'}_k\left({\bf p}\right) + g^{'}_k\left({f_k}\right)$. ${\rm C}_1$ is non-convex due to $g_k\left({\bf p}, f_k\right)$. To overcome this difficulty, we exploit the framework of successive inner convexification for $g_k({\bf p}, f_k)$ \cite{marks1978general}. The successive inner convexification optimizes a sequence of approximate convex problems, denoted by ${\cal A}_{CP}$, which allows the development of a computationally-efficient algorithm converging to a first-order optimal solution \cite{marks1978general, zappone2016EE}. As the non-convexity of $g_k({\bf p}, f_k)$ stems from $g^{'}_k({\bf p})$, in the following we obtain a convex approximation for $g^{'}_k({\bf p})$. To be more specific, letting $p_k = 2^{q_k}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g^{'}_k({\bf q}) &= - \log_2 \left(1 + \frac{2^{q_k} \alpha_{k,k}}{\eta_k + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K 2^{q_j} \alpha_{k,j} + 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{r=1}^R \Xi_{r,k}\left({\bf q} \right)} \right), \\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf q} \triangleq \left[q_1, \dots, q_K \right]^T$. In the $t$-th sequence of convexification, denoted by $\tilde{g}^{'}_k({\bf q}^{(t)}; {\bf q}^{(t-1)})$, we require the following three properties to be satisfied for the convex approximation of $g^{'}_k({\bf q}^{(t)})$ \cite{marks1978general}:
\vspace{-4mm}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{equation}
g_k^{'} \left({\bf q}^{(t)} \right) \leq \tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)}; {\bf q}^{(t - 1)}\right), \; \forall t, k,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
g_k^{'} \left({\bf q}^{(t - 1)} \right) = \tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t - 1)}; {\bf q}^{(t - 1)}\right),\; \forall k,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\nabla g_k^{'} \left({\bf q}^{(t - 1)}\right) = \nabla \tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t - 1)}; {\bf q}^{(t - 1)}\right),\; \forall k,
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
where ${\bf q}^{(t-1)}$ is the optimal solution for ${\cal A}_{CP}^{(t-1)}$. The central step of this approach is to find a suitable approximation for ${g}^{'}_k\left({\bf q}^{(t)} \right), \; \forall k$, which fulfills the requirements in (33), given by the following lemma.
\noindent
\textbf{\textit{Lemma 2:}} For a given ${\bf q}^{(t-1)} \succeq 0$, a $\tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)}; {\bf q}^{(t-1)} \right)$ that satisfies (33) can be defined as
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)}; {\bf q}^{(t-1)} \right) \triangleq - \psi_k^{(t-1)} \left(\log_2 (\alpha_{k,k}) + q_k^{(t)} - \log_2 \left(\bar{\eta}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)} \right) + \sum_{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}^K \alpha_{k,j} 2^{q_j^{(t)}} \right) \right) - \beta_k^{(t-1)},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\psi_k^{(t-1)} \triangleq \frac{\zeta_k^{(t-1)}}{1 + \zeta_k^{(t-1)}},\; \beta_k^{(t-1)} \triangleq \log_2 \left(1 + \zeta_k^{(t-1)} \right) - \frac{\zeta_k^{(t-1)}}{1 + \zeta_k^{(t-1)}} \log_2 \left(\zeta_k^{(t-1)} \right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\zeta_k^{(t-1)} \triangleq \frac{2^{q_k^{(t-1)}} \alpha_{k,k}}{\bar{\eta}_k\left({\bf q}^{(t-1)}\right) + \sum_{{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}}^K 2^{q_j^{(t-1)}} \alpha_{k,j}},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\bar{\eta}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t-1)} \right) \triangleq \eta_k + 2^{-2 \varpi} \sum_{r=1}^R \Xi_{r,k}\left({\bf q}^{(t-1)} \right).
\end{equation}
\textit{Proof}: From (32), we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g^{'}_k({\bf q}^{(t)}) &\overset{(a)}\leq - \psi_k^{(t-1)} \left(\log_2 (\alpha_{k,k}) + q_k^{(t)} - \log_2 \left(\bar{\eta}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)} \right) + \sum_{{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}}^K \alpha_{k,j} 2^{q_j^{(t)}} \right) \right) - \beta_k^{(t-1)}, \\
&= \tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)}; {\bf q}^{(t-1)} \right), \; \forall k,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where step (a) is obtained by leveraging the lower-bound of the logarithmic function \cite{zappone2016EE}, i.e., $ \log_2 \left( 1 + \zeta \right) \geq \psi \log_2 \left(\zeta\right) + \beta$, where $\psi = \frac{\bar{\zeta}}{1 + \bar{\zeta}}$ and $\beta = \log_2 \left(1 + \bar{\zeta} \right) - \frac{\bar{\zeta}}{1 + \bar{\zeta}} \log_2 \left(\bar{\zeta} \right)$. Hence, $\tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)}; {\bf q}^{(t-1)} \right), \; \forall k$ satisfies (33a), where (33b) and (33c) hold at ${\bf q}^{(t)} = {\bf q}^{(t-1)}$. $\blacksquare$
Accordingly from (31), for the $t$-th sequence, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g_k\left({\bf q}^{(t)}, f_k^{(t)}\right) &\leq \tilde{g}^{'}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)}; {\bf q}^{(t-1)}\right) + g^{'}_k\left({f_k^{(t)}} \right), \\
&= - \psi_k^{(t-1)} \left(\Gamma_k + q_k^{(t)} \right) - \beta_k^{(t-1)} + \frac{f_k^{(t)} b_k}{B_W f_k^{(t)} \bar{T}_k^{th} - \omega_k} \leq 0,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_k \triangleq \left(\log_2 (\alpha_{k,k}) - \log_2 \left(\bar{\eta}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t)} \right) + \sum_{{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}}^K \alpha_{k,j} 2^{q_j^{(t)}} \right) \right) $. As the logarithm of the sum of the exponentials is a convex function \cite{boyd2004convex}, $g_k\left({\bf q}^{(t)}, f_k^{(t)}\right), \; \forall k$ is jointly convex in ${\bf q}^{(t)}$ and ${f}_k^{(t)}$. Consequently, ignoring the sequence index $t$, the approximate convex problem ${\cal A}_{CP}^{(t)}$ for the non-convex problem $\mathcal{P}_{4}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{P}_{6}: && \underset{\left\{{\bf q}, {\bf f}\right\}}{\min} \; {\bf 1}_K^T 2^{\circ {\bf q}} \\
& \text{\it s.t.}
& & {\rm C_1}: - \psi_k \left(\Gamma_k + q_k \right) - \beta_k + \frac{f_k b_k}{B_W f_k \bar{T}_k^{th} - \omega_k} \leq 0, \; \forall k, \\
&&& {\rm C_2}: {\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} \leq F_T, \; {\rm C_3}: 2^{q_k} \leq P_{k,max}, \; \forall k. \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $2^{\circ {\bf q}} \triangleq \left[2^{{q}_1}, \dots, 2^{{q}_K} \right]^T$. Further, assuming ${\bf q}^{(t)} \preccurlyeq {\bf q}^{(t-1)}$\footnote{The subsequent derivations in Lemma 3 and Lemma 4 comply with this assumption.} and $\exists \; {\bf q}^{(t)}$ such that (28) is satisfied, i.e., $2^{q_k^{(t)}} \leq P_{k,max}, \; \forall t, k$, we formulate the following problem based on $\mathcal{P}_6$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{P}_{7}: && \underset{\left\{{\bf q}, {\bf f}\right\}}{\min} \; {\bf 1}_K^T 2^{\circ {\bf q}}\\
& \text{\it s.t.}
& & {\rm C_1}: - \psi_k \left(\bar{\Gamma}_k + q_k \right) - \beta_k + \frac{f_k b_k}{B_W f_k \bar{T}_k^{th} - \omega_k} \leq 0, \; \forall k, \\
&&& {\rm C_2}: {\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} \leq F_T, \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\Gamma}_k \triangleq \left(\log_2 (\alpha_{k,k}) - \log_2 \left(\bar{\eta}_k \left({\bf q}^{(t-1)} \right) + \sum_{{\substack{j = 1, \;j \neq k}}}^K \alpha_{k,j} 2^{q_j^{(t-1)}} \right) \right)\leq \Gamma_k$. Therefore, any feasible solution for $\mathcal{P}_{7}$ is a feasible solution for $\mathcal{P}_{6}$. Accordingly, in the following we focus on $\mathcal{P}_{7}$ and resort to the KKT conditions to find the closed-form expressions for ${\bf p}^{(t)}$, i.e., $2^{\circ{\bf q}^{(t)}}$ and ${\bf f}^{(t)}$. Subsequently, the Lagrangian associated with $\mathcal{P}_{7}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\Upsilon \left({q}_k, {f_k}, {\vartheta_k}, {\mu} \right) = {\bf 1}_K^T 2^{\circ {\bf q}} + \sum_{k=1}^K \vartheta_k \left[ - \psi_k \left(\bar{\Gamma}_k + q_k \right) - \beta_k + \frac{f_k b_k}{B_W f_k \bar{T}_k^{th} - \omega_k} \right] + \mu \left({\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} - F_T \right),
\end{equation}
where the variables $\vartheta_k$ and $\mu$ are the non-negative Lagrange multipliers. Accordingly, the KKT conditions are given by
\vspace{-4mm}
\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{rCl}
\IEEEyesnumber
\pdv{\Upsilon}{q_k} = (\log 2) 2^{q_k} - \vartheta_k \psi_k = 0, \; \forall k, \\
\pdv{\Upsilon}{f_k} = -\frac{\vartheta_k b_k \omega_k}{\left(B_W f_k \bar{T}^{th}_k - B_W \omega_k \right)^2} + \mu = 0, \; \forall k, \\
\vartheta_k \left[ -\psi_k \left(\bar{\Gamma}_k + q_k \right) - \beta_k + \frac{f_k b_k}{B_W f_k \bar{T}_k^{th} - \omega_k} \right] = 0, \; \vartheta_k \geq 0, \forall k,\\
\mu \left({\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} - F_T \right) = 0, \; \mu \geq 0.
\end{IEEEeqnarray}
Since $\mathcal{P}_7$ satisfies (28), all the $K$ IoTDs are served, i.e., $q_k > 0$ and $f_k > 0, \; \forall k$. Accordingly, the conditions (43), (44) and (46) imply $\vartheta_k > 0,\; \forall k$ and $\mu > 0$, which means that the computational capability at the BBU server is fully utilized, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
{\bf 1}^T_K {\bf f} = F_T.
\end{equation}
From another perspective, we can also obtain that ${\bf 1}_K^T{\bf f} < F_T$ would be sub-optimal, since at least the value of one $p_k$ can be further reduced by increasing the value of the corresponding $f_k$. Furthermore, $\vartheta_k > 0, \; \forall k$ implies that the latency constraint is always active, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
-\psi_k \left(\bar{\Gamma}_k + q_k \right) - \beta_k + \frac{f_k b_k}{B_W f_k \bar{T}_k^{th} - \omega_k} = 0.
\end{equation}
This equation establishes a one-to-one relationship between the transmit power $p_k = 2^{q_k}$ and the number of cycles per second $f_k$ at the BBU server assigned to the $k$-th IoTD. Consequently, from (43) and (44), we obtain the expression for the optimal computational resource $f_k$ as
\begin{equation}
f_k = \frac{1}{B_W \bar{T}^{th}_k} \left[\sqrt{\frac{(\log 2) b_k \omega_k 2^{q_k}}{\mu \psi_k}} + B_W \omega_k \right].
\end{equation}
By substituting (49) into (47) to obtain $\mu$ and by replacing $2^{q_k}$ with $p_k$, $f_k$ is further transformed into
\begin{equation}
f_k = \frac{1}{B_W \bar{T}^{th}_k} \left[\frac{F_T - \sum_{k=1}^K \frac{\omega_k}{\bar{T}^{th}_k}}{\sum_{k=1}^K \frac{1}{B_W \bar{T}^{th}_k} \sqrt{\frac{(\log 2) b_k \omega_k p_k}{a_k}}} \sqrt{\frac{(\log 2) b_k \omega_k p_k}{a_k}} + B_W \omega_k \right].
\end{equation}
Finally, from (48), the optimal transmit power for the $k$-th IoTD is given by
\begin{equation}
p_k = 2^{\left[\frac{1}{\psi_k} \left(\frac{f_k b_k}{B_W \bar{T}^{th}_k f_k - B_W \omega_k} - \beta_k \right) - \bar{\Gamma}_k\right]}.
\end{equation}
\noindent
\textit{\textbf{Lemma 3:}} Under the assumption that $\exists \; {\bf p}$ such that (28) is satisfied, ${p_k}, \forall k$ obtained by (51) will converge to an optimal solution to $\mathcal{P}_6$ for a given $f_k, \; \forall k$.
\textit{Proof:} Refer to Appendix.
\noindent
\textit{\textbf{Lemma 4:}} Under the assumption that $\exists \; {\bf p}$ such that (28) is satisfied, ${f_k}, \forall k$ given by (50) converges to a KKT point of $\mathcal{P}_6$.
\textit{Proof:} According to \textbf{\textit{Lemma 3}}, when $\exists \; {\bf p}$ such that (28) is satisfied, ${\bf p}$ obtained by (51) converges, i.e, ${\bf p}^{(t)} = {\bf p}^{(t-1)}$. Accordingly, upon convergence equality holds for $\bar{\Gamma}_k \leq {\Gamma}_k, \; \forall k$, which results in the equivalent KKT conditions for $\mathcal{P}_6$ and $\mathcal{P}_7$. Hence, $f_k, \; \forall k$ given by (50) converge to KKT point of $\mathcal{P}_6$. $\blacksquare$
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \textbf{Input}: ${\bf p}^{(0)}$, $\varpi^{(0)}$.
\STATE Initialize $t \gets 1$;
\REPEAT
\STATE Update $\psi_k^{(t-1)}$, $\beta_k^{(t-1)}$ using (35), $\forall k$;
\STATE Update $f_k^{(t)}$ using (50), $\forall k$;
\STATE Update $p_k^{(t)}$ using (51), $\forall k$;
\STATE $t \gets t + 1$.
\UNTIL{convergence}
\STATE \textbf{Output}: $p_k$, $f_k, \;\forall k$.
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{Iterative algorithm to solve $\mathcal{P}_6$}
\label{AG1}
\end{algorithm}
For clarity, we summarize the above procedure in Algorithm~\ref{AG1}, which describes the framework to obtain the transmit power and computational resource for the $K$ IoTDs. Since $\mathcal{P}_6$ satisfies the conditions in (33), its solution will converge to the KKT point of $\mathcal{P}_4$, which accordingly gives a local minimum of $\mathcal{P}_{4}$ \cite[Corollary 1]{marks1978general}. Hence, according to \textbf{\textit{Lemma 3}} and \textbf{\textit{Lemma 4}}, Algorithm~\ref{AG1} converges to a local minimum of $\mathcal{P}_{4}$.
\subsubsection{Solution for the problem $\mathcal{P}_5$}
$\mathcal{P}_5$ is a non-convex problem due to its constraints ${\rm C_1}$ and ${\rm C_3}$. Noting that there is only a single integer variable to be optimized, we resort to the line-search method to find the optimal $\varpi$ over the feasible set. Accordingly, $\varpi$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\varpi = \underset{\tilde{\varpi}}{\argmax} \; \left\{\tilde{\varpi} \in \mathbb{Z}_{>0} : \xi_k^{TL} \left({\bf p}, \tilde{\varpi} \right) + \frac{2 b_k R \varpi}{C_F \log_2(M)} \leq \tilde{\mathcal{T}}_k^{th}, \; \forall k, \tilde{\varpi} \leq \frac{C_{F}}{2 B_W R} \right\}.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Overall algorithm for the problem $\mathcal{P}_2$}
Algorithm~\ref{AG2} summarizes the overall algorithm to solve $\mathcal{P}_2$. Specifically, for a given feasible ${\bf p}$, ${\bf f}$ and $\varpi$, the algorithm starts by obtaining ${\bf W}$ using (23). Subsequently, for the obtained ${\bf W}$ and a fixed $\varpi$, ${\bf p}$ and ${\bf f}$ are updated using Algorithm 1. Finally, for the obtained ${\bf W}, {\bf p}$, and ${\bf f}$, we find a feasible $\varpi$ using (52) for the next iteration. As the objective of $\mathcal{P}_2$ is decreasing in each iteration owing to Algorithm~\ref{AG1}, Algorithm~\ref{AG2} converges to a local minimum.
\begin{algorithm}[ht]
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \textbf{Input}: ${\bf p}^{(0)}$, $\varpi^{(0)}$.
\STATE Initialize $t \gets 1$;
\REPEAT
\STATE Update ${\bf W}^{(t)}$ using (23);
\STATE Update ${\bf p}^{(t)}$ and ${\bf f}^{(t)}$ using Algorithm 1;
\STATE Update $\varpi^{(t)}$ using (52);
\STATE $t \gets t + 1$.
\UNTIL{convergence}
\STATE \textbf{Output}: ${\bf W}$, ${\bf p}$, ${\bf f}$, ${\varpi}$.
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{Overall algorithm to solve $\mathcal{P}_2$}
\label{AG2}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Low-Complexity Implementation for the Joint Optimization based on Deep Learning}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.375]{figDNNArc.pdf}
\caption{\small DNN architecture for the proposed supervised deep learning with the training and testing phase.}
\label{DNNA}
\end{figure}
Although Algorithm~\ref{AG2} obtains near-optimal solutions for $\mathcal{P}_2$, it involves an interleaved loop structure which can limit its practicability in terms of the real-time processing. Accordingly, in this section, we present a supervised deep learning method using the DNN to approximate the proposed Algorithm 2, such that by passing the input operating parameters of Algorithm 2 through a trained DNN gives a feasible output for the resource allocation for the C-RAN network with much reduced execution time. Furthermore, training the DNN is fairly convenient as the training samples can easily be obtained by running Algorithm~\ref{AG2} offline \cite{SunDeep2018}.
Next, we describe the DNN architecture used in our work, as shown in Fig.~\ref{DNNA}. Specifically, the DNN consists of a) one input layer of $3K$ neurons by aligning the computation bits, the latency thresholds and the effective channel at BBU for $K$ IoTDs into a column vector defined as $ {\bf x}_D \triangleq \left[{\bf b}^T, {\mathcal{\bf T}}_{th}^T, {\bf 1}^T_K \left({\bf V}_D {\bf H} \odot {\bf I}\right)\right]^T$, where ${\bf b} \triangleq \left[b_1, \dots, b_k \right]^T$ and ${\mathcal{\bf T}}_{th} \triangleq \left[{\mathcal{T}}_1^{th}, \dots, {\mathcal{T}}_K^{th} \right]^T$, b) one output layer of $2K + 1$ neurons corresponding to the transmit powers and computational resources for the $K$ IoTDs, and the quantization bit allocation, jointly defined by the column vector ${\bf y}_{D} \triangleq \left[{\bf p}^T, {\bf f}^T, \varpi \right]^T$, and c) $L - 1$ fully connected hidden layers. Let $\mathcal{L} \triangleq \left\{0, \dots, L \right\}$ represent the set of layers, where $l = 0$ and $l = L$ denote the input and output layers, respectively. The number of neurons in each layer $l \in \mathcal{L}$ is denoted by $n_l$, and accordingly, we have $n_0 = 3K$ and $n_L = 2K + 1$. For each hidden layer $l$, the output ${\bf y}_l \in \mathbb{R}^{n_l \times 1}$ is calculated as
\begin{equation}
{\bf y}_l = {\rm ReLU} \left({\bf Q}_l {\bf y}_{l - 1} + b_l \right), \; l \in \left\{1, \dots, L-1 \right\},
\end{equation}
where ${\bf y}_{l - 1} \in \mathbb{R}^{n_{l-1} \times 1}$ is the output of the $(l - 1)$-th layer with ${\bf y}_0 = {\bf i}_D$, ${\bf Q}_l \in \mathbb{R}^{n_l \times n_{l-1}}$ and ${\bf b}_l \in \mathbb{R}^{n_l \times 1}$ are respectively the weight matrix and bias vector at the $l$-th layer, and ${\rm ReLU} \left(x \right) = \max \left(x,0 \right)$ is the Rectified Linear Unit function, which introduces nonlinearity to the network. Accordingly, the deep learning method involves
\begin{enumerate}
\item Obtaining the training data (${\rm Train_D}$), i.e., the training input ${\bf x}_D$ and the training output ${\bf y}_D$ from Algorithm~\ref{AG2}.
\item Normalizing ${\rm Train_D}$ such that ${\rm Train_D} \in \left[0,1\right]$.
\item Deploying the mini-batch gradient descent based on Adam optimizer to train the DNN \cite{learningSurvey2019, DeepSVKim2018, chollet2015keras, kingma2014adam, DeepSVKim2018} as shown in Fig.~\ref{DNNA} (Training phase), which effectively minimizes the mean square error (MSE) given by
\begin{equation}
{\rm MSE} = \frac{\sum_{b=1}^{B_M} \sum_{i=1}^{2K+1} \left( o_{L,i,b}- o_{D,i,b}\right)^2}{B_M\left(2K + 1\right)},
\end{equation}
%
where $B_M$ is the number of mini-batches, $o_{L,i,b}$ and $o_{D,i,b}$ are the outputs at the $i$-th neuron of the $L$-th layer and the corresponding training output, respectively, for the $b$-th mini-batch.
\item After the training phase, the DNN is used to obtain the desired output based on the test data, which can be real-time data from the C-RAN network, as shown in Fig.~\ref{DNNA} (Testing phase).
\end{enumerate}
\section{Numerical Results}
In this section, we evaluate the performance of our proposed approach via Monte-Carlo simulations. Unless otherwise stated, we consider a network composed of $N = 128$ antennas randomly deployed on a wall in a $10 \; {\rm m} \times 10 \; {\rm m} \times 10 \; {\rm m}$ indoor room as shown in Fig.~\ref{SetUP}. Furthermore, there are $K = 10$ single-antenna IoTDs uniformly distributed inside the room. The number of bits $b_k$ and latency threshold $\mathcal{T}_k^{th}$ for each IoTD's computational task $C_k$ are randomly assigned between $10 \; {\rm kbs}$ to $20 \; {\rm kbs}$ and $0.5 \; {\rm s}$ to $1 \; {\rm s}$, respectively. The computation bits are encoded using the QPSK modulation, i.e., $M = 4$. For the sake of simplicity, the number of CPU cycles needed for completing $C_k$ is set as a linear function of $b_k$, i.e., $\omega_k = \eta b_k$, with $\eta = 50$ \cite{Barbarossa2013}. The carrier frequency of the wireless links is taken to be $f_c = \frac{c}{\lambda} = 1.5 \; {\rm GHz}$ with a transmission bandwidth of $B_W = 180 \; {\rm KHz}$, where $c = 3 \times 10^8 \; {\rm m/s}$. Furthermore, the channel parameters are given as $\xi = 3.7$, $\kappa = \left(13 - 0.03 \; d_{n,k}[m]\right) {\rm dB}$ and $\tau_{n,k} = 6\; {\rm dB}, \; \forall n,k$ \cite{tse2005fundamentals, DeepUSVXu2019, LISWaad2018}. The transmit power constraint for each user is $P_{k, max} = 0 \; {\rm dBm}$. The power spectral density of the background noise at the xL-MIMO RRH is assumed to be $-169 \; {\rm dBM/Hz}$, and the noise figure due to the receiver processing is $7 \; {\rm dB}$ \cite{zhang2015CRAN}. Lastly, it is assumed that the BBU server has a computational capability of $F_T = 15 \; {\rm MHz} \; {\rm cycles/s}$ with a fronthaul capacity of $C_{F} = 100 \; {\rm MHz}$. The above choice of parameters guarantees the non-emptiness of the feasible set for $\mathcal{P}_3$, where ${p}_k^{(0)}, \; \forall k$ and $\varpi^{(0)}$ are selected randomly within the feasible sets $\Psi$ and $\mathcal{D}$, respectively.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.225]{figSM.eps}
\caption{\small Simulation set-up with $N$ antennas (blue circles) deployed on a wall and $K$ IoTDs (red triangles) distributed in an indoor room.}
\label{SetUP}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Performance per IoTDs' Distribution}
To gain insights from the communication and computational resource allocations by the proposed algorithm, we firstly consider the resource allocation for a particular distribution of the IoTDs and channel realization. In Fig.~\ref{OVA}, we illustrate the obtained communication (transmit power $p_k, \; \forall k$, first sub-figure) and computational (normalized number of CPU cycles $\frac{f_k}{F_T}, \; \forall k$, second sub-figure) resources assigned to each IoTD with respect to the corresponding effective channel gains at the BBU, i.e., $\left|{\bf h}^e_k \right| = \left| {\bf 1}^T_K \left({\bf V}_D {\bf H} \odot {\bf I}\right) \right|, \; \forall k$ (third sub-figure), the number of computation bits ($b_k, \; \forall k$, fourth sub-figure) and the latency thresholds ($\mathcal{T}_k^{th},\; \forall k$, fifth sub-figure). In the fifth sub-figure, we also plot the overall latency $ \xi_{k},\; \forall k$ computed using (16).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.30]{figA.eps}
\caption{\small Optimal transmitted power $p_k$, normalized CPU cycles $f_k/F_T$ and overall latency $\xi_{k}$, with respect to the effective channel gain ${\bf h}^e_k$, the number of transmit bits $b_k$ and the latency threshold $\mathcal{T}^{th}_k$ corresponding to each IoTD.}
\label{OVA}
\end{figure}
As observed, the proposed algorithm assigns a higher transmit power and CPU cycles to IoTDs with a poor effective channel gain (IoTD 5,6), a larger number of computation bits (IoTD 1,4) or a stringent latency constraint (IoTD 8,9). An interesting observation is that, with similar channel gains, the latency constraint dominates over the number of computation bits in determining the allocation of the communication and computational resources as observed for IoTD 7 and 8. This demonstrates that the latency constraints play a crucial role in the computation offloading for the IoTDs. Furthermore, it is seen that the computational tasks of all the IoTDs are executed within the respective latency constraint.
\vspace{-4mm}
\subsection{Joint versus Disjoint Optimization}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\subfigure[$P_{\rm sum}$ vs $N$]
{
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{figB1.eps}
} \hskip -1.95ex
\subfigure[$P_{\rm sum}$ vs $\eta$]
{
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{figB.eps}
}
\caption{Total transmit power $P_{\rm sum}$ versus the number of antennas $N$ and the computational load $\eta$ for the proposed joint optimization and the disjoint optimizations.}
\label{PSUM}
\end{figure}
In this section, we evaluate the merit of the proposed algorithm with two benchmark algorithms: 1) Disjoint optimization with fixed ${\bf f}$: Solving $\mathcal{P}_2$ with Algorithm 2 where $p_k, \; \forall k$ and $\varpi$ are optimized with $f_k = \frac{\omega_k F_T}{\sum_{k=1}^K \omega_k}, \; \forall k$, which meets the computational rate constraint $F_T$ with equality \cite{Barbarossa2015}, and 2) Disjoint optimization with fixed ${\varpi}$: Solving $\mathcal{P}_2$ with Algorithm 2 where $p_k, \; \forall k$ and $f_k, \; \forall k$ are optimized with the number of quantization bits $\varpi$ fixed at $\varpi = \left\lceil{\frac{C_F}{4 B_W L}}\right\rceil$, i.e., half of the maximum feasible $\varpi$. We assess the usefulness of the algorithms with respect to the number of antennas $N$ at the xL-MIMO RRH and the computational load given by the ratio $\eta = \frac{\omega_k}{b_k}$ between the required number of CPU cycles $\omega_k$ and number of computation bits $b_k$ \cite{Barbarossa2015}.
Fig.~\ref{PSUM}(a) shows the total transmit power of the IoTDs with respect to $N$ for $\eta = 50$, obtained using Algorithm 2 and the disjoint optimization algorithms, with both the HSF and the FDSF. It can be observed that the proposed joint optimization algorithm yields a considerable gain compared to the disjoint optimization algorithms, where deploying a large number of antennas results in a decrease in the total transmit power. This decrease in the total trasmit power is because of the array gain, which is proportional to $N$, resulting in a decrease in the required transmit power of each IoTD \cite{ngo2013energy}. Furthermore, this explains the use of the xL-MIMO with a large $N$ to minimize the power drainage of IoTDs and consequently, extend their battery life.
Next, Fig.~\ref{PSUM}(b) presents the total transmit power of the IoTDs with respect to $\eta$ for $N = 128$ and $\omega_k = \eta b_k, \; \forall k$, obtained using the algorithms, with both the HSF and the FDSF. Specifically, $\eta$ is varied with $b_k$ and $\mathcal{T}^{th}_k$ randomly set between $10 \; {\rm kbs}$ to $20 \; {\rm kbs}$ and $0.5 \; {\rm s}$ to $1 \; {\rm s}$, respectively. It can be observed that the proposed joint optimization algorithm outperforms the disjoint optimization algorithms for the computational tasks with a stringent computational requirement. Finally, it can be seen from Fig.~\ref{PSUM} that there is a performance loss for the HSF compared to the FDSF owing to a loss in the spectral efficiency for the hybrid architecture \cite{jointKim2019, yu2016alternating, sohrabi2016hybrid}.
\subsection{Deep Neural Network Evaluation}
\subsubsection{Impact of small-scale fading on DNN training}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\centering
\subfigure[pdf for $p_k$ ]
{
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{figA3.eps}
} \hskip -4.0ex
\subfigure[pdf for $\frac{f_k}{F_T}$]
{
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{figA4.eps}
}
\caption{\small Probability density function of the optimal transmit power $p_k$ and the normalized CPU cycles $\frac{f_k}{F_T}$ assigned to an IoTD.}
\label{PDF}
\end{figure}
We begin by evaluating the impact of the small-scale fading on the resource allocation for the computation offloading. Accordingly, for a fixed number of computation bits $(b_k, \; \forall k)$ and latency thresholds $(\mathcal{T}_k^{th}, \; \forall k)$, we ran the proposed algorithm for $10^3$ channel initializations for a fixed distribution of the IoTDs. In Fig.~\ref{PDF}(a) and \ref{PDF}(b), we show the pdf for the optimal transmit power $p_k$ and normalized number of CPU cycles $\frac{f_k}{F_T}$ assigned to an IoTD across $10^3$ channel realizations. It can be seen that for $N = 128$, $p_k$\footnote{As analyzed in \cite{ngo2013energy}, a larger number of antennas at the xL-MIMO RRH is seen to decrease the required transmit power of the IoTD, thereby further minimizing the power consumption and the total transmit power as seen in Fig.5(a).} and $\frac{f_k}{F_T}$ have a significantly lesser deviation compared to that for $N = 20$. Hence, for a fixed $b_k$ and $\mathcal{T}_k^{th}, \; \forall k$, these results demonstrate that the proposed HSF with a large number of antennas at the xL-MIMO RRH reduces the impact of the small-scale fading on the resource allocation for the IoTDs as explained in Section 3. Consequently, the BBU needs to update the operating parameters depending only on the large-scale fading of the IoTDs. Additionally, this explains the use of the effective channel at the BBU, representing the large-scale fading corresponding to each IoTD as shown in (19), as an input parameter to train the proposed DNN along with $b_k$ and $\mathcal{T}_k^{th}, \; \forall k$.
\subsubsection{DNN training and testing}
We implemented the proposed DNN scheme with the Keras machine learning toolkit where Adam optimizer was used for minimizing the MSE during the training phase \cite{chollet2015keras, kingma2014adam, DeepSVKim2018}. Accordingly, we consider three hidden layers with $128$, $64$ and $32$ neurons for $l = 1, 2$ and $3$, respectively. We collected $50000$ $Train_{D}$ sets, which are split in the ratio of $9:1$ for the training and testing of the DNN. Fig.~\ref{loss} shows the training and testing losses with respect to the number of epochs, which can be seen to converge within $20$ epoch.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.20]{figloss.png}
\caption{\small Training and testing losses versus epoch for the DNN based learning.}
\label{loss}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{figDNN.eps}
\caption{\small Transmitted power $p_k$, normalized CPU cycles $f_k/F_T$ and overall latency $\xi_{k}$ obtained from the proposed algorithm (elapsed time: $118 \; {\rm ms}$) and the DNN (elapsed time: $1 \; {\rm ms}$) with respect to the effective channel gain ${\bf h}^e_k$, the number of transmit bits $b_k$ and the latency threshold $\mathcal{T}_k^{th}$ corresponding to each IoTD.}
\label{DNN}
\end{figure}
Next, in Fig.~\ref{DNN}, we show the communication (transmit power $p_k, \; \forall k$, first sub-figure) and computational (normalized number of CPU cycles $\frac{f_k}{F_T}, \; \forall k$, second sub-figure) resources, and the overall latency along with the respective latency thresholds ($\xi_{k}$ and $\mathcal{T}_k^{th},\; \forall k$, third sub-figure) obtained from the proposed joint optimization through Algorithm 2 and the trained DNN for an IoTDs' distribution and channel realization. As observed, although the transmit power of the IoTDs obtained from the DNN is marginally higher than that obtained from Algorithm 2, the DNN is able to emulate the performance of Algorithm 2 in allocating the resources to the IoTDs, while satisfying the latency requirement. Finally, in Fig.~\ref{cdf}, we evaluate the total transmit power performance of the DNN based approach in the testing phase compared to the proposed joint optimization and the disjoint optimizations described in the previous sub-section. The cumulative distribution function (CDF) for $P_{sum}$ in Fig.~\ref{cdf} is obtained over 5000 testing data sets \cite{SunDeep2018}. It is observed that the total transmit power of the IoTDs obtained from the trained DNN is very close to that obtained from the proposed joint optimization while significantly outperforming the disjoint optimizations. Furthermore, we measured the elapsed time for the computation of the optimal resource allocations through the proposed joint optimization and the trained DNN, where Intel core i7-6700 CPU@$3.40 \; {\rm GHz}$ and $16.00 \; {\rm GB}$ RAM are used. The average elapsed time per computation corresponding to the proposed joint optimization and the trained DNN was found to be $118 \; {\rm ms}$ and $1 \;{\rm ms}$, respectively, which highlights the practicability of the proposed deep learning method.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.245]{figcdf.eps}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{\small CDF for $P_{sum}$ achieved by the proposed joint optimization, the DNN and the disjoint optimizations.}
\label{cdf}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have formulated a computation offloading problem for IoT applications with a latency constraint in an uplink xL-MIMO C-RAN. The constructed optimization problem that minimizes the total transmit power of the IoTDs while satisfying the latency requirement is found to be non-convex. With the HSF matrix obtained locally at the xL-MIMO RRH, the joint optimization on the baseband combiner, the communication and computational resource allocations, and the number of quantization bits at the BBU is solved with the alternating optimization based on the concepts of the MMSE metric, the successive inner convexification and the linear-search method, respectively. Furthermore, a supervised deep learning method using the DNN is deployed as an efficient solution. Numerical results validate the effectiveness of the proposed joint optimization scheme, which outperforms two benchmarks based on disjoint optimization. The efficiency of the DNN-based method is also verified.
|
\section{Introduction}
The framework of \emph{Quantum Resource Theories (QRTs)} \cite{RT_review} has proven to be a powerful framework within quantum information. The all-encompassing nature of QRTs has led to the cross fertilisation of ideas amongst different quantum phenomena: Inter-convertibility of states with respect to a particular resource \cite{BG2015}, general resource distillation \cite{BR2019}, impossibility (no-go) theorems \cite{FL2019}, general laws for inter-convertibility of resources \cite{QRT_FL}, insights into general probabilistic theories \cite{RT2}, amongst others \cite{RT_review}. Within the the language of QRTs, properties of different objects deemed as \emph{resources} can be addressed under the same umbrella and therefore, results in a particular QRT with a particular resource has led to insights into different resources and QRTs of different objects.
There are QRTs addressing quantum objects like: states \cite{RT_review}, measurements \cite{RT_measurements0, RT_measurements1, RT_measurements2}, behaviours or boxes \cite{RT_nonlocality, RT_noncontextuality}, steering assemblages \cite{RT_steering}, teleportation assemblages \cite{RoT} and channels \cite{Citeme3, RT_channels1, RT_channels2}. Properties of these objects that are deemed as resources include: entanglement \cite{RoE}, nonlocality \cite{RoNL_RoS_RoI}, steering \cite{RoS}, asymmetry \cite{RoA}, coherence \cite{RoC}, informativeness \cite{RoM}, projective simulability \cite{RT_PS}, incompatibility \cite{RoNL_RoS_RoI, RT_channels1, Citeme1, Citeme2}, teleportation \cite{RoT}, superposition \cite{RT_superposition}, purity \cite{RoP}, magic \cite{RT_magic}, nongaussianity \cite{RT_nongaussianity}, nonmarkovianity \cite{RT_nonmarkovianity1, RT_nonmarkovianity2, Namit}, athermality \cite{RT_thermodynamics}, and reference frames \cite{RT_RF}.
One of the main goals of QRTs is to define \emph{resource quantifiers} in order to properly quantify the amount of a resource present in an object, as well as to devise \emph{operational tasks} explicitly harnessing these resources. Two prominent families of resource quantifiers are the geometric quantifiers known as: \emph{robustness-based} \cite{RoE,GRoE,RoS,RoA,RoC,RoT,RoT2,RT_magic} and \emph{weight-based} \cite{EPR2,WoE,WoS,WoI_MP, RoNL_RoS_RoI,WoAC} quantifiers. It has been proven that there is a general correspondence between robustness-based resource quantifiers and discrimination-based operational tasks amongst QRTs of various objects \cite{RT1,RT2,RoM}. Recently, it has also been proven \cite{DS2019a}, for the QRT of measurement informativeness, that there exists a parallel quantifier-task correspondence that connects the resource quantifier of weight of informativeness with the operational task of state exclusion, and it was conjectured that this holds true for general resources and convex QRTs of different objects.
In this work we prove that this conjecture holds true in the context of general convex QRTs of states with arbitrary resources. Specifically, we consider the resource quantifier of \emph{weight of resource} and prove that it quantifies the advantage that a resourceful state offers, when compared to all possible free states, in the operational task of \emph{subchannel exclusion}. In particular, this result holds true when considering the resource of entanglement and therefore, provides an operational interpretation to the weight of entanglement, which is better known as the best separable approximation, or Lewenstein-Sanpera decomposition, introduced in 1998 \cite{WoE}.
The results presented here nicely complement the \emph{weight-exclusion} correspondence found in \cite{DS2019a} within the QRT of measurement informativeness and therefore, support the conjecture made in the same article about the existence of such a correspondence for convex QRTs of arbitrary objects and arbitrary resources. Interestingly, we will furthermore show that it is possible to extend the full three-way correspondence found in \cite{DS2019a}, which now links weight and exclusion to the so-called `excludible' information. Explicitly, we prove that for convex QRTs of states with arbitrary resources, the weight of resource also quantifies the single-shot excludible information of an appropriately defined ensemble of states.
\section{Convex quantum resource theories of states and resource quantifiers}
We start by addressing convex QRTs of states with an arbitrary resource.
{\it
\textbf{Definition 1:} (Convex QRT of states \cite{RT_review}) Consider the set of quantum states in a Hilbert space of dimension $d$. Consider a property of these states defining a closed convex set which we will call the set of free states and denote as ${\rm F}$. We say a state $\rho \in {\rm F}$ is a \emph{free state}, and $\rho \notin {\rm F}$ is a \emph{resourceful} state.
}
There are numerous properties of quantum states considered as resources namely; entanglement, asymmetry, coherence, amongst many others \cite{RT_review}. We now want to quantify the amount of resource present in an state. We define a weight-based quantifier for an arbitrary resource.
{\it
\textbf{Definition 2:} (Weight of resource) Consider a convex QRT of states with an arbitrary resource. The weight of resource of a state is given by:
\begin{align}
{\rm WoR}\left(\rho\right)=
\min_{\substack{w \geq 0,\\
\sigma \in {\rm F}, \\
\rho_G }}
\left\{
w\,\Big| \, \rho=w\rho_G+(1-w)\sigma
\right\}.
\label{eq:WoR}
\end{align}
This quantifies the minimal amount of a general state $\rho_G$ that has to be used to recover the state $\rho$.
}
This quantifier was originally introduced in \cite{EPR2} in the context of nonlocality and independently rediscovered later on in \cite{WoE} within the context of entanglement. It has been addressed under several different names such as: part, content, cost and weight. In this work we use the term \emph{weight} in order to be consistent with recent literature. We now move on to operational tasks.
\section{State exclusion games}
The operational task of state exclusion was first explicitly defined in \cite{CES1}. This task was implicitly introduced in the treatment of the Pusey-Barrett-Rudolph (PBR) theorem \cite{PBR}, in which an ensemble of states allowing conclusive (or perfect) state exclusion was deemed to have the property of Post-Peierls (PP) incompatibility \cite{PP}, or not-PP compatibility \cite{DSR2017}, or antidistinguishability \cite{Leifer}. The task of state exclusion has been explored under noisy channels \cite{DSR2017}, from a communication complexity point of view \cite{CES2, CES3}, for pure states \cite{HK1, HK2}, as well as perfect state exclusion \cite{AM2019}.
{\it
\textbf{Game 1:} (State exclusion \cite{CES1}) A referee has a collection of states $\{\rho_x\}$, $x\in\{1,...,k\}$, and promises to send a player one of these states $\rho_x$ with probability $p(x)$. The goal is for the player to output a guess $g \in \{1,...,k\}$ for a state that was \textit{not} sent. That is, the player succeeds at the game if $g \neq x$ and fails when $g=x$. A given state exclusion game is fully specified by an ensemble $\mathcal{E} = \{\rho_x,p(x)\}$.
}
The operational task of state exclusion can then be seen as being the opposite to the standard discrimination task, in which the goal is to identify (discriminate), as oppose to exclude. We now consider a quantum protocol for a player to address this task.
{\it
\textbf{Quantum protocol 1:} We consider that the player performs a quantum measurement $\mathbb{M}=\{M_a\}$, $M_a\geq 0$, $\forall a$, $\sum_a M_a=\mathds{1}$ with $o$ outcomes and uses this to simulate a measurement \cite{RoM} $\mathbb{N}=\{N_x\}$ with $k$ outcomes as $N_x=\sum_a q(x|a)M_a$ in order to output the guess of which state to exclude. The probability of error following this strategy is \cite{CES1}:
\begin{align}
P_{\rm err}^{\rm Q}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M}) =
\min_{\mathbb{N} \preceq \mathbb{M}}
\sum_{x} p(x) {\rm Tr}[N_x\rho_x],
\label{eq:QSE}
\end{align}
with the minimisation being performed over all POVMs $\mathbb{N}$ that are simulable by $\mathbb{M}$ \cite{RoM,DS2019a}.
}
Naturally, we are interested in minimising this probability of error by implementing an optimal POVM. If we consider a binary ensemble, we have that a QSE game is equivalent to a quantum state discrimination (QSD) game and therefore we have $P_{\rm err}^{\rm QSE}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})=P_{\rm err}^{\rm QSD}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})$. Having this, we can then use the Holevo-Helstrom theorem \cite{HHthm1, HHthm2, HHthm3} to address state exclusion games with \emph{binary} ensembles.
{\it
\textbf{Lemma 1:} (Holevo-Helstrom for state exclusion) The minimum probability of error over all possible POVMs in a state exclusion game with a binary ensemble $\mathcal{E}=\{\rho_x,p(x)\}$ $x\in\{0,1\}$ is given by:
\begin{align}
\underset{\mathbb{M}}{{\rm min}}\,
P_{\rm err}^{\rm Q}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})=
\frac{1}{2}
\Big(
1-
\norm{\tilde \rho_0-\tilde \rho_1}_1
\Big),
\label{eq:Lemma1}
\end{align}
with $\tilde \rho_x=p(x)\rho_x$ and the trace norm $\norm{X}_1=\Tr(\sqrt{X^\dagger X})$.
}
The proof of this Lemma is in Appendix A. This result then compares with the standard Holevo-Helstrom theorem for binary QSD \cite{HHthm1, HHthm2, HHthm3} which is usually stated as the maximum probability of succeeding in a binary QSD game being given by $\max_{\mathbb{M}}\,
P_{\rm succ}^{\rm QSD}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})=
\frac{1}{2}
\big(
1+
\norm{\tilde \rho_0-\tilde \rho_1}_1
\big)$. We have that for a binary ensemble, state exclusion is precisely the opposite to state discrimination. This however, does not scale when considering ensembles with more than two states, since $k$-state exclusion games can naturally be defined \cite{CES1}. This Lemma is going to prove useful when addressing one of our main results. We now consider a variant of these state exclusion games.
\section{Subchannel exclusion games}
In analogy to subchannel discrimination games \cite{RoS, RT1}, we now define subchannel exclusion games as follows.
{\it
\textbf{Game 2:} (Subchannel exclusion) The player sends a quantum state $\rho$ to the referee who has a collection of subchannels $\Psi=\{\Psi_x\}$, $x\in\{1,...,k\}$. The subchannels $\Psi_x$ are completely-positive (CP) trace-nonincreasing linear maps such that $\Lambda=\sum_x \Psi_x$ forms a completely-positive trace-preserving (CPTP) linear map. The referee promises to apply one of these subchannels on the state $\rho$ and the transformed state is then sent back to the player. The player then has access to the ensemble $\mathcal{E}_{\Psi}=\{\rho_x, p(x)\}$ with $p(x)=\Tr[\Psi_x(\rho)]$, $\rho_x=\Psi_x(\rho)/p(x)$. The goal is for the player to output a guess $g \in \{1,...,k\}$ for a subchannel that did \textit{not} take place. That is, the player succeeds at the game if $g \neq x$ and fails when $g=x$.
}
This game can alternatively be seen as playing a quantum state exclusion game with the ensemble $\mathcal{E}^{\rho}_{\Psi}=\{\rho_x, p(x)\}$, in which the player has a certain level of control over the ensemble when proposing the state $\rho$. A particular case of subchannel exclusion is \emph{channel exclusion}, in which $\Psi=\{\Lambda_x,p(x)\}$ with $\{\Lambda_x\}$ being CPTP maps and $p(x)$ a probability distribution. We now consider a quantum protocol for the player to address this game.
{\it
\textbf{Quantum protocol 2:} Consider a subchannel exclusion game in which the player sends a state $\rho$ to the referee who in turn, applies a subchannel from the collection $\Psi=\{\Psi_x\}$ with $x\in\{1,...,k\}$. Having received the state back, the player now performs a quantum measurement $\mathbb{M}=\{M_a\}$ with $o$ outcomes, and uses this to simulate a measurement $\mathbb{N}=\{N_x\}$ with $k$ outcomes to produce a guess of which subchannel to exclude. The probability of error in quantum subchannel exclusion following this protocol is given by:
\begin{align}
P_{\rm err}^{\rm Q}(\Psi,\mathbb{M},\rho)=
\min_{\mathbb{N} \preceq \mathbb{M}}
\sum_{x} {\rm Tr}\big[
N_x\Psi_x(\rho)
\big],
\label{eq:QSCE}
\end{align}
with the minimisation being performed over all POVMs $\mathbb{N}$ that are simulable by $\mathbb{M}$ \cite{RoM, DS2019a}. This game can alternatively be seen as playing quantum state exclusion with the ensemble $\mathcal{E}^{\rho}_{\Psi}=\{\rho_x, p(x)\}$ with $p(x)=\Tr[\Psi_x(\rho)]$, $\rho_x=\Psi_x(\rho)/p(x)$ and we indeed have $P_{\rm err}^{\rm Q}(\Psi,\mathbb{M},\rho)=P_{\rm err}^{\rm Q}(\mathcal{E}^{\rho}_{\Psi},\mathbb{M})$ with the latter as in (\autoref{eq:QSE}).
}
Similarly to state exclusion, we are interested in minimising this probability of error. We will be particularly interested in the performance of a resourceful state compared to the best free state when playing subchannel exclusion games.
\section{All resourceful states are useful in a subchannel exclusion game}
It has already been proven that any resourceful state is useful in a subchannel discrimination game \cite{RT1}. This result addresses a \emph{binary} discrimination game, and since we have already seen that $P_{\rm err}^{\rm QSE}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})=P_{\rm err}^{\rm QSD}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})$ the result then follows. However, since we are now interested in the probability of error, we will write this in the context of state exclusion games as follows.
{\it
\textbf{Result 1:} For any resourceful state $\rho \notin {\rm F}$, there exists a subchannel exclusion game $\Psi^{\rho}$ for which playing with the state $\rho$ generates fewer errors when compared with any free state as:
\begin{align}
\min_\mathbb{M}\,
P^{\rm Q}_{\rm err}(\Psi^{\rho},\mathbb{M},\rho)
<
\min_\mathbb{N}
\min_{\sigma \in {\rm F}}
P^{\rm Q}_{\rm err}(\Psi^{\rho},\mathbb{N},\sigma).
\label{eq:result1}
\end{align}
In the right-hand side the error probability is minimised over all possible free states and all measurements.}
The proof of this result follows from the identification that for binary subchannel games we have $P_{\rm err}^{\rm QSE}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})=P_{\rm err}^{\rm QSD}(\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M})$ together with the exclusion version of the Holevo-Helstrom theorem addressed in the previous section. The full proof of this result is in Appendix B. This result shows that every resourceful state is better that any possible free state when playing a tailored subchannel exclusion task, which turns out to always be binary. We now address how to \emph{quantify} the performance of a resourceful state in subchannel exclusion games.
\section{Weight as the advantage in subchannel exclusion games}
We are now interested in quantifying the performance of a resourceful state in comparison to all free states when playing subchannel exclusion games.
{\it
\textbf{Result 2:} Consider a subchannel exclusion game in which the player sends a quantum state $\rho$ to the Referee, who in turns applies a subchannel from the ensemble $\Psi=\{\Psi_x\}$ with $x\in\{1,...,k\}$ before sending the state back to the player. The player then implements a measurement $\mathbb{M}=\{M_a\}$ to simulate $\mathbb{N}=\{N_x\}$ and produce the outcome guess $g\in\{1,...,k\}$ representing the choice of a subchannel to be excluded. Then, the quantum-classical ratio of probability of error in subchannel exclusion is lower bounded by a function involving the weight of resource \eqref{eq:WoR}. Furthermore, there exists a subchannel ensemble $\Psi^\rho$ and a measurement $\mathbb{M}^\rho$ for which the lower bound is tight as follows:
\begin{align}
1-{\rm WoR}(\rho)=
\min_{\Psi, \mathbb{M}}
\frac{
P^{\rm Q}_{\rm err}(\Psi,\mathbb{M},\rho)
}{\displaystyle
\min_{\sigma\in {\rm F}}
P^{\rm Q}_{\rm err}(\Psi,\mathbb{M},\sigma)
}.
\label{eq:result2}
\end{align}
}
The proof of this result is in Appendix C. We remark that this result holds true for any property of a quantum states that defines a closed convex subset and therefore, it holds in particular for the weight of entanglement, a.~k.~a. the best separable approximation or Lewenstein-Sanpera decomposition \cite{WoE}, and for the weight of asymmetry \cite{WoAC}.
We note here that in the game the quantum and classical players are required to use the same measurement (\autoref{eq:result2}). In a different setting, we can alternatively ask for the measurements to be chosen independently. We now explore relaxing this measurement constraint.
\section{Quantum-classical ratio with independent measurements}
We now consider a scenario in which the quantum and classical players implement independent measurements.
{\it
\textbf{Result 3:} Consider a state $\rho$ and the optimal dual variable $Y^\rho=\sum y_i \ketbra{e_i}{e_i}$ from the dual formulation of the weight of resource (see \eqref{eq:WoR1}). If there exists a set of unitaries $\{U_x\}$ satisfying i) $\sum_x U_x |e_j\rangle \langle e_j |U_x^\dagger=\mathds{1}$, $\forall j$ and ii) $U_i \sigma U_i^\dagger=U_j \sigma U_j^\dagger$, $\forall \sigma\in {\rm F}$, $\forall i,j$, then, the weight of the resource quantifies the advantage of the resourceful state $\rho$ over all free states in subchannel exclusion with independent measurements as:
\begin{align}
1-{\rm WoR}(\rho)=
\min_{\Psi}
\frac{\displaystyle
\min_\mathbb{M}\,
P^{\rm Q}_{\rm err}(\Psi,\mathbb{M},\rho)
}{\displaystyle
\min_{\mathbb{N}}
\min_{\sigma\in {\rm F}}
P^{\rm Q}_{\rm err}(\Psi,\mathbb{N},\sigma)
}.
\label{eq:result3}
\end{align}
}
The proof of this result is in Appendix D. An example of a resource that satisfies the necessary conditions of Result 3 is coherence \cite{RT1}. This stronger thus holds for this particular resource. We now address single-shot information-theoretic quantities that are also related to the weight of resource.
\section{Single-shot information theory}
We now introduce an exclusion-based quantity closely related to the accessible information of an ensemble, and show that it too relates to the weight of resource. We are interested in the ability of an ensemble $\mathcal{E} = \{\rho_x, p(x)\}$ to be useful for sending exclusion-type information, for example, information of the form `do not cut the blue wire' \cite{DS2019a}. We assume that the ensemble $\mathcal{E}$ is an encoding of a classical random variable $X$, such that $\rho_x$ encodes $x$, the value that should be avoided. A measurement $\mathbb{M} = \{M_g\}$ will be made, in order to produce a new random variable $G$ (the measurement outcome). Using $G$, a prediction for a value $x'\neq x$ can be made, with the optimal choice being $\argmin_g p(g|x)$, i.e. the least likely value of $x$ given the observed $g$, where $p(g|x) = \Tr[M_g \rho_x]$. The total error probability is $P_\mathrm{err}(X|G) = \sum_x p(x) \min_g p(g|x)$ and the associated entropy, which we call the exclusion entropy is $H_{-\infty}(X|G)_{\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M}} = -\log P_\mathrm{err}(X|G)$, which is the order minus-infinity conditional R\'enyi entropy, and where we have explicitly denoted the encoding-decoding dependence upon $\mathcal{E}$ and $\mathbb{M}$ as a final subscript \cite{2015_Informational_nonequilibrium}. Without access to the ensemble, the error probability would be $P_\mathrm{err}(X) = \min_x p(x)$ (i.e. the best choice for $x'$ is just the least likely value of $x$), and the associated exclusion entropy is $H_{-\infty}(X)_{\mathcal{E}} = -\log P_\mathrm{err}(X)$. The reduction in exclusion entropy leads to an mutual exclusion information, $I_{-\infty}(X:G)_{\mathcal{E},\mathbb{M}} = H_{-\infty}(X|G) - H_{-\infty}(X)$.
We now focus on ensembles which arise by probabilistic ally applying channels onto a fixed quantum state. In particular, we consider the ensemble of channels $\Psi=\{\Lambda_x, p(x)\}$, where each $\Lambda_x$ is a CPTP map. For a fixed state $\rho$, this leads to an ensemble $\mathcal{E}_\rho^\Psi = \{\Lambda_x(\rho),p(x)\}$. We will then compare all of the ensembles that can arise from a state $\rho$, and the mutual exclusion information they lead to, in comparison to the best free state. We find the following result:
{\it
\textbf{Result 4:} The weight of resource of a quantum state quantifies the maximum increase in mutual exclusion information as:
\begin{multline}
\max_{\Psi,\mathbb{M}}
\left\{
I_{-\infty}(X \colon G)_{\mathcal{E}_\rho^\Psi,\mathbb{M}}
-
\max_{\sigma \in {\rm F}}
I_{-\infty}(X \colon G)_{\mathcal{E}_\sigma^\Psi,\mathbb{M}}
\right\}\\
=-\log \Big[1-{\rm WoR}(\rho)\Big],
\label{eq:result4}
\end{multline}
with the maximisation over all ensembles of channels and all measurements.
}
The proof of this result is in Appendix E. This result therefore establishes, for the QRT of states with arbitrary resources, a \emph{three-way correspondence} between weight-based resource quantifiers, exclusion-based tasks, and single-shot information-theoretic quantities in the form of mutual exclusion information. This supports the conjecture made in \cite{DS2019a}, that whenever there is a robustness-discrimination correspondence, there is a weight-exclusion correspondence and furthermore, it extends the full three-way correspondence found in the context of measurement informativeness \cite{DS2019a}. For completeness we also provide here a new result concerning the robustness of resource for arbitrary convex QRTs of states, which was not included in a recent review \cite{RT2}.
{\it
\textbf{Result 5:} The robustness of resource of a quantum state quantifies the maximum increase in mutual accessible information as:
\begin{multline}
\max_{\Psi,\mathbb{M}}
\left\{
I_{+\infty}(X \colon G)_{\mathcal{E}_\rho^\Psi,\mathbb{M}}
-
\max_{\sigma\in {\rm F}}
I_{+\infty}(X \colon G)_{\mathcal{E}_\sigma^\Psi,\mathbb{M}}
\right\}\\
=\log \Big[1+{\rm RoR}(\rho)\Big],
\label{eq:result5}
\end{multline}
with the maximisation over all ensembles of channels and all measurements. Please see Appendix F for full definitions.
}
The proof of this result is in Appendix F. This results means that the three-way correspondence found in \cite{DS2019a}, for the QRT of measurement informativeness, can indeed be lifted from measurements to states.
\section{Conclusions}
In this work we have proven, in the context of convex QRTs of states, that \emph{weight-based} resource quantifiers for \emph{arbitrary resources} capture the advantage that a resourceful state has over all free states, in the operational task of \emph{subchannel exclusion}. As a corollary of this result, we have shown that the best separable approximation/Lewenstein-Sanpera decomposition \cite{WoE} quantifies the advantage that an entangled state has over all separable states, in the task of subchannel exclusion. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first operational interpretation that has been given to this entanglement quantifier. Going forward, it would be interesting to derive a version of our result that allows for independent measurements when comparing resourceful and free states, as was done in \cite{RT1} for the robustness of entanglement.
The results presented here also support the conjecture made in \cite{DS2019a} that, whenever there is an discrimination-based operational task where a robustness-based resource quantifier plays a relevant role, there is an exclusion-based operational task where a weight-based resource quantifier plays a relevant role as well. It would also be interesting to address this conjecture for other objects, such as steering assemblages or collections of incompatible measurements. All of these considerations are interesting in themselves, but we leave these for future research.
Furthermore, and beyond the weight-exclusion correspondence, we have provided a third connection to single-shot information-theoretic quantities. In particular, we have shown that the weight of resource of a state is also closely related to an exclusion-version of the accessible information of an ensemble of states, which itself originates from a fixed state.
The results presented in this work nicely fit within the endeavour of linking resource quantifiers to operational tasks in general convex QRTs. One can go even further and consider general probabilistic theories in which the discrimination-robustness correspondence has already been extended \cite{RT2}. We believe that the results presented in this work can be extended to this regime as well, but we leave this for future research.
\section*{Note added}
During the development of this work we became aware of a complementary work by R. Uola et. al. \cite{Uola}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank Noah Linden, Patryk Lipka-Bartosik and Tom Purves for insightful discussions. A.F.D acknowledges support from COLCIENCIAS 756-2016. P.S. acknowledges support from a Royal Society URF (UHQT).
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Distributed beamforming is concerned with the problem of cooperative communication where randomly located independent nodes coordinate among themselves to form a virtual antenna array. Although numerous studies on distributed beamforming have been carried out for over a decade, it was initially considered impractical due to the high complexity involved in modeling the generated beam pattern and the hardly achievable requirements on positioning and synchronization. Recent research results demonstrating the efficacy of distributed beamforming as a suitable solution for 5G communication systems such as mm-wave communication and machine to machine communications has further ignited the interest in this research field. The concept of distributed beamforming was conceived in early 2000’s by two independent pieces of research under the names collaborative beamforming \cite{ Ochiai2005} and distributed beamforming \cite{Barriac2004}. While initial research on collaborative beamforming focused on the beampattern analysis and the random array theory while assuming perfect phase synchronization among the nodes, the research on distributed beamforming focused only on the feasibility of achieving synchronization among distributed nodes and did not consider the significance of the physical array geometry and the beampattern. Over the years, the lines that separated the collaborative beamforming and distributed beamforming significantly blurred such that both the terms are now interchangeable.
Similar to the conventional antenna array beamforming, the distributed beamforming provides improvement in the received signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) compared to a point-to-point transmission. With a fixed radiated power at each antenna element (node), an ideal distributed beamformer with $n$ collaborating nodes will result in $n^2$ fold increase in the received power at the destination \cite{Ochiai2005}. Conversely, received power can be reduced by an order of $\frac{1}{n^2}$ for a fixed received power threshold. Thus distributed beamforming based collaborative communication drastically decreases the transmit power requirements allowing the individual nodes to conserve crucial resources and battery life especially in applications where the network is deployed at places where it difficult to replace or recharge the power source. Distributed beamforming has also shown to helps alleviate the long-distance transmission limitation in circumstances where it is unsuitable to layout sink node and multi-hop transmission.
Though much of the distributed beamforming works simply focus on achieving a desired SNR at the receiver, sophisticated distributed array techniques such as null-forming has also shown to be achieved through distributed beamforming as a solution to the covert communication problem~\cite{ Kumar2014, Goguri2016}. However, null-forming is a formidable problem due to its sensitivity to small phase errors. Furthermore, since null-forming fundamentally relies on a node’s transmitted signal cancelling the signals from all other transmitters, the amplitude and phase of the transmitted signal at each node cannot be chosen independently of the amplitudes and phases of other nodes. Therefore distributed null-forming algorithms often assume that each transmitter knows every transmitter’s complex channel gain to the receiver, in other words, global channel state information at each of the transmitters (CSIT).
There exists a plethora of literature on the concept of distributed transmit beamforming. For example, reference \cite{ Mudumbai2009} reviews several results in architectures, algorithms, and working prototypes available almost a decade ago to address the changes of coordinating the sources for information sharing and timing synchronization and, most crucially, distributed carrier synchronization so that the transmissions combine constructively at the destination. In order to ensure phase coherence of the radio frequency signals from the different transmitters in the presence of unknown phase offsets between the transmitters and unknown channel gains from the transmitters to the receiver, in \cite{Mudumbai2010}, authors propose a distributed adaptation scheme, where each transmitter independently makes a small random adjustment to its phase at each iteration, while the receiver broadcasts a single bit of feedback, indicating whether the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improved or worsened after the current iteration. Reference \cite{Liu2010} investigates linear beamforming techniques in relay networks with multiple independent sources, destinations and relay(s), where the goal is to determine the beamforming matrix to minimize the sum transmit power at the relays while meeting signal-to-interference (SINR) requirements at the destinations. In \cite{ Brown2012} authors describes a receiver-coordinated distributed transmission protocol for the joint beamforming and nullforming problem, in which the receive nodes feedback periodic channel measurements to the transmit cluster and the transmit nodes use this feedback to generate optimal channel predictions and then calculate a time-varying transmit vector that minimizes the average total power at the protected receivers while satisfying an average power constraint at the intended receiver during distributed transmission. Similarly, \cite{Fan2017} proposes a fast baseband transmit beamforming algorithm for the distributed antennas with one-bit feedback control using the received signal strength (RSS) at the receiver. An adaptive minimum variance distortion-less response (MVDR) beamformer for nonuniform linear arrays with enhanced degrees of freedom is presented in \cite{Yu2015} to enforce a unit response at the direction of the desired signal and places nulls in the directions of the interferences. In \cite{Kumar2017} authors consider the distributed joint beamforming and nullforming problem where $N$ single antenna transmitters must broadcast a common message signal by forming beams towards each of the single antenna receivers, while simultaneously forming nulls at another set of receivers. After formulating the problem as an unconstrained optimization problem to minimize the mean square error between the achieved and desired modulating amplitudes at the receivers, authors propose a gradient descent algorithm that utilizes a common feedback message, broadcasted by each of the receivers to all transmitters, consisting of a single complex number representing the amplitude of the aggregate (total) baseband received signal in the previous iteration. While most of the above mentioned work only considers the phase coherence of the radio frequency signals at each of the transmitters as the control variable, more resent works~\cite{ Chatzipanagiotis2014, Farazi2016, Muralidharan2018} focuses on both the transmitter position as well the phase offset. Finally a comprehensive survey of various distributed beamforming research, as well as its classifications, inherent features, constraints, challenges and the lessons learned from the shortcomings of previous research are summarized in \cite{Jayaprakasam2017}.
In this paper we consider the problem of beam matching, as opposed to previous methods for distributed and mobile beamformers that wish to maximize SINR at the client while minimizing transmit power \cite{chatzipanagiotis2012controlling}. The reasoning's behind our proposed objective are two-fold; first, the transmit power given the proposed devices and frequencies used are minimal when compared to the power used to maneuver the transmit nodes. With that being said, minimizing transmit power is not a major performance objective. Second, we wish to have more precision with the formed beam that would provide built in null-forming for covert missions.\cite{farazi2016simultaneous} proposes a phase adjustment protocol to maintain perfect nulls at desired locations while mobile nodes alter their positions to improve the received power at the client. This method relies on random perturbations to the phase displacement vector and use of the heavy ball method.
Consider an equally spaced linear array (ESLA) of $n$ elements. See Fig.~\ref{ESLA}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\coordinate (Origin) at (0,0);
\coordinate (XAxisMin) at (-3.5,0);
\coordinate (XAxisMax) at (4,0);
\coordinate (YAxisMin) at (0,-2);
\coordinate (YAxisMax) at (0,3);
\draw [thin, gray,-latex] (XAxisMin) -- (XAxisMax) node [below left] {$x$}
\draw [thin, gray,-latex] (YAxisMin) -- (YAxisMax) node [below left] {$y$};
\foreach \x in {-2,-1,...,2}
\foreach \y in {0}
\node[draw,circle,inner sep=2pt,fill] at (1.5*\x,1.5*\y) {};
}
}
\draw[blue, <->] (1.5,-0.5) -- (3,-0.5) node [midway,fill=white] {$\frac{\lambda}{2}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{ESLA with $n=5$ and $d=\frac{\lambda}{2}$}
\label{ESLA}
\end{figure}
The general array factor can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{Ern:AF}
AF(\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{n-1} I_m\, e^{jk \mathbf{r}_m^\top \hat{\mathbf{r}}},
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{r}_m$ is the vector to the $m$-th element, $\hat{\mathbf{r}}$ is a unit vector pointing in the direction of interest i.e.,
$$\hat{\mathbf{r}} = \begin{bmatrix}
\cos(\theta) & \sin(\theta)
\end{bmatrix}^\top,$$
$k$ is the wave number and $I_m$ is the element excitation with amplitude $a_m$ and linear phase gradient of $\alpha$ across the array, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{Ern:Im}
I_m = a_m\, e^{jm\alpha}.
\end{equation}
For the ESLA given in Fig.~\ref{ESLA}, we have
$$\mathbf{r}_m = \begin{bmatrix}
(m-2)\frac{\lambda}{2} & 0
\end{bmatrix}^\top,$$
and
\begin{equation}\label{Ern:AF1}
AF(\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{n-1} a_m\, e^{j\left(m\alpha+k (m-2)\frac{\lambda}{2}\cos(\theta) \right)}.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{centering}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{BeamPattern.eps}
\caption{2-D Beam Pattern}
\end{centering}\label{BeamPattern}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{BeamPattern} shows the beam pattern obtained for the 5 element ESLA with Binomial amplitude tapering and a phase gradient of $\alpha = -\pi/2$ at $40$ MHz.
The generalized array factor for $n$-elements located at $\begin{bmatrix} x_1 \\ y_1 \end{bmatrix}$ $\ldots$ $\begin{bmatrix} x_m \\ y_m \end{bmatrix}$ $\ldots$ $\begin{bmatrix} x_n \\ y_n \end{bmatrix}$ can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{Ern:AF0}
AF(\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{n-1} a_m\, e^{j\left(m\alpha+k x_m\cos(\theta) + k y_m \sin(\theta) \right)}.
\end{equation}
Assume there exists a receiver at location $\mathbf{p}\in\mathbb{R}^2$. The channel between the $m$-th element and the receiver is modeled as
\begin{equation}\label{Ern:Ch}
c_m(\mathbf{p}) = \gamma\left( \mathbf{r}_m \right) \beta(d_m) e^{j k d_m},
\end{equation}
where $d_m = \| \mathbf{p} - \mathbf{r}_m \|_2$ is the distance between the $m$-th element and the receiver, $\gamma\left( \cdot \right): \mathbb{R}^2\mapsto\mathbb{R}$ captures multipath fading and $\beta\left( \cdot \right): \mathbb{R}\mapsto\mathbb{R}$ denotes the path loss. Here we model the path loss as
\begin{equation}
\beta(d_m) = d_m^{-\mu/2},
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ is the path loss exponent. For the frequency we are considering we model the multipath gain as a random variable $\gamma_m$. If $\mathbf{p} = \rho \hat{\mathbf{r}}$, then the beam pattern taking the channel into consideration is
\begin{align}\label{Ern:AF2}
\begin{split}
AF&(\rho,\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{n-1} \frac{a_m\, \gamma_m}{\left(d_m\right)^{\mu/2}}\,e^{j\left(m\alpha+ k x_m\cos(\theta) + k y_m \sin(\theta) + k d_m\right)},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $d_m = \| \rho \hat{\mathbf{r}} - \mathbf{r}_m \|_2$. Note that the channel could affect both amplitude and phase.
\section{Problem Formulation}
Consider the following desired array pattern constructed by $n$ fictitious agents located at $\begin{bmatrix} \bar{x}_0 \\ \bar{y}_{0}\end{bmatrix}$, $\ldots$, $\begin{bmatrix} \bar{x}_{n-1} \\ \bar{y}_{n-1}\end{bmatrix}$:
\begin{align}\label{Ern:AFd}
\begin{split}
AF_d&(\rho,\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{n-1} \frac{\bar{a}_m\, \bar{\gamma}_m}{\left(\bar{d}_m\right)^{\bar{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left(m\bar{\alpha}+ k \bar{x}_m\cos(\theta) + k \bar{y}_m \sin(\theta) + k \bar{d}_m\right)},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where
$$ \bar{d}_m = \left\| \begin{bmatrix} \bar{x}_m \\ \bar{y}_m \end{bmatrix} - \rho \begin{bmatrix} \cos(\theta) \\ \sin(\theta)\end{bmatrix}\right\|_2, $$
$\bar{a}_m$, $\bar{\mu}$, and $\bar{\alpha}$ are nominal system values (these could be unknown parameters). Now $s$ mobile agents (array elements) located at $\mathbf{r}_0(t_0)$ $\ldots$ $\mathbf{r}_{s-1}(t_0)$ would like to construct the desired pattern such that
\begin{align}\label{Ern:AFd}
\begin{split}
J &= \frac{1}{2}\,\int_{0}^{2\pi} \int_{\rho_a}^{\rho_b} \, \left\| |AF_d(\rho,\theta)| - |AF(\rho,\theta)| \right\|_2^2 \, d\theta\, d\rho + \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \, \int_{t_0}^{t_f} \left[ \mathbf{r}_m(t)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right]^\top S_m \left[ \mathbf{r}_m(t)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right] dt
\end{split}
\end{align}
is minimized. Here $S_m$ is a positive definite matrix. The true array factor is given as
\begin{align}\label{Ern:AFa}
\begin{split}
AF&(\rho,\theta) = \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{{a}_m\, {\gamma}_m}{\left(d_m(t_f)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left({\alpha}_m+ k x_m(t_f)\cos(\theta) + k y_m(t_f) \sin(\theta) + k d_m(t_f)\right)},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where $ \mathbf{r}_m(t_f) = \begin{bmatrix} x_m(t_f) & y_m(t_f) \end{bmatrix} ^\top$ is the actual element locations, and
$$ d_m(t_f) = \left\| \begin{bmatrix} {x}_m(t_f) \\ {y}_m(t_f) \end{bmatrix} - \rho \begin{bmatrix} \cos(\theta) \\ \sin(\theta)\end{bmatrix}\right\|_2.$$
Design parameters are $\alpha_0,\ldots,\alpha_{s-1}$, $a_0$, $\ldots$, $a_{s-1}$, $\mathbf{r}_0(t_f)$, $\ldots$, $\mathbf{r}_{s-1}(t_f)$.
\subsection{Simplification}
In practice, it is usually not required to match the beam pattern over a continuous space, but to rather match the beam at desired instances of $\rho$ and $\theta$ deemed valuable for either transmission or null forming. We start with discretizing the polar coordinates as $\{\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_l\}$ and $\{\rho_1,\ldots,\rho_{\ell}\}$. Thus the magnitude of the desired total array factor for all $(\rho_i, \theta_i)$ pairs, where $\theta_i \in \{\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_l\}$ and $\rho_i\in\{\rho_1,\ldots,\rho_{\ell}\}$, can be denoted as $f(\rho_i, \theta_i)$. For example, Fig.~\ref{BeamPattern} could present one such pattern of $f(\rho_i, \theta_i)$.
Now the resulting problem can be viewed as the following optimization problem
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{OptCont}
&\min_{\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\mathbf{r}(t_f)}\quad J =\frac{1}{2}\,\sum_{i} \| f(\rho_i, \theta_i) - |AF(\rho_i, \theta_i, \bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a}, \mathbf{r}_m(t_f))| \|_2^2\\
&\qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad + \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \, \int_{t_0}^{t_f} \left[ \mathbf{r}_m(t)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right]^\top S_m \left[ \mathbf{r}_m(t)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right]
\,\,dt.
\end{split}
\end{align}
\section{A proposed solution}
The proposed solution consists of a two time-scale process. A fast time-scale optimization process to identify the amplitude and phase, while a slow time-scale process to relocate the agents if needed.
Before we proceed we simplify the problem by assuming that the number of antenna-elements involved in the construction of desired beam pattern is same as the number of mobile-agents involved in distributed beamforming, i.e., $n = s$.
\subsection{Fast-Scale Optimization}
Given the current location of the agents, $\mathbf{r}_0(t)$ $\ldots$ $\mathbf{r}_{s-1}(t)$, $AF(\rho_i,\theta_i)$ can be written as
\begin{align}\label{Ern:AFa2}
\begin{split}
AF&(\rho_i,\theta_i) = \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + k x_m(t)\cos(\theta_i) + k y_m(t) \sin(\theta_i) + k d_{m_i}(t)\right)},
\end{split}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
d_{m_i}(t) = \left\| \begin{bmatrix} {x}_m(t) \\ {y}_m(t) \end{bmatrix} - \rho_i \begin{bmatrix} \cos(\theta_i) \\ \sin(\theta_i)\end{bmatrix}\right\|_2.
\end{align}
Thus an optimization problem can be posed as
\begin{align}\label{Eqn:Opt1}
\begin{split}
\min_{\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a}}\,\,
\frac{1}{2}\, \sum_{i} \left\| f(\rho_i, \theta_i) - \left| \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + k x_m(t)\cos(\theta_i) + k y_m(t) \sin(\theta_i) + k d_{m_i}(t)\right)} \right| \right\|_2^2.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Let
$$ \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) = \frac{1}{2}\, \left\| f(\rho_i, \theta_i) - \left| \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + k x_m(t)\cos(\theta_i) + k y_m(t) \sin(\theta_i) + k d_{m_i}(t)\right)} \right| \right\|_2^2$$
Now the above optimization problem can be rewritten as
\begin{align}\label{Eqn:Opt2}
\begin{split}
\min_{\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a}}\,\,
\sum_{i} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right)
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note that the objective $\Phi_i$ is time-varying since it changes with agent location. Ideally, we would like to keep the agents stationary while solving for the optimal beamforming weights. However the agents are constantly moving and therefore we propose the following fast gradient flow to solve for the weights:
\begin{align}
\epsilon \dot{\mathbf{a}}(t) &= - \sum_{i} \nabla_{\mathbf{a}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right), \epsilon \ll 1, \quad \textnormal{and}\\
\epsilon \dot{\bm{\alpha}}(t) &= - \sum_{i} \nabla_{\bm{\alpha}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right)
\end{align}
In other words, we assume that the agents are moving sufficiently slow comparing with the above optimization algorithm, i.e., $\dot r_m \sim O(\epsilon)$.
The gradients $\nabla_{\mathbf{a}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right)$ are calculated as
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\nabla_{\mathbf{a}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) &= \left(\left| \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + k x_m(t)\cos(\theta_i) + k y_m(t) \sin(\theta_i) + k d_{m_i}(t)\right)} \right|-f(\rho_i, \theta_i)\right) \\
&\qquad \qquad \times
\frac{\partial \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + k x_m(t)\cos(\theta_i) + k y_m(t) \sin(\theta_i) + k d_{m_i}(t)\right)} \right|}{\partial \mathbf{a}}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Define
\begin{align}
\zeta_{m_i}(t) = k x_m(t)\cos(\theta_i) + k y_m(t) \sin(\theta_i) + k d_{m_i}(t).
\end{align}
Now using the Euler identity we have
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right| &= \Bigg( \left( \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\, \cos\left(\alpha_m +\zeta_{m_i}(t)\right) \right)^2 \\& \qquad + \left( \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\, \sin\left(\alpha_m +\zeta_{m_i}(t)\right)\right)^2 \Bigg)^{1/2}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Let
\begin{align}
\bm{u}_i(t) = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{ {\gamma}_0}{\left(d_{0_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\, \cos\left(\alpha_0 +\zeta_{0_i}(t)\right) \\
\vdots\\
\frac{ {\gamma}_{s-1}}{\left(d_{{s-1}_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\, \cos\left(\alpha_{s-1} +\zeta_{{s-1}_i}(t)\right)
\end{bmatrix}
\quad \textnormal{and} \quad
\bm{v}_i(t) = \begin{bmatrix} \frac{ {\gamma}_0}{\left(d_{0_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\, \sin\left(\alpha_{0} +\zeta_{0_i}(t)\right) \\
\vdots\\
\frac{ {\gamma}_{s-1}}{\left(d_{{s-1}_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\, \sin\left(\alpha_{s-1} +\zeta_{{s-1}_i}(t)\right)
\end{bmatrix}
\end{align}
Thus we have
\begin{align}
\left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right| &= \left( \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)\bm{u}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a} + \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)\bm{v}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a} \right)^{1/2}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right| }{\partial \mathbf{a}} &= \frac{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\sqrt{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)\bm{u}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a} + \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)\bm{v}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}}}\bm{u}_i(t) \\
&\qquad + \frac{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\sqrt{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)\bm{u}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a} + \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)\bm{v}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}}}\bm{v}_i(t).
\end{split}
\end{align}
Therefore
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\nabla_{\mathbf{a}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) &= \frac{\left( \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|-f(\rho_i, \theta_i)\right)\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|}\bm{u}_i(t) \\
&\qquad + \frac{\left( \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|-f(\rho_i, \theta_i)\right)\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|}\bm{v}_i(t).
\end{split}
\end{align}
Similarly the gradients $\nabla_{\bm{\alpha}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right)$ are calculated as
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\nabla_{\bm{\alpha}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) &= \left( \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|-f(\rho_i, \theta_i)\right) \frac{\partial \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right| }{\partial \bm{\alpha}}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Note
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right| }{\partial \bm{\alpha}} &= \frac{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\sqrt{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)\bm{u}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a} + \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)\bm{v}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}}}\frac{\partial\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\partial \bm{\alpha}} \\
&\qquad + \frac{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\sqrt{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)\bm{u}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a} + \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)\bm{v}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}}}\frac{\partial\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\partial \bm{\alpha}}
\end{split}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\partial \bm{\alpha}} = -\left(\mathbf{a} \circ \bm{v}_i(t)\right) \quad \textnormal{and}\quad
\frac{\partial\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\partial \bm{\alpha}} = \left(\mathbf{a} \circ \bm{u}_i(t)\right).
\end{align}
Here $\circ$ denotes the Hadamard product or the element-wise product. Therefore
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\nabla_{\bm f{\alpha}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) &= -\frac{\left( \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|-f(\rho_i, \theta_i)\right)\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|}\left(\mathbf{a} \circ \bm{v}_i(t)\right) \\
&\qquad + \frac{\left( \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|-f(\rho_i, \theta_i)\right)\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|}\left(\mathbf{a} \circ \bm{u}_i(t)\right).
\end{split}
\end{align}
\subsection{Slow-Scale Motion Planning}
We rewrite the slow-scale optimization in \eqref{OptCont} as
\begin{align}\label{OptCont1}
\begin{split}
&\min_{\mathbf{r}(t)}\quad J = \sum_{i} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) + \sum_{m=1}^{s} \, \int_{t_0}^{t} \left[ \mathbf{r}_m(\tau)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right]^\top S_m \left[ \mathbf{r}_m(\tau)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right] \,\,d\tau.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Thus we propose the following gradient flow to solve for the control:
\begin{align}
\dot{\mathbf{r}}_m(t) = - \nabla_{\mathbf{r}_m} J,\quad \forall m=0,\ldots,s-1
\end{align}
Substituting \eqref{OptCont1}, the above equation can be rewritten as
\begin{align}
\dot{\mathbf{r}}_m(t) &= - \sum_{i} \nabla_{\mathbf{r}_m} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) + \mathbf{v}_m(t) \\
\dot{\mathbf{v}}_m(t) &= -2S_m \left( \mathbf{r}_m(t)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right).
\end{align}
The gradients $\nabla_{\mathbf{r}_m} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right)$ are calculated as
\begin{align}
\nabla_{\mathbf{r}_m} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right)&= \left( \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|-f(\rho_i, \theta_i)\right)\frac{\partial \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|}{\partial \mathbf{r}_m}
\end{align}
Note
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial \left| \displaystyle \sum_{m=0}^{s-1} \frac{ {a_m\,\gamma}_m}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}\,e^{j\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)} \right|}{\partial \mathbf{r}_m} &= \frac{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\sqrt{\bm{u}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t) + \bm{v}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}}\frac{\partial \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\partial \mathbf{r}_m} \\
&\qquad + \frac{\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\sqrt{\bm{u}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t) + \bm{v}_i^\top(t)\mathbf{a}\mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}}\frac{\partial \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\partial \mathbf{r}_m}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
Also note
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{u}_i(t)}{\partial \mathbf{r}_m} =
\begin{bmatrix}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial x_m(t)}\\
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial y_m(t)}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{split}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\frac{\partial \mathbf{a}^\top\bm{v}_i(t)}{\partial \mathbf{r}_m} =
\begin{bmatrix}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial x_m(t)}\\
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial y_m(t)}
\end{bmatrix}
\end{split}
\end{align}
Recall
$$d_{m_i}(t) = \left\| \begin{bmatrix} {x}_m(t) \\ {y}_m(t) \end{bmatrix} - \rho_i \begin{bmatrix} \cos(\theta_i) \\ \sin(\theta_i)\end{bmatrix}\right\|_2$$
and
$$\zeta_{m_i}(t) = k x_m(t)\cos(\theta_i) + k y_m(t) \sin(\theta_i) + k d_{m_i}(t).$$
Now the partials can be computed as
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial x_m(t)}
= &-\displaystyle\frac{\mu\, a_m \gamma_m \cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left( 2x_m(t) - 2\rho_i\cos(\theta_i)\right)}{4\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{\mu/2+2}}\\
&\, -\displaystyle\frac{a_m {\gamma}_m\sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left(k\cos(\theta_i)+\frac{k\left(2x_m(t)-2\rho_i\cos(\theta_i)\right)}{2d_{m_i}(t)}\right)}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial y_m(t)}
= &-\displaystyle\frac{\mu\, a_m \gamma_m \cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left( 2y_m(t) - 2\rho_i\sin(\theta_i)\right)}{4\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{\mu/2+2}}\\
&\,-\displaystyle\frac{a_m {\gamma}_m\sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left(k\sin(\theta_i)+\frac{k\left(2y_m(t)-2\rho_i\sin(\theta_i)\right)}{2d_{m_i}(t)}\right)}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial x_m(t)}
= &-\displaystyle\frac{\mu\, a_m \gamma_m \sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left( 2x_m(t) - 2\rho_i\cos(\theta_i)\right)}{4\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{\mu/2+2}}\\
&\,+\displaystyle\frac{a_m {\gamma}_m\cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left(k\cos(\theta_i)+\frac{k\left(2x_m(t)-2\rho_i\cos(\theta_i)\right)}{2d_{m_i}(t)}\right)}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}
\displaystyle\frac{\partial a_m {\gamma}_m\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{-\mu}/2}\, \sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)}{\partial y_m(t)}
= &-\displaystyle\frac{\mu\, a_m \gamma_m \sin\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left( 2y_m(t) - 2\rho_i\sin(\theta_i)\right)}{4\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{\mu/2+2}}\\
&\,+\displaystyle\frac{a_m {\gamma}_m\cos\left( \alpha_m + \zeta_{m_i}(t) \right)\left(k\sin(\theta_i)+\frac{k\left(2y_m(t)-2\rho_i\sin(\theta_i)\right)}{2d_{m_i}(t)}\right)}{\left(d_{m_i}(t)\right)^{{\mu}/2}}
\end{split}
\end{align}
\subsection{Summary}
In summary the proposed solution consists of the following process:
\begin{itemize}
\item Select an appropriate $\epsilon \ll 1$
\item Simultaneously solve the
\begin{itemize}
\item Fast gradient flow for amplitude and phase
\begin{align}
\epsilon \dot{\mathbf{a}}(t) &= - \sum_{i} \nabla_{\mathbf{a}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right), \quad \textnormal{and}\\
\epsilon \dot{\bm{\alpha}}(t) &= - \sum_{i} \nabla_{\bm{\alpha}} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right)
\end{align}
\item Slow gradient flow for control input
\begin{align}
\dot{\mathbf{r}}_m(t) &= - \sum_{i} \nabla_{\mathbf{r}_m} \Phi_i\left(\bm{\alpha},\mathbf{a},\rho_i,\theta_i,t\right) + \mathbf{v}_m(t) \\
\dot{\mathbf{v}}_m(t) &= -2S_m \left( \mathbf{r}_m(t)-\mathbf{r}_m(t_0)\right).
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\section{Numerical Results}
For numerical simulations we consider a $5$ element beamforming array transmitting at 40 MHz. Given in Fig.~\ref{Fig1} is the desired beam pattern obtained by a linear array consisting of 5 elements. Initially the agents are randomly positioned and they have random phase offsets. The initial beam pattern obtained from the initial agent positions and phase offsets are given in Fig.~\ref{Fig2}. Finally given in Fig.~\ref{Fig3} is the reconstructed beam pattern obtained by implementing the proposed two time-scale optimization scheme. Note that the reconstructed beam pattern clearly matches the desired beam pattern.
\begin{figure}[!hb]
\begin{centering}
\subfigure[Desired beam pattern]{
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Fig1}\label{Fig1}}
\subfigure[Initial beam pattern]{
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Fig2}\label{Fig2}}
\subfigure[Final constructed beam pattern]{
\includegraphics[width=.55\textwidth]{Fig3}\label{Fig3}}
\caption{2D beam pattern reconstructed using the proposed two time-scale approach}
\label{Results1}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
Given in Fig.~\ref{Result2} are the parameters obtained from implementing the proposed fast scale optimization algorithm. Fig.~\ref{Amp} contains the amplitude for the each of the 5 array elements while Fig~\ref{Phs} contains the phase.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{centering}
\subfigure[Amplitude]{
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Amp}\label{Amp}}
\subfigure[Phase]{
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{Phs}\label{Phs}}
\caption{Evolution and amplitude and phase all 5 elements during the optimization process}\label{Result2}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conclusion}
Here we presented a two time-scale optimization algorithm for multi-agent coordination for the purpose of distributed beamforming. Each agent is assumed to be randomly positioned with respect to each other with random phase offsets and amplitudes. We propose a two time-scale optimization algorithm that consists of a fast time-scale algorithm to solve for the amplitude and phase while a slow time-scale algorithm to solve for the control required to re-position the agents. The numerical results given here indicate that the proposed two time-scale approach is able to reconstruct a desired beam pattern. Future work include considering positioning as well as synchronization uncertainties and errors. We would also consider the uncertainties associated with channel model and the recruitment problem when the number of required array elements is unknown.
|
\section{Derivation of value function formulation}
We start out with the $J_{\diamond}$ objective:
\begin{align}
J_{\diamond} =& \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \bigg( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) -
\epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \bigg) R_t.
\end{align}
We evaluate this objective by taking an expectation over the trajectories
$\tau$ as induced by the policy $\pi$. Here $\tau$ is a complete sequence of
states, actions and rewards, $\tau = \{s_0, a_0, r_1,.. ,s_T, a_T\}$.
For convenience in the following derivation we have defined the reward,
$r_{t+1}$, to be indexed by the next time step, after action $a_t$ was taken.
This ensures that partial trajectories (e.g. $\tau_{> t}$) correctly keep
rewards after the actions that cause them. Note that $R_t = \sum_{k=0}^{T-t}
\gamma^k r_{t+k+1}$ depends only on $\tau_{>t}$. The expectation of our
objective is given by:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}_{\pi} [J_{\diamond}]
=& \sum_{\tau} P(\tau ) J_{\diamond}(\tau) \\
=& \sum_{\tau} P(\tau ) \bigg( \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \big( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le
t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \big) R_t \bigg)\\
=& \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \bigg( \sum_{\tau} P(\tau ) \big(
\epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \big) R_t \bigg)\\
=& \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t J_t
\end{align}
We note that for each time step the term, $J_t$ is of the form:
\begin{align}
J_t = \sum_{\tau} P(\tau ) f(\tau_{\le t}) g(\tau_{>t} ),
\end{align}
where $f(\tau_{\le t}) = \big( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \big) $ and
$g(\tau_{>t} ) = R_t$.
Next we use:
\begin{align}
P(\tau ) &= P(\tau_{\le t} ) P(\tau_{> t} |\tau_{\le t} ) \\
&= P(\tau_{\le t} ) P(\tau_{> t} |s_t, a_t ),
\end{align}
where in the last step we have used the Markov property.
Substituting we obtain:
\begin{align}
J_t &= \sum_{\tau} P(\tau_{\le t} ) P(\tau_{> t} |s_t, a_t ) f(\tau_{\le
t}) g(\tau_{> t} ) \\
&= \sum_{\tau_{\le t}} P(\tau_{\le t} ) f(\tau_{\le t})
\sum_{\tau_{> t}} P(\tau_{\ge t} |s_t, a_t ) g(\tau_{> t} )
\end{align}
If we substitute back for $g$ and $f$ we obtain:
\begin{align}
J_t &= \sum_{\tau_{\le t}} P(\tau_{\le t} ) \big( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) -
\epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \big) \sum_{\tau_{> t}} P(\tau_{\ge t} |s_t, a_t ) R_t \\
&= \sum_{\tau_{\le t}} P(\tau_{\le t} ) \big( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{<
t}) \big) \mathbb{E}[ R_t | s_t, a_t] \\
&= \sum_{\tau_{\le t}} P(\tau_{\le t} ) \big( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \big) Q(s_t, a_t)\\
\end{align}
Putting all together we obtain the final form:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}_{\pi} [J_{\diamond}] =& \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \bigg[ \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \bigg( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \bigg) Q(s_t, a_t) \bigg]
\end{align}
\newpage
\section{Experimental details}
\subsection{Random MDPs}
We use the $\texttt{mdptoolbox.example.rand()}$ function from PyMDPToolbox to generate random MDP transition functions with five states and four actions per state.
The reward is a function only of state, and is sampled from $\mathcal{N}(5,10)$.
We use $\gamma=0.95$.
When sampling for the stochastic estimators, we use batches of 512 rollouts of length 50 steps unless the batch size is otherwise specified.
We only compute higher order derivatives of the derivative of the first parameter at each order, to save computation.
For the sweeps over $\lambda$ and $\tau$ we use 200 batches for each value of $\lambda$ or $\tau$.
To simulate function approximation error in our analysis of the impact of $\tau$, we add a gaussian noise with standard deviation 10 to the true value function.
\subsection{MAML experiments}
We use the following hyperparameters for our MAML experiments:
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|r}
\toprule
\textbf{Parameter} & \textbf{Value} \\
\midrule
$\gamma$ & 0.97 \\
hidden layer size & 100 \\
number of layers & 2 \\
task batch size & 20 trajectories \\
meta batch size & 40 tasks \\
inner loop learning rate & 0.1 \\
outer loop optimiser & Adam \\
outer loop learning rate & 0.0005 \\
outer loop $\tau$ & 1.0 \\
reward noise & Uniform(-0.01, 0.01) at each timestep \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We also normalise all advantages in each batch (per task).
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
In this section we empirically demonstrate the correctness of our estimator in
the absence of function approximation, and show how the bias and variance of
the estimator may be traded off (a) by the choice of advantage estimator when
only an approximate value function is available, and (b) by the use of our
novel discount factor $\lambda$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/corr_crc.png}
\caption{Convergence with increasing batch size of unbiased any-order
estimators (DiCE, DiCE with the baseline of \citet{mao2018better}, and
Loaded DiCE). Also, LVC \citep{rothfuss2018promp}, a low-variance but biased
estimator.}
\label{fig:dice_unbiased}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Bias and variance in any-order derivatives}
To make the initial analysis simple and interpretable, we use small random MDPs
with five states, four actions per state, and rewards that depend only on
state. For these MDPs the discounted value may be calculated analytically, as
follows.
$P^\pi$ is the state transition matrix induced by the MDP's transition function
$P(s,a,s')$ and the tabular policy $\pi$, with elements given by
\begin{equation}
P^\pi_{ss'} =
\sum_a P(s, a, s') \pi(a | s).
\end{equation}
Let $P_0$ be the initial state distribution as a vector.
Then, the probability distribution over states at time $t$ is a vector $p_{s_t}
= (P^\pi)^t P_0$.
The mean reward at time $t$ is $r_t = R^T p_{s_t}$, where $R$ is the vector of
per-state rewards.
Finally,
\begin{align}
V^\pi &= \sum_{t=0}^{\infty}\gamma^t r_t
= R^T \sum_{t=0}^{\infty} (\gamma P_{\pi})^{t} P_0 \nonumber \\
&= R^T (I - \gamma P_\pi)^{-1} P_0.
\end{align}
This $V^\pi$ is differentiable wrt $\pi$ and may be easily computed with
automatic differentiation packages.
More details and code can be found in the Supplementary Material.
\paragraph{A low-variance, unbiased, any-order estimator.}
Figure \ref{fig:dice_unbiased} shows how the correlation between estimated and true derivatives changes as a function of batch size, for up to third order.
We compare the original DiCE estimator to Loaded DiCE, and
the objective proposed by \citet{mao2018better} which incorporates only a
baseline.
For Loaded DiCE, we use $A^{GAE}$ with $\tau=0$, the exact value function, and
$\lambda=1$ (so as to remain unbiased).
As these are all unbiased estimators, they will converge to the true
derivatives with a sufficiently large batch size.
However, when using an advantage estimator with the exact value function, the variance may be dramatically reduced and the estimates converge much more rapidly.
We also show the performance of LVC \citep{rothfuss2018promp}.
At first order it matches exactly the estimator of \citet{mao2018better}, but underperforms Loaded DiCE~because it does not use the advantage.
At higher orders, it is low variance but biased, as expected.
\paragraph{Trading off bias and variance with advantage estimation.}
Figure \ref{fig:toy_tau} shows the bias and standard deviation of estimated
derivatives using a range of $\tau$, and an inexact value function (we perturb
the true value function with Gaussian noise for each state to emulate function
approximation).
The effect of the choice of advantage estimator trades off bias and
variance not only at the first order, but in any-order derivatives.
\paragraph{Trading off bias and variance by discounting causes.}
Figure \ref{fig:toy_lambda} shows the bias and standard deviation of estimated derivatives using a range of $\lambda$.
To isolate the effect of $\lambda$ we use the exact value function and $\tau=0$, so the absolute bias and variance are lower than in figure \ref{fig:toy_tau}.
First-order derivatives are unaffected by $\lambda$, as expected.
However, in higher-order derivatives, $\lambda$ strongly affects the bias and variance of the resulting estimator.
There is an outlier at $\lambda=0.75$ for third order derivatives -- there is no guarantee of monotonicity in the bias or variance, but we found such outliers rarer at second than third order, and appearing as artefacts of particular MDPs.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.48\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/tau_trade_crc.png}
\caption{Low $\tau$ produces low variance estimates at the cost of high
bias.
The effect holds
at all orders of derivatives.}
\label{fig:toy_tau}
\end{subfigure}\hfill
\begin{subfigure}{.48\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/lambda_trade_crc.png}
\caption{High $\lambda$ considers the full past to produce low-bias
high-variance estimators, low $\lambda$ discounts the past. First
order
gradients are unaffected.}
\label{fig:toy_lambda}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Trading off bias and variance with $\tau$ and $\lambda$ in a small
MDP.}
\label{fig:tau_lambda}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Meta reinforcement learning with MAML and Loaded DiCE}
We now apply our new family of estimators to a pair of more challenging
meta-reinforcement-learning problems in continuous control, following the work
of \citet{finn2017model}.
The aim of their Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning (MAML) is to learn a good
initialisation of a neural network policy, such that with a single (or small
number of) policy gradient updates on a batch of training episodes, the policy
achieves good performance on a task sampled from some distribution.
Then, in meta-testing, the policy should be able to adapt to a new task from the same distribution.
MAML is theoretically sound, but the original implementation neglected the
higher order dependencies induced by the RL setting
\citep{rothfuss2018promp,stadie2018some}.
The approach is to sample a number of tasks and adapt the policy in an inner-loop policy-gradient optimisation step.
Then, in the outer loop, the initial parameters are updated so as to maximise the returns of the post-adaptation policies.
The outer loop optimisation depends on the post-adaptation parameters, which depend on the gradients estimated in the inner loop.
As a result, there are important higher-order terms in the outer loop optimisation.
Using the correct estimator for the inner loop optimisation can therefore
impact the efficiency of the overall meta-training procedure as well as the
quality of the final solution.
For the inner-loop optimisation, we use our novel objective, with a range of
values for $\tau$ and $\lambda$.
We sweep a range of $\tau$ with fixed $\lambda = 0$, and then sweep a range of
$\lambda$ using the best value found for $\tau$.
For the outer-loop optimisation, we use a vanilla policy gradient with a baseline.
The outer-loop could use any other gradient-based policy optimisation algorithm, but we choose a simple version to isolate, to some extent, the impact of the inner loop estimator.
Figure \ref{fig:maml} shows our results.
In the CheetahDir task, if $\tau$ is too high the estimator is too high variance and performance is bad.
$\tau$ is less impactful in the CheetahVel task.
We note that in these tasks, episodes are short, $\gamma$ is low, and the value
functions are simple linear functions fit to each batch of data as in
\cite{finn2017model}. These factors which would all favor a high
$\tau$.
With higher variance returns or better value functions, relying more heavily on
the learned value function (by using a lower $\tau$) may be effective.
In both environments, $\lambda=1.0$ leads to too high variance.
The unbiased ($\lambda=1.0$) version of our objective may also be more valuable
when value functions are better and can be used more effectively to mitigate
variance.
In CheetahVel, noticeably faster learning is achieved with a low but non-zero $\lambda$.
The analysis of \citet{furmston2016approximate} indicates that the magnitude of the higher-order terms discounted by $\lambda$ will in many cases become small as the policy approaches a local optimum.
This is consistent with our empirical finding here that non-zero $\lambda$ may learn faster but plateaus at a similar level.
We conclude that Loaded DiCE~provides meaningful control of the higher-order estimator with significant impact on a realistic use-case.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/maml_all_crc.png}
\caption{Trading off bias and variance with $\tau$ and $\lambda$ in
meta-reinforcement-learning. We report the mean and standard error
(over
[\#runs]) of the post-adaptation returns, smoothed with a moving
average
over 10 outer-loop optimisations.}
\label{fig:maml}
\end{figure}
\section{Introduction}
In stochastic settings, such as reinforcement learning (RL), it is often impossible to compute the derivative of our objectives, because they depend on an unknown or intractable distribution (such as the transition function of an RL environment).
In these cases, gradient-based optimisation is only possible through the use of stochastic gradient estimators.
Great successes in these domains have been found by building estimators of first-order derivatives which are amenable to automatic differentiation, and using them to optimise the parameters of deep neural networks \citep{franccois2018introduction}.
Nonetheless, for a number of exciting applications, first-order derivatives are insufficient.
Meta-learning and multi-agent learning often involve differentiating through the learning step of a gradient-based learner \citep{finn2017model,stadie2018some,zintgraf2018caml,foerster2018learning}.
Higher-order optimisation methods can also improve sample efficiency \citep{furmston2016approximate}.
However, estimating these higher order derivatives correctly, with low variance, and easily in the context of automatic differentiation, has proven challenging.
\citet{foerster2018dice} propose tools for constructing estimators for any-order derivatives that are easy to use because they avoid the cumbersome manipulations otherwise required to account for the dependency of the gradient estimates on the distributions they are sampled from.
However, their formulation relies on pure Monte-Carlo estimates of the objective, introducing unacceptable variance in estimates of first- and higher-order derivatives and limiting the uptake of methods relying on these derivatives.
Meanwhile, great strides have been made in the development of estimators for first-order derivatives of stochastic objectives.
In reinforcement learning, the use of learned value functions as both critics and baselines has been extensively studied.
The trade-off between bias and variance in gradient estimators can be made explicit in mixed objectives that combine Monte-Carlo samples of the objective with learned value functions \citep{schulman2015high}.
These techniques create families of \emph{advantage estimators} that can be
used
to reduce variance and accelerate credit assignment in first-order
optimisation, but have not been applied in full generality to higher-order
derivatives.
In this work, we derive an objective that can be differentiated any number of times to produce correct estimators of higher-order derivatives in Stochastic Computation Graphs (SCGs) that have a Markov property, such as those found in RL and sequence modeling.
Unlike prior work, this objective is fully compatible with arbitrary choices of advantage estimators.
When using approximate value functions, this allows for explicit trade-offs
between bias and variance in any-order derivative estimates to be made using
known techniques (or using any future advantage estimation methods designed for
first-order derivatives).
Furthermore, we propose a method for trading off bias and variance of higher order derivatives by discounting the impact of more distant causal dependencies.
Empirically, we first use small random MDPs that admit analytic solutions to
show that our estimator is unbiased and low variance when using a perfect value
function, and that bias and variance may be flexibly traded off using two
hyperparameters.
We further study our objective in more challenging meta-reinforcement-learning
problems for simulated continuous control, and show the impact of various
parameter choices on training.
Demonstration code is available at
\url{https://github.com/oxwhirl/loaded-dice}.
Only a handful of additional lines of code are needed to implement our
objective in any existing codebase that uses higher-order derivatives for RL.
\section{Background}
\subsection{Gradient estimators}
We are commonly faced with objectives that have the form of an expectation over
random variables.
In order to calculate the gradient of the expectation with respect to parameters of interest, we must often employ gradient estimators, because the gradient cannot be computed exactly.
For example, in reinforcement learning the environment dynamics are unknown and form a part of our objective, the expected returns.
The polyonymous ``likelihood ratio'', ``score function'', or ``REINFORCE'' estimator is given by
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\theta}\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}_{x}[f(x, \theta)] = \operatorname{\mathbb{E}}_{x}[f(x, \theta)\nabla_{\theta} \log p(x;\theta) + \nabla_{\theta} f(x, \theta)].
\end{equation}
The expectation on the RHS may now be estimated from Monte-Carlo samples drawn from $p(x; \theta)$.
Often $f$ is independent of $\theta$ and the second term is dropped.
If $f$ depends on $\theta$, but the random variable does not (or may be reparameterised to depend only deterministically on $\theta$) we may instead drop the first term.
See \citet{fu2006gradient} or \citet{mohamed2019monte} for a more comprehensive
review.
\subsection{Stochastic Computation Graphs and MDPs}
\label{sec:mdp_scg}
Stochastic computation graphs (SCGs) are directed acyclic graphs in which nodes are determinsitic or stochastic functions, and edges indicate functional dependencies \citep{schulman2015gradient}.
The gradient estimators described above may be used to estimate the gradients of the objective (the sum of cost nodes) with respect to parameters $\theta$.
\citet{schulman2015gradient} propose a \emph{surrogate loss}, a single objective that produces the desired gradient estimates under differentiation.
\citet{weber2019credit} apply more advanced first-order gradient estimators to SCGs.
They formalise Markov properties for SCGs that allow the most flexible and powerful of these estimators, originally developed in the context of reinforcement learning, to be applied.
We describe these estimators in the following subsection, but first define the
relevant subset of SCGs.
To keep the main body of this paper simple and highlight the most important known use case for our method, we adopt the notation of reinforcement learning rather than the more cumbersome notation of generic SCGs.
The graph in reinforcement learning describes a Markov Decision Process (MDP),
and begins with an initial state $s_0$ at time $t=0$.
At each timestep, an action $a_t$ is sampled from a stochastic policy $\pi_\theta$, parameterised by $\theta$, that maps states to actions.
This adds a stochastic node $a_t$ to the graph.
The state-action pair leads to a reward $r_t$, and a next state $s_{t+1}$, from which the process continues.
A simple MDP graph is shown in Figure \ref{fig:mdp_scg}.
In the figure, as in many problems, the reward conditions only on the state rather than the state and action.
We consider episodic problems that terminate after $T$ steps, although all of our results may be extended to the non-terminating case.
The (discounted) rewards are the cost nodes of this graph, leading to the familiar reinforcement learning objective of an expected discounted sum of rewards: $J = \mathbb{E}[\sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t r_t]$, where the expectation is taken with respect to the policy as well as the unknown transition dynamics of the underlying MDP.
A generalisation of our results holds for a slightly more general class of SCGs as well, whose objective is still a sum of rewards over time.
We may have any number of stochastic and deterministic nodes $\mathcal{X}_t$ corresponding to each timestep $t$.
However, these nodes may only influence the future rewards through their influence on the next timestep.
More formally, this Markov property states that for any node $w$ such that
there exists a directed path from $w$ to any $r_{t'}, t' \ge t$ not blocked by
$\mathcal{X}_t$, none of the descendants of $w$ are in $\mathcal{X}_t$
(definition 6 of \citet{weber2019credit}).
This class of SCGs can capture a broad class of MDP-like models, such as those in Figure \ref{fig:mdp_scg}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figures/scg_mdps_bold.png}
\caption{Some example SCGs that support our new objective. From left to right (a) Vanilla MDP (b) MDP with stochastic latent goal variable $g$ (c) POMDP}
\label{fig:mdp_scg}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Gradient estimators with advantages}
A value function for a set of nodes in an SCG is the expectation of the objective over the other stochastic variables (excluding that set of nodes).
These can reduce variance by serving as control variates (``baselines''), or as critics that also condition on the sampled values taken by the corresponding stochastic nodes (i.e. the sampled actions).
The difference of the critic and baseline value functions is known as the advantage, which replaces sampled costs in the gradient estimator.
Baseline value functions only affect the variance of gradient estimators \citep{weaver2001optimal}.
However, using learned, imperfect critic value functions results in biased gradient estimators.
We may trade off bias and variance by using different mixtures of sampled costs (unbiased, high variance) and learned critic value functions (biased, low variance).
This choice of advantage estimator and its hyperparameters can be used to tune the bias and variance of the resulting gradient estimator to suit the problem at hand.
There are many ways to model the advantage function in RL.
A popular and simple family of advantage estimators is proposed by \cite{schulman2015high}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gae}
A^{GAE(\gamma, \tau)} (s_t, a_t) = \sum_{t'=t}^\infty (\gamma \tau)^{t' - t} \big(r_{t'} + \gamma \hat{V}(s_{t'+1}) - \hat{V}(s_{t'})\big).
\end{equation}
The parameter $\tau$ trades off bias and variance: when $\tau=1$, $A$ is formed only of sampled rewards and is unbiased, but high variance; when $\tau=0$, $A^{GAE}$ uses only the next sampled reward $r_t$ and relies heavily on the estimated value function $\hat{V}$, reducing variance at the cost of bias.
\subsection{Higher order estimators}
To construct higher order gradient estimators, we may recursively apply the above techniques, treating gradient estimates as objectives in a new SCG.
\citet{foerster2018dice} note several shortcomings of the surrogate loss approach of \citet{schulman2015gradient} for higher-order derivatives.
The surrogate loss cannot itself be differentiated again to produce correct higher-order estimators.
Even estimates produced using the surrogate loss cannot be treated as objectives in a new SCG, because the surrogate loss severs dependencies of the sampled costs on the sampling distribution.
To address this, \cite{foerster2018dice} introduce DiCE, a single objective that may be differentiated repeatedly (using automatic differentiation) to produce unbiased estimators of derivatives of any order.
The DiCE objective for reinforcement learning is given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:dice_rl}
J_{\scriptsize \epsdice{2}} &= \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) r_t,
\end{align}
where $a_{\le t}$ indicates the set of stochastic nodes (i.e. actions)
occurring at timestep $t$ or earlier.
$\epsdice{2}$ is a special operator that acts on a set of stochastic nodes $\mathcal{W}$.
$\epsdice{2}(\cdot)$ always \emph{evaluates} to 1, but has a special behaviour under differentiation:
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{\theta} \epsdice{2}(\mathcal{W})
= \epsdice{2}(\mathcal{W}) \sum_{w \in \mathcal{W}} \nabla_{\theta}
\log p(w; \theta)
\end{equation}
This operator in effect automates the likelihood-ratio trick for
differentiation of expectations, while maintaining dependencies such that the
same trick will be applied when computing higher order derivatives.
For notational convenience in our later derivation, we extend the definition of
$\epsdice{2}$ slightly by defining its operation on the empty set:
$\epsdice{2}(\varnothing) = 1$, so it has a zero derivative.
The original version of DiCE has two critical drawbacks compared to the state-of-the-art methods described above for estimating first-order derivatives of stochastic objectives.
First, it has no mechanism for using baselines to reduce the variance of estimators of higher order derivatives.
\citet{mao2018better}, and \citet{liu2019taming} (subsequently but
independently) suggest the
same partial solution for this problem, but neither provide proof of
unbiasedness of
their estimator beyond second order.
Second, DiCE (and the estimator of \cite{mao2018better} and
\cite{liu2019taming}) are formulated in a way that requires the use of
Monte-Carlo sampled costs.
Without a form that permits the use of critic value functions, there is no way to make use of the full range of possible advantage estimators.
In an exact calculation of higher-order derivative estimators, the dependence of a given reward on all previous actions leads to nested sums over previous timesteps.
These terms tend to have high variance when estimated from data, and become small in the vicinity of local optima, as noted by \citet{furmston2016approximate}.
\citet{rothfuss2018promp} use this observation to propose a simplified version of the DiCE objective dropping these dependencies:
\begin{equation}
J_{LVC} = \sum_{t=0}^T \epsdice{2}(a_t) R_t
\end{equation}
This estimator is biased for higher than first-order derivatives, and \citet{rothfuss2018promp} do not derive a correct unbiased estimator for all orders, make use of advantage estimation in this objective, or extend its applicability beyond meta-learning in the style of MAML \citep{finn2017model}.
In the next section, we introduce a new objective which may make use of the critic as well as baseline value functions, and thereby allows the bias and variance of any-order derivatives to be traded off through the choice of an advantage estimator.
Furthermore, we introduce a discounting of past dependencies that allows a smooth trade-off of bias and variance due to the high-variance terms identified by \citet{furmston2016approximate}.
\section{Method}
The DiCE objective is cast as a sum over rewards, with the dependencies of the
reward node $r_t$ on its stochastic causes captured by $\epsdice{2}(a_{\le t})$.
To use critic value functions, on the other hand, we must use forward-looking sums over returns.
This is possible if the graph maintains the Markov property defined above in Section \ref{sec:mdp_scg} with respect to its objective, so as to permit a sequential decomposition of the cost nodes, i.e., rewards $r_t$, and their stochastic causes influenced by $\theta$, i.e., the actions $a_t$.
We begin with the DiCE objective for a discounted sum of rewards given in (\ref{eq:dice_rl}), where our true objective is the expected discounted sum of rewards in trajectories drawn from a policy $\pi_\theta$.
We define, as is typical in RL, the return $R_t = \sum_{t'=t}^T \gamma^{t'-t} r_{t'}$.
Now we have $r_t = R_t - \gamma R_{t+1}$, so:
\begin{align*}
J_{\scriptsize \epsdice{2}} &= \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) (R_t - \gamma R_{t+1}) \\
&= \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) R_t - \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^{t+1} \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) R_{t+1}
\end{align*}
Now we simply take a change of variables $t' = t + 1$ in the second term, relabeling the dummy variable immediately back to $t$:
\begin{align}
J_{\scriptsize \epsdice{2}} =& \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) R_t - \sum_{t=1}^{T+1} \gamma^{t} \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t-1}) R_{t} \nonumber \\
=& \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) R_t - \sum_{t=1}^{T+1} \gamma^{t} \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) R_{t} \nonumber \\
=& \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) R_t - \sum_{t=0}^{T} \gamma^{t} \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) R_{t} \nonumber \\
&\; + \gamma^{0} \epsdice{2}(a_{< 0}) R_{0}
- \gamma^{T+1} \epsdice{2}(a_{< T+1}) R_{T+1} \nonumber \\
=& R_0 + \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \bigg( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \bigg) R_{t}.
\end{align}
In the last line we have used that $\epsdice{2}(a_{<0}) = \epsdice{2}(\varnothing) = 1$, and that $R_{T+1} = 0$.
Now we have an objective formulated in terms of forwards-looking returns, that captures the dependencies on the sampling distribution through $\epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t})$.
Since this is just a re-expression of the DiCE objective (applied to a restricted class of SCGs with the requisite Markov property), we are still guaranteed that its derivatives will be unbiased estimators of the derivatives of our true objective, up to any order.
The proof for the original DiCE objective is given by \citet{foerster2018dice}.
Because $R_0$ carries no derivatives, we will omit it from the following estimators for clarity.
Including it, however, ensures the convenient property that the objective still evaluates in expectation to the true return (as $\epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t})$ always evaluates to zero).
We can now introduce value functions.
$R_t$ is conditionally independent of each of $\epsdice{2}(a_{\le t})$ and $\epsdice{2}(a_{< t})$ (as well as all their derivatives), conditioned on $a_{\le t}, s_{\le t}$.
Because of the Markov property of our SCG, this is equivalent to conditional independence given $s_t, a_t$.
If we consider the expectation of our new form of $J_{\scriptsize \epsdice{2}}$, we can use this conditional independence to push the expectation over $a_{>t}, s_{>t}$ onto $R_t$.
For a complete derivation please see the Supplementary Material.
This is simply a critic value function, defined by $Q(s_t, a_t) = \mathbb{E}_{\pi}[ R_{t} | s_t, a_t]$:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}_{\pi} [J_{\scriptsize \epsdice{2}}]
=& \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \bigg[ \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \bigg( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \bigg) \mathbb{E}[ R_{t} | s_t, a_t] \bigg] \nonumber \\
=& \mathbb{E}_{\pi} \bigg[ \sum_{t=0}^T \gamma^t \bigg( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \bigg) Q(s_t, a_t) \bigg]
\end{align}
Furthermore, a baseline that does not depend on $a_{\ge t}$ or $s_{>t}$ does not change the expectation of the estimator, as shown by the standard derivation reproduced in \citet{schulman2015gradient}.
In reinforcement learning, it is common to use the expected state value $V(s_t) = \mathbb{E}_{a_t}[Q(s_t, a_t)]$ as an approximation of the optimal baseline.
The estimator may now use $A(s_t, a_t) = Q(s_t, a_t) - V(s_t)$ in place of $R_t$, further reducing its variance.
We have now derived an estimator in terms of an advantage $A(s_t, a_t)$ that recovers unbiased estimates of derivatives of \emph{any order}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:new_exact}
J_\Diamond = \sum_t \gamma^t \bigg( \epsdice{2}(a_{\le t}) - \epsdice{2}(a_{< t}) \bigg) A(s_t, a_t).
\end{equation}
In practice, it is common to omit $\gamma^t$, thus optimising the undiscounted returns, but still using discounted advantages as a variance-reduction tool.
See, e.g., the discussion in \cite{thomas2014bias}.
\subsection{Function approximation}
In practice, an estimate of the advantage must be made from limited data.
Inexact models of the critic value function (due to limited data, model class misspecification, or inefficient learning) introduce bias in the gradient estimators.
As in the work of \cite{schulman2015high}, we may use combinations of sampled costs and estimated values to form advantage estimators that trade off bias and variance.
However, thanks to our new estimator, which captures the full dependencies of the advantage on the sampling distribution, these trade-offs may be immediately applied to higher-order derivatives.
Approximate baseline value functions only affect the estimator variance.
Careful choice of this baseline may nonetheless be of great significance (e.g., by exploiting the factorisation of the policy \citep{foerster2018counterfactual}).
Our formulation of the objective extends such methods, as well as any future
advances in advantage estimation at first order, to higher order derivatives.
\subsection{Variance due to higher-order dependencies}
Now that we have the correct form for the unbiased estimator, which uses proper variance-reduction strategies for computing the advantage, we may also trade off the bias and variance in estimates of higher-order derivatives that arises due to the full history of causal dependencies.
In particular, we propose to set a discount factor $\lambda \in [0,1]$ on prior
dependencies that limits the horizon of the past actions that are accounted for
in the estimates of higher-order derivatives.
Similarly to the way the MDP discount factor $\gamma$ reduces variance by
constraining the horizon into the \emph{future} that must be considered,
$\lambda$ constrains how far into the \emph{past} we consider causal
dependencies that influence higher order derivatives.
First note that $\epsdice{2}$ acting on any set of stochastic nodes $\mathcal{W}$ decomposes as a product: $\epsdice{2}(\mathcal{W}) = \prod_{w \in \mathcal{W}} \epsdice{2}(w)$.
We now implement discounting by exponentially decaying past contributions:
\begin{equation}
J_\lambda = \sum_{t=0}^{T} \bigg( \prod_{t'=0}^t \epsdice{2}(a_{t'}) \lambda^{t - t'} - \prod_{t'=0}^{t-1} \epsdice{2}(a_{t'}) \lambda^{t - t'}) \bigg) A_t.
\end{equation}
This is our final objective, which we call ``Loaded DiCE".
The products over $\epsdice{2}(\cdot)$ may be computed in the log-space of the
action probabilities, transforming them into convenient and numerically stable
sums.
Algorithm \ref{alg:dice} shows how the objective may easily be computed from an episode.
\begin{algorithm}[th]
\caption{Compute Loaded DiCE~Objective}
\label{alg:dice}
\begin{algorithmic}
\State \Require {trajectory of states $s_t$, actions $a_t$, $t = 0 \dots
T$}
\State $J \gets 0$ \Comment{$J$ accumulates the final objective}
\State $w \gets 0$ \Comment{$w$ accumulates the $\lambda$-weighted stochastic dependencies}
\For{$t \gets 0$ to $T$}
\State {$w \gets \lambda w + \log(\pi(a_t | s_t))$} \Comment{$w$ has the dependencies including $a_t$}
\State {$v \gets w - \log(\pi(a_t | s_t))$} \Comment{$v$ has the dependencies excluding $a_t$}
\State {$\texttt{deps} \gets f(w) - f(v)$} \Comment{$f$ applies the $\epsdice{2}$ operator on the log-probabilities}
\State {$J \gets J + \texttt{deps} \cdot A(s_t, a_t)$} \Comment{The dependencies are weighted by the advantage $A(s_t,a_t)$}
\EndFor
\State \Return $J$
\\
\Function{$f$}{$x$}
\State \Return {$\exp(x - \texttt{stop\_gradient}(x))$}
\EndFunction
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
When $\lambda=0$, this estimator resembles $J_{LVC}$, although it makes use of advantages.
It may be low variance, but is biased regardless of the choice of advantage estimator.
When $\lambda=1$, we recover the estimator in (\ref{eq:new_exact}), which is unbiased if the advantage estimator is itself unbiased.
Intermediate values of $\lambda$ should be able to trade off bias and variance,
as we demonstrate empirically in Section \ref{sec:experiments}.
Our new form of objective allows us to use $\lambda$ to reduce the impact of
the high variance terms identified by \citet{furmston2016approximate} and
\citet{rothfuss2018promp} in a smooth way, rather than completely dropping
those terms.
\section{Conclusion}
In this work, we derived a theoretically sound objective which can apply general advantage functions to the estimation of any-order derivatives in reinforcement-learning type sequential problems.
In the context of function approximation, this objective unlocks the ability to trade off bias and variance in higher order derivatives.
Importantly, like the underlying DiCE objective, our single objective generates estimators for any-order derivatives under repeated automatic differentiation.
Further, we propose a simple method for discounting the impact of more distant causal dependencies on the estimation of higher order derivatives, which allows another axis for the trade-off of bias and variance.
Empirically, we use small random MDPs to demonstrate the behaviour of the bias
and variance of higher-order derivative estimates, and further show its utility
in meta-reinforcement-learning.
We are excited for other applications in meta-learning, multi-agent learning
and higher-order optimisation which may be made possible using our new
objective.
In future work, we also wish to revisit our choice of $\lambda$-discounting,
which is a heuristic method to limit the impact of high-variance terms.
Further theoretical analysis may also help to identify contexts in which
higher-order dependencies are important for optimisation.
Finally, it may even be possible to meta-learn the hyperparameters $\tau$
and $\lambda$ themselves.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Maruan Al-Shedivat and Minqi Jiang for valuable discussions.
This work was supported by the UK EPSRC CDT in Autonomous Intelligent Machines
and Systems.
This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC)
under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme
(grant agreement number 637713).
\small
|
\section{Introduction}\label{section=introduction}
It is a historical and significant problem in extremal combinatorics to study the maximum of the sizes of subsets in a finite abelian group $G$ that does not contain a specified shape, such as a non-degenerate \textit{three-term arithmetic progression} (hereafter, we abbreviate it as a `$3$-AP'). In this paper, we consider that case where $G=\mathbb{F}_p^n$, where $p$ is a prime number. Inspired by the breakthrough by Croot--Lev--Pach \cite{CrootLevPach}, Ellenberg--Gijswijt \cite{EllenbergGijswijt} obtained an upper bound of the size of a subset $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$, $p\geq 3$, that is non-degenerate $3$-AP-free, of the form $\#A\leq (cp)^n$. Here $c<1$ is a universal constant; see \cite[Subsection~4.3]{BCCGNSU} for more details on $c$. A (possibly degenerate) $3$-AP $(x_1,x_2,x_3)$ in this order may be seen as a solution of the linear equation $x_1-2x_2+x_3=0$. In this paper, extending this framework to that of a (finite) \textit{system $\mathcal{T}$ of linear equations} (with each equation having zero-sum of the coefficients); more precisely, we study the maximum of the sizes of $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that does not admit a `non-trivial' solution of $\mathcal{T}$. A motivating example is the system representing $4$-APs:
\begin{equation*}\label{4AP}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-2x_2+x_3&=0,\\
x_2-2x_3+x_4&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_{4\mathrm{AP}}$}
\end{equation*}
However, as known to experts, at present the \textit{slice rank method} of Tao \cite{Tao} does not provide a non-trivial upper bound in this case. In this paper, we succeed in obtaining non-trivial bounds for the maximum of the sizes with respect to another system of equations, whose solution represents an interesting configuration from geometric aspects.
\begin{theorem}[Avoiding a `$\mathrm{W}$ shape', outlined version]\label{theorem=Wshape}
Let $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$ be the following system of linear equations in $5$ variables:
\begin{equation*}\label{SW}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4&=0,\\
x_1-2x_3+x_5&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$}
\end{equation*}
Then, there exist universal constants $0<c_1<c_2<1$ such that for every prime $p\geq 3$, the following holds: For $n\in \mathbb{N}$ sufficiently large depending on $p$, the maximum $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathrm{W},p}(n)$ of subsets $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that do not admit a solution $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ of \eqref{SW} $\mathrm{consisting}$ $\mathrm{of}$ $\mathrm{five}$ $\mathrm{distinct}$ $\mathrm{points}$ satisfies that
\[
(c_1p)^n\leq \mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathrm{W},p}(n) \leq (c_2p)^n.
\]
\end{theorem}
For sufficiently large $p$, we have that $0.5\leq c_1 <c_2\leq 0.985$; see
Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape} for a more precise form. Geometrically, the solution $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ of the system \eqref{SW} is the combination shape of a `parallelogram $(x_1,x_2,x_4,x_3)$' and a `$3$-AP $(x_1,x_3,x_5)$'; it may be regarded as a `\textit{$\mathrm{W}$ shape}'. See figure~\ref{fig5}. (In this paper, we will make a distinction between a system of linear equations with coefficients in $\mathbb{F}_p$ and that with coefficients in $\mathbb{Z}$; for this reason, strictly speaking, we should use $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ for the system in Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape} instead of $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$. We will do it from the next section. See Section~\ref{section=result} for more details.)
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5.0cm]{./fig.5}
\caption{An $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-shape}\label{fig5}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The trivial upper bound of $\#A$ above is $\#\mathbb{F}_p^n=p^n$. The estimate from above in Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape} shows that for a fixed prime $p\geq 3$, $\frac{\#A}{\#\mathbb{F}_p^n}$ tends to $0$ \textit{exponentially fast} as $n\to \infty$.
Note that there are two possible ways to formulate the notion of being `\textit{non-trivial}' for a solution of a system $\mathcal{T}$; see Definition~\ref{definition=Erdos} for more details.
\begin{itemize}
\item Regard a solution consisting of at least two points as a `non-trivial' one; we say that $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ is \textit{strongly $\mathcal{T}$-free} if $A$ does not admit a non-trivial solution in this sense.
\item Regard a solution consisting of \textit{distinct} points as a `non-trivial' one; we say that $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ is \textit{weakly $\mathcal{T}$-free} if $A$ does not admit a non-trivial solution in that sense.
\end{itemize}
Tao's slice rank method, which reformulates the work of \cite{CrootLevPach} and \cite{EllenbergGijswijt}, applies to the problem of bounding the size of \textit{strongly} $\mathcal{T}$-free sets. However, it is trivial to bound the size of strongly $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$-free sets in $\mathbb{F}_p^n$. Indeed, if $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ admits distinct two points $a,b\in A$, then $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)=(a,b,a,b,a)$ is a solution violating strong $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$-freeness; it gives that $\#A\leq 1$. On the other hand, if we switch from strong freeness to \textit{weak} freeness, then it becomes a non-trivial problem to study the maximum of the sizes of $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$-free subsets in $\mathbb{F}_p^n$, as Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape} indicates. This example exhibits significance of estimating the maximum of the sizes of \textit{weakly} $\mathcal{T}$-free subsets in $\mathbb{F}_p^n$ for a system $\mathcal{T}$; in this formulation, the slice rank method does \textit{not} immediately apply in general. Note that for the system of \eqref{4AP}, strong freeness and weak freeness are equivalent; the difference described above between these two notions is invisible if we only discuss $k$-APs.
Quite recently, Sauermann \cite{Sauermann} has provided a considerably improved upper bound of the size of a subset $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that is \textit{weakly} free with respect to the equation in $p$ variables $x_1+x_2+\cdots +x_p=0$ with coefficients in $\mathbb{F}_p$. See Section~\ref{section=Wshape} for more details. The proof of the upper bound in the assertions in Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape} will be established in the following two steps.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[Step~$1$.] For a system $\mathcal{T}$ of linear equations, obtain an upper bound, in the \textit{multicolored version}, of the size of strongly $\mathcal{T}$-free set; see Corollary~\ref{mcorollary=multicolor} and Definition~\ref{definition=multicolored}.
\item[Step~$2$.] Adapt the argument of Sauermann and deduce the desired upper bound of the size of a \textit{weakly} $\mathcal{T}$-free set from the estimate obtained in Step~$1$.
\end{enumerate}
There is a difficulty in applying the argument in \cite{Sauermann} to the case of our system $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$: When we try to modify one of the key lemmas \cite[Lemma~3.1]{Sauermann} to our case, Lemma~\ref{lemma=extendability}, it is \textit{impossible} to do so in one case. This is exactly the case where the degenerate solution of \eqref{SW} is of the form $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)=(a,b,a,b,a)$ with $a\ne b$, which appeared above. It occurs because of lack of the full symmetry of the coefficients of the system of equations; it may be seen as a new phenomenon compared with the original case of \cite{Sauermann}. See also Remark~\ref{remark=difference} and Problem~\ref{problem=Sauermann}.
The estimate in Step~$1$ above may be done for a general system of linear equations (with each equation having zero-sum of the coefficients). The proof of the lower bound in the assertions of Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape} can be extended to a system that admits a sequence of `\textit{dominant reductions}' that terminates with the empty system of equations in one variable. The main results in the present paper consist of the following three parts.
\begin{enumerate}[$(i)$]
\item $[$Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank} and Corollary~\ref{mcorollary=multicolor}$]$ For a system $\mathcal{T}$ in $r$ variables of $L$ linear equations with coefficients in $\mathbb{F}_p$, we define parameters $(r_1,r_2,L)$, where $r_1+r_2=r$. We obtain a non-trivial upper bound of the size of a subset $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that is strongly $\mathcal{T}$-free, provided that the parameters $(r_1,r_2,L)$ satisfy `inequality \eqref{bigstar}', which is stated in Section~\ref{section=result}. The proofs here are done by slice rank method.
\item $[$Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}, Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominantsharp} and Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=dominant}$]$ We define a notion of being \textit{dominant} for a system $\mathcal{S}$ of linear equations with \textit{coefficient in $\mathbb{Z}$}. For a system $\mathcal{S}$ that admits a subsystem that is dominant and irreducible (see Definitions~\ref{definition=dominant} and \ref{definition=multiplicity}), we provide a lower bound of the maximum of the sizes of $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that is strongly/weakly $\mathcal{S}(p)$-free. Here, $\mathcal{S}(p)$ denotes the system of linear equations with coefficients in $\mathbb{F}_p$ obtained by $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reduction of $\mathcal{S}$. The proof is inspired by arguments by (Behrend \cite{Behrend} and) Alon \cite[Lemma~17, Corollary~18]{FoxPham}; it employs strict convexity of Euclidean norms (namely, that of the unit sphere in Euclidean spaces). Further, we define a `\textit{dominant reduction}' (Definition~\ref{definition=dominantreduction}), which is an operation on systems of linear equations with coefficients in $\mathbb{Z}$, and generalize the argument above.
\item $[$Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}$]$ As an application of $(i)$ (upper bound) and $(ii)$ (lower bound), we establish Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape}. We adapt an argument of Sauermann \cite{Sauermann} to have an upper bound of the size of $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that is \textit{weakly} `$\mathrm{W}$-shape'-free.
\end{enumerate}
See Section~\ref{section=result} for more details.
\section{Main results}\label{section=result}
Throughout the current paper, let $p$ be a prime number, $q$ be a prime power, and $\mathbb{F}_q$ denote the finite field of order $q$; we mainly use a prime field $\mathbb{F}_p$. Let $\mathbb{N}=\{1,2,\ldots \}$. We use the symbol $\#A$ for the size of a finite set $A$. For $k\in \mathbb{N}$, let $[k]:=\{1,2,\ldots ,k\}$. For a prime $p$, we call a linear equations with coefficients in $\mathbb{F}_p$ simply \textit{an $\mathbb{F}_p$-equation}; we call that with coefficients in $\mathbb{Z}$ simply \textit{a $\mathbb{Z}$-equation}. Unless otherwise stated, we use $a_i^{(l)}(\in \mathbb{F}_p)$ for coefficients of a system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations; we use the symbol $b_i^{(l)}(\in \mathbb{Z})$ for those of a system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. Similarly, we use $\mathcal{T}$ and $\mathcal{S}(p)$ for a system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations, $\mathcal{S}$ for that of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. We only consider systems of finitely many equations. Let $e=2.71828\ldots$ denote the base of the natural logarithm.
The main subject of the present paper is the maximum of the sizes, viewed as a function on the dimension $n$, of a subset $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that is strongly/weakly $\mathcal{T}$-free. Here $\mathcal{T}$ is a system of $L$ $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $r$ variables:
\begin{equation*}\label{T}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
a_1^{(1)}x_1+a_2^{(1)}x_2+a_3^{(1)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(1)}x_r&=0,\\
a_1^{(2)}x_1+a_2^{(2)}x_2+a_3^{(2)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(2)}x_r&=0,\\
\vdots\qquad\qquad \qquad\\
a_1^{(L)}x_1+a_2^{(L)}x_2+a_3^{(L)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(L)}x_r&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{T}$}
\end{equation*}
Here we say that an $\mathbb{F}_p$-equation $a_1x_1+a_2x_2+a_3x_3+\cdots +a_rx_r=0$ is \textit{balanced} if $\sum_{i=1}^ra_i=0$. We say that $\mathcal{T}$ is \textit{balanced} if every equation belonging to $\mathcal{T}$ is balanced. We define the notions of \textit{balanced} $\mathbb{Z}$-equations/systems of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations in the same manner as one above. In this paper, we assume that systems of $\mathbb{F}_p$- or $\mathbb{Z}$-equations are balanced. We will explicitly write this assumption in the statements of theorems, but even in other parts, we always assume it.
\begin{definition}[Semishapes and shapes]\label{definition=shape}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a balanced system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations. Let $n\in \mathbb{N}$ and $A_1,A_2,\ldots ,A_r\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$.
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item We say that $(x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_r)\in A_1\times A_2\times \cdots \times A_r$ is a $\mathcal{T}$-\textit{semishape} in $A_1\times A_2\times \cdots \times A_r$ if it is a solution to $\mathcal{T}$.
\item We say that a $\mathcal{T}$-semishape $(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_r)$ is \textit{non-degenerate} if $x_1,\ldots,x_r$ are distinct. A non-degenerate $\mathcal{T}$-semishape is called a \textit{$\mathcal{T}$-shape}.
\end{enumerate}
If $A_1=A_2=\cdots =A_r=A$, then we call a $\mathcal{T}$-(semi)shape in $A_1\times \cdots \times A_r$ that in $A$.
\end{definition}
For each $k\geq 3$, we use the terminology of \textit{non-degenerate $k$-APs} in the sense above.
Since the system $\mathcal{T}$ is balanced, for $(\emptyset \ne )A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ and for $x\in A$, $(x,x,\ldots,x)$ is always a $\mathcal{T}$-semishape in $A$; we call it a \textit{singleton semishape}.
\begin{definition}[Strong $\mathcal{T}$-freeness and weak $\mathcal{T}$-freeness]\label{definition=Erdos}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a balanced system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations. Let $n\in \mathbb{N}$.
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item We say that $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ is \textit{strongly $\mathcal{T}$-free} if $\mathcal{T}$-semishapes in $A$ are all singletons. We define $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)\in \mathbb{N}$ by
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n):=\max\{\#A:\ A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n,\ \textrm{$A$ is strongly $\mathcal{T}$-free}\}.
\]
\item We say that $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ is \textit{weakly $\mathcal{T}$-free} if $A$ admits no $\mathcal{T}$-shape. We define $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)\in \mathbb{N}$ by
\[
\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}}(n):=\max\{\#A:\ A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n,\ \textrm{$A$ is weakly $\mathcal{T}$-free} \}.
\]
\end{enumerate}
For a balanced system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations
\begin{equation*}\label{S}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
b_1^{(1)}x_1+b_2^{(1)}x_2+b_3^{(1)}x_3+\cdots +b_r^{(1)}x_r&=0,\\
b_1^{(2)}x_1+b_2^{(2)}x_2+b_3^{(2)}x_3+\cdots +b_r^{(2)}x_r&=0,\\
\vdots\qquad\qquad \qquad\\
b_1^{(L)}x_1+b_2^{(L)}x_2+b_3^{(L)}x_3+\cdots +b_r^{(L)}x_r&=0,
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}$}
\end{equation*}
we construct, for each prime $p$, a system $\mathcal{S}(p)$ of \textit{$\mathbb{F}_p$-equations} by $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reduction of $\mathcal{S}$. We define $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$ and $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$ respectively by
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p):=\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}(p)}(n),\quad \mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p):=\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}(p)}(n).
\]
\end{definition}
As we mentioned in the Introduction, we distinguish $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations and $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. This is because the dominant property, defined in Definition~\ref{definition=dominant}, only makes sense for $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. We use the terminology of solutions, not semishapes, to indicate solutions of a system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations.
To explain the results mentioned in $(i)$ in the Introduction, we define the concept of a \textit{multiplicity} of a variable in a system of equations.
We also need to define \emph{irreducible} systems to state the results
mentioned in $(ii)$ in the Introduction.
To this end we introduce a hypergraph associated with the system;
see also Example~\ref{example=irreducible}.
\begin{definition}[Hypergraph associated with $\mathcal{T}$, multiplicities, simple variables]\label{definition=multiplicity}
Let \eqref{T} be a balanced system of $L$ $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $r$ variables
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
a_1^{(1)}x_1+a_2^{(1)}x_2+a_3^{(1)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(1)}x_r&=0,\\
a_1^{(2)}x_1+a_2^{(2)}x_2+a_3^{(2)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(2)}x_r&=0,\\
\vdots\qquad\qquad \qquad\\
a_1^{(L)}x_1+a_2^{(L)}x_2+a_3^{(L)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(L)}x_r&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation*}
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item We define a \textit{hypergraph} (multi-hypergraph) $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}=(J,H)=(J_{\mathcal{T}},H_{\mathcal{T}})$ associated with $\mathcal{T}$ in the following manner: For each $l\in [L]$, set an edge $e_l:=\{i\in [r]:a_i^{(l)}\ne 0\}$. Define the multiset of edges as $H=H_{\mathcal{T}}=\{e_l:l\in [L]\}$. Set the set of vertices $J=J_{\mathcal{T}}$ as $J:=\bigcup_{l\in [L]}e_l$.
\item We say that the system $\mathcal{T}$ is \textit{irreducible} if the hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}=(J,H)$ satisfies $J=[r]$ and that it is connected. Here we say that $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}$ is \textit{connected} if for every $\{i,j\}\in \binom{J}{2}$, there exists a sequence of vertices $i=v_1,v_2,\ldots ,v_k=j$ such that for each $k'\in [k-1]$, there exists $l\in [L]$ with $\{v_{k'},v_{k'+1}\}\subseteq e_l$.
\item Define the \textit{multiplicity} $m_i$ of a variable $x_i$, $i\in [r]$, in $\mathcal{T}$ by
\[
m_i:=\#\{l\in [L]:i\in e_l\}\quad (=\#\{l\in [L]: a_i^{(l)}\ne 0\});
\]
in other words, $m_i$ is the degree of vertex
$i\in J$ in the (multi-)hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}$.
We say that a variable $x_i$ is \textit{simple} if $m_i=1$; otherwise, $x_i$ is said to be \textit{non-simple}.
\item Define the following two parameters for $\mathcal{T}$:
\[
r_1:=\#\{i\in [r]: m_i=1\},\quad
r_2:=\#\{i\in [r]: m_i\geq 2\}.
\]
Namely, $r_1$ is the number of simple variables; $r_2$ is the number of variables with multuiplicity at least $2$.
\item The \textit{maximal multiplicity} $m_{\mathcal{T}}$ of $\mathcal{T}$ is defined as $m_{\mathcal{T}}:=\max\{m_i:i\in [r]\}$; of course, it is the maximum degree of the (multi-)hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We usually assume that our balanced system $\mathcal{T}$ is in addition irreducible. In that case, we have that $r_2$ equals the number of non-simple variables, and that $r_1+r_2=r$.
\begin{remark}
For a system $\mathcal{S}$ of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations, we define the hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}}$, irreducibility, the parameters $r_1$ and $r_2$, If a prime is strictly bigger than the maximum of the absolute values of the coefficients in $\mathcal{S}$, then these give exactly the same pieces of information as those associated with the system $\mathcal{S}(p)$ constructed by $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reduction.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}\label{example=irreducible}
Consider the following system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations in $9$ variables:
\begin{equation*}\label{S1}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1+x_2-x_3-x_4 &=0,\\
x_5+x_6-2x_7&=0,\\
x_5+x_7+x_8-3x_9&=0,\\
x_4-2x_5+x_8&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_1$}
\end{equation*}
Then the hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}_1}=(J_{\mathcal{S}_1},H_{\mathcal{S}_1})$ is the
following: $J_{\mathcal{S}_1}=[9]$, and $H_{\mathcal{S}_1}$ is the (multi)set $\{e_1,e_2,e_3,e_4\}$,
where $e_1=\{1,2,3,4\}$, $e_2=\{5,6,7\}$, $e_3=\{5,7,8,9\}$ and $e_4=\{4,5,8\}$.
The simple variables of $\mathcal{S}$ are $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_6,x_9$, and the parameters for $\mathcal{S}_1$ are $(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{S}_1})=(5,4,4,3)$. (Indeed, $5\in [9]$ is contained in $e_2$, $e_3$ and $e_4$.) Since $J_{\mathcal{S}_1}=[9]$ and
$\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}_1}$ is connected, $\mathcal{S}_1$ is irreducible. However, if we construct
a subsystem consisting of the first, second and third equations,
\begin{equation*}\label{S1'}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1+x_2-x_3-x_4 &=0,\\
x_5+x_6-2x_7&=0,\\
x_5+x_7+x_8-3x_9&=0,\\
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_1'$}
\end{equation*}
then this $\mathcal{S}_1'$ is no longer irreducible. Indeed, despite that $J_{\mathcal{S}_1'}=[9]$,
the connected components of $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}_1'}$ consist of $\{1,2,3,4\}$ and
$\{5,6,7,8,9\}$.
Hence this system $\mathcal{S}_1'$ may be seen as the union of two `independent' systems, one is in
variables $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4$, and the other is in variables $x_5,x_6,x_7,x_8,x_9$.
Similarly, if we construct another subsystem $\mathcal{S}_1''$ by picking up the first, second and
fourth equations, then $\mathcal{S}_1''$ is not irreducible because $J_{\mathcal{S}_1''}=[8]$; the
variable $x_9$ is missing in the subsystem $\mathcal{S}_1''$.
These examples indicate that a subsystem of irreducible system is \textit{not necessarily} irreducible. Hence, although we usually assume that an original system of equations is irreducible, we may sometimes encounter with subsystems that are not irreducible. More precisely, in Definition~\ref{definition=dominantreduction}, we utilize the connected components of $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}'}$ for a subsystem $\mathcal{S}'$ of $\mathcal{S}$, which is \textit{not} irreducible in general.
\end{example}
\begin{mtheorem}[`Inequality $(\bigstar )$' and upper bounds of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)$]\label{mtheorem=slicerank}
Let $p$ be a prime. Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a balanced and irreducible system of $L$ $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $r$ variables. Let $r_1$ and $r_2$ be the parameters for $\mathcal{T}$ defined in Definition~$\ref{definition=multiplicity}$. Assume that the parameters $(r_1,r_2,L)$ satisfy the following \textit{`inequality'}
\[\label{bigstar}
\frac{1}{2}r_1+\frac{1}{e}r_2>L.\tag{$\bigstar$}
\]
Then, there exists $c_{\mathcal{T}}(p)<1$ such that for all $n\in \mathbb{N}$, it holds that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)\leq (c_{\mathcal{T}}(p)\cdot p)^n.
\]
Furthermore, we have that
\[
c_{\mathcal{T}}(p) \leq \frac{\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(p)}{p},
\]
where the constant $\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(p)$ is defined in Definition~$\ref{definition=Lambda}$$(2)$ below.\end{mtheorem}
See Proposition~\ref{proposition=slicerank} for more details of the upper bound of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)$. It may be possible to improve the coefficient $\frac{1}{e}$ in `inequality \eqref{bigstar}' if $m_{\mathcal{T}}$ is bounded from above. However, in the present paper, we do not perform a further optimization for each $m_{\mathcal{T}}$. For an irreducible system of a \textit{single} equation in $r$ variables, we always have that $(r_1,r_2,L)=(r,0,1)$. Hence, we may see `inequality \eqref{bigstar}' only after we consider a \textit{system} of equations.
The parameters associated with the system \eqref{4AP} in the Introduction, which characterizes a $4$-AP, are $(r_1,r_2,L)=(2,2,2)$; unfortunately, they do \textit{not} fulfill `inequality \eqref{bigstar}'. However, there exists other systems $\mathcal{S}$ of $\mathbb{Z}$-inequalities for which Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank} provides a non-trivial upper bound of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$; some of them appear naturally from a geometric point of view, For instance, the system \eqref{SW} representing a `$\mathrm{W}$ shape',
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4&=0,\\
x_1-2x_3+x_5&=0
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation*}
is such an example if we switch from $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)$ to $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)$; compare with arguments in the Introduction.
The following is the definition of the constant $\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m)}(d)$ which appears in Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}. See Lemma~\ref{lemma=sum} for properties of the constant $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,h}$, and see Proposition~\ref{proposition=slicerank} for the background of the constant $\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m)}(d)$.
\begin{definition}[The constants $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,h}$ and $\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m)}(d)$]\label{definition=Lambda}
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item Let $m \in \mathbb{N}$, $\alpha\in \mathbb{R}_{>0}$ and $h\in \mathbb{N}$. Define a function
\begin{align*}
G_{m,\alpha,h}\colon (0,1]\to \mathbb{R};\quad u\mapsto u^{-\alpha h}(1+u+u^2+u^3+\cdots +u^{mh}).
\end{align*}
Define $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,h}$ to be the minimum of $G_{m,\alpha,h}$ over $(0,1]$. If $\alpha=0$, then define $\Lambda_{m,0,h}:=1$.
\item Let $r_1,r_2\in \mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}$ with $(r_1,r_2)\ne (0,0)$ and let $L,m\in \mathbb{N}$. For $d\geq 2$, define the following constant $\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m)}(d)$ by
\[
\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m)}(d):=\inf\{\max\{\Lambda_{1,\alpha,d-1},\Lambda_{m,\beta,d-1}\}:\ r_1\alpha+r_2\beta=L,\ \alpha\geq 0,\ \beta\geq 0\}.
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
In the literature on the slice rank method, $\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{k},p-1}$ ($k\geq 3$) in our paper is sometimes expressed as $\Gamma_{p,k}$. In the study of a \textit{system} of equations, it seems that $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,h}$ is more suited; this is the reason why we switch the symbol `$\Gamma$' to a new symbol `$\Lambda$'.
\end{remark}
Next, we will state the result in point $(ii)$ as in the Introduction. The main result here, Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=dominant}, is somewhat technical (which involves `\textit{dominant reductions}' as in Definition~\ref{definition=dominantreduction}); hence we only exhibit the most basic case of it in this section. The notion of being `dominant' for a $\mathbb{Z}$-equation is defined as follows.
\begin{definition}[Dominant $\mathbb{Z}$-equations]\label{definition=dominant}
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item A balanced $\mathbb{Z}$-equation $b_1x_1+b_2x_2+b_3x_3+\cdots +b_rx_r=0$ is said to be \textit{dominant} if either of the following is satisfied:
\begin{itemize}
\item There exists $j\in [r]$ such that $b_j>0$ and that for all $i\in [r]\setminus \{j\}$, $b_i\leq 0$ holds,
\item there exists $j\in [r]$ such that $b_j<0$ and that for all $i\in [r]\setminus \{j\}$, $b_i\geq 0$ holds.
\end{itemize}
We call the index $j$ above a \textit{dominant index}, and $|b_j|(\in \mathbb{N})$ the \textit{dominant coefficient} of the equation.
\item We say a balanced system $\mathcal{S}$ of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations is \textit{dominant} if every equation belonging to $\mathcal{S}$ is dominant. For a balanced and dominant system $\mathcal{S}$, we define the \textit{dominant coefficient} of $\mathcal{S}$ as the maximum of the dominant coefficients of the equations in $\mathcal{S}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
A dominant index of a dominant equation is uniquely determined unless it is of the form $bx_i-bx_j=0$, where $b\in \mathbb{N}$ and $\{i,j\}\in \binom{[r]}{2}$. An equation of the form above may be seen as an `uninteresting' dominant equation. However, it might appear in the process of dominant reductions; compare with Lemma~\ref{lemma=dominantreduction}. The dominant coefficient of a dominant equation is uniquely determined. A \textit{subsystem} $\mathcal{S}'$ of a system $\mathcal{S}$ of equations in $r$ variables is a nonempty subcollection of equations. We say that a subsystem $\mathcal{S}'$ is \textit{irreducible} if $\mathcal{S}'$, viewed as a system of equations in the original $r$ variables, is irreducible; recall also Example~\ref{example=irreducible}. Note that irreduciblity of a system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations \textit{does not necessarily} pass to a subsystem, while the dominant property does.
\begin{theorem}[Lower bound of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$ for $\mathcal{S}$ admitting a dominant and irreducible subsystem]\label{theorem=dominant}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a balanced system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. Assume that there exists a subsystem $\mathcal{S}'$ of $\mathcal{S}$ that is dominant and irreducible. Fix such an $\mathcal{S}'$, and let $b_{\mathcal{S}'}$ be the dominant coefficient of $\mathcal{S}'$.
Then we have the following for every prime $p$ with $p> b_{\mathcal{S}'}$:``For every $\epsilon>0$, there exists $n_0=n_0(p,\epsilon)$ such that for all $n\geq n_0(p,\epsilon)$,
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)\geq \left((1-\epsilon)\left\lfloor \frac{p+b_{\mathcal{S}'}-1}{b_{\mathcal{S}'}}\right\rfloor\right)^n
\]
holds true.'' In particular, if moreover $b_{\mathcal{S}'}\geq 2$, then for sufficiently large $n$ depending on $p$, we have that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)\geq \left(\frac{p}{b_{\mathcal{S}'}}\right)^n.
\]
\end{theorem}
By introducing the operation `\textit{dominant reduction}' on balanced systems of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations, we obtain a refinement of Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}; see Definition~\ref{definition=dominantreduction} and Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=dominant} for more details. This operation of dominant reductions appears only after we broaden the framework from a single equation to a system of equations; compare with Problem~\ref{problem=dominant}.
Finally, we present the precise form of the upper bound part of the assertions in Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape}, which is the main part of $(iii)$ as in the Introduction.
\begin{mtheorem}[Avoiding a `$\mathrm{W}$ shape']\label{mtheorem=Wshape}
Let $p\geq 3$ be a prime. Let $\mathcal{T}_{\mathrm{W},p}$ be the following system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $5$ variables:
\begin{equation*}\label{TWp}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4&=0,\\
x_1-2x_3+x_5&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{T}_{\mathrm{W},p}$}
\end{equation*}
In other words, $\mathcal{T}_{\mathrm{W},p}=\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$. Then, for every $p\geq 3$, there exists $C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)<p$ such that for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$, it holds that
\[
\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}_{\mathrm{W},p}}(n)\leq 7\left(\sqrt{C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)\cdot p}\right)^n.
\]
Furthermore, we may have that $C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)=\tilde{C}_{(3,2,2,2)}(p)$, namely,
\[
C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)=\inf\{\max\{\Lambda_{1,\alpha,p-1},\Lambda_{2,\beta,p-1}\}:\ 3\alpha+2\beta=2,\ \alpha\geq 0,\ \beta\geq 0\}.
\]
\end{mtheorem}
The constant $C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ above satisfies for sufficiently large $p$,
\[
C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)<0.97p \quad (<(0.985)^2p);
\]
see Remark~\ref{remark=lessthanpW}. The conclusion of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape} is rephrased in terms of the system $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$ of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations as
\[
\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)\leq 7\left(\sqrt{C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)\cdot p}\right)^n.
\]
On the lower bound of $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)$, see Remark~\ref{remark=lowerW}.
\
\noindent
\textbf{Organization of the present paper:} Section~\ref{section=slicerankpreliminary} is for preliminaries on the slice rank method. In Section~\ref{section=slicerank}, we prove Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank} by showing a precise version of the expression of the upper bound, which appears in Proposition~\ref{proposition=slicerank}. We verify the multicolored version, Corollary~\ref{mcorollary=multicolor}, of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}; it will be employed in the proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}. In Section~\ref{section=dominant}, we first prove Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}. Then we proceed to the formulation of dominant reductions, and generalize Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant} to Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=dominant}. Section~\ref{section=Wshape} is devoted to the proofs of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape} and Theorem~\ref{theorem=Wshape}. In Section~\ref{section=problems}, we propose two further problems.
\section{Preliminaries on the slice rank method}\label{section=slicerankpreliminary}
Here we briefly recall basics on the slice rank method; see \cite{Tao} and \cite{BCCGNSU} for more details. In his blog post, Tao \cite{Tao} introduced the notion of \textit{slice ranks} as a generalization of that of tensor ranks. In this section, let $F$ be a field and $X$ be a non-empty finite set. Let $r\in \mathbb{N}$.
\begin{definition}[Slice rank, \cite{Tao}]\label{definition=slicerank}
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item A function $g\colon X^r\to F$ is called a \textit{slice function} if there exists an index $i\in [r]$ such that the function $g$ is factorized as $g(x_1,\ldots ,x_r)$$=g_1(x_i)g_2(x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_{i-1},x_{i+1},\ldots ,x_r)$, as the product of a one-variable function and a function in the rest $(r-1)$ variables.
\item The \textit{slice rank} $\mathrm{sr}(f)$ of a function $f\colon X^r\to F$ is the minimum of $R$ over all expressions $f=\sum_{k=1}^Rg_k$ of $f$ as the sum of slice functions $g_1,g_2,\ldots ,g_R$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
The tensor rank of $f$ above is the minimum of $R$ over all expressions of $f$ as the sum of functions $g_1,\ldots ,g_R$ of the from $g_i=g_{i,1}(x_1)g_{i,2}(x_2)\cdots g_{i,r}(x_r)$. It is not too difficult to verify that $\mathrm{sr}(f)\leq \#X$ in general; see \cite{Tao} and \cite[Subsection~4.1]{BCCGNSU}. Note that the slice rank is subadditive, that means for $f_1,f_2\colon X^r\to F$, it holds that $\mathrm{sr}(f_1+f_2)\leq \mathrm{sr}(f_1)+\mathrm{sr}(f_2)$.
The following proposition explains utility of the slice rank; this is a special case of \cite[Lemma~$1$]{Tao}.
\begin{proposition}[\cite{Tao}]\label{proposition=Tao}
Assume that $f\colon X^r\to F$ satisfies the condition
\[\label{ast}
f(x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_r)\ne 0 \quad \Longleftrightarrow \quad x_1=x_2=\cdots =x_r. \tag{$\ast$}
\]
Then we have that $\mathrm{sr}(f)=\#X$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Lemma~1]{Tao} or \cite[Lemma~4.7]{BCCGNSU}.
\end{proof}
Recall from Definition~\ref{definition=Lambda} the definition of $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,h}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma=sum}
Let $n\in \mathbb{N}$. Let $m\in \mathbb{N}$, $\alpha\in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}$ and $h\in \mathbb{N}$. Define the set of indices by
\[
\Theta_{m,\alpha,h}(n):=\{(\theta_1,\theta_2,\ldots ,\theta_n)\in \{0,1,\ldots ,mh\}^n: \theta_1+\theta_2+\cdots +\theta_n\leq \alpha hn\}.
\]
Then we have that $\#\Theta_{m,\alpha,h}(n)\leq (\Lambda_{m,\alpha,h})^n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $\alpha=0$, then the inequality holds trivially because $1\leq 1$. In what follows, we assume that $\alpha>0$.
Given an $n$-tuple $(\theta_1,\theta_2,\ldots ,\theta_n)$ as above, we set for $i\in \{0,1,\ldots ,mh\}$, $j_i:=\#\{l\in [n]:\theta_l=i\}$. Then there is a one-to-one correpsondence between an $(mh+1)$-tuple $(j_0,j_1,\ldots ,j_{mh})$ of non-negative integers with the following two conditions
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
j_0+j_1+j_2+j_3+\cdots+ j_{mh}&=n,\\
j_1+2j_2+3j_3+\cdots +(mh)j_{m}&\leq \alpha hn,
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation*}
and a $\textit{multi}$set $\{\theta_1,\theta_2,\ldots ,\theta_n\}$, where we care the multiplicities, but we do not take the orders into account. This correspondence provides us with the following equality which involves multinomial coefficients:
\[
\#\Theta_{m,\alpha,h}(n)=\sum_{(j_0,j_1,\ldots ,j_{mh})}\binom{n}{j_0,j_1,\ldots ,j_{mh}}.
\]
Here, in the sum on the right-hand side of the equality above, $(j_0,\ldots ,j_{mh})$ runs over all tuple of non-negative integers satisfying the two conditions above. We write $J_{m,\alpha,h}(n)$ for the set of all tuples of non-negative integers $(j_0,\ldots ,j_{mh})$ fulfilling these two conditions.
For $u\in (0,1]$, we have that
\begin{align*}
(G_{m,\alpha,h}(u))^n&=u^{-\alpha hn}(1+u+u^2+\cdots +u^{mh})^n\\
&=\sum_{(j_0,\ldots ,j_{mh})}\binom{n}{j_0,j_1,\ldots ,j_{mh}}u^{j_1+2j_2+\cdots +(mh)j_{mh}-\alpha hn}.
\end{align*}
Here in the sum on the very below side of the equalities above, the indices run over all non-negative integers with $j_0+j_1+\cdots+j_{mh}=n$. By removing indices with $j_1+2j_2+3j_3+\cdots +(mh)j_{mh}> \alpha hn$ from the sum above, we obtain that
\begin{align*}
(G_{m,\alpha,h}(u))^n\geq \sum_{(j_0,\ldots ,j_{mh})\in J_{m,\alpha,h}(n)}\binom{n}{j_0,j_1,\ldots ,j_{mh}}u^{j_1+2j_2+\cdots +(mh)j_{mh}-\alpha hn}.
\end{align*}
Since $u\in (0,1]$, for each term in the sum on the right-hand side of the inequality above, it holds that $u^{j_1+2j_2+\cdots +(mh) j_{mh}-\alpha hn}\geq 1$. Therefore, we have that for every $u\in (0,1]$,
\begin{align*}
(G_{m,\alpha,h}(u))^n&\geq \sum_{(j_0,\ldots ,j_{mh})\in J_{m,\alpha,h}(n)}\binom{n}{j_0,j_1,\ldots ,j_{mh}}\\
&=\# \Theta_{m,\alpha,h}(n).
\end{align*}
We obtain the conclusion by taking the minimum of $G_{m,\alpha,h}(u)$ over $u\in (0,1]$.
\end{proof}
The following lemma is the background of `inequality \eqref{bigstar}', which appears in Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}.
\begin{lemma}[Comparison between $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,d-1}$ and $d$]\label{lemma=lessthanp}
Let $d\geq 2$ be an integer.
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item Let $\alpha \in (0,\frac{1}{2})$. Then, we have
\[
\frac{\Lambda_{1,\alpha,d-1}}{d}<1.
\]
Furthermore, $\frac{1}{d}\Lambda_{1,\alpha,d-1}$ is decreasing in $d\geq 2$.
\item Let $\beta\in (0,\frac{1}{e}]$. Then, for every $m\in \mathbb{N}$, there exists $d_0(m,\beta)\geq 2$ such that for every $d\geq d_0(m,\beta)$, we have that
\[
\frac{\Lambda_{m,\beta,d-1}}{d}<\beta e \left(1-\frac{1}{2}e^{-\frac{m}{\beta}}\right) \quad (<1).
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The former assertion of $(1)$ follows from $G_{1,\alpha,d-1}(1)=d$ and from $G'_{1,\alpha,d-1}(1)>0$ if $\alpha \in (0,\frac{1}{2})$. The latter assertion of $(1)$ is non-trivial, and showed in \cite[Proposition~4.12]{BCCGNSU}. (There, an expression of $\lim_{d\to \infty}(\frac{1}{d}\Lambda_{1,\alpha,d-1})$ is moreover given.)
Next, we will prove $(2)$. By definition, for every $u\in (0,1)$,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\Lambda_{m,\beta,d-1}}{d}&\leq \frac{1}{d}G_{m,\beta,d-1}(u)\\
&= \frac{1}{d(1-u)}u^{-\beta d}(1-u^{m(d-1)+1}) \\
&<\frac{1}{d(1-u)}u^{-\beta d}(1-u^{md}).
\end{align*}
For $d>\frac{1}{\beta}$, substitute $u=u_{\beta,d}:=1-\frac{1}{\beta d}\in (0,1)$. Then we obtain that
\[
\frac{\Lambda_{m,\beta,d-1}}{d}\leq \beta u_{\beta,d}^{-\beta d}(1-u_{\beta,d}^{md}).
\]
As $d\to \infty$, the right-hand side of the inequality above converges to $\beta e(1-e^{-\frac{m}{\beta}})$. Therefore, if $\beta\in (0,\frac{1}{e}]$, then for sufficiently large $d$ (depending on $m$ and $\beta$), we have that
\[
\frac{\Lambda_{m,\beta,d-1}}{d}< \beta e \left(1-\frac{1}{2}e^{-\frac{m}{\beta}}\right) \quad (<1).
\]
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}}\label{section=slicerank}
First we prove the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}[Expression of the upper bound in Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}]\label{proposition=slicerank}
Let $p$ be a prime. Consider a balanced and irreducible system \eqref{T} of $L$ $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $r$ variables:
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
a_1^{(1)}x_1+a_2^{(1)}x_2+a_3^{(1)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(1)}x_r&=0,\\
a_1^{(2)}x_1+a_2^{(2)}x_2+a_3^{(2)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(2)}x_r&=0,\\
\vdots\qquad\qquad \qquad\\
a_1^{(L)}x_1+a_2^{(L)}x_2+a_3^{(L)}x_3+\cdots +a_r^{(L)}x_r&=0.\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation*}
Let $m_1,m_2,\ldots ,m_r$ be, respectively, the multiplicities of $x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_r$. Then for every $r$-tuple of real numbers $(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\ldots,\alpha_r)$ satisfying $\alpha_1+\alpha_2+\cdots +\alpha_r=L$ and $\alpha_i\geq 0$ for $i\in [r]$, we have the following estimate for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$:
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)\leq \sum_{i=1}^r (\Lambda_{m_i,\alpha_i,p-1})^n.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Fix an $r$-tuple $(\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\ldots,\alpha_r)$ as above. Assume that
$A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ is strongly $\mathcal{T}$-free.
Define a polynomial $f\colon A^r\to \mathbb{F}_p$ by
\begin{align*}
f(x_1,\ldots ,x_r):=\prod_{l=1}^L\left(\prod_{k=1}^n\left(1-(a_1^{(l)}x_{1,k}+a_2^{(l)}x_{2,k}+\cdots +a_r^{(l)}x_{r,k})^{p-1}\right)\right).
\end{align*}
Here, for every $i\in [r]$, we express $x_i\in \mathbb{F}_p^n$ as $x_i=(x_{i,1},x_{i,2},\ldots ,x_{i,n})$. We claim that this polynomial $f$ fulfills condition \eqref{ast} as in Proposition~\ref{proposition=Tao}. Indeed, first note that for $a\in \mathbb{F}_p$,
\[
a^{p-1}=\left\{\begin{array}{lc}
1, &\textrm{if $a\ne 0$},\\
0, &\textrm{if $a= 0$}.
\end{array}\right.
\]
Then combine it with strong $\mathcal{T}$-freeness of $A$; it follows that
\[
f(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_r)=\left\{\begin{array}{lc}
1, &\textrm{if $x_1=x_2=\cdots=x_r$},\\
0, &\textrm{otherwise}.
\end{array}\right.
\]
Therefore, Proposition~\ref{proposition=Tao} implies that $\#A=\mathrm{sr}(f)$.
Now we proceed to bounding $\mathrm{sr}(f)$ from above. In the definition of $f$, expand the product. Then $f$ may be written as the sum of scalar multiples of monomials of the following form:
\[
x_{1,1}^{\theta_{1,1}}\cdots x_{1,n}^{\theta_{1,n}}x_{2,1}^{\theta_{2,1}}\cdots x_{2,n}^{\theta_{2,n}}\cdots x_{r,1}^{\theta_{r,1}}\cdots x_{r,n}^{\theta_{r,n}}.
\]
Here, for each $i\in [r]$, setting $\theta(i):=\sum_{k=1}^n\theta_{i,k}$, we have that the sequence of non-negative integers $(\theta_{i,k})_{i\in [r],\ k\in [n]}$ satisfies that
\[
\theta_{i,k}\in \{0,1,\ldots ,m_i(p-1)\},\quad \textrm{and}\quad \sum_{i=1}^{r}\theta(i)=L(p-1)n.
\]
Since $\alpha_1+\alpha_2+\cdots +\alpha_r=L$, for each monomial above, there exists at least one $i\in [r]$ that satisfies $\theta(i)\leq \alpha_i(p-1)n$. For each monomial, we choose the smallest index $i\in [r]$ with the property above. For $i\in [r]$, let $f_i$ be the sum of monomials with coefficients whose index, determined in the manner above, equals $i$. (Here we regard the empty sum as $0$, if it appears.) Since $f=\sum_{i=1}^rf_i$, subadditivity of the slice rank implies that $\mathrm{sr}(f)\leq \sum_{i=1}^r\mathrm{sr}(f_i)$.
Note that for each $i\in [r]$, $f_i$ may be written as the sum of the form
\[
f_i(x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_r)=\sum_{\theta=(\theta_{i,1},\ldots ,\theta_{i,n})\in \Theta_{m_i,\alpha_i,p-1}}f_{\theta}(x_i)g_{\theta}(x_1,\ldots ,x_{i-1},x_{i+1},\ldots ,x_{r}),
\]
where $\Theta_{m,\alpha,h}$ is the set of indices defined in Lemma~\ref{lemma=sum}; Lemma~\ref{lemma=sum} shows that $\mathrm{sr}(f_i)\leq (\Lambda_{m_i,\alpha_i,p-1})^n$. Therefore,
\[
\#A(=\mathrm{sr}(f))\quad \leq \sum_{i=1}^r(\Lambda_{m_i,\alpha_i,p-1})^n,
\]
as desired.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}]
First, given a system $\mathcal{T}$, define
\[
\overline{C}_{\mathcal{T}}(p):=\inf\left\{\max_{i\in [r]}\Lambda_{m_i,\alpha_i,p-1}: \sum_{i=1}^r\alpha_i=L,\ \alpha_i\geq 0\right\}.
\]
Then, Proposition~\ref{proposition=slicerank} implies that $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)\leq r (\overline{C}_{\mathcal{T}}(p))^n$. The direct product construction shows that for $n,n'\in \mathbb{N}$, in general, $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n+n')\geq\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)\cdot \mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n')$. Hence the inequality above, in fact, shows that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)\leq (\overline{C}_{\mathcal{T}}(p))^n;
\]
this argument is sometimes called a `\textit{power trick}'. For $m\geq m'$, it holds that $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,h}\geq \Lambda_{m',\alpha,h}$. Hence by replacing $m_i$ with $m_{\mathcal{T}}$ if $m_i\geq 2$, we have that $\overline{C}_{\mathcal{T}}(p)\leq \tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(p)$.
Finally, we make a comparison between $\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(p)$ and $p$. Now assume that the parameters $(r_1,r_2,L)$ satisfy `inequality \eqref{bigstar}'. Then we claim that there exists a constant $\tilde{c}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}<1$, not depending on $p$, such that for sufficiently large $p$, we have that
\[
\frac{\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(p)}{p}< \tilde{c}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}.
\]
Indeed, by `inequality \eqref{bigstar}', there exist $\alpha<\frac{1}{2}$ and $\beta< \frac{1}{e}$ with $r_1\alpha+r_2\beta=L$. Fix such a pair $(\alpha,\beta)$. Then, Lemma~\ref{lemma=lessthanp} implies that
\begin{itemize}
\item for every $p\geq 3$, $\frac{1}{p}\Lambda_{1,\alpha,p-1}\leq \frac{1}{3}\Lambda_{1,\alpha,2}<1$,
\item for sufficiently large $p$, $\frac{1}{p}\Lambda_{m_{\mathcal{T}},\beta,p-1}<\beta e(<1)$.
\end{itemize}
What remains is treatment of the case where $p$ is small. Here we employ a variant of `\textit{tensor power trick}' on finite fields. For such a small $p$, take $N\in \mathbb{N}$ sufficiently large such that the inequality in the second item above is valid if we replace $p$ with $q:=p^N$. Note that there is an upper bound for such an $N$ because $p\geq 2$. Consider the finite field $\mathbb{F}_{q}$ and consider $\mathcal{T}$ as a system of $\mathbb{F}_q$-equations via standard embedding $\mathbb{F}_p\subseteq \mathbb{F}_q$. We write $\mathcal{T}_q$ for this system. Replace the power $(p-1)$ with the power $(q-1)$ in the construction of the polynomial $f$ in the proof of Proposition~\ref{proposition=slicerank}. Then, the slice rank method works as well for $\mathcal{T}_q$ and it provides that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}_q}(n)\leq (\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(q))^n.
\]
Now observe that all coefficients of the system $\mathcal{T}_q$ are in $\mathbb{F}_p$ and that as $\mathbb{F}_p$-vector space, $\mathbb{F}_q\simeq (\mathbb{F}_p)^N$. It then follows that $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}_q}(n)=\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(nN)(\geq (\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n))^N)$. Therefore, by setting $c_{\mathcal{T}}(p):=\frac{1}{p} \left(\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(q)\right)^{\frac{1}{N}}$, we have the assertion even for small $p$.
\end{proof}
We, furthermore, extend Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank} to the `\textit{multicolored version}'. To state it, we provide the following definition; see \cite[Definition~3.1]{BCCGNSU} for more details.
\begin{definition}[Multicolored $\mathcal{T}$-free sets]\label{definition=multicolored}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a balanced system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $r$ variables. For fixed $X_1,\ldots,X_r\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ with $\#X_1=\cdots=\#X_r=s \in \mathbb{N}$, we say that an $r$-dimensional perfect matching $M\subseteq X_1\times\cdots\times X_r$ is an \textit{$r$-colored $\mathcal{T}$-free set} if for every $\bm{x}=(x_1,\ldots,x_r)\in X_1\times\cdots\times X_r$, it holds that
\begin{center}
$\bm{x}$ is a $\mathcal{T}$-semishape\quad $\Longleftrightarrow$ \quad $\bm{x}\in M$.
\end{center}
\end{definition}
In particular, if $M$ is expressed as $M=\{(x_{1,i},\ldots,x_{r,i}):1\leq i\leq m\}$, then $M$ is $r$-colored $\mathcal{T}$-free if the equivalence
\begin{center}
$(x_{1,i_1},\ldots,x_{r,i_r})$ is a $\mathcal{T}$-semishape\quad $\Longleftrightarrow$ \quad
$i_1=\cdots=i_r$
\end{center}
holds true. In this case, each element $(x_{1,i},\ldots,x_{r,i})$ in $M$ can be regarded as an `$r$-colored singleton semishape'. If $X_1=\cdots=X_r$, then $r$-colored $\mathcal{T}$-freeness is equivalent to strong $\mathcal{T}$-freeness defined in Definition~\ref{definition=Erdos}.
We may obtain the following result. It implies Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank} from the reasoning above; nevertheless, we can see it as a corollary to the proofs of (Proposition~\ref{proposition=slicerank} and) Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}. Recall from Definition~\ref{definition=Lambda} the definition of $\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m)}(d)$.
\begin{mcorollary}[Upper bounds for the multicolored version]\label{mcorollary=multicolor}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ be a balanced and irreducible system of $L$ $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $r$ variables. Let $(r_1,r_2,L)$ be the parameters of $\mathcal{T}$. Assume that they satisfy `inequality \eqref{bigstar}'. Let $X_1,\ldots,X_r\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ satisfy $\#X_1=\cdots=\#X_r=s \in\mathbb{N}$. Assume that $M\subseteq X_1\times\cdots\times X_r$ is $r$-colored $\mathcal{T}$-free. Then, we have that
\[
s\leq (\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(p))^n.
\]
\end{mcorollary}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following polynomial $F\colon [s]^r\to \mathbb{F}_p$:
\begin{align*}
F(i_1,i_2\ldots ,i_r):=\prod_{l=1}^L\left(\prod_{k=1}^n\left(1-(a_1^{(l)}x_{1,i_1,k}+a_2^{(l)}x_{2,i_2,k}+\cdots +a_r^{(l)}x_{r,i_r,k})^{p-1}\right)\right).
\end{align*}
Here we express $x_{j,i_j}$ as $x_{j,i_j}=(x_{j,i_j,1},x_{j,i_j,2},\ldots ,x_{j,i_j,n})$. Then the slice rank method as in the proof of Proposition~\ref{proposition=slicerank} applies to this $F$; it provides that $s\leq r(\tilde{C}_{(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})}(p))^n$. The power trick enables us to drop $r$ in the right-hand side of the inequality above.
\end{proof}
As we mentioned in the Introduction, Corollary~\ref{mcorollary=multicolor} will be employed in the proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}; compare with \cite[Theorem~2.2]{Sauermann}.
\begin{remark}\label{remark=lessthanpW}
Here we give more precise estimates of the conclusion of Corollary~\ref{mcorollary=multicolor} in the case where $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$, for we will utilize them in Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}. Let $p\geq 3$. Then the parameters of $\mathcal{T}=\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ are $(r_1,r_2,L,m_{\mathcal{T}})=(3,2,2,2)$. Hence, we can set, as stated in Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape},
\[
C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)=\tilde{C}_{(3,2,2,2)}(p)\quad (=\inf\{\max\{\Lambda_{1,\alpha,p-1},\Lambda_{2,\beta,p-1}\}:3\alpha+2\beta=2,\ \alpha,\beta\geq 0 \}).
\]
First, we will observe for all $p\geq 3$, it holds that $\frac{1}{p}C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)<1$. Let $\alpha_1=\frac{1.9}{3.85}$ and $\beta_1=\frac{1}{3.85}$. Then, $C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)\leq \max\{\Lambda_{1,\alpha_1,p-1},\Lambda_{2,\beta_1,p-1}\}$. Since $\alpha_1<\frac{1}{2}$, Lemma~\ref{lemma=lessthanp}$(1)$ implies that $\frac{1}{p}\Lambda_{1,\alpha_1,p-1}<1$. In what follows, we examine for which $p$, $\Lambda_{2,\beta_1,p-1}<p$ holds. In a similar argument to one in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma=lessthanp}$(2)$, we have that for every $p\geq 5$,
\[
\frac{\Lambda_{2,\beta_1,p-1}}{p}\leq \frac{1}{3.85} \left( 1-\frac{3.85}{p}\right)^{-\frac{p}{3.85}}.
\]
Note that for $x>1$, the function $x\mapsto \left(1-\frac{1}{x}\right)^{-x}$ is decreasing. Since $\left(1-\frac{3.85}{11}\right)^{-\frac{11}{3.85}}=3.42\ldots <3.85$, the inequality above implies that for $p\geq 11$, $\frac{1}{p}C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)<1$. For $p=3$, $5$ and $7$, numerical computations show that $\frac{1}{p}C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ are, respectively, at most $0.994$, $0.987$ and $0.983$. Hence, we conclude that for all prime $p\geq 3$, it holds that $\frac{1}{p}C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)<1$.
Secondly, we will see that for sufficiently large $p$, it holds that $\frac{1}{p}C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)<0.97$. This time we set $\alpha_2=0.428$ and $\beta_2=0.358$. Then, we have that $C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)\leq \max\{\Lambda_{1,\alpha_2,p-1},\Lambda_{2,\beta_2,p-1}\}$.
By setting $u_{2}=1-\frac{0.874964}{p}$ and $v_{2}=1-\frac{2.72792}{p}$, we obtain by numerical computation that
\[
\lim_{p\to \infty}\frac{G_{1,\alpha_2,p-1}(u_2)}{p}=0.969185\ldots,\quad \textrm{and} \quad \lim_{p\to \infty}\frac{G_{2,\beta_2,p-1}(v_2)}{p}=0.969258\ldots.
\]
Therefore, we have that for sufficiently large $p$,
\[
\frac{C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)}{p}< 0.97 \quad (<(0.985)^2 ).
\]
\end{remark}
\section{Dominant reduction and lower bounds of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$}\label{section=dominant}
In this section, we provide an lower bound of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$ under certain conditions in terms of the dominant property of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. Recall from the Introduction that for every $p\geq 3$ and every $n\in \mathbb{N}$, we have $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)=1$. Here $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$ is the system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations representing a `$\mathrm{W}$ shape'. Hence, in this case, the upper bound given by Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank} itself is by no means reasonable.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~$\ref{theorem=dominant}$}\label{subsection=dominantirreducible}
Recall from Definition~\ref{definition=dominant} the definition for a (balanced) $\mathbb{Z}$-equation $b_1x_1+b_2x_2+\cdots +b_rx_r=0$ to be \textit{dominant}. Note that this notion uses the natural total order $(\mathbb{Z},\geq )$; hence in this section we mainly discuss systems of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations, and later take $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reductions to obtain systems of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations.
\begin{definition}[Standard form of a dominant equation]\label{definition=standard}
Let $b_1x_1+b_2x_2+\cdots +b_rx_r=0$ be a balanced and dominant $\mathbb{Z}$-equation. Then we may rewrite the equation above, only by transposition of terms, as that of the form
\[
b'_jx_j=\sum_{i\in [r]\setminus \{j\}}b_i'x_i,\quad \textrm{where},\quad b'_j=\sum_{i\in [r]\setminus \{j\}}b_i'.
\]
Here $b'_j>0$, for all $i\in [r]$, $b'_i\geq 0$, and $b_j'=\sum_{i\in [r]\setminus \{j\}}b_i'$. It is called a \textit{standard form} of the dominant equation.
\end{definition}
To see the assertion in Definition~\ref{definition=standard}, let $j$ be a dominant index. Then $b'_j:=b_j$ and for $i\in [r]\setminus \{j\}$, $b'_i:=-b_i$ works if $b_j>0$. If $b_j<0$, then multiply $(-1)$ to all coefficients above. The value $b'_j$ in the standard form above coincides with the dominant coefficient of the original $\mathbb{Z}$-equation. A standard from is uniquely determined unless the original equation is of the form $bx_i-bx_j=0$, where $b\in \mathbb{N}$ and $\{i,j\}\in \binom{[r]}{2}$.
\begin{example}\label{example=dominant}
\begin{enumerate}[$(1)$]
\item Consider the system \eqref{SW} of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. The first equation $x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4=0$ is not dominant. The second equation $x_1-2x_3+x_5=0$ is dominant, and the standard form is $2x_3=x_1+x_5$. Its dominant index is $3$ and dominant coefficient is $2$. This system $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$ is irreducible but \textit{not} dominant.
\item Consider the following system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations in $7$ variables:
\begin{equation*}\label{S2}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1+x_2+x_3+x_4-4x_5&=0,\\
x_1+x_2-x_5-x_6&=0,\\
x_1-2x_6+x_7&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_2$}
\end{equation*}
The first and the third equations are both dominant; their dominant coefficients are respectively $4$ and $2$. The second equation is not dominant. However, the subsystem consisting of the first and the third equations:
\begin{equation*}\label{S2'}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1+x_2+x_3+x_4-4x_5&=0,\\
x_1-2x_6+x_7&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_2'$}
\end{equation*}
is a dominant and irreducible. (Recall the definition of irreducibility of a subsystem from Section~\ref{section=result}.) The dominant coefficient $b_{\mathcal{S}_2'}$ of the subsystem $\mathcal{S}_2'$ equals $4$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{example}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant} will go along a similar line to one in the work of (Behrend \cite{Behrend} and) Alon \cite[Lemma 17, Corollary 18]{FoxPham}. The key here is strict convexity of Euclidean norms (strict convexity of the unit sphere in Euclidean spaces).
\begin{proposition}\label{proposition=Behrend}
Let $k\geq 1$. Consider a balanced system \eqref{S} of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
b_1^{(1)}x_1+b_2^{(1)}x_2+b_3^{(1)}x_3+\cdots +b_r^{(1)}x_r&=0,\\
b_1^{(2)}x_1+b_2^{(2)}x_2+b_3^{(2)}x_3+\cdots +b_r^{(2)}x_r&=0,\\
\vdots\qquad\qquad \qquad\\
b_1^{(L)}x_1+b_2^{(L)}x_2+b_3^{(L)}x_3+\cdots +b_r^{(L)}x_r&=0,
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation*}
that is dominant and irreducible.
Then for every $n\geq 2$, there exists $Y\subseteq \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}^n(\subseteq \mathbb{Z}^n)$ that fulfills the following two conditions:
\begin{enumerate}[$(a)$]
\item $\#Y\geq \frac{(k+1)^n}{nk^2}$.
\item All solutions $(y_1,y_2,\ldots ,y_r)$ of $\mathcal{S}$ in $Y$ satisfy that $y_1=y_2=\cdots =y_r$. $($In other word, $Y$ is `strongly $\mathcal{S}$-free', if we extend the definition of strong freeness to a system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations.$)$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Via $\mathbb{Z}\subseteq \mathbb{R}$, we regard each $y\in \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}^n\setminus \{(0,0,\ldots ,0),(k,k,\ldots ,k)\}$ as an element in $(\mathbb{R}^n,\|\cdot\|_2)$, where $\|\cdot\|_2$ denotes the Euclidean norm. There are $(k+1)^n-2$ elements of this form; the possible values of the square of the Euclidean norms of them lie in $[1,(n-1)k^2+(k-1)^2]\cap \mathbb{Z}$. By pigeon hole principle, there exists $R\in \mathbb{R}_{>0}$ such that at least $\frac{(k+1)^n-2}{(n-1)k^2+(k-1)^2}$ elements in $\{0,1,\ldots ,k\}^n\setminus \{(0,0,\ldots ,0),(k,k,\ldots ,k)\}$ are on the sphere $\{y \in \mathbb{R}^n: \|y\|_2=R\}$ of radius $R$ centered at the origin. Fix such an $R$, and set $Y=\{y\in \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}^n : \|y\|_2=R\}$.
We claim that this $Y$ fulfills the two conditions $(a)$ and $(b)$ above. For $(a)$, by construction,
\begin{align*}
\#Y&\geq \frac{(k+1)^n-2}{(n-1)k^2+(k-1)^2} \\
&\geq \frac{(k+1)^n}{nk^2},
\end{align*}
for $k\geq 1$ and $n\geq 2$.
In what follows, we confirm $(b)$. We consider a single $\mathbb{Z}$-equation in $\mathcal{S}$; it is of the form $b_1^{(l)}x_1+b_2^{(l)}x_2+b_3^{(l)}x_3+\cdots +b_r^{(l)}x_r=0$ with $l\in [L]$. By assumption, this equation is dominant. Let $j(l)\in [r]$ be a dominant index of it. Then by standard form, a solution $(y_1,y_2,\ldots ,y_r)$ satisfies that
\[
b^{(l)}_{j(l)}{}'y_{j(l)}=\sum_{i\in [r]\setminus \{j(l)\}} b^{(l)}_{i}{}'y_{i}.
\]
By dividing the equality above by $b^{(l)}_{j(l)}{}'R(>0)$, we have that
\[
\frac{y_{j(l)}}{R}=\sum_{i\in [r]\setminus \{j(l)\}} \frac{b^{(l)}_{i}{}'}{b^{(l)}_{j(l)}{}'}\cdot \frac{y_{i}}{R}.
\]
We claim that for every $i\in e_{l}$, it holds that $y_i=y_{j(l)}$. Here $e_l$ is the edge indexed by $l$ in the hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}}$, defined in Definition~\ref{definition=multiplicity}. Indeed, if there exists $i\in [r]\setminus \{j(l)\}$ such that $b^{(l)}_{i}{}'=b^{(l)}_{j(l)}{}'$, then the claim above follows because for all $h \in [r]\setminus \{i,j(l)\}$, $b^{(l)}_{h}{}'=0$. Otherwise, observe that each $\frac{y_i}{R}$, $i\in [r]$, is on the unit sphere and that the right-hand side of the equality above is a convex combination of such vectors with non-trivial coefficients. By strict convexity of the Euclidean norm $\|\cdot\|_2$, we then conclude for every $i\in e_{l}$ that $y_i=y_{j(l)}$. See \cite{Cioranescu} for more details on convexity of norms of real normed spaces.
Since $\mathcal{S}$ is assumed to be irreducible, it follows that $y_1=y_2=\cdots =y_r$. Indeed, for every $\{i_1,i_2\}\in \binom{[r]}{2}$, we can construct a sequence of vertices that connects $i_1$ and $i_2$ in $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}}$; see Definition~\ref{definition=multiplicity}$(2)$. Therefore, $Y\subseteq \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}^n$ also satisfies $(b)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~$\ref{theorem=dominant}$]
Given a system $\mathcal{S}$ of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations, take a subsystem $\mathcal{S}'$ that is dominant and irreducible by assumption. Then it holds that $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)\geq \mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}'}(n,p)$,
where $\mathcal{S}'$ is viewed as a system of equations in the original $r$ variables. Hence, we may assume $\mathcal{S}'=\mathcal{S}$ to prove Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}; we simply write $b_{\mathcal{S}}$ for $b_{\mathcal{S}'}$.
Fix a prime $p$ with $p>b_{\mathcal{S}}$. Let $k=\left\lfloor \frac{p-1}{b_{\mathcal{S}}} \right\rfloor $. Recall that we define $\mathcal{S}(p)$ as the system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations obtained by $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reduction of $\mathcal{S}$. We claim the following: There is a one-to-one correspondence between $\mathcal{S}(p)$-semishapes in $X\subseteq \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}(\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n)$ and solutions of $\mathcal{S}$ in $X\subseteq \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}\subseteq \mathbb{Z}^n$,
\[
(\mathbb{F}_p^n\supseteq)\{0,1,\ldots ,k\}^n\ni (x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_r)\quad \longleftrightarrow \quad (y_1,y_2,\ldots ,y_r) \in \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}^n (\subseteq \mathbb{Z}^n).
\]
Indeed, observe that $kb_{\mathcal{S}}\leq p-1$. In general, there will be degeneration of information by the process of $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reduction. However, by viewing dominant $\mathbb{Z}$-equations as their standard forms, we see that this degeneracy does not occur in the setting above.
Hence by $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reduction of the construction of $Y$ in Proposition~\ref{proposition=Behrend}, we have that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)\geq \frac{(k+1)^n}{nk^2}.
\]
Note that for every $\epsilon>0$, there exists $n_0'=n_0'(k,\epsilon)$ such that for all $n\geq n_0'$, it holds that
\[
\frac{(k+1)^n}{nk^2}\geq \{(1-\epsilon)(k+1)\}^{n}.
\]
It completes the proof of the former assertion of Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}. Here, note that since $k$ depends on $p$, $n_0'(k,\epsilon)$ can be seen as $n_0(p,\epsilon)$.
Finally, we prove the latter assertion of Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}. Since $p> b_{\mathcal{S}}\geq 2$ and since $p$ is prime, $\frac{p}{b_{\mathcal{S}}}\not \in \mathbb{Z}$. It implies that
\[
k+1>\frac{p}{b_{\mathcal{S}}}.
\]
Hence, by choosing $\epsilon=\epsilon(p)$ sufficiently small depending on $p$ we have that
\[
(1-\epsilon(p))(k+1)>\frac{p}{b_{\mathcal{S}}}.
\]
Then, the former assertion implies the latter for $n$ sufficiently large depending on $p$. More precisely, for the $\epsilon (p)$ above, every $n$ with $n\geq n_0(p,\epsilon(p))$ works.
\end{proof}
Concerning lower bounds of $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$, we have the following.
\begin{theorem}[Lower bounds of $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$]\label{theorem=dominantsharp}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a balanced system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. Assume that there exists an equation belonging to $\mathcal{S}$ that is dominant; let $b$ be the dominant coefficient of it. If $b\geq 2$, then for every prime $p$ with $p>b$ the following holds true: There exists $n_0=n_0(p)$ such that for every $n\geq n_0(p)$, we have
\[
\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)\geq \left(\frac{p}{b}\right)^n.
\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $r'$ be the number of non-zero coefficients in the dominant equation of $\mathcal{S}$. Let $\mathcal{S}''$ be a system of equation(s), viewed as one in $r'$ variables consisting of the dominant equation only. Then, we have $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)\geq \mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}''}(n,p)$. By construction, $\mathcal{S}''$ is dominant and irreducible. The latter assertion of Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant} ends our proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark=lowerW}
Consider the system \eqref{SW} of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. As we argued in the Introduction, $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)=1$. On the other hand, for $p\geq 3$ and for sufficiently large $n$, depending on $p$, we have that
\[
\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)\geq \left(\frac{p}{2}\right)^n.
\]
Indeed, the equation $x_1-2x_3+x_5=0$ belonging to $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$ is dominant, and its dominant coefficient is $2$. The lower bound above now follows from Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominantsharp}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Dominant reduction}
In this subsection, we introduce a `reduction' operation on a system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. This process is stated in terms of the dominant property. In this paper, we call the process a \textit{dominant reduction}. First we describe it by supplying an example, and then we will explain the formulation in a general setting.
Consider the following example of a system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations in $6$ variables
\begin{equation*}\label{S3}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4&=0,\\
x_2-x_3-x_4+x_5&=0,\\
x_1-2x_2+x_6&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_3$}
\end{equation*}
Since there exists no subsystem of $\mathcal{S}_3$ that is dominant and irreducible, Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant} does not directly apply to $\mathcal{S}_3$. In what follows, we will observe that nevertheless, a certain argument employing strict convexity, similar to one in Proposition~\ref{proposition=Behrend}, works for this system $\mathcal{S}_3$.
\begin{lemma}[Example of dominant reductions]\label{lemma=dominantreduction}
Assume that $Y\subseteq \mathbb{Z}^n$ is included in some sphere in $(\mathbb{R}^n,\|\cdot\|_2)$ centered at the origin. Then if $(x_1,x_2,\ldots ,x_6)$ is a solution of \eqref{S3} in $Y$, then $x_1=x_2=\cdots=x_6$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, observe that the third equation in $\mathcal{S}_3$, $x_1-2x_2+x_6=0$, is dominant. In an argument utilizing strict convexity, we have that in $Y$, $x_1-2x_2+x_6=0$ is equivalent to the equations $x_1=x_2=x_6$. Hence, if we view $\mathcal{S}_3$ as a system of equations \textit{on $Y$}, it is equivalent to the following system of equations:
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4=0,\\
x_2-x_3-x_4+x_5=0,\\
x_1=x_2=x_6.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation*}
This observation is the key to the present proof.
In the system above, we may `reduce' three variables $x_1,x_2,x_6$ to one variable; we write $x_{\{1,2,6\}}$ for it. Then, on $Y$, the original system $\mathcal{S}$ may be reduced to the following system of two equations in $4$ variables $x_{\{1,2,6\}},x_3,x_4,x_5$:
\begin{equation*}\label{S2(1)}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
-x_3+x_4&=0,\\
x_{\{1,2,6\}}-x_3-x_4+x_5&=0.\\
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_3^{(1)}$}
\end{equation*}
Now, in $\mathcal{S}_3^{(1)}$, the first equation $-x_3+x_4=0$ is dominant; we have that $x_3=x_4$. This time, reduce $x_3$ and $x_4$ to one variable $x_{\{3,4\}}$. Then, $\mathcal{S}_3^{(1)}$ is reduced to the following (system of) equation in $3$ variables $x_{\{1,2,6\}},x_{\{3,4\}},x_5$:
\[\label{S2(2)}
x_{\{1,2,6\}}-2x_{\{3,4\}}+x_5=0.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_3^{(2)}$}
\]
Unlike $\mathcal{S}_3$ and $\mathcal{S}_3^{(1)}$, this system $\mathcal{S}_3^{(2)}$ is dominant and irreducible as that of an equation in $3$ variables $x_{\{1,2,6\}},x_{\{3,4\}},x_5$. Therefore, Proposition~\ref{proposition=Behrend} applies to $\mathcal{S}_3^{(2)}$; we obtain that $x_{\{1,2,6\}}=x_{\{3,4\}}=x_5$. Since we reduce variables as $x_{\{1,2,6\}}=x_1=x_2=x_6$ and $x_{\{3,4\}}=x_3=x_4$, on $Y$, we have that $x_1=x_2=x_3=x_4=x_5=x_6$.
\end{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lemma=dominantreduction}, we may have the following lower bound of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_3}(n,p)$ in a similar argument to one in the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}: For prime $p\geq 3$ and for sufficiently large $n$ depending on $p$, it holds that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_3}(n,p)\geq \left(\frac{p}{2}\right)^n.
\]
To formalize the argument in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma=dominantreduction}, we define the operation of a \textit{dominant reduction} as follows. Recall from Definition~\ref{definition=multiplicity} that for the hypergraph $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}}=(J_{\mathcal{S}},H_{\mathcal{S}})$, we have the concept of connected components of $J_{\mathcal{S}}$ in the standard sense. See also Example~\ref{example=irreducible}.
\begin{definition}[Dominant reduction]\label{definition=dominantreduction}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a balanced system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations in $r$ variables $x_1,\ldots, x_r$. Assume that $\mathcal{S}$ admits a subsystem $\mathcal{S}'$ that is dominant. Then we define an operation of a \textit{dominant reduction} as follows, which reduce the system $\mathcal{S}$ in $r$ variables to a new system $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}=\mathcal{S}^{(1)}_{\mathcal{S}'}$ of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations in strictly fewer numbers of variables.
\begin{itemize}
\item $[$Reduction of variables$]$ We define the variables of $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$ in the following manner: Let $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}'}=(J_{\mathcal{S}'},H_{\mathcal{S}'})$ be the hypergraph associated with $\mathcal{S}'$. If $i\in [r]\setminus J_{\mathcal{S}'}$, then we keep the variable $x_i$ in the new system. For $i\in [r]$ with $i\in J_{\mathcal{S}'}$, we reduce all variables $x_j$, where $j$ and $i$ belong to the same connected component, to a single variable $x_K$. Here $K$ is the connected component of $J_{\mathcal{S}'}$ in $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}'}$ that contains $i$.
In this process, the number of variables reduce from $r$ by $\#J_{\mathcal{S}'}- c(\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}'})$. Here, $c(\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}'})$ denotes the number of connected components in $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}'}$.
\item $[$Reduction of equations$]$ We define the equations in the system $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$ as follows: For each equation belonging to $\mathcal{S}$, we keep the term in the variable $x_i$ if $i\in [r]\setminus J_{\mathcal{S}'}$. For each connected component $K$ of $J_{\mathcal{S}'}$ in $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{S}'}$, we replace $x_i$ for every $i\in K$ with the new variable $x_K$. If we obtain the trivial equation `$0=0$' after this reduction process, then we remove that equation from the new system.
\end{itemize}
We write $\mathcal{S}\stackrel{\mathrm{d}}{\rightsquigarrow}_{\mathcal{S}'} \mathcal{S}^{(1)}$ if $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$ is obtained by dominant reduction of $\mathcal{S}$ with respect to $\mathcal{S}'$. If we do not specify $\mathcal{S}'$, then we simply write $\mathcal{S}\stackrel{\mathrm{d}}{\rightsquigarrow} \mathcal{S}^{(1)}$.
\end{definition}
If $\mathcal{S}$ admits a subsystem $\mathcal{S}'$ that is dominant and irreducible, then the resulting new system after the dominant reduction with respect to $\mathcal{S}'$ is $\emptyset(1)$, which denotes the empty system of equations \textit{in one variable}.
The following theorem is a refinement of Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}. We may prove it by generalizing the arguments of the proofs of Proposition~\ref{proposition=Behrend} and Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant}; compare with the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma=dominantreduction}.
\begin{mtheorem}[Dominant reduction and lower bounds of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)$]\label{mtheorem=dominant}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a dominant irreducible system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations. Assume that $\mathcal{S}$ admits a sequence of dominant reductions that terminates with $\emptyset(1)$:
\[
\mathcal{S}=\mathcal{S}^{(0)}\stackrel{\mathrm{d}}{\rightsquigarrow} \mathcal{S}^{(1)}\stackrel{\mathrm{d}}{\rightsquigarrow}\mathcal{S}^{(2)}\stackrel{\mathrm{d}}{\rightsquigarrow}\cdots \stackrel{\mathrm{d}}{\rightsquigarrow}\mathcal{S}^{(k)}\stackrel{\mathrm{d}}{\rightsquigarrow}\emptyset(1).
\]
Let $\tilde{b}$ be the maximum of the dominant coefficients of the dominant subsystems, which are used in the sequence above of dominant reductions.
Then for every prime $p> \tilde{b}$, we have the following: For every $\epsilon>0$, there exists $n_0=n_0(p,\epsilon)$ such that for every $n\geq n_0(p,\epsilon)$, it holds that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}}(n,p)\geq \left((1-\epsilon)\left\lfloor \frac{p+\tilde{b}-1}{\tilde{b}}\right\rfloor\right)^n.
\]
\end{mtheorem}
Theorem~\ref{theorem=dominant} is a special case of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=dominant} where $k=0$.
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}}\label{section=Wshape}
As we emphasized in the Introduction, in general, it is much more difficult to bound $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)$ from above than to bound $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)$ from above. Very recently, Sauermann \cite{Sauermann} has introduced a new method to address a problem of this type; she has obtained the following result for the system of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations in $p$ variables:
\[\label{Tpzerosum}
x_1+x_2+\cdots +x_p=0.\tag{$\mathcal{T}_{p,\mathrm{zerosum}}$}
\]
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Sauermann}]\label{theorem=Sauermann}
For $n\in \mathbb{N}$, let $P(n)$ denotes the number of partitions of $n$. Then, for every prime $p\geq 5$, it holds that
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}_{p,\mathrm{zerosum}}}(n)\leq 2p^2P(p)\left(\sqrt{\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{p},p-1}\cdot p}\right)^{n} \quad (\leq 2p^2P(p)(2\sqrt{p})^n).
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
Her motivation of Theorem~\ref{theorem=Sauermann} is to provide a new upper bound of the \textit{Erd\H{o}s--Ginzburg--Ziv constant} $\mathfrak{s}(\mathbb{F}_p^n)$; Sauermann \cite[Corollary~1.2]{Sauermann} deduced the best known bound of it, without the assumption of `property $D$', from Theorem~\ref{theorem=Sauermann}. See \cite{FoxSauermann} for historical developments of the known bounds of the Erd\H{o}s--Ginzburg--Ziv constants.
Sauermann's method may be extended to obtain an upper bound of $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)$ if $\mathcal{T}$ is a (system of a) single $\mathbb{F}_p$-equation. At the present, there may be a gap to extend it for a general system $\mathcal{T}$; the key lemma \cite[Lemma~3.1]{Sauermann} to her argument will not be modified in the full generality. Compare with Problem~\ref{problem=Sauermann}. In this section, we will see that for $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ (`$\mathrm{W}$ shapes' with coefficients in $\mathbb{F}_p$), this modification is possible. We will demonstrate Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}; then in Remark~\ref{remark=difference}, we describe new points appearing in adaptation of Sauermann's argument in our setting.
The key difference between our proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape} and Sauermann's original argument in \cite{Sauermann} is the following: The strategy of our proof is to \textit{focus on a `certain shape'} in the concerning set $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$. Then we divide the proof into the following two cases. If there exists a \textit{disjoint} collection of large size of such `shapes', then we follow Sauermann's argument \cite{Sauermann}; see the definition of the disjointness here below. Otherwise, consider the collection of the maximal size of such `shapes', and remove all points appearing in that collection from $A$. Then, \textit{the resulting subset of $A$ does not admit such `shapes'}; thus, we are now ready to employ a result on an upper bound of the size of \textit{weakly-free} subsets with respect to that `shape'. See Remark~\ref{remark=difference} for backgrounds of this strategy.
In the proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}, the `shape' on which we cast a spotlight is a non-degenerate $3$-AP. For the (system of an) $\mathbb{Z}$-equality
\[\label{3AP}
x_1-2x_2+x_3=0,\tag{$\mathcal{S}_{3\mathrm{AP}}$}
\]
the work of Ellenberg--Gijswijt \cite{EllenbergGijswijt}, mentioned in the Introduction, states that for $p\geq 3$, $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{3\mathrm{AP}}}(n,p)\leq (\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{3},p-1})^n$. Since for every $p\geq 3$, strong $\mathcal{S}_{3\mathrm{AP}}(p)$ freeness and weak $\mathcal{S}_{3\mathrm{AP}}(p)$-freeness are equivalent, it follows that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{3\mathrm{AP}}}^{\sharp}(n,p)\leq (\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{3},p-1})^n;
\]
we employ this estimate in the proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}.
In this section, we concentrate on the system \eqref{SW} of two equations with $r=5$,
and the $\mathrm{mod}$ $p$ reduction $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ of it for $p\geq 3$. In what follows, we call $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-semishape and $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-shape, respectively, simply semishapes and shapes. (Semishapes are called `cycles' in \cite{Sauermann} in her setting.)
Let $X_1,X_2,X_3,X_4,X_5\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$. Following \cite{Sauermann}, for $\{i,j\}\in \binom{[5]}{2}$, we define the \textit{$(i,j)$-extendability}.
\begin{definition}[\cite{Sauermann}]\label{definition=extendability}
For $x\in X_i$ and for $y\in X_j$, we say that $(x,y)$ is \textit{$(i,j)$-extendable} in $X_1\times X_2\times X_3\times X_4\times X_5$ if there exists a semishape $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ in $X_1\times X_2\times X_3\times X_4\times X_5$ such that $x_i=x$ and $x_j=y$.
We call such a semishape a semishape in $X_1\times \cdots \times X_5$ \textit{$(i,j)$-extended from $(x,y)$}.
\end{definition}
We say that two semishapes $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ and $(x_1',x_2',x_3',x_4',x_5')$ are \textit{disjoint} if the two sets of points in the shapes are disjoint, namely, $\{x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5\}\cap \{x_1',x_2',x_3',x_4',x_5'\}=\emptyset$. We define disjointness of $k$-APs for $k\geq 3$ in a similar manner to one above. For a semishape $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ and for $i\in [5]$, we call $x_i$ the \textit{$i$-th term} of the semishape.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}]
Throughout the proof, fix a prime $p\geq 3$. As we see later, in the proof, we will employ Corollary~\ref{mcorollary=multicolor} for the system $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ to deal with Case~$2$ below.
The complete list of point-configurations of degenerate ($\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-)semishapes is the following. Here by the \textit{point-configuration} of a semishape, we mean the set of disjoint points, without multiplicities or labellings.
\begin{itemize}
\item One non-degenerate $4$-AP $(x,y,z,w)$: with labellings, there are two possibilities, $(x_1,x_3,x_2=x_5,x_4)$ and $(x_2,x_1=x_4,x_3,x_5)$.
\item One non-degenerate $3$-AP $(x,y,z)$: with labellings, there are two possibilities, $(x_1=x_2,x_3=x_4,x_5)$ and $(x_1,x_2=x_3,x_4=x_5)$.
\item Two distinct points $(x,y)$: with labellings, it is of the form $(x_1=x_3=x_5,x_2=x_4)$.
\item One point $x_1=x_2=x_3=x_4=x_5$.
\end{itemize}
Note that if there exists a non-degenerate $4$-AP in $A$, then we, in particular, have a non-degenerate $3$-AP in $A$.
Take $A\subseteq \mathbb{F}_p^n$ that is weakly $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-free. Set $t:=\left\lceil\frac{2}{7} \#A\right\rceil \in \mathbb{N}$. We divide our proof into the following two cases.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[Case~$1$.] There do not exist $t$ disjoint non-degenerate $3$-APs in $A$.
\item[Case~$2$.] There \textit{does} exist $t$ disjoint non-degenerate $3$-APs in $A$.
\end{enumerate}
\noindent
\textbf{Case~$1$.} In this case, pick a collection of non-degenerate disjoint $3$-APs in $A$ of the maximal size; remove all points appearing in this collection from $A$. Write $A'$ for the resulting subset of $A$. Observe that we have
\[
\#A'\geq \#A-3(t-1)\geq \frac{\#A}{7}.
\]
The key to the proof for Case~$1$ is the following: By construction, the $A'$ above is weakly $\mathcal{S}_{3\mathrm{AP}}(p)$-free. Hence, by the aforementioned work of Ellenberg--Gijswijt on $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{3AP}}}(n,p)$, we obtain that
\[
\#A'\leq (\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{3},p-1})^n.
\]
Therefore, in Case~$1$, we have that
\begin{align*}
\#A&\leq 7(\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{3},p-1})^n.
\end{align*}
\noindent
\textbf{Case~$2$.} Pick a collection of size $t$ of disjoint non-degenerate $3$-APs in $A$. Observe that for each non-degenerate $3$-AP $(a,a',a'')$ (forming a $3$-AP in this order) in $A$, $(a,a,a',a',a'')$ is a semishape in $A$. Hence, we define the following set of disjoint semishapes in $A$:
\[
M=\{(a,a,a',a',a''): \textrm{ $(a,a',a'')$ is a non-degenerated $3$-AP picked in the collection}\}.
\]
By construction, $\#M=t$ holds. For each $i\in [5]$, define $X_i$ as the set of the $i$-th terms of the semishapes in $M$. By disjointness, we have the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\#X_1=\#X_2=\#X_3=\#X_4=\#X_5=t$,
\item $X_1=X_2$ and $X_3=X_4$,
\item Three subsets $X_1(=X_2)$, $X_3(=X_4)$ and $X_5$ of $A$ are pairwise disjoint.
\end{itemize}
Set $\tilde{X}:=X_1\times X_2\times X_3\times X_4\times X_5$. The following two lemmas, specially Lemma~\ref{lemma=extendability}, are the key to the proof for Case~$2$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma=shape}
Every semishape $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ in $\tilde{X}$ satisfies that $x_1=x_2$ and that $x_3=x_4$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose, to the contrary, that a semishape $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ in $\tilde{X}$ satisfies $x_1\ne x_2$. Since $A$ is weakly $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-free, every semishape in $\tilde{X}$ must be degenerate. By the classification of degenerate shapes, stated at the beginning of the present proof, it must satisfy $x_2=x_3$, $x_2=x_5$, $x_1=x_4$ or $x_1=x_3=x_5$. If $x_2=x_3$, then it contradicts $X_2\cap X_3=\emptyset$. Similarly, we may draw a contradiction in every option above; hence $x_1=x_2$. We also conclude that $x_3=x_4$ in a similar manner.
\end{proof}
Define the subset $B$ of $X_1\times X_3$ by
\[
B:=\{(x,y)\in X_1\times X_3:\textrm{ $(x,y)$ is $(1,3)$-extendable in $\tilde{X}$}\}.
\]
\begin{lemma}[Key lemma to the proof]\label{lemma=extendability}
For $(x,y)\ne (x',y')$ in $B$, we have that
\[
x-y\ne x'-y'.
\]
In particular, it holds that $\#B\leq p^n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we prove the former assertion. Suppose, to the contrary, that $x-y=x'-y'$ and $(x,y)\ne (x',y')$ are in $B$. Then it follows that $x\ne x'$ and $y\ne y'$. A semishape in $\tilde{X}$ $(1,3)$-extended from $(x,y)$ is of the from $(x,x,y,y,2y-x)$; similarly that from $(x',y')$ is of the from $(x',x',y',y',2y'-x')$. The key observation here is that then
\[
(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5):=(x',x,y',y,2y'-x')\in \tilde{X}
\]
is a semishape in $\tilde{X}$ with $x_1\ne x_2$. It contradicts Lemma~\ref{lemma=shape}. See figure~\ref{fig6} for a geometric meaning of this construction.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6.5cm]{./fig.6}
\caption{Extracting an $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$-semishape}\label{fig6}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Secondly, we deduce the latter assertion. It immediately follows because the map $B\ni (x,y)\mapsto x-y\in \mathbb{F}_p^n$ is injective by the former assertion.
\end{proof}
The following lemma enables us to find a subset $M'$ of $M$ of not too small size that is $5$-colored $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-free; recall Definition~\ref{definition=multicolored}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma=color2}
There exists a subset $M'\subseteq M$ of $M$ that satisfies the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\#M'\geq \frac{t^2}{4p^n}$,
\item $M'$ is $5$-colored $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-free.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we explain the idea, originated in \cite{Sauermann}, to construct $M'$. Find `many' $x\in X_1$ such that for $j\in \{3,4,5\}$, `not too many' $y\in X_j$ satisfies that $(x,y)$ is $(1,j)$-extandable in $\tilde{X}$. By Lemma~\ref{lemma=shape}, a semishape in $\tilde{X}$ is completely determined by the pair $(x_1,x_3)$. Hence, in the idea above, we only need to discuss the case where $j=3$.
Now we proceed to the precise argument. Set
\[
X_{1,\mathrm{bad}}:=\left\{x\in X_1: \#\{y\in X_3:(x,y)\in B\}\geq \frac{2p^n}{t}\right\}
\]
and $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}:=X_1\setminus X_{1,\mathrm{bad}}$. From the view point of the idea described above, points $x$ in $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}$ may be considered as `good' points. Then, by Lemma~\ref{lemma=extendability}, we have that
\[
\#X_{1,\mathrm{bad}}\leq \frac{p^n}{\frac{2p^n}{t}}\leq \frac{t}{2}.
\]
Hence, we obtain that $\#X_{1,\mathrm{good}}= \#X_1-\#X_{1,\mathrm{bad}}\geq \frac{t}{2}$. Run the following algorithm with initially setting $M':=\emptyset$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(I)] Pick $x\in X_{1,\mathrm{good}}$. Add to $M'$ the semishape in $M$ whose first term is $x$.
\item[(II)] For the element $x$ chosen in (I), consider all $y\in X_3$ with $(x,y)\in B$. For each such $y$, remove from $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}$ the first term (if it was still in $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}$) of the semishape in $M$ whose third term is $y$.
If $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}=\emptyset$ after the procedure above, then halt. Otherwise, return to (I).
\end{enumerate}
Note that $x$ itself as in (I) is removed from $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}$ in (II). By construction of the original $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}$, in (II), there are at most $\frac{2p^n}{t}$ points which are removed from $X_{1,\mathrm{good}}$. Therefore, the flow `(I) and (II)' may be repeated for at least
\[
\frac{\frac{t}{2}}{\frac{2p^n}{t}}= \frac{t^2}{4p^n}
\]
times. Hence the resulting $M'$ satisfies that $\#M'\geq \frac{t^2}{4p^n}$.
In what follows, we will prove that $M'$ above is $5$-colored $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$-free. Here we change the indices and express $M'$ as
\[
M'=\{(x_{1,i},x_{2,i},x_{3,i},x_{4,i},x_{5,i}):1\leq i\leq \#M'\}.
\]
For each $j\in[5]$, define $X'_j\subseteq X_j$ as the set of the $j$-th terms of semishapes in $M'$. Set $\tilde{X}':=X_1'\times X_2'\times X_3'\times X_4'\times X_5'$. By construction of $M'$, it follows that $(x_{1,i},x_{3,j})\in X_1'\times X_3'$ is $(1,3)$-extendable in $\tilde{X}'$ if and only if $i=j$. Suppose now that
$(x_{1,i_1},x_{2,i_2},x_{3,i_3},x_{4,i_4},x_{5,i_5})$ is a semishape in $\tilde{X}'$. Then Lemma~\ref{lemma=shape} implies that $x_{1,i_1}=x_{2,i_2}$ and $x_{3,i_3}=x_{4,i_4}$. Since $M'$ is a collection of disjoint semishapes, it follows that $i_1=i_2$ and $i_3=i_4$. Moreover, the argument above shows that $i_1=i_3$. Since $x_{1,i_1}-2x_{3,i_3}+x_{5,i_5}=0$,
we have that $x_{5,i_5}=x_{5,i_1}$; by disjointness, it implies that $i_5=i_1$. Therefore, we conclude that $i_1=i_2=i_3=i_4=i_5$, as desired.
\end{proof}
Apply Corollary~\ref{mcorollary=multicolor}, with respect to the system $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$, to this $M'$. Then by using the constant $C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$ as in Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}, we have that
\[
\left(\frac{t^2}{4p^n}\leq\right)\quad \#M'\leq C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)^n.
\]
Hence, we obtain that $t\leq 2\left(\sqrt{C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)\cdot p}\right)^n$. Recall that $t=\left\lceil\frac{2}{7}\#A\right\rceil$. Therefore, in Case~$2$, we conclude that
\[
\#A\leq 7\left(\sqrt{C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)\cdot p}\right)^n.
\]
Let us unify these two cases to close up our proof. Note that $\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{3},p-1}< C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)$. Indeed, if $\alpha,\beta\geq 0$ satisfy $3\alpha+2\beta=2$, then $\max\{\alpha,\beta\}\geq \frac{2}{5}>\frac{1}{3}$. (Note also that $\Lambda_{m,\alpha,p-1}$ is strictly increasing both in $m$ and $\alpha$.) Hence, we conclude that in both cases, the inequality
\[
\#A\leq 7 \left(\sqrt{C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)\cdot p}\right)^n
\]
holds true. It complete the proof.
\end{proof}
Recall that in Remark~\ref{remark=lessthanpW}, we show that for every $p\geq 3$, it holds that $C_{\mathrm{W}}(p)<p$.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~$\ref{theorem=Wshape}$]
The estimate from above immediately follows from Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape} and Remark~\ref{remark=lessthanpW}. If $n$ is sufficiently large depending on $p$, the estimate from below is obtained from Remark~\ref{remark=lowerW}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remark=difference}
Here we describe main differences between the argument in the original paper \cite{Sauermann} on $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}_{p,\mathrm{zerosum}}}(n)$ and one in our proof on $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}}(n,p)$. More precisely, we explain backgrounds of our strategy to focus on a non-degenerate $3$-AP; recall the argument at the beginning of this section. There is a \textit{gap} for a straightforward application of Sauermann's original argument to nour case, which we describe below. In our case, we may \textit{not} obtain a similar result to Lemma~\ref{lemma=extendability}, which is an adaptation of \cite[Lemma~3.1]{Sauermann}, for a certain type of semishapes. More precisely, this issue occurs if the point-configuration of the semishape is a distinct two points. Namely, if the semishape is of the form $(x_1=x_3=x_5,x_2=x_4)$, where $x_1\ne x_2$. Indeed, let $(x,y,x,y,x)$ and $(x',y',x',y',x')$ be two semishapes obtained by $(1,2)$-extensions. Our task in this case is to construct another semishape $(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5)$ out of the two semishapes above that violates $x_1=x_3=x_5$. However, it is \textit{totally impossible}. Indeed, at least two of $x_1$, $x_3$ and $x_5$ must coincide, then all of them must be the same. Hence, an argument relying on a variant of \cite[Lemma~3.1]{Sauermann} \textit{breaks down} in this case.
Nevertheless, we have completed our proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}; \textit{the trick here} is to put the annoying case above into Case~$1$. Case~$1$ in the proof is treated \textit{all at once by the aforementioned upper bound of Ellenberg--Gijswijt} of non-degenerate $3$-AP-free sets. Thus \textit{we have bypassed a variant of Lemma~$\ref{lemma=extendability}$} for the problematic case above. Furthermore, we obtain the mltiplicative constant part `$7$' in Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}, which is good. We do it by putting the case where there exists a collection of large size of disjoint non-degenerate $4$-APs into Case~$2$. If we treat that case separately from Case~$2$, then we would obtain `$15$' instead of `$7$'.
In our short paper \cite{MimuraTokushigeX}, we also study another system of equations
\[\label{astk}
\left\{\begin{aligned}
x_1+x_2-2x_{2k+1}&=0,\\
x_3+x_4-2x_{2k+1}&=0,\\
x_5+x_6-2x_{2k+1}&=0,\\
\vdots\qquad\quad\\
x_{2k-1}+x_{2k}-2x_{2k+1}&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_{\ast_{k}}$}
\]
and provides an upper bound of $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_{\ast_k}}(n,p)$. (An $\mathcal{S}_{\ast_k}(p)$-shape consists of $k$ $3$-APs, sharing the middle term, such that all $2k+1$ terms are distinct; it represents a `$k$-star shape'.) In that case, we focus on an $\mathcal{S}_{\ast_{k-1}}(p)$-shape, instead of a non-degenerate $3$-AP, and argue in an induction on $k\geq 1$.
\end{remark}
By extracting a part of the proof of Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=Wshape}, we obtain an upper bound of `weakly `parallelogram-free' sets. We leave the proof to the reader.
\begin{corollary}[Avoiding a parallelogram]\label{corollary=parallelogram}
Consider the following $\mathbb{Z}$-equation
\[\label{SP}
x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4=0.\tag{$\mathcal{S}_P$}
\]
Then, for every prime $p\geq 3$ and for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$, we have that
\[
\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{S}_P}(n,p)\leq 7\left(\sqrt{\Lambda_{1,\frac{1}{4},p-1}\cdot p}\right)^n.
\]
\end{corollary}
\section{Further problems}\label{section=problems}
\begin{problem}\label{problem=dominant}
Fix a balanced and irreducible system $\mathcal{S}$ of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations and $($sufficiently large$)$ prime $p$. Is there any procedure to replace $\mathcal{S}$ with another system $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}$ in the same variables such that $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}$ `behaves better' than $\mathcal{S}$ from the aspect of our paper and that $\mathcal{S}(p)$-semishapes coincide with $\tilde{\mathcal{S}}$-semishapes?
\end{problem}
For instance, consider the following system of $\mathbb{Z}$-equations:
\begin{equation*}\label{SPP}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-x_2-x_3+x_4&=0,\\
x_2-x_3-x_4+x_5&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\tag{$\mathcal{S}_{PP}$}
\end{equation*}
It represents `two overlapping parallelograms'. We may see that for every $p\geq 3$, $\mathcal{S}_{PP}(p)$-semishapes coincide with $\mathcal{S}_{W}(p)$-semishapes. Hence, for every $p\geq 3$ and $n$, we have that
\[
\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{PP}}^{\sharp}(n,p)=\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{W}}^{\sharp}(n,p).
\]
However, the system $\mathcal{S}_{PP}$ `\textit{behaves worse}' than $\mathcal{S}_{W}$ from the view point of the current paper. For instance, the parameters of $\mathcal{S}_{PP}$ are $(r_1,r_2,L)=(2,3,2)$, and it gives a worse bound if we apply Theorem~\ref{mtheorem=slicerank}, compared with $(r_1,r_2,L)=(3,2,2)$ for the system $\mathcal{S}_{\mathrm{W}}$. Moreover, the system $\mathcal{S}_{PP}$ does not admit any dominant subsystem. Hence we are unable to apply dominant reductions directly to $\mathcal{S}_{PP}$; hence it is, at the first glance, unclear how to obtain a non-trivial lower bound of $\mathrm{ex}_{\mathcal{S}_{PP}}^{\sharp}(n,p)$.
We provide another example. Recall the system \eqref{S3} from Lemma~\ref{lemma=dominantreduction}. For every $p\geq 3$, the following system gives the same semishapes:
\begin{equation*}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
x_1-2x_2+x_6&=0,\\
x_1-2x_3+x_5&=0,\\
-2x_4+x_5+x_6&=0.
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{equation*}
This system itself is dominant and irreducible; we do not need repeat dominant reductions for several times for it. From this aspect, the system above `behaves better' than $\mathcal{S}_3$.
We note that Problem~\ref{problem=dominant} is visible only after we extend the framework from a single equation to a system of equations.
\begin{problem}\label{problem=Sauermann}
Find more systems $\mathcal{T}$ of $\mathbb{F}_p$-equations for which variants of the argument of Sauermann \cite{Sauermann} applies to obtain non-trivial upper bounds of $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}_{\mathcal{T}}(n)$.
\end{problem}
As we discussed in Remark~\ref{remark=difference}, the main difficulty here is extending the key lemma \cite[Lemma~3.1]{Sauermann}.
In the original paper \cite{Sauermann}, she considers extendability for a pair $(x,y)$. If we can extend the framework to one for a triple $(x,y,z)$ with providing a non-trivial upper bound of $\mathrm{ex}^{\sharp}$, then we may provide broader classes of systems for Problem~\ref{problem=Sauermann}.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors are grateful to the members, Wataru Kai, Akihiro Munemasa, Shin-ichiro, Seki and Kiyoto Yoshino, of the ongoing seminar on the Green--Tao theorem (on arithmetic progressions in the set of prime numbers) at Tohoku University launched in October, 2018. Thanks to this seminar, the first-named author has been intrigued with the subject of this paper. They thank Masayuki Asaoka and Kota Saito for comments. Masato Mimura is supported in part by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP17H04822, and
Norihide Tokushige is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP18K03399.
\bibliographystyle{amsalpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
The discovery of the Higgs boson at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has experimentally proven that fermions and gauge bosons masses in the Standard Model (SM) are generated via Brout-Englert-Higgs (BEH) mechanism. However, one of the key questions that still remains unexplained is the origin of light neutrino masses and mixings. A number of neutrino oscillation experiments have observed that, the solar and atmospheric neutrino mass splittings are $\Delta m^2_{12} \sim 10^{-5}$ $ \rm{eV}^2$ and $\Delta m^2_{13} \sim 10^{-3}$ $ \rm{eV}^2$, and the mixing angles are $\theta_{12} \sim 32^\circ$, $\theta_{23} \sim 45^\circ$, and
$\theta_{13} \sim 9^\circ$ \cite{deSalas:2017kay}. A Dirac mass term of the SM neutrinos can be generated by extending the SM to include right-handed neutrinos. However, this requires very small Yukawa couplings, that introduces $\mathcal{O}(10^{-11})$ order of magnitude hierarchy between SM fermion Yukawa couplings, and hence is unappealing. A different ansatz is that neutrinos are their own anti-particles and hence, their masses can have a different origin compared to the other SM fermions. One of such profound mechanisms is seesaw, where tiny eV masses of the Majorana neutrinos are generated from lepton number violating (LNV) $d=5$ operator $LLHH/\Lambda$~\cite{Weinberg:1979sa,Wilczek:1979hc}. Being, a higher dimensional
non-renormalizable operator, there can be different UV completed theories behind this operator, commonly known as, type-I, -II, and -III seesaw mechanisms. These models include extensions of the SM fermion/scalar contents by SM singlet fermions~\cite{Minkowski:1977sc,Mohapatra:1979ia,Yanagida:1979as,GellMann:1980vs,Schechter:1980gr,Babu:1993qv,Antusch:2001vn}, $SU(2)_L$ triplet scalar boson~\cite{Magg:1980ut,Cheng:1980qt,Lazarides:1980nt,Mohapatra:1980yp}, and $SU(2)_L$ triplet fermion~\cite{Foot:1988aq}, respectively.\\
Among the above, type-II seesaw model, where a triplet scalar field with the hypercharge $Y=+2$ is added to the SM, has an extended scalar sector. There are seven physical Higgs states that includes singly and doubly charged Higgs, CP even and odd neutral Higgs. The details of the Higgs spectra have been discussed in \cite{Arhrib:2011uy,Dev:2013ff}. The neutral component of the triplet acquires a vacuum expectation value (vev) $v_{\Delta}$, and generates neutrino masses through the Yukawa interactions. The same Yukawa interaction between the lepton doublet and the triplet scalar field also dictates the charged Higgs phenomenology in this model. The presence of a doubly charged Higgs ($H^{\pm\pm}$) is the most appealing feature of this model, and hence, a discovery of this exotic particle will be a smoking gun signature of type-II seesaw. \\
A number of searches have already been performed to search for the signatures of the doubly charged Higgs (see \cite{Akeroyd:2005gt} for Tevatron, and \cite{Perez:2008ha,Melfo:2011nx,delAguila:2008cj,Chakrabarti:1998qy,Aoki:2011pz,Akeroyd:2011zza,Chun:2013vma,delAguila:2013mia, Banerjee:2013hxa,kang:2014jia,Han:2015hba,Han:2015sca,Babu:2016rcr,Du:2018eaw,Antusch:2018svb} for LHC). Depending on the triplet vev, the doubly-charged Higgs boson can have distinct decay modes. For low vev $v_{\Delta} \lesssim 10^{-4}$ GeV, this can decay into same-sign di-lepton, whereas, for $v_{\Delta} \geq 10^{-4}$ GeV, this can decay to same-sign gauge bosons. For non-degenerate masses of doubly and singly charged Higgs, another possible decay is the cascade decay of a doubly charged Higgs to a singly charged Higgs and SM states. This has been explored in \cite{Perez:2008ha,Melfo:2011nx,delAguila:2008cj}. The CMS and ATLAS collaboration have searched for the same-sign di-lepton final states
with different flavors, and excluded the mass of the doubly-charged Higgs ($M_{H^{\pm \pm}})$ below 820 and 870 GeV, respectively, at 95$\%$ C.L. \cite{Aaboud:2017qph, CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036}. An alternative search where the $H^{\pm \pm}$ is produced in association with two jets, i.e., vector boson fusion gives relaxed constraints \cite{Khachatryan:2014sta, Sirunyan:2017ret}. Another scenario where doubly-charged Higgs decays to same-sign $W^\pm$ boson pairs. The collider signatures and the discovery prospects of this scenario have been discussed in \cite{Kanemura:2013vxa,Kanemura:2014goa,Kanemura:2014ipa}, and \cite{Mitra:2016wpr, Ghosh:2017pxl}. ATLAS collaboration have searched for the same final state and excluded the doubly-charged Higgs mass between 200 and 220 GeV at 95$\%$ C.L.~\cite{Aaboud:2018qcu}. Previous searches for $H^{\pm \pm}$ in the pair-production channel and their subsequent decays into same-sign leptons at LEP-II has put a constraint $M_{H^{\pm \pm}} > 97.3 $ GeV at $95 \%$ C.L. \cite{Abdallah:2002qj}. For discussions on Higgs triplet model at a linear collider, see \cite{Shen:2015bna,Blunier:2016peh,Cao:2016hvg,Guo:2016hjt,Agrawal:2018pci} and at $ep$ collider, see~\cite{Dev:2019hev}. Displaced vertex signatures have been discussed in Ref.~\cite{Dev:2018kpa,Antusch:2018svb}. A review on this model is presented in ~\cite{Cai:2017mow}.
While a number of searches at the LHC are ongoing to experimentally verify the presence of the doubly-charged Higgs boson, in this work we explore the impact of light neutrino mass hierarchy, neutrino oscillation parameters, as well as, the lightest neutrino mass scale $m_0$ on $H^{\pm \pm} $ searches. We relate the branching ratios of doubly and singly charged Higgs decays for both normal and inverted mass hierarchy. We find that among the different leptonic modes, the decay mode of doubly charged Higgs into two same-sign electron, and the decay mode of a singly charged Higgs into an electron and neutrino are the least uncertain for inverted neutrino mass ordering, and has the potential to differentiate neutrino mass hierarchy. We also discuss how the inclusion of uncertainties in the neutrino oscillation parameters affect the theory cross-section, which may in turn change the mass limits of doubly charged Higgs in individual channel. As it is well known that for c.m. energy $\sqrt{s}=13\ ( \text{or}\ 14)$ TeV LHC, production of multi-TeV $H^{\pm\pm}$ will be difficult due to suppressed cross-section. However, increasing c.m. energy one can probe heavier $H^{\pm\pm}$. Therefore we consider pair-production and associated production of the doubly-charged Higgs boson and its subsequent decays into leptonic states, including tau's, and analyse the discovery prospects of doubly charged Higgs at a future hadron collider (HE-LHC), that can operate with c.m. energy $\sqrt{s}=27$ TeV. We consider both the tri and four lepton final states, and present a detail analysis taking into account different possible SM background processes. We find that in addition to the associated production, the pair-production of doubly charged Higgs also gives a significant contribution to the tri-lepton final states. We consider a wide range of doubly charged Higgs mass, and explore the sensitivity reach with the projected luminosity (15 $\rm{ab}^{-1}$) of HE-LHC~\cite{Abada2019,Cepeda:2019klc}.
Our paper is organized as follows: we briefly review the basics of the type-II seesaw model in Sec.~\ref{model}. In Sec.~\ref{br}, we discuss leptonic branching ratios of doubly-charged ($H^{\pm\pm}$) and singly charged ($H^{\pm}$) Higgs, and the relation between $H^{\pm\pm}$ and $H^{\pm}$ decays. In Sec.~\ref{limit}, we discuss the effect of uncertainties in neutrino oscillation parameters on the production cross-section of multi-lepton signal. In Sec.~\ref{multilep}, we present the simulation of multilepton signal at $\sqrt{s}=27$ TeV LHC. Finally, we present our conclusions in Sec.~\ref{conclu}.
\section{Model description \label{model}}
In this section, we briefly discuss type-II seesaw model \cite{Magg:1980ut, Cheng:1980qt, Lazarides:1980nt, Mohapatra:1980yp}. The model is based on the gauge group as of the SM gauge group, \ $G_{SM} =\ SU(3)_C \times \ SU(2)_L \times \ U(1)_Y$. Apart from the SM particles, the particle spectrum also contains {one additional } $SU(2)_L $ triplet scalar $\Delta$ with hypercharge $\ \rm{Y_\Delta} = +2$ :
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta=\begin{pmatrix} \frac{\Delta^+}{\sqrt{2}} & \Delta^{++} \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(v_{\Delta}+\delta^0+i\eta^0) & -\frac{\Delta^+}{\sqrt{2}}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{eqnarray}
{The SM Higgs doublet is represented as follows, }
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi= \begin{pmatrix} \phi^+ \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(v_{\phi}+\phi^0+i\chi^0) \end{pmatrix} .
\end{eqnarray}
After electroweak symmetry breaking, the real part of neutral Higgs $\phi^0$ and $\delta^0$ acquire vevs, denoted as $v_{\phi}$ and $v_{\Delta}$, respectively. The two vevs satisfy $v^2=v^2_{\phi}+v^2_{\Delta}=(246 \, \, \rm{GeV})^2$. {Below, we discuss different terms of the Lagrangian. }
\begin{itemize}
\item The kinetic Lagrangian for the scalar sector is,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal L}_{\text{kin}} & = & \rm{(D_\mu \Phi)^\dagger (D^\mu \Phi)} \ + \ \rm{Tr} [(D_\mu \Delta)^\dagger (D^\mu \Delta)].
\end{eqnarray}
The covariant derivatives in Eq. 3 are defined as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\rm{D_\mu\Phi}=\rm{\partial_\mu\Phi+i\frac{g}{2}\tau^aW_\mu^a\Phi}+\rm{i g' \frac{Y_\Phi}{2}B_\mu\Phi},
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}\rm{D_\mu \Delta}=\rm{\partial_\mu \Delta+i\frac{g}{2}[\tau^aW_\mu^a,\Delta]}+\rm{i g' \frac{Y_\Delta}{2}B_\mu\Delta}.
\end{eqnarray}
Both $v_\phi \ \text{and} \ v_\Delta$ contribute to the masses of weak gauge bosons at tree level. {Therefore,} the $\rho$ - parameter (=$\frac{M_W^2}{M_Z^2 \cos^2\theta_W}$) in this model is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho = \frac{1 + \frac{2 v_\Delta^2}{v_\phi^2}}{1 + \frac{4 v_\Delta^2}{v_\phi^2}}.
\end{eqnarray} The current electroweak precision data~\cite{Patrignani:2016xqp} gives the value of $\rho$ parameter, $\rho=1.00037\pm0.00023$, which is $ 1.6 \sigma $ away from the tree-level SM prediction. We consider $ 2.18 \sigma $ experimental error on the measured central value of $\rho$ parameter and estimate a conservative bound on $v_\Delta, \ \text{i.e.}, \ v_\Delta \lesssim 2$ GeV. Thus the two vevs
satisfy $v_\Delta \ll v_\phi$.
\item The Yukawa Lagrangian of this model is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}\rm{ {\cal L}_{Y}(\Phi, \Delta)}&= {{\cal L}_{Y}^{SM}(\Phi)}& \ + { Y^\nu \ L_L^T \ C \ i \sigma_2 \ \Delta \ L_L \ }+\rm{h.c.}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, the first term in ${{\cal L}_{Y}(\Phi,\Delta)}$ represents the Yukawa interactions of the SM Higgs doublet ($\Phi$) and the second term is the needed Yukawa interaction of the triplet Higgs ($\Delta$), that generates neutrino mass. ${Y^\nu}$ is Yukawa coupling matrix, C is the charge conjugation operator, and $\sigma_2$ is the Pauli matrix. ${L_L}$ is the left chiral lepton doublet. Once, the triplet Higgs ($\Delta$) acquires vacuum expectation value $v_\Delta$, the second term in ${ {\cal L}_{Y}(\Phi, \Delta)}$ generates a Majorana mass for neutrino, which is given by,
\begin{eqnarray}
M^{\nu}= \sqrt{2} \ Y^\nu \ v_{\scriptscriptstyle\Delta}.
\end{eqnarray}
In the above $M^{\nu}$ is a complex symmetric $3 \times 3 $ matrix, which can be diagonalized by an unitary transformation defined as $M^\nu = V^*_{\rm{PMNS}} m^\nu_{d} V_{\rm{PMNS}}^\dagger$ . Here $m^\nu_d = \text{diag} (m_1,\ m_2,\ m_3)$, is diagonal light neutrino mass matrix, and $V_{\rm{PMNS}}$ is the neutrino mixing matrix parametrised by the three mixing angles ($\theta_{12}, \ \theta_{13},\ \theta_{23}$) and three phases ($\phi_1, \ \phi_2,\ \delta $).
\item The scalar potential \cite{Arhrib:2011uy} with the two Higgs fields $\Phi$ and $\Delta$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
V(\Phi,\Delta)&=&m^2\Phi^\dagger\Phi + M^2\rm{Tr}(\Delta^\dagger\Delta)+\left(\mu \Phi^Ti\sigma_2\Delta^\dagger \Phi+\rm{h.c.}\right)+\frac{\lambda}{4}(\Phi^\dagger\Phi)^2 \nonumber\\
&+&\lambda_1(\Phi^\dagger\Phi)\rm{Tr}(\Delta^\dagger\Delta)+\lambda_2\left[\rm{Tr}(\Delta^\dagger\Delta)\right]^2+\lambda_3\rm{Tr}[(\Delta^\dagger\Delta)^2]+\lambda_4\Phi^\dagger\Delta\Delta^\dagger\Phi. ~~~~~
\end{eqnarray}
%
All operators in the above scalar potential are self conjugate except the operator containing $\mu$. Therefore, all parameters except $\mu$ are real. Although $\mu$ can pick up a would-be CP phase, this phase is unphysical and can always be absorbed in a redefinition of the scalar fields. Together $Y^{\nu}$ and the $\mu$ term violate lepton number symmetry in this model. Minimization of $ \rm{V(\Phi,\Delta)}$ gives the following two conditions \cite{Arhrib:2011uy}:
\begin{eqnarray} M^2 &= &\ \frac{2 \mu v_{\phi}^2 - \sqrt{2}(\lambda_1 + \lambda_4)v_{\phi}^2 v_\Delta - 2\sqrt{2}(\lambda_2 + \lambda_3) v_{\Delta}^3}{ 2\sqrt{2} v_\Delta},\\
m^2 &=& \frac{\lambda v_{\phi}^2}{4} - \sqrt{2} \mu v_\Delta + \frac{(\lambda_1 + \lambda_4)v_{\Delta}^2}{2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Thus the two mass parameters $m^2$ and $M^2$ can be eliminated which leaves 8 free parameters ($v_\Delta,v_\phi,\mu,\lambda,\lambda_{1},\lambda_{2},\lambda_{3},\lambda_{4}$). Further $v^2 \equiv v^2_{\Phi}+v^2_{\Delta}=(246 \, \, \rm{GeV})^2$, reduces this set of free parameters down to seven.
{There are ten real scalar degrees of freedom present in this model, out of which three are the would be Goldstone bosons, and they give masses to the SM weak gauge bosons after electroweak symmetry breaking. The remaining seven states are the physical Higgs bosons. Doubly charged scalars, $\Delta^{\pm \pm} (\equiv H^{\pm\pm})$ is purely triplet, and is already in mass eigenbasis. The singly charged scalars ($\phi^{\pm}$,~$\Delta^{\pm}$) and neutral scalars
($\chi^{0},\eta^0,\phi^0,\delta^0$) are not physical fields, as they share non-trivial mixings among them. We denote the mass eigenstates of the singly charged scalars by $G^{\pm}$ and $H^{\pm}$, that are linear combinations of $\phi^{\pm}$ and $\Delta^{\pm}$. Similarly, the two CP-odd physical fields are denoted by $G^{0}$ and $A$ (linear combinations of $\chi^{0}$ and $\eta^{0}$)}. The SM Higgs field ($h$) and a heavy Higgs ($H$) are massbasis of the two neutral CP-even states $\phi^{0}$ and $\delta^{0}$. $G^\pm$ and $G^{0}$ are the three Goldstone bosons. These scalar mixings are small, as they are proportional to the triplet vev $(v_\Delta)$. The presence doubly charged Higgs ($H^{\pm\pm}$) is the unique feature of this model. For detail discussion on mass of these scalars and doublet triplet mixing angles, see \cite{Arhrib:2011uy}.
Assuming $v_\Delta \ll v_\phi$, the masses of the physical Higgs bosons are given by \cite{Arhrib:2011uy},
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{H^{\pm\pm}}^2 \simeq M_{\Delta}^2-\frac{\lambda_4}{2}v_\phi^2, \ M_{H^\pm}^2 \simeq M_\Delta^2-\frac{\lambda_4}{4}v_\phi^2, \
M_h^2 \simeq 2 v_\phi^2\lambda, \
M_H^2 = M_A^2 \simeq M_{\Delta}^2 \nonumber,
\end{eqnarray}
where $M_\Delta^2 \equiv \frac{\mu v_{\phi}^2}{\sqrt{2}v_\Delta}$. {We identify the $h$ field as the neutral SM Higgs, with its mass denoted as $M_h$. The mass of the SM Higgs is primarily governed by $\lambda$.}
The parameter $M_\Delta$ determines the mass scale of all other Higgs bosons.
Mass square differences between the scalars are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{H^{\pm}}^2 - M_{H^{\pm\pm}}^2 \simeq \frac{\lambda_4}{2}v_\phi^2, \
M_{H/A}^2 - M_{H^{\pm}}^2 \simeq \frac{\lambda_4}{4}v_\phi^2 .
\end{eqnarray}
Note that, the quartic coupling $\lambda_4$ of the potential {dictates} the mass splitting between $H^{\pm}-H^{\pm\pm}$ and $H(A)-H^{\pm}$. These two mass square differences are of similar order.
Taking into account the electroweak precision data \cite{Lavoura:1993nq}, the mass
splitting of triplet Higgs is constrained as $\delta M< $40$ \, \rm{GeV}$ \cite{Melfo:2011nx,Chun:2012jw}. Therefore, the value of $\lambda_4 $ defines three different mass spectrum of the triplet Higgs,
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] $\lambda_4 = 0 $ \ (Degenerate Scenario) : $M_{H^{\pm\pm}} \simeq M_{H^{\pm}} \simeq M_{H/A}$,
\item [$\bullet$]$\lambda_4 > 0 $ \ (Positive Scenario) : $M_{H^{\pm\pm}} < M_{H^{\pm}} < M_{H/A}$,
\item[$\bullet$] $\lambda_4 < 0 $ \ (Negative Scenario): $M_{H^{\pm\pm}} > M_{H^{\pm}} > M_{H/A}$.
\end{itemize}
In our entire analysis, we assume degenerate scenario for triplet Higgs mass, where all the triplet like scalars have same masses. The lightest neutral Higgs, that is primarily originated from the doublet $\Phi$ is considered as the SM like Higgs. In Degenerate Scenario, one triplet Higgs will not be able to decay into another triplet Higgs and a gauge boson. Going beyond Degenerate Scenario opens up a number of other decay possibilities, such as the cascade decays $H^{++} \to H^+ W^{+\star} \ , \ H^+ \to H/A \ W^{+\star} $ in Negative Scenario and $H^{+} \to H^{++} W^{-\star} \ , \ H/A \to H^+ W^{-\star} $ in Positive Scenario. As discussed in \cite{Aoki:2011pz}, these decays can be dominant if the mass differences between the charged Higgs states, $\delta M > 1$ GeV. In other mass ranges, these are very suppressed. In the next section, we discuss the decay widths and branching ratios of different Higgs states, assuming a degenerate scenario. Therefore, cascade
decay is not very relevant in our analysis.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{ee_brm.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{em_brm.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{et_brm.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{mt_brm.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{mm_brm.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{tt_brm.png}
\caption{Variation of branching ratios of $ H^{++} \to l^{+} l^{+} $ (where $l=e, \mu,\tau$) as a function of lightest neutrino mass $m_0$ ($m_0$ is $m_1$ in NH and $m_3$ in IH). The band represents the uncertainty in branching ratio due to $3\sigma$ variation of neutrino oscillation parameters. We vary the CP phases (Dirac and Majorana phases) in between $0-2\pi$. Blue (red) band represents IH (NH) of neutrino mass pattern.}
\label{fig:hppbr}
\end{figure}
\section{Branching ratios of $H^{\pm \pm }$ and $H^{\pm}$ \label{br}}
The decay properties of charged Higgs states in different $v_{\Delta}$ region has been discussed extensively in the literature~\cite{Perez:2008ha,Garayoa:2007fw}.
For $v_{\Delta}<10^{-4}$ GeV the dominant decay channel of the doubly-charged Higgs is $H^{\pm \pm}\to l_i^{\pm}l_j^{\pm}$ and singly-charged Higgs is $H^{\pm}\to l_i^{\pm}\nu$, which is clear from Figs. 4, 5 of ~\cite{Perez:2008ha}. In this region of $v_\Delta$ it will be possible to find out the correct neutrino mass ordering by measuring the leptonic branching ratios of the charged Higgs states \cite{Chun:2003ej}.
Note that, in the leptonic channel, the same Yukawa coupling governs both the doubly-charged and singly-charged Higgs decays. Therefore, the leptonic decays of these two Higgs states are related. Below, we discuss the different decay channels and the relation between $H^{\pm\pm}$ and $H^{\pm}$ decays in detail.
\begin{itemize}
\item $\boldsymbol{H^{\pm \pm}}$ \textbf{Decays} \\
Partial decay width of $H^{\pm\pm}$ to a pair of same-sign leptons ~\cite{Perez:2008ha} is given by
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{l_il_j} \equiv \Gamma(H^{\pm \pm}\to l_i^\pm l_j^\pm) = \frac{1}{4 \pi(1+\delta_{ij})}\abs{Y^\nu_{ij}}^2 M_{H^{\pm \pm}}.
\end{equation}
We consider $v_{\Delta}<10^{-4}$ GeV, and hence, $H^{\pm \pm}$ predominantly decays to leptonic final states. The
decay branching ratio (BR) has the following form,
\begin{equation}
{\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm \pm}\to l_i^\pm l_j^\pm) = \frac{\Gamma_{l_il_j}}{\sum_{kl} \Gamma_{l_kl_l}} = \frac{2}{(1+\delta_{ij})} \frac{\abs{Y^\nu_{ij}}^2}{\sum_{kl}\abs{Y^\nu_{kl}}^2 }, \end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\quad \sum_{kl}\abs{Y^\nu_{kl}}^2 = \dfrac{1}{2v^2_\Delta}\sum_i m_i^2.
\end{equation}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:hppbr}, we plot the ${\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm \pm}\to l_i^\pm l_j^\pm)$ as a function of lightest neutrino mass ($m_0$) for both normal (NH) and inverted (IH) mass hierarchy. Blue and red bands represent IH and NH, respectively. Similar plots have already been presented in ~\cite{Perez:2008ha,Garayoa:2007fw} considering the $3\sigma$ range of neutrino mixing angles and mass square differences. But here we also vary all phases in between $0-2\pi$ and we consider current value of neutrino oscillation parameters~\cite{deSalas:2017kay}, including nonzero $\theta_{13}$. Some notable points about these plots are as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $m_{0}>0.1$ eV represents the quasi-degenerate neutrino mass spectrum, which is disallowed by cosmological data \cite{Aghanim:2018eyx}.
\item For $m_{0}<0.1$ eV, and for the modes $ e^\pm e^\pm, e^\pm \mu^\pm, e^\pm \tau^\pm$, the maximum value of the branching ratio in IH is larger than that in NH. For $\mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm},\mu^{\pm}\tau^{\pm},\tau^{\pm}\tau^{\pm}$ mode, it is the reverse. This behaviour can be understood from Eq.~\ref{eq_emu},~\ref{eq_ee},~\ref{eq_mumu}, which are the ratios between maximum branching ratio in IH and NH for a given decay channel in the hierarchical regime with $m_0\approx0$. The exact equations are presented in Sec.~\ref{app}.
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{IH}}}{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{NH}}}
\approx\dfrac{c_{13}^2 \left(c_{12}^2 s_{13} s_{23}+2 c_{23} c_{12} s_{12}-s_{12}^2 s_{13} s_{23}\right)^2}{2 \left(0.2 c_{12} c_{23} s_{12}+s_{13} s_{23} \left(0.2 s_{12}^2+1\right)\right){}^2}\approx6.6, \label{eq_emu}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\dfrac{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } e^{\pm })_{\text{IH}}}{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } e^{\pm })_{\text{NH}}}
\approx\dfrac{ c_{13}^4}{2\left(0.2 c_{13}^2 s_{12}^2+s_{13}^2\right)^2}\approx50 ,\label{eq_ee}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to \mu^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{IH}}}{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to \mu^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{NH}}}\approx \dfrac{c_{23}^4}{2 (0.2 c_{12}^2 c_{23}^2 +c_{13}^2 s_{23}^2)^2}\approx0.45 . \label{eq_mumu}
\end{equation}
In the above, we consider the values of oscillation parameters, that maximize the numerator and denominator separately, as we are interested in the relative comparison of maximum branching ratios in NH and IH. The approximate
expressions in the above equations clearly show that for IH neutrino mass spectrum, $e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$ and $e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$ final states will be more favourable, as these channels can have large branching ratios. Although the final state $e^{\pm}\tau^{\pm}$ has large branching, however, further leptonic decays of $\tau^{\pm}$ will give suppression in cross-section.
\item There exist a large uncertainty in branching ratios, that somewhat reduces for the choice of CP phases to be zero. Among the different leptonic modes, $H^{\pm \pm }\to e^\pm e^\pm $ in IH is the most favourable mode for the entire range of $m_0$, as this decay mode has a less uncertainty in branching ratio, and there is a definite predicted lower value of ${\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm})$. Irrespective of the value of lightest neutrino mass, and the variation of oscillation parameters, the discovery of $H^{\pm \pm}$ will therefore be more favourable in this channel. An observation of $H^{\pm\pm}$ in any other leptonic decay mode except $e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$ mode with a branching ratio limit ${{\rm{BR}}}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm})< 0.015$ will indicate normal mass hierarchy in the light neutrino sector.
\item Note that, except $H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm}$ in IH, all other decay modes heavily depend on the oscillation parameters, and $m_0$. Moreover, for those decays, there may exist a cancellation region, in which the branching ratio becomes highly suppressed. This occurs when different terms in the partial decay widths cancel out each other. This is to note that, for $H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm}$ in IH, such cancellation regions do not exist. As an example, the cancellation region for $H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm}$ in NH, that exists in between $10^{-3} \ \text{eV}\lesssim m_0\lesssim10^{-2} \ \text{eV}$ can be explained as follows:
\text{ } For the choice $m_1=10^{-3}$ eV, the largest neutrino mass $ \sum_{i}m_i^2\approx m_3^2 \approx 4 \times 10^{-3}\ \text{eV}^2$. Considering the CP phases, $\phi_1=2\delta-\phi_2=\pi$, one obtains,
\begin{equation}
{{\rm{BR}}}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm})_{\text{NH}}\approx 10^{-6} \dfrac{(-\ c_{12}^2+8 s_{12}^2 c_{13}^2- 60 s_{13}^2)^2}{4 \times 10^{-3}}\approx 10^{-4}.
\end{equation}
The branching ratio in IH, is instead significantly large for the above choice of parameters. For similar values of $m_0=m_3=10^{-3} \ \text{eV},\phi_1,\phi_2 \ \text{and} \ \delta$ as mention in case of NH, one obtains, \begin{equation}
{{\rm{BR}}}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm})_{\text{IH}}\approx 10^{-6} \dfrac{(-60 \ c_{12}^2+ 60 \ s_{12}^2 c_{13}^2- s_{13}^2)^2}{ 7\times 10^{-3}}\approx 10^{-2}.
\end{equation}
\item For NH scenario, $H^{\pm \pm}\to \mu^\pm \mu^\pm /\mu^\pm \tau^\pm /\tau^\pm \tau^\pm$ channels have least uncertainty for $m_{0}<0.01$ eV, and hence the discovery of $H^{\pm \pm}$ into these above mentioned final states are more favourable for NH with $m_0< 0.01$ eV. Due to further decay of $\tau$ into leptonic states, that involves smaller branching ratio, the overall cross-section in the channel with $\tau$ will be relatively smaller than the channel with $\mu \mu$. Furthermore, a doubly charged Higgs can not be fully reconstructed with the channel involving leptons from $\tau$, due to the presence of missing energy. Therefore, $H^{\pm \pm}\to \mu^\pm \mu^\pm$ decay mode will be more effective compare to other two $H^{\pm \pm}\to \mu^\pm \tau^\pm /\tau^\pm \tau^\pm$.
\end{enumerate}
\text{ } As we will discuss in the next section, the variation of decay branching ratios of $H^{\pm \pm} $ with oscillation parameters, as well as, the dependency on neutrino mass hierarchy have large effect on the theory cross-section of the four-lepton final states.
\pagebreak
\item $\boldsymbol{H^{\pm}}$ \textbf{Decay} \\
$H^{\pm}$ decays predominantly to a lepton and neutrino for $v_{\Delta} < 10^{-4}$ GeV. The partial decay width of $H^{\pm}$ to a lepton and neutrino ~\cite{Perez:2008ha} is given by,
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{l_j\nu_i} \equiv \Gamma(H^{\pm}\to l_j^\pm \nu_i) = \frac{1}{16 \pi}\abs{Y_{ij}^+}^2 M_{H^{\pm}}.
\end{equation}
In the above, $Y^+ = \cos\theta^+ \frac{m^\nu_{d}V_{PMNS}^\dagger}{v_\Delta}$ , $\theta^+$ is the singly charged Higgs mixing angle. For $v_{\Delta}<10^{-4}$ GeV, branching ratio for the decay, $H^{\pm}\to l_j^\pm {\nu}_i$ is given by
\begin{equation}
{\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm}\to l_j^{\pm}\nu_i) = \frac{\Gamma_{l_j\nu_i}}{\sum_{kl} \Gamma_{l_k\nu_{l}}} = \frac{\abs{Y_{ij}^+}^2}{\sum_{kl}\abs{Y_{kl}^+}^2 },
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\sum_{kl}\abs{Y_{kl}^+}^2 = \dfrac{\cos^2\theta^+}{v^2_\Delta}\sum_i m_i^2.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{enu_br.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{munu_br.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=7cm,height=6cm]{taunu_br.pdf}
\caption{Branching ratios of $ H^{+} \to l^{+} \nu $ (where $l=e, \mu,\tau$). Blue(red) band represents IH(NH) of neutrino mass pattern .}
\label{fig:hpbr}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:hpbr}, we plot ${\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm}\to l_j^\pm \nu) \equiv \sum_i {\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm}\to l_j^\pm \nu_i)$ as a function of lightest neutrino mass ${m_0}$, where we consider $3\sigma$ variation of neutrino oscillation parameters, and variation of CP phases between $0-2\pi$. Important points to be noticed are:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Note that, for $m_{0} < 0.1$ eV and for IH, $ H^{\pm} \to e^{\pm} \nu $ has a large branching ratio ($\sim$ 0.5). This decay channel is however, has a smaller branching ratio for NH. In Sec.~\ref{app} (Appendix) this branching ratio has been calculated for $m_{0} \approx 0$. Maximum possible value of $\text{BR}(H^{\pm}\to e^{\pm } \nu)$ in IH compare to that in NH is given by,
\begin{equation}\dfrac{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm}\to e^{\pm } \nu)_{\text{IH}}}{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm}\to e^{\pm } \nu)_{\text{NH}}}
\approx\dfrac {c_{13}^2} {2(0.04 c_{13}^2 s_{12}^2+s_{13}^2)}\approx13. \end{equation}
\item Another important point to be noticed, is that, for $H^{\pm}$ the uncertainty in branching ratio is less compare to that for $H^{\pm\pm}$. This occurs because the Yukawa couplings in case of $H^{\pm}$ decay are independent of two Majorana phases $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$. This is evident from the equations given in Sec.~\ref{app}.
\item Among the three decay modes of $H^{\pm}$, $ H^{\pm} \to e^{\pm} \nu $ has less uncertainty in the branching ratio, as the respective Yukawa is independent of Dirac CP phase $\delta$ (see Sec.~\ref{app}). This branching ratio depends on $m_0, \ \theta_{12},\ \theta_{13}$. The other two branching ratios for the muon and tau decay modes depend on $\theta_{23}$ and $\delta$ as well.
\item The uncertainty in branching ratios for $ H^{\pm} \to \mu^{\pm} \nu $ and $ H^{\pm} \to \tau^{\pm} \nu $ are nearly equal. This is clear from the top right and bottom plots of Fig.~\ref{fig:hpbr}, where both the blue bands (in case of IH) have similar spread. This feature also exists in case of NH.
\end{enumerate}
\hspace{0.5cm}Assuming 100$\%$ branching ratios in leptonic decays, CMS and ATLAS searches have constrained $H^{\pm \pm}$ below 820 GeV and 870 GeV, respectively. This is evident from the above discussion, that the branching ratio in any of the leptonic channels can not reach upto $100\%$. In the next section, we re-evaluate the production cross-section of four-lepton final state, originating from pair-production of doubly charged Higgs, for different leptonic channels, taking into account the uncertainties of branching ratios. As an example, we consider the decay channels $ H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm} / e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} / e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} $ in IH, as they offer largest values of branching ratios compared to NH. Note that, the maximum value of branching ratio for the other three decay modes $\mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} , \mu^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}$ and $ \tau^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ are relatively smaller in IH.
We provide a sample benchmark point in Table.~\ref{fig:BP1}, that shows $e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$ and $e^{\pm}\tau^{\pm}$ has large branching ratios in IH as compared to the other modes. This is to clarify that simultaneously the decay modes can not have maximum branching ratios. For the estimation in NH, we assume the decay modes $ H^{\pm \pm} \to \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} / \mu^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} / \tau^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} $, as they offer relatively large branching ratios.
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,height=7cm]{eeenu_corel2_new.png}%
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,height=7cm]{emuenu_corel2_new.png}
\includegraphics[width=12cm,height=7.5cm]{mmmnu_corel_new.png}
\caption{Variation of leptonic branching ratios of singly charged Higgs with the leptonic branching ratios of doubly charged Higgs. Here $\nu$ implies all the neutrino states $\nu_{1,2,3}$. See the texts for the details.}
\label{fig:corel}
\end{figure}
\item \textbf{Relating } $\boldsymbol{H^{\pm\pm}}$ \textbf{and} $\boldsymbol{H^{\pm}}$ \textbf{Decays}
\hspace{0.5cm}The doubly charged Higgs $H^{\pm \pm}$ as well as singly charged Higgs $H^{\pm}$ interact with the leptons through the same Yukawa couplings, that determine light neutrino masses. Therefore, the branching ratios of $H^{\pm \pm}$ into $l^{\pm} l^{\pm}$, and the branching ratio of $H^{\pm}$ into $ l^{\pm} \nu$ are related. Fig.~\ref{fig:corel} shows the variation of $H^{\pm} $ branching with $ H^{\pm\pm} $ branching for different leptonic decay channels. Here we consider four illustrative samples of lightest neutrino masses $(m_{0}= 0.0008,0.007,0.02,0.05 \ \text{eV})$ that covers almost entire allowed light neutrino spectrum. Different colour codes indicate different values of $m_0$. The spread of these color bands along horizontal and vertical direction represent the uncertainty in BR($H^{\pm\pm}\to l_{i}^{\pm}l_{j}^{\pm}$) and BR($H^{\pm}\to l_{i}^{\pm}\nu$), respectively. In the upper left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:corel}, we show the variation of BR($H^{\pm\pm}\to e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$) with the variation of BR($H^{\pm}\to e^{\pm}{\nu}$), where we assume IH for neutrino mass ordering. There is a small variation in BR($H^{\pm}\to e^{\pm}{\nu}$) for a given value of BR($H^{\pm\pm}\to e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$) that occurs due to the variation of oscillation parameters. Upper right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:corel} represents the variation of BR($H^{\pm}\to e^{\pm}\nu$) with BR($H^{\pm\pm}\to e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$), again assuming IH as neutrino mass ordering. This also shows similar features as the previous plot. The plot in the lower panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:corel} shows large variation of BR($H^{\pm}\to \mu^{\pm}\nu$) with BR($H^{\pm\pm}\to \mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$) for NH. For smaller $m_0$, the BR($H^{\pm\pm}\to \mu^{\pm}\nu$) has a large dependency on oscillation parameters.
\end{itemize}
As we quantify in the next section, the uncertainty in branching ratios can have large impact on the theory cross-section.
\section{ Pair-production cross-section for $\sqrt{s}=13\, \text{TeV}$ LHC \label{limit}}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:cross}, we plot the production cross-section of ${H^{\pm\pm}}$ as a function of $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ at LHC with $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. we also show the cross-section for a future $pp$ collider HE-LHC that can operate with center of mass energy 27 TeV. Here we show both pair ( $p p \to H^{++} H^{--}$) and associated ($p p \to H^{++} H^{-} + h.c.$) production modes. Cross sections for the production of $ H^{++} H^{--}$(mediated by $\gamma^{\star}/Z^{\star}$) and $ H^{++} H^{-}$(mediated by $W^{+\star}$) are comparable. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cross}, the production cross-section of $ H^{+} H^{--}$(mediated by $W^{-\star}$) is smaller than that of $ H^{++} H^{-}$, which can be understood from parton distribution functions of proton. At $p\bar{p}$ collider both are the same. We consider a $K$-factor as 1.25 \cite{Muhlleitner:2003me} for the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:cross}. In our analysis we assume degenerate mass spectrum for the singly and doubly charged Higgs.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{subfigure}{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=7.6cm,height=5cm]{13_cros.pdf}
\label{fig:sfig1}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=7.6cm,height=5cm]{27_cros.pdf}
\label{fig:sfig2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Pair and associated production cross-section of $H^{\pm\pm}$ as a function of $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$.}
\label{fig:cross}
\end{figure}
CMS and ATLAS collaboration have already placed constraint on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ by analyzing the leptonic decay channels of $ H^{\pm\pm}$ \cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036, Aaboud:2017qph}. {A degenerate mass spectrum for charged scalars and BR($ H^{\pm\pm} \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{\pm} $)= 100\% have been assumed in the analysis. The CMS analysis focussed on the tri-lepton and four-lepton final states originating from the leptonic decays of $ H^{\pm\pm} {\rm{and} } \, H^{\pm}$.} ATLAS searches considered pair production of $ H^{\pm\pm}$ and their subsequent decay into
$e^{\pm} e^{\pm} , e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} , \mu^{\pm} \mu^{\pm}$ states. As a result of these searches, limits on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$
vary between 770 GeV and 870 GeV at 95$\%$ C.L. CMS collaboration studied both pair and associated production channels of $ H^{\pm\pm}$ and subsequent decay of $ H^{\pm\pm}$ and $ H^{\pm}$ to different leptonic states. Limits on $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$ obtained from the combined study of both the channels vary between 535 to 820 GeV at 95$\%$ C.L, for $100$\% branching to each leptonic state. This limit vary between 396 to 712 GeV, if only the pair production channel is considered. The most stringent constraint $M_{H^{\pm\pm}} > 820 $ GeV has been given by assuming $ H^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} $ decay, and this takes into account both
pair and associated productions. The CMS analysis~\cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036} has further considered few benchmark points, and has given limits on $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$. However, the PMNS mixing angle $\theta_{13}$ has been assumed as zero, that is inconsistent with the present neutrino oscillation data.
The above mentioned searches include pair and associated production of $ H^{\pm\pm} $ and only its leptonic decay modes, so the observed limit on $ M_{H^{\pm\pm}} $ is valid only for low triplet vev $v_\Delta \leq 10^{-4}$ GeV, where the di-leptonic branching is maximum. {As this is evident from the discussion presented in the previous section, the maximum possible branching in each channel can never be $100\%$, rather can be at most $73\%$ (for $H^{\pm\pm} \to \mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ in NH). Instead of considering BR($H^{\pm\pm} \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{\pm}$ ) = 100\%, we re-scale the theory cross-section with appropriate branching ratios.
This somewhat weakens the individual bounds from different channels.
In context of BNT model~\cite{Ghosh:2018drw} it has been shown that taking into account neutrino oscillation data one can lower the current CMS bound on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}} $.
For illustration, we focus on the final states with $e^{\pm} e^{\pm} e^{\mp} e^{\mp}$, $e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} e^{\mp} \tau^{\mp}$ and $e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} e^{\mp} \mu^{\mp}$. Due to the absence of any cancellation region, the first channel is the least uncertain. We note that, apart from the dependency on neutrino oscillation parameter, the limit from individual channel also depends on the value of lightest neutrino mass $m_0$. }
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{ee_band1.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{em_band1.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{et_band1.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{ee_band2.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{em_band2.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{et_band2.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{ee_band3.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{em_band3.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.5cm]{et_band3.png}\\
\caption{The blue (red) bands for IH (NH) correspond to the theory cross-section for the channel $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_k^{-} l_l^{-} $ obtained by including $3\sigma$ variation of neutrino oscillation parameters. Black line represents the observed limit from CMS analysis~\cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036}. The horizontal panels in row 1-3 represent $m_0=(0.0008,0.007,0.02) \ \text{eV}$. In 1st, 2nd and 3rd columns we consider the decay of $ H^{\pm\pm} $ to $e^{\pm} e^{\pm} $ , $e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} $ and $e^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} $, respectively.}
\label{fig:band}
\end{figure}
{In Fig.~\ref{fig:band}, we show the production cross-section of $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to e^{+} e^{+} e^{-} e^{-}$, $e^{+} \mu^{+} e^{-} \mu^{-}$, and $e^{+} \tau^{+} e^{-} \tau^{-}$ at LHC for $\sqrt{s} = 13\, $TeV. The coloured band represents the variation of cross-section due to $3\sigma$ uncertainty in neutrino oscillation parameters. As illustrative points, we choose three values of lightest neutrino masses $m_{0}={0.0008, 0.007,0.02} \ \text{eV}$, that falls in hierarchical mass regime. The blue (red) band corresponds to IH (NH) neutrino mass spectrum. The
black line represents the observed limit from 13 TeV CMS analysis \cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036}. For a given value of the lightest neutrino mass $m_0$, the upper boundary in these bands is determined from $\sigma(p p \to H^{++} H^{--})$ folded with the square of maximum possible BR($H^{\pm\pm} \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{\pm}$). Similarly, the lower line represents the minimum value of BR($H^{\pm\pm} \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{\pm}$). Couple of points are in order :
\begin{itemize}
\item
The total cross-section has a large variation, specially for $e^+\mu^+e^-\mu^-$ and $e^{+} \tau^{+} e^{-} \tau^{-}$ channels. The $e^{+}e^{+} e^{-}e^{-}$ channel in IH is the least uncertain, as this has a definite lower value of the cross-section.
\item
Due to relatively smaller branching ratio, the cross-section in NH for these modes are lower than the maximal possible cross section in IH.
\item
The drop in cross-section for $ e^{+} \mu^{+} e^{-} \mu^{-}$ and $e^{+} \tau^{+} e^{-} \tau^{-}$ occurs, due to the cancellation between different terms in $M_{12}^{\nu}$ and $M_{13}^{\nu}$.
\end{itemize}
Taking into account the branching ratios, the limit from each of the leptonic channels somewhat weakens, as compare to the analysis presented in \cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036}. However, the combined limit might be comparable to that analysis. For the above modes, IH can give the best constraint. The cross-section for NH is order of magnitude smaller in the hierarchical limit, and therefore, competitive limits can not be placed on $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$ in the above channels, if light neutrinos follow NH. We tabulate the predicted value of maximum possible branching ratios in Table.~\ref{fig:limit}, where each entry represents the maximum possible value of BR($ H^{\pm} \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{\pm} $) for a given value of $m_0$. The value within the bracket denotes the best lower limit on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$, from each channel.
In Fig.~\ref{masslimit_NH}, we present plots similar to that of Fig.~\ref{fig:band}, considering the decay of $H^{\pm\pm}$ to $\mu^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} $ , $\mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} $ and $\tau^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} $. The different plots represent the production cross-section of $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to \mu^{+} \mu^{+} \mu^{-} \mu^{-}$, $\mu^{+} \tau^{+} \mu^{-} \tau^{-}$ and $\tau^{+} \tau^{+}\tau^{-} \tau^{-}$ at LHC for $\sqrt{s} = 13\, $ TeV. We use the same color code and the same values of lightest neutrino masses as used in Fig.~\ref{fig:band}. For these modes, the maximal possible cross-section in NH are higher as compared to IH. Therefore, competitive limits on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ can be derived in the above mentioned channels, if NH is assumed. The derived limits on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ are tabulated in Table.~\ref{fig:limit}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{mumu_band1.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{mut_band1.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{tt_band1.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{mumu_band2.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{mut_band2.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{tt_band2.png}\\
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{mumu_band3.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{mut_band3.png}
\includegraphics[scale=1,width=5.2cm,height=4.3cm]{tt_band3.png}\\
\caption{The blue (red) bands for IH (NH) correspond to the theory cross-section for the channel $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_k^{-} l_l^{-} $ obtained by including $3\sigma$ variation of neutrino oscillation parameters. Black line represents the observed limit from CMS analysis~\cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036}. The horizontal panels in row 1-3 represent $m_0=(0.0008,0.007,0.02) \ \text{eV}$. In 1st, 2nd and 3rd columns we consider the decay of $ H^{\pm\pm} $ to $\mu^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} $ , $\mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} $ and $\tau^{\pm} \tau^{\pm} $, respectively.}
\label{masslimit_NH}
\end{figure}
In CMS search combined limits have been presented which result from the combined analysis of both the pair and associated production channels. Also, for the benchmark studies, their analysis combines different leptonic modes. Such a study for the combined limit is beyond the scope of this paper.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{5}{|c|}{Maximum value of BR($ H^{\pm\pm} \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{\pm}$) $(M_{H^{\pm\pm}} \text{[GeV]})$} \\ \hline
Decay mode &$m_{0}=0.0008$ eV & $m_{0}=0.007$ eV \quad & $m_{0}=0.02$ eV \qquad & Mass Hierarchy \\ \hline
$e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$ & 0.478 (435)&0.476 (435) &0.454 (424) & IH \\ \hline
$e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$& 0.537 (495)&0.547 (503)& 0.552 (503) &IH \\ \hline
$e^{\pm}\tau^{\pm}$ & 0.583 (373)&0.594 (376)& 0.594 (376) & IH \\ \hline
$\mu^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$ &0.410 (465) &0.424 (478)&0.434 (482)&NH\\ \hline
$\mu^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$ &0.604 (428) & 0.656 (440) & 0.735 (450) & NH \\ \hline
$ \tau^{\pm}\tau^{\pm}$ & 0.363($<200$)&0.382($<200$)&0.404($<200$) & NH \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{ Maximum possible branching ratio for the decay mode $ H^{\pm\pm} \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{\pm} $. We also show the corresponding lower limit on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ in bracket obtained from the channel $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_i^{-} l_j^{-}$ (Here $l_i^+ = e^+ / \mu^+ / \tau^+ $). We use \cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036} to derive the limits.}
\label{fig:limit}
\end{table}
As discussed in \cite{Dev:2016dja,Borah:2018yxd}, the $3\sigma$ sensitivity reach of a doubly-charged Higgs in minimal left right symmetric model is less than 1.3 TeV, where a c.m.energy $\sqrt{s}=14$ TeV and $3\ \text{ab}^{-1}$ integrated luminosity have been assumed. Another study on charged Higgs in the context of minimal super-symmetric model \cite{Aboubrahim:2018tpf} compares the discovery potential of HL-LHC and HE-LHC. In Ref.~\cite{Crivellin:2018ahj}, the phenomenology of a $SU(2)$-singlet doubly charged scalar has been discussed at HL-LHC.
In Ref.~\cite{Mitra:2016wpr}, pair production of $H^{\pm\pm}$ and its subsequent decay to same-sign dilepton has been explored at 13 TeV and 14 TeV LHC for $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ upto 700 GeV. Fig.~6 of Ref.~\cite{Mitra:2016wpr} shows that 13 TeV and 14 TeV cross-sections are not very different.
It is evident from Fig.~\ref{fig:cross}, that the pair production cross-section of $H^{\pm\pm}$ at 13 TeV LHC becomes smaller for higher mass. For $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}=1.3$ TeV, the cross-section is less than $10^{-5}$ pb, whereas at HE-LHC it is around $10^{-4}$ pb. Therefore, assuming $3\ \text{ab}^{-1}$ ($15\ \text{ab}^{-1}$) integrated luminosity, approximately 60 (3000) number of $H^{\pm\pm}$ with mass $1.3$ TeV can be produced at HL-LHC (HE-LHC). Increase in sensitivity for higher mass range will be possible for HE-LHC. Therefore, to study the discovery prospects of heavier $H^{\pm \pm}$ and $ H^{\pm}$, we consider higher center of mass energy, i.e., the HE-LHC setup with $\sqrt{s}=27$ TeV \footnote{While preparing the manuscript for this work, Ref.~\cite{deMelo:2019asm} appeared in arXiv. This considers pair-production of doubly charged Higgs and subsequent decays at HE-LHC. We consider both pair and associated production, oscillation parameter dependency, and the correct values of the leptonic branching ratios which has largely been overlooked in the literature.}.
In the next section we present the collider analysis for multilepton signatures of $H^{\pm\pm}$, where we assume BR($ H^{\pm\pm} \to e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm} $) = 0.547, corresponding to $m_0 = $0.007 eV, and IH as neutrino mass ordering. The other branching ratios are given in Table.~\ref{fig:BP1}. For completeness, in our analysis, we however consider all leptonic modes, with their corresponding branching ratios. Note that, other than the pair-production by Drell-Yan process, the photon fusion can also contribute to the pair-production of doubly charged Higgs. It has been pointed out in~\cite{Cai:2017mow}, that for 13 TeV, the channel contributes at most 10$\%$ to the pair-production of doubly charged Higgs states. However, there are different issues, regarding large uncertainties in PDFs. Therefore one needs to evaluate this channel carefully. We do not consider this channel in our present analysis.
\section{Multi-lepton Signals from $H^{\pm \pm}$ and $H^{\pm}$ for $\sqrt{s} = 27\, \text{TeV}$ HE-LHC \label{multilep}}
We consider the set-up for a future $p p $ collider HE-LHC, that can operate with a c.m.energy $\sqrt{s}=27$ TeV, and analyse the tri-lepton and four-lepton channels in detail. To simulate the signal samples, we implement the model in
FeynRules(v2.3) \cite{Alloul:2013bka}. The UFO output is then fed into MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO(v2.6) \cite{Alwall:2014hca} that generates the parton-level events. We use the default PDFs NNPDF23LO1 \cite{Ball:2013hta} for computation. We perform parton showering and hadronization with Pythia8 \cite{Sjdostrand:2007gs} and carry out the detector simulations with Delphes(v3.4.1) \cite{deFavereau:2013fsa}. Finally data analysis and ploting is done in ROOT(v6.14/04) \cite{Brun:1997pa}.
We choose the degenerate mass spectrum for charged Higgses for which the most promising signals are $4$ lepton and $3$ lepton final states, arising from pair and associated production of doubly charged Higgs.
\subsection{$4l$ Final State }
{This originates from the pair-production of $H^{++}$ and its subsequent decays $H^{\pm \pm} \to l^{\pm} l^{\pm}$. Therefore, the signal is represented by the following chain, }
\begin{itemize}
\item
Signal : $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_k^{-} l_l^{-} $, ( with $l_i^{\pm} = e^{\pm} / \mu^{\pm} / \tau^{\pm} $).
\end{itemize}
The $\tau$ in the final state, further decays into fully hadronic, or leptonic final states. For our analysis, we consider leptonic decays of $\tau$, and therefore, collect all the event samples with $e, \mu$ in the final state. There are a number of SM processes that can mimic
the signal, hence are considered as SM background. Here we list the following processes as dominant SM background:
\begin{itemize}
\item $ ZZ\ :\ p p \to Z Z \to l_i^{+} l_i^{-} l_j^{+} l_j^{-} $
\item $t \bar{t} Z \ : \ p p \to t \bar{t} Z \to l_i^{+} l_j^{-} l_k^{+} l_k^{-} + b \bar{b} + \slashed{E}_{T}$
\item $t \bar{t} W \ : \ p p \to t \bar{t} W^{\pm} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{-} l_k^{\pm} + b \bar{b} + \slashed{E}_{T}$
\item $t \bar{t} \ : \ p p \to t \bar{t} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{-} + b \bar{b} + \slashed{E}_{T} $
\item $VVV \ ( V = Z \ \text{or} \ W^\pm) \ : \ p p \to VVV ,\ V \to l_i^+ l_i^- \
\text{or} \ l_i^\pm \slashed{E}_{T} \text{or} \ jj $
\item $WZ \ :\ p p \to W^{\pm} Z \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{+} l_j^{-} + \slashed{E}_{T}$.
\item $t \bar{t}t \bar{t} \ : \ p p \to t \bar{t} t \bar{t} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{-} l_k^{+} l_m^{-} + 2b \bar{b} + \slashed{E}_{T}$
\end{itemize}
Among all these backgrounds, $ZZ, \ t \bar{t} Z$, $W^{\pm} W^{\mp} Z$ processes lead to irreducible backgrounds. However, a few other SM processes, such as, $t \bar{t},\ t \bar{t}W, \ W Z$ with their subsequent decays can also give rise to four-lepton final states, due to the misidentification of jets as leptons. Multi-lepton events ($N^{l} > 4$) from $p p \to ZZZ \to 6 l$ ($l=e, \mu$) can also mimic the signal due to detector inefficiency in lepton reconstruction, or if the lepton is too soft, and does not pass the selection cuts. Additionally, one of the $Z$ bosons in the above mentioned background can decay to two hadronic taus, that can also mimic the signal. As we will show below, most of the backgrounds are reduced significantly after imposing $Z$-veto, as well as, selecting a window on the $l^{\pm} l^{\pm}$ invariant mass.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:cross}, we show the pair-production cross-section of $H^{\pm \pm}$ for $\sqrt{s} \ = 27$ TeV. The cross-section varies from $10^{-2}$ pb for $M_{H^{ \pm \pm}} = 400$ GeV
to $10^{-6}$ pb for $M_{H^{ \pm \pm}} = 3$ TeV. As the cross-section is gradually decreasing with increasing mass, it will be difficult to probe very heavy $H^{\pm \pm}$.
Here we present a benchmark point with $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$ = 1 TeV to show a detail cut-efficiency. We consider a triplet vev $v_{\Delta}$ as $10^{-8}$ GeV. We re-iterate that, for the analysis, we consider IH neutrino mass ordering and the following set of oscillation parameters, for which $H^{\pm \pm } \to e^{\pm}\mu^{\pm}$ is the most dominant decay channel with a branching ratio 0.547:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\theta_{12} = 0.6567, \ \theta_{13} = 0.1567, \ \theta_{23} = 0.7385,$
\item $ \phi_1 = 3.0614, \ \phi_2 = 5.9, \ \delta = 0.2029,$
\item $m_1 = 0.04902$ eV, $m_2=0.04973$ eV and $m_3=0.007$ eV.
\end{itemize}
This set of parameters is assumed because it puts the strongest limit on $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$, as evident from Table.~\ref{fig:limit}. Another reason for selecting this particular set of parameters is to reduce the value of BR($H^{\pm\pm}\to \tau^{\pm} \tau^{\pm}$).
Branching ratio of $ H^{\pm\pm}$ decays to different leptonic flavour states for this set of parameter are shown in Table~\ref{fig:BP1}. {Note that, the doubly charged Higgs pre-dominantly decays to $e^\pm\mu^\pm$ and $e^\pm\tau^\pm$ final state.}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& $e^\pm e^\pm$&$e^\pm\mu^\pm$ &$e^\pm\tau^\pm$&$\mu^\pm \tau^\pm$ & $\mu^\pm \mu^\pm$ &$\tau^\pm \tau^\pm$ \\ \hline
BR&0.026 &0.547&0.365 &0.001 &0.001&0.053 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{{Branching ratio of $H^{\pm \pm}$ into different leptonic states in case of IH for $m_0 = 0.007$ eV.}}
\label{fig:BP1}
\end{table}
{We apply the following set of basic cuts on transverse momentum, pseudo-rapidity, and separation between two leptons, } $P_{T}(l) > 10$ GeV ($l = e \ \text{or} \ \mu$), $\abs{\eta(l)} < 2.5$, $\Delta R_{ll} > 0.4$, at the time of event generation in MadGraph5. For detector level analysis, the isolation condition for a lepton($e,\mu$) is defined as: $\frac{\sum P_T(x)}{P_T(l)}<0.2$, where $\sum P_T(x)$ is the scalar sum of transverse momenta of all particles with in a cone of radius $\Delta R<0.4$ around the lepton direction and $P_T(l)$ is the transverse momentum of lepton.
We assume a jet misidentification rate\footnote{ It is defined as the rate by which jets are identified
as leptons. There is a small chance for low $P_T$ jets to be identified as leptons. Although it is small, a significant background cross-section can be resulted from misidentification because of the large production cross section of QCD jets at the LHC.} of $10^{-3}$~\cite{Sirunyan:2018fpa}.
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,height=5.5cm]{pt_4l.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=8.6cm,height=5.5cm]{smim.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=5.5cm]{opim.pdf}
\caption{Normalised distributions of transverse momentum of leading lepton $P_T(l_1)$, same-sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^{\pm}l^{\pm})$, opposite sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^+l^-)$ for both $4l$ signal and background events.}
\label{fig:dist}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:dist}, we plot distribution of different kinematical variables for both signal and SM backgrounds. Top left plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:dist} shows the transverse momentum distribution of leading lepton. It is evident from this figure that most of the background lies in low $P_{T}(l_1)$ region and the signal peaks at high $P_{T}(l_1)$ for high $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$. Top right plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:dist}, shows the distribution of same-sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^\pm l^\pm)$. Here the signal distribution peaks at $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$, which is very clear and well separated from backgrounds. Such a distinguished peak of $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$ at a high value of $M(l^{\pm} l^{\pm})$ distribution helps to discover $H^{\pm\pm}$.
In the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:dist}, we show the distribution of opposite sign di-lepton invariant mass, which shows that most of the dominant backgrounds peak around $Z$ boson mass. Therefore, a veto on opposite sign di-lepton invariant mass around $M_Z$ will reduce most of the backgrounds involving $Z$.
{The above distributions motivate to consider the following set of selection cuts that suppress backgrounds:}
\begin{itemize}
\item $ \rm{A_1}$ : $ \ N_{l} = 4$. we demand 4 isolated leptons in the final state. The leptons are $e,\mu$.
\item $ \rm{A_2}$ : We demand sum of charges of four leptons to be zero.
\item $ \rm{A_3:}$$ \ \abs{M(l^+ l^-) - M_{Z}} > 10 $ GeV. To remove the backgrounds including atleast one $Z$ boson, we veto the lepton pairs with the same flavor but opposite charges inside the mass window $\abs{M(l^+ l^-) - M_{Z}} < 10$ GeV.
\item$\rm{A_4:}$$ \ \abs{M(l^\pm l^\pm) - M_{H^{\pm\pm}}} \leqslant 50$.
The signal events are selected by demanding a window on same-sign di-lepton invariant mass in between $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}\pm 50$ GeV.
\end{itemize}
In Table.~\ref{fig:cstable}, we show the changes in signal and background cross-sections after each selection cut.
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1 \ : \ N_{l} = 4$.
\item $c_2 \ : \ c_1 \ \text{and} \ \Sigma l_{charge} = 0$ .
\item $c_3 \ : \ c_2 \ \text{and} \ \abs{M(l^+ l^-) - M_{Z}} > 10$ GeV.
\item $c_4 \ : \ c_3 \ \text{and} \ \abs{M(l^\pm l^\pm) - M_{H^{\pm\pm}}} \leqslant 50$.
\end{itemize}
From Table.~\ref{fig:cstable}, the signal cross-section before applying cut is 0.2683 fb for $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}=$ 1 TeV. Most dominant irreducible background appears from $ZZ$ with a cross-section 83.559 fb. The channels
$t \bar{t} \ \text{and} \ WZ $ have huge cross-section compared to other backgrounds but they result in very less number of four lepton events. Demanding four leptons in the final state reduces the background cross-section to a significant extent. Invariant mass window on same-sign di-lepton finally help to suppress almost all background events. It should be noted that, we consider $t\bar{t}$\ \text{and} $WZ$ backgrounds with 0-parton. In our analysis, particles of interest are not jets but leptons as the final state contains multilepton. We implimented stringent selection criteria on leptons. Hence we expect involvement of multi-parton processes will not subtantialy change the final results. However, we check the contribution of multi-parton $t\bar{t}$\ \text{and} $WZ$ processes, performing MLM matching in MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO(v2.6)~\cite{Alwall:2014hca} and Pythia8~\cite{Sjdostrand:2007gs}. The result we obtain is similar to that in case of 0-parton backgrounds.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{1}{c|}{ $\sigma$ [fb] for signal } & \multicolumn{5}{c|}{$\sigma$ [fb] for backgrounds} \\ \hline
& $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ = 1 TeV & $\ ZZ \ $ & $\ t \bar{t}\ $ & $t \bar{t}Z$ & $\ WZ \ $ & $VVV$ \\ \hline
before cut & 0.2683 & 83.559 & 142075 & 14.413 & 702.333 & 9.49 \\ \hline
after $c_1$ & 0.0597 & 18.56 & 9.9452 & 2.2616 & 0.9341 & 0.2668 \\ \hline
after $c_2$ & 0.0591& 18.5035 & 9.9453 & 2.2368 & 0.48461 & 0.2568 \\ \hline
after $c_3$ & 0.0589 & 0.2031 & 7.1037& 0.363 & 0.0913 & 0.0407 \\ \hline
after $c_4$ & 0.0194& $\approx 0$ & $\approx 0$ & $\approx 0$ & $\approx 0$ & $\approx 0$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{ Signal ( $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_k^{-} l_l^{-} $) and background cross-sections for $\sqrt{s}= 27$ TeV after the different selection cuts for the channel. Here $l_i^+ = e^+ / \mu^+ $. }
\label{fig:cstable}
\end{table}
Note that, although we present the $p p \to ZZ \to 4l$ background in Table.~\ref{fig:cstable}, we also estimate $p p \to 4l$, that includes virtual photon contribution. The channel $pp \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_k^{-} l_l^{-} $ has cross-section 117.1 fb.} We find a cross-section 2.8 fb after applying cut $c_3$. However after cut $c_4$, the cross-section becomes negligibly small. {This is expected, as we choose a very large value of same-sign di-lepton invariant mass, for which this background already falls off. We check the contribution of $t \bar{t}t \bar{t}$ background, for which the cross-section is 0.276 fb. After applying cuts $c_2$ and $c_3$ the cross-sections are 0.027 fb and 0.023 fb, respectively. After cut $c_4$ this cross-section is reduced to a insignificant value.
In addition, we also check $t \bar{t} W$ background, which after cut $c_4$ gives insignificant contribution. Although the SM background cross-section is much higher than that of signal before applying cut $c_1$, the backgrounds become insignificant after applying selection cuts. We find that, with 1000 $\rm{fb}^{-1}$ luminosity, 19 events can be obtained for $M_{H^{\pm \pm}} = 1$ TeV. We give the variation of number of events versus mass of doubly charged Higgs in Fig.~\ref{fig:27_pred}.
\subsection{$3l$ Final state}
Here we consider the signal containing tri-lepton (two same-sign lepton and other of opposite sign) and missing transverse energy $\slashed{E}_{T}$ in the final state. Associated production of $H^{\pm\pm}$ with $H^{\pm}$ and their subsequent leptonic decay dominantly contribute to the desired signal events. However pair production of $H^{\pm\pm}$ also contribute to the same when atleast one hadronically decaying tau lepton is present in the decay products of $H^{\pm\pm}$. Therefore, the signal events we are analysing originate from the following decay chains:
\begin{itemize}
\item PP : $p p \to H^{++} H^{--} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_k^{-} l_l^{-} $ (where $l_i^+ = e^+ / \mu^+ / \tau^+ $)
\item AP : $p p \to H^{++} H^{-} \ + h.c. \to l_i^{+} l_j^{+} l_k^{-} \nu$ (where $l_i^+ = e^+ / \mu^+ / \tau^+ $)
\end{itemize}
We consider the following dominant SM backgrounds:
\begin{itemize}
\item $WZ \ :\ p p \to W^{\pm} Z \to l_i^{\pm} l_j^{+} l_j^{-} + \slashed{E}_{T}$.
\item $ ZZ\ :\ p p \to Z Z \to l_i^{+} l_i^{-} l_j^{+} l_j^{-} $
\item $VVV \ ( V = Z \ \text{or} \ W^\pm) \ : \ p p \to VVV ,\ V \to l_i^+ l_i^-/ \ l_i^\pm \slashed{E}_{T}/ jj.$
\item $t \bar{t} W \ : \ p p \to t \bar{t} W^{\pm} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{-} l_k^{\pm} + b \bar{b} + \slashed{E}_{T}$
\item$DY \ :\ p p \to Z / \gamma \to l_i^+ l_i^-$
\item $t \bar{t} \ : \ p p \to t \bar{t} \to l_i^{+} l_j^{-} + b \bar{b} + \slashed{E}_{T} $
\item $t \bar{t} Z \ : \ p p \to t \bar{t} Z \to l_i^{+} l_i^{-} l_j^{+} l_j^{-} + b \bar{b} + \slashed{E}_{T}$
\end{itemize}
$WZ$ and $VVV$ channels result in irreducible background events with comparatively higher $\slashed{E}_{T}$. $ZZ$ and $t \bar{t}Z$ also contribute to the background when one among the leptons in the final state is a hadronic tau or is left undetected. Drell-Yan ($DY$), $ t \bar{t}$ process give tri-lepton events when a jet fakes as a lepton.\\
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=5.5cm]{a3lfs_lpt.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=5.5cm]{a3lfs_met.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=5.5cm]{a3lfs_opim.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=9cm,height=5.5cm]{a3lfs_smim.pdf}
\caption{Normalised distribution of transverse momentum of leading lepton $P_T(l_1)$, missing transverse energy $\slashed{E}_{T}$, opposite sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^+l^-)$, same-sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^{\pm}l^{\pm})$ for both $3l$ signal and background events.}
\label{fig:dist3l}
\end{figure}
To simulate the signal and backgrounds, we generate events in MadGraph5, where we are applying the basic cuts $P_{T}(l) > 10$ GeV, $|\eta(l)| < 2.5$, $\Delta R_{ll} > 0.4$. Here we consider the same neutrino mass pattern and oscillation parameters that we have considered for $4l$ signal analysis in the previous subsection. For this set of parameters, $H^{\pm}$ branching ratios are $e^{\pm}\nu\ : \ \mu^{\pm}\nu \ : \tau^{\pm}\nu = 0.48: 0.28: 0.24 $. {As the branching into muon and tau are very similar, we consider all the leptonic states into our analysis. }We consider the mass of charged Higgs as $1$ TeV and show distribution of transverse momentum of leading lepton $P_T(l_1)$, missing transverse energy $\slashed{E}_{T}$, opposite sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^+l^-)$, same-sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^{\pm}l^{\pm})$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:dist3l}. The two contributions to the signal events i.e., AP and PP are plotted separately. Most of the backgrounds events are distributed in the region of $P_T(l_1) \leq 200$ GeV, as the leptons in backgrounds originate from SM particles, but not from a heavy resonance. The signal sample on the contrary shows a peak at $P_T(l_1)> 200$ GeV. {A comparison in the $\slashed{E}_{T}$ distribution between signal and background shows, most of the background events contain $\slashed{E}_{T}<200$ GeV. Signal events coming from AP channel contain more $\slashed{E}_{T}$, as compared to that of PP channel. This occurs, as in AP channel, $\slashed{E}_{T}$ results from direct decay of $H^{\pm}$ into a lepton and neutrino. For PP channel, the source of $\slashed{E}_T$ is the decay of $\tau$ into semi-leptonic/leptonic final states, or the mis-measurement of jet energy.} {We also show other distributions, such as, opposite sign and same-sign di-lepton invariant mass distributions. } In the opposite sign di-lepton invariant mass distribution, background events peak around $Z$ mass. In the same-sign di-lepton invariant mass distribution, signal events peak at a higher value of $M(l^\pm l^\pm)$ as they directly originate from $H^{\pm \pm}$. Most of the background events are accumulated in lower $M(l^{\pm}l^{\pm})$ region.
To suppress the backgrounds, we consider the following selection criteria:
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_1 \ :$ Number of leptons $\ N_{l} = 3$. We demand exactly 3 isolated leptons in the final state.
\item $A_2 \ : $ Sum of lepton charge is $\pm 1$, \ $\abs{\Sigma l_{charge}}=1$. Charge configuration of leptons are either $++-$ or $--+$.
\item $A_3 \ : $ Invariant mass of opposite sign leptons falls within a 10 GeV mass window around $M_Z$, \ $ \abs{M(l^+ l^-) - M_{Z}} > 10$ GeV. {This cut effectively removes most of the backgrounds, from $Z$ decay.}
\item $A_4 \ :$ The transverse momentum of leading lepton, $ \ P_{T}(l_1)\ge150 $ GeV. We implement a 150 GeV cut on $P_T$ of leading lepton, as SM background events contain soft lepton compare to that of signal events.
\item $A_5 \ :$ The missing transverse energy, $\ \slashed{E}_{T} > 100 $ GeV. We collect events with $\slashed{E}_{T} > 120 $ GeV.
\item $A_6 \ : $ Same-sign di-lepton invariant mass $ \ \abs{M(l^\pm l^\pm) - M_{H^{\pm\pm}}} \leqslant 50$, i.e., events within 100 GeV are selected.
\end{itemize}
In Table~\ref{fig:3ltable}, we show signal and background cross-sections after applying each of the selection cuts.
\begin{itemize}
\item $c_1 \ : \ N_{l} = 3$.
\item $c_2 \ : c_1 \ \text{and} \ \abs{\Sigma l_{charge}}=1.$
\item $c_3 \ : \ c_2 \ \text{and} \ \abs{M(l^+ l^-) - M_{Z}} > 10$ GeV.
\item $c_4 \ : \ c_3 \ \text{and} \ P_{T}(l_1)\ge150$ GeV.
\item$c_5 \ : \ c_4 \ \text{and} \ \slashed{E}_{T} \ge 120 $ GeV.
\item $c_6 \ : \ c_5 \ \text{and} \ \abs{M(l^\pm l^\pm) - M_{H^{\pm\pm}}} \leqslant 50$ GeV.
\end{itemize}
The partonic cross-section for AP channel is $0.4501$ fb, before applying any cut. For PP channel, this is $0.2683$ fb. Most of the backgrounds have very large cross-sections as compared to the signal. At the detector level,
demanding three leptons reduces the cross-sections significantly. The $Z$-veto (cut $c_3$) and demanding high $P_T$ of leading lepton (cut $c_4$) removes many backgrounds. The missing transverse energy cut ($c_5$) also helps to suppress backgrounds. SM processes like Drell-Yan ($DY$), $ t \bar{t}$ which give $3l$ due to jet faking as lepton, are left with negligible cross-sections after applying above mentioned cuts. Therefore, we do not show them explicitly in the Table.~\ref{fig:3ltable}. Similarly the virtual photon contribution to $3l$ signal does not survive at the end. Cut $c_5$ reduces the AP and PP cross-section to one sixth and one ninth of its initial value.
Although, at the partonic level, signal cross-sections are very small compared to that of SM backgrounds, we suitably choose selection criterion, that suppress most of the backgrounds and keep a significant number of signal events. SM background cross-section finally reduced to around $0.0015$ fb. For an integrated luminosity of $1000 \ \rm{fb}^{-1}$, we get around $79$ and $30$ number of signal events for AP and PP channels, respectively.
Note that, most of the backgrounds in both tri-lepton and four-lepton channel drop off, after including the invariant mass cuts. For completeness, we however consider all the backgrounds, and show the effect of selection cuts.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{ $\sigma$ (fb) for signal } &\multicolumn{5}{c|}{$\sigma$ (fb) for backgrounds} \\ \hline
& AP & PP &$\ WZ \ $ & $\ ZZ \ $ & $VVV$ &$ t \bar{t}W$&$t \bar{t}Z$ \\ \hline
before cut & 0.4501 & 0.2683& 702.333&83.5597 & 9.49& 20.38&14.4134\\\hline
after $c_1$ &0.1456& 0.1052& 195.368&22.104&2.48&3.868&4.637 \\ \hline
after $c_2$ & 0.1453&0.1051&195.2 &22.09&2.476&3.853&4.629\\ \hline
after $c_3$&0.14497&0.1048& 17.158&1.8943&1.174& 3.391&1.577 \\ \hline
after $c_4$ &0.14493&0.1047&0.899 & 0.122& 0.265&0.725&0.354 \\ \hline
after $c_5$ &0.14074& 0.0672&0.3582&0.0192&0.1138&0.3053&0.1503\\\hline
after $c_6$ &0.0793&0.0308&$\approx$0&$\approx0$&0.0005&0.001&$\approx$0\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Backgrounds and signal cross-sections for $\sqrt{s}= 27$ TeV after the final selection cuts for $3l$ final state. For signal $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}=1$ TeV.}
\label{fig:3ltable}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,height=5cm]{27_pred.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,height=5cm]{both_nevent.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,height=5cm]{3l_signf.pdf}%
\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,height=5cm]{3l_extd_signf.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=7.9cm,height=5cm]{4l_lumi.pdf}
\caption{ Upper panel: variation of tri and four lepton cross-sections after all cuts (left plot) and number of events (right plot) for 3 $\text{ab}^{-1}$ (solid line), and 15$\, \text{ab}^{-1}$ (dashed, dot-dashed line) luminosity as a function of $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$. Middle panel: variation of required luminosity to reach $3\sigma$ and $5\sigma$ significance, and number of events $N=3,5$ versus $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ for tri-lepton signal. Lower panel: variation of required luminosity to observe number of events $N=3,5$ versus $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ for four-lepton signal. The gray shaded band represents the excluded region from CMS search~\cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036}.}
\label{fig:27_pred}
\end{figure}
We show the variation of effective cross-sections of the $4l$ and $3l$ final states with $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:27_pred}. The green line in top left plot represents the cross-section for $4l$ final state. The blue-dashed line denotes the cross-section for $3l$ final state, taking into account both pair and associated production. Although the dominant contribution for $3l$ final state comes from associated production of $H^{\pm\pm}$, pair production channel also contributes to this by a significant amount. In top right plot, we show the variation of number of events as a function of $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}$. We consider two different luminosities 3 $\text{ab}^{-1}$, and the projected 15 $\text{ab}^{-1}$ of HE-LHC.
Finally, we calculate the statistical significance for the tri-lepton channel: \begin{equation} \mathcal{S} = \dfrac{s}{\sqrt{s+b}}. \end{equation}
In the above, $s$ and $b$ are the number of signal and background events after all of the above mentioned selection cuts. The required luminosity ($\mathcal{L}$) to achieve a desired significance ($\mathcal{S}$) therefore scales as
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{ \mathcal{L}}=\mathcal{S} \dfrac{\sqrt{\sigma_b+\sigma_s}}{\sigma_s}.
\label{lum1}
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_s$ and $\sigma_b$ are the signal and background cross-sections after all the cuts. We obtain, $3.3\sigma$ significance for a 1 TeV doubly charged Higgs with 100 $\text{fb}^{-1}$ luminosity, in tri-lepton channel. After including systematic uncertainty\footnote{We consider 2-6$\%$ uncertainty for the lepton identification~\cite{CMS-PAS-HIG-16-036} and $5\%$ uncertainty on missing transverse enery scale~\cite{Sirunyan:2018zut}.} the significance decreases to $3.2\sigma$. For the four-lepton final states, and for tri-lepton channel in higher mass range, there is no SM background. This happens due to the very high invariant mass cut of the same-sign di-lepton. Therefore,
for these cases, we simply scale the required luminosity as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=\dfrac{N}{\sigma_s},
\label{lum2}
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the number of signal events, and $\sigma_s$ is the cross-section after all cuts. The two plots in the middle panel show the required luminosity to observe tri-lepton states for the $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$ in between 820-2500 GeV. In the left plot, we impose a flat 100 GeV window of invariant mass $l^{\pm} l^{\pm}$ around $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$. The orange and red lines have been obtained by using Eq.~\ref{lum1}, where the background is
sizeable. In the higher mass range, there is almost no background. We therefore use Eq.~\ref{lum2}. $H^{\pm\pm}$ with mass $\sim 2.2$ TeV can be discovered with 5 number of events. We also present a conservative estimate in the right plot (middle panel), where we impose a cut on same-sign di-lepton invariant mass $M(l^{\pm} l^{\pm} ) > 820$ GeV, for which we have a constant background 0.008 fb. This shows that $\sim$ 2 TeV $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$ can be discovered in the tri-lepton channel with integrated luminosity 15 $\rm{ab}^{-1}$. For the four-lepton final state (lower panel), we find that approximately five events can be observed for $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}=1.7$ TeV with the same luminosity.\\
The analysis that we present here, depends on the chosen final state, branching ratios, as well as, the selection cuts. Additionally, the results presented are at the LO level. However, we would like to present an estimate of the results taking into account K-factor for leading background. For signal K-factors at 14 TeV and 100 TeV LHC have been calculated in Ref.~\cite{Fuks:2019clu}, which are not widely different. For background cross-sections we calculate the NLO corrections at 27 Tev LHC using MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO(v2.6)~\cite{Alwall:2014hca}. K-factor for $t\bar{t}W$ ($ VVV$) is 1.86 (2.2). Considering the LO cross-sections, the statistical significance ($\mathcal{S}$) for $3l$ signal ( with $M_{H^{\pm\pm}}=1$ TeV and $\mathcal{L}=100 \ \text{fb}^{-1}$) is 3.29. If we include K-factors the significance will increase to 3.6. Including NLO corrections to the pair-production of doubly charged Higgs ($K=1.25$), the discovery reach of ${H^{\pm \pm}}$ in the four-lepton final state can extend upto $1.8$ TeV. We also cross-checked the discovery potential of a very heavy $H^{\pm\pm}$ at HE-LHC. We would like to point out that for a very large mass, such as, $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}=4$ TeV, the pair-production cross-section via DY process drops to $\sigma \sim 3 \times 10^{-5}$ fb. Folded with approximately 50$\%$ branching ratios (note that, branching ratio in any of the leptonic final states can not be $100\%$), the final cross-section for four-lepton channel becomes very small. Due to this, we do not obtain any signal event with 15 $\text{ab}^{-1}$ luminosity for 4 TeV doubly charged Higgs mass.
\section{Conclusion \label{conclu}}
We analyse discovery prospect of a doubly charged Higgs - a particle content of type-II seesaw model in $p p $ collider (HE-LHC). We focus on the region of small triplet vev, where the doubly and singly charged Higgs naturally decays to
same-sign di-leptons and a charged lepton and neutrino final states, respectively. We analyse in detail multi-lepton signatures, containing tri and tetra-leptons in the final states. The model signatures in this low vev regime strongly depends on the neutrino oscillation parameters, neutrino mass hierarchy, and the lightest neutrino mass scale. We perform a robust estimation of the maximal possible branching ratios, that each of the leptonic modes can accommodate.
The constraint on doubly charged Higgs mass from individual leptonic channel somewhat weakens, after taking into account correct branching ratios. The doubly charged Higgs and singly charged Higgs couple to the leptons through the same Yukawa coupling. We explore the relation between the branching ratios of singly and doubly charged Higgs decays. Our major findings are,
\begin{itemize}
\item
The branching of doubly charged Higgs into same-sign leptons is augmented with large variation due to the uncertainty of neutrino oscillation parameters. We find that in IH neutrino mass spectrum, and among all the leptonic decay modes of $H^{\pm \pm}$, $e^{\pm}e^{\pm}$ mode is least uncertain for the entire range of lightest neutrino mass $m_0$. This decay mode predicts a lower value of branching ratio, which is $\text{BR}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm})> 0.015$. Therefore, observation of doubly charged Higgs in any other leptonic decay mode except $ e^{\pm} e^{\pm}$ with an upper limit on branching ratio $\text{BR}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm})< 0.015$ will rule out IH. The singly charged Higgs decay to $H^{\pm} \to e^{\pm} \nu$ is the least uncertain among all charged Higgs decays, with a predicted branching ratio, that vary between $ \sim33\%- 50\%$ for the variation of the lightest neutrino mass $m_0 \sim 10^{-4}\, {\rm{eV}} -1$ eV.
\item The interaction of $H^{\pm\pm}$ and $H^{\pm}$ with leptons are governed by the same Yukawa couplings, and hence their leptonic branching ratios are ralated. In IH, for a fixed $m_0$, and for a fixed value of $\text{BR}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} e^{\pm})$, there is a small variation in $\text{BR}(H^{\pm} \to e^{\pm} \nu)$. Similar result also exists between $\text{BR}(H^{\pm \pm} \to e^{\pm} \mu^{\pm})$ and $\text{BR}(H^{\pm} \to e^{\pm} \nu)$.
\item
We perform a detailed analysis to find out discovery prospect of tri and tetra-lepton final states at a future $p p $ collider, that can operate with c.m.energy $\sqrt{s}=27 \, \rm{TeV}$. We consider both the pair and associated productions, and a benchmark point of $H^{\pm \pm}$ with a mass 1 TeV. In tetra-lepton final state, we find using 1000 $\rm{fb}^{-1}$ integrated luminosity, 19 events can be observed. In tri-lepton final state, we find that the same mass can be discovered at 27 TeV LHC with a significance of more than $5\sigma$ for 1000 $\rm{fb}^{-1}$ luminosity. Higher mass region of ${H^{\pm \pm }} $ can be probed with more luminosity. We find that sensitivity reach for ${H^{\pm \pm }}$ in tri-lepton channel is more compared to that in four-lepton channel, as both the pair and associated production of ${H^{\pm \pm }}$ contribute to the former. ${H^{\pm \pm }} $ upto mass $\sim 2.2$ TeV can be probed in tri-lepton channel with $15 \ \text{ab}^{-1}$ integrated luminosity. In four-lepton channel, five events can be observed for $M_{H^{\pm \pm}}$ $\lesssim$ $1.7$ TeV with the same luminosity.
\end{itemize}
\section{Acknowledgement}
MM acknowledges the DST-INSPIRE Grant (IFA-14-PH-99). RP acknowledges the support of IOP Cluster SAMKHYA.
\section{Appendix\label{app}}
Here we expand neutrino mass matrix in terms of the PMNS mixing angles, CP phases, and the mass square differences \cite{Perez:2008ha}. We first consider the $H^{\pm \pm}$ decay and then $H^{\pm}$ decay.
\begin{itemize}
\item
\underline{$H^{\pm\pm} \ \text{Decays}$}\\
The branching ratio has the following form
\begin{equation}
{\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm \pm}\to l_i^\pm l_j^\pm) = \frac{\Gamma_{l_il_j}}{\sum_{kl} \Gamma_{l_kl_l}} = \frac{2}{(1+\delta_{ij})} \frac{\abs{Y^\nu_{ij}}^2}{\sum_{kl}\abs{Y^\nu_{kl}}^2 }, \end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\quad \sum_{kl}\abs{Y^\nu_{kl}}^2 = \dfrac{1}{2v^2_\Delta}\sum_i m_i^2.
\end{equation}
The Yukawa and neutrino mass matrix are related as,
\begin{equation}
Y^\nu = \dfrac{M^\nu}{\sqrt{2}v_\Delta}=\dfrac{V^*_{\text{PMNS}} m^\nu_{\text{d}}V^\dag_{\text{PMNS}}}{\sqrt{2}v_\Delta}.
\end{equation}
Neutrino mass matrix elements can be written as a function of light neutrino masses and mixing parameters in the following forms (Here $c_{ij}\equiv \text{cos}\theta_{ij} \ \text{and} \ s_{ij}\equiv \text{sin}\theta_{ij}$):
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
M^\nu_{11} &=&
m_1 e^{-i \Phi_1} c_{12}^2 c_{13}^2
+m_2 s_{12}^2 c_{13}^2
+m_3 e^{i(2 \delta -\Phi_2)} s_{13}^2
\\ \nonumber
M^\nu_{22} &=&
m_1 e^{-i \Phi_1} \left(-s_{12} c_{23} -e^{-i \delta } c_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right){}^2
+m_2 \left(c_{12} c_{23}-e^{-i \delta } s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right){}^2
+m_3e^{-i \Phi_2} c_{13}^2 s_{23}^2
\\ \nonumber
M^\nu_{33} &=&
m_1 e^{-i \Phi_1} \left(s_{12} s_{23}-e^{-i\delta } c_{12} s_{13} c_{23}\right){}^2
+m_2 \left(-c_{12} s_{23}-e^{-i \delta } s_{12} s_{13} c_{23}\right){}^2
+m_3 e^{-i \Phi_2} c_{13}^2 c_{23}^2
\\ \nonumber
M^\nu_{12} &=&
m_1 e^{-i \Phi_1} c_{12} c_{13} \left(-s_{12} c_{23}-e^{-i \delta } c_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right)
+m_2 s_{12} c_{13} \left(c_{12} c_{23}-e^{-i \delta } s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right)
\\ \nonumber
&+&m_3 e^{i (\delta -\Phi_2)} s_{13} c_{13} s_{23}
\\ \nonumber
M^\nu_{13} &=&
m_1 e^{-i \Phi_1} c_{12} c_{13} \left(s_{12} s_{23}-e^{-i \delta } c_{12} c_{23} s_{13}\right)
+m_2 c_{13} s_{12} \left(-c_{12} s_{23}-e^{-i\delta } s_{12} s_{13} c_{23}\right)
\\ \nonumber
&+&m_3 e^{i (\delta -\Phi_2)} s_{13} c_{13} c_{23}
\\ \nonumber
M^\nu_{23} &=&
m_1 e^{-i \Phi_1} \left(s_{12} s_{23}-e^{-i \delta } c_{12} s_{13} c_{23}\right)
\left(-s_{12} c_{23}-e^{-i \delta } c_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right)
\\ \nonumber
&+&m_2 \left(-c_{12} s_{23}-e^{-i \delta } s_{12} s_{13} c_{23}\right)
\left(c_{12} c_{23}-e^{-i \delta } s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right)
+m_3 e^{-i \Phi_2} c_{13}^2 s_{23} c_{23}
\end{eqnarray}
Following \cite{deSalas:2017kay}, we consider the following set of 3$\sigma$ variation of PMNS mixing angles and mass squared differences:
$ \sin^{2}\theta_{12} \Rightarrow [0.273-0.379]
\ $ \\
$ \sin^2 \theta_{23} \Rightarrow [0.445 - 0.599]_{\text{NH}} ,\quad [0.453-0.598]_{\text{IH}}$ \\
$\sin^2\theta_{13} \Rightarrow ( [1.96 - 2.41] \times 10^{-2})_{\text{NH}} , \quad ([1.99-2.44] \times 10^{-2})_{\text{IH}}$
$\Delta m_{21}^2 \Rightarrow [7.05-8.14] \ \times 10^{-5} \ \text{eV}^2$\\
$ |\Delta m_{31}^2 | \Rightarrow \ [2.41-2.60] \ \times \ 10 ^{-3}\ \text{eV}^2 \ \ \text{(NH)}$\\
$|\Delta m_{31}^2 | \Rightarrow \ \ [2.31-2.51] \ \times10^{-3} \ \text
{eV}^2 \ \text{(IH)}$\\
Below, we analytically calculate the maximum value of branching ratios for different leptonic decay modes of $H^{\pm\pm}$. For this calculation we assume those values of the oscillation parameters that gives a maximum branching ratio for a given decay mode. The set of parameters is not necessarily same for each mode.
\begin{enumerate}
\item{ Inverted Hierarchy neutrino mass spectrum ($m_3\approx0$):} Here, due to very small mass splitting between $m_{1}$ and $m_{2}$,
$m_1\approx m_2=m$. This gives summation of light neutrino mass as $ \sum_{j} m_j^2=2 m^2$. We identify different phases, for which the branching ratios in $ee$, $\mu \mu, e \mu $ modes are maximal.
\begin{itemize}
\item
For $\phi _1=0$, the $(1,1)$ element of neutrino mass matrix $ M^\nu_{11}= m c_{13}^2$. The branching ratio is $ \text{BR}\left(H^{\pm\pm }\to e ^{\pm } e ^{\pm }\right)
\approx \dfrac{c_{13}^4}{2}\approx 0.44$.
\item For $\delta =\phi _1=\phi _2=0$, the $(2,2)$ element of neutrino mass matrix is $ M^\nu_{22}=\left(c_{23}^2 + s_{13}^2 s_{23}^2\right)m$. This gives the maximal branching ratio as
$\text{BR}\left(H^{\pm \pm }\to \mu ^{ \pm } \mu ^{\pm }\right)\approx \dfrac{c_{23}^4}{2} \approx 0.18$.
\item For $ \phi _2=\pi ,\delta =0$, the $(1,2)$ element of neutrino mass matrix is $M^\nu_{12}=c_{12} c_{13} m_1 \left(c_{23} s_{12}+c_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right)+c_{13} m_2 s_{12} \left(c_{12} c_{23}-s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right)$. The branching ratio in $e\mu$ mode is $$\text{BR}\left(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{ \pm } \mu ^{\pm }\right)\approx 2c^2_{13} \dfrac{\left((c_{12}^2-s_{12}^2) s_{13} s_{23}+2 c_{23} c_{12} s_{12}\right)^2}{2} \approx 0.48.$$
\end{itemize}
\item{ Normal Hierarchy neutrino mass spectrum ($m_1\approx 0$):} The two other masses are
$m_2\approx0.2 \ m_3$.
\begin{itemize}
\item For $2\delta-\phi_2=0$, the $(1,1)$ element of neutrino mass matrix is $ M^\nu_{11}= m _2s_{12}^2c_{13}^2+ m_3 s_{13}^2$, that gives $ \text{BR}\left(H^{\pm\pm }\to e ^{\pm } e ^{\pm }\right)\approx 0.008 $.
\item For $\delta =\pi$ and $\phi _2=0$, the $(2,2)$ element of neutrino mass matrix is $ M^\nu_{22} = c_{12}^2 c_{23}^2 m_2+c_{13}^2 m_3 s_{23}^2 + 2 c_{12} c_{23} m_2 s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}+m_2 s_{12}^2 s_{13}^2 s_{23}^2$. Ignoring the 3rd and 4th terms, the branching ratio in $\mu\mu$ becomes $$ \text{BR}\left(H^{\pm \pm }\to \mu ^{ \pm } \mu ^{\pm }\right)\approx \dfrac{(c_{12}^2 c_{23}^2 m_2+c_{13}^2 m_3 s_{23}^2)^2}{m^2_3} \approx 0.4.$$
\item
For $\phi _2=\delta=\pi$, the (1,2) element of neutrino mass matrix is $ M^\nu_{12}=c_{13} m_3 s_{13} s_{23}+c_{13} m_2 s_{12} \left(c_{12} c_{23}+s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\right)$. The branching ratio is
$$\text{BR}\left(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{ \pm } \mu ^{\pm }\right)\approx \dfrac{2\left(0.2 c_{12} c_{23} m_3 s_{12}+s_{13} s_{23} \left(0.2 m_3 s_{12}^2+m_3\right)\right)^2}{m^2_3}\approx 0.072.$$
\end{itemize}
The different ratios of branching ratio are \\ \\
$\dfrac{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{IH}}}{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{NH}}}
\approx\dfrac{\left(c_{12}^2 s_{13} s_{23}+2 c_{23} c_{12} s_{12}-s_{12}^2 s_{13} s_{23}\right)^2}{2 \left(0.2 c_{12} c_{23} s_{12}+s_{13} s_{23} \left(0.2 s_{12}^2+1\right)\right){}^2}\approx6.6$,\\
$
\dfrac{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } e^{\pm })_{\text{IH}}}{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to e^{\pm } e^{\pm })_{\text{NH}}}
\approx\dfrac{ c_{13}^4}{2\left(0.2 c_{13}^2 s_{12}^2+s_{13}^2\right)^2}\approx50$,\\
$\dfrac{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to \mu^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{IH}}}{\text{BR}^{\max}(H^{\pm \pm }\to \mu^{\pm } \mu^{\pm })_{\text{NH}}}
\approx \dfrac{c_{23}^4}{2 (c_{12}^2 c_{23}^2 0.2+c_{13}^2 s_{23}^2)^2}\approx0.45$.\\
\end{enumerate}
Similarly, one can obtain such ratios for all other modes.
\item \underline{$H^{\pm}$ Decays}\\
The coupling through which $H^{\pm}$ interact with charged lepton and neutrino is
\begin{equation}
Y^+ = \cos\theta^+ \frac{m^\nu_{d}V_{PMNS}^\dagger}{v_\Delta}.\end{equation}
In the above, $\theta^+$ is the singly charged Higgs mixing angle. The branching ratio has the following form,
\begin{equation}
{\text{BR}\left(H^{\pm }\to l_j^{ \pm }\nu \right)\equiv \sum_{i=1}^{3} {\rm{BR}}(H^{\pm}\to l_j^\pm \nu_i) =\dfrac{X_j}{\sum_{i}^3 m_i^2}}, \quad (l_j=e,\mu,\tau)\end{equation}
where, $ X_j $ is defined as, $X_j=\dfrac{v^2_\Delta}{\text{cos}^2\theta^+}\sum_{i=1}^{3}|Y^+_{ij}|^2. $ The $X_{1,2,3}$ has the following form,
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
X_1 &=& m_1^2 c_{12}^2 c_{13}^2 + m_2^2 c_{13}^2 s_{12}^2+m_3^2 s_{13}^2. \\ \nonumber
X_2 &=& m_1^2 c_{23}^2 s_{12}^2+2 \text{cos}(\delta) \left(m_1^2-m_2^2\right) c_{12} c_{23}s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\\ \nonumber &+&\left( m_3^2 c_{13}^2 +m_2^2 s_{12}^2 s_{13}^2\right) s_{23}^2+c_{12}^2 \left( m_2^2 c_{23}^2 +m_1^2 s_{13}^2 s_{23}^2\right).\\ \nonumber
X_3&=& m_3^2 c_{13}^2 c_{23}^2 -2 \text{cos}(\delta ) \left(m_1^2-m_2^2\right)c_{12} c_{23} s_{12} s_{13} s_{23}\\ \nonumber
&+& s_{12}^2 ( m_2^2 c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2+m_1^2 s_{23}^2)+c_{12}^2 (m_1^2 c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2+m_2^2 s_{23}^2).
\\ \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Maximum value of branching ratio for $H^{\pm}\to l_j^{ \pm }\nu$ is presented bellow assuming different type of neutrino mass spectrum.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Inverted Hierarchy neutrino mass spectrum ($m_3\approx0$):\\ Here,
$m_1\approx m_2=m\Rightarrow \sum_{j} m_j^2=2 m^2$.
\begin{itemize}
\item
$X_1=c_{13}^2 m^2$ gives $\text{BR}\left(H^{\pm }\to e^{ \pm }\nu \right)= \dfrac{c_{13}^2}{2}\approx 0.49$. Since there is only $\theta_{13}$ dependency in $X_1$, and $\theta_{13}$ is very well measured, therefore $H^{\pm }\to e^{ \pm }\nu$ decay modes has very less uncertainty.
\item For $\delta=0$, $X_2$ has the following form $X_2=\left(1-s_{23}^2 \left(1+s_{13}^2\right)\right)m^2$, that gives $ \text{BR}\left(H^{\pm }\to \mu^{ \pm }\nu \right)= \dfrac{1-s_{23}^2 \left(1+s_{13}^2\right)}{2} \approx0.3.$
\item For $\delta=\pi$, $X_3$ has the following form $X_3=\left(s_{23}^2\left(1-s_{13}^2\right)+s_{13}^2\right)m^2$, that gives $ \text{BR}\left(H^{\pm }\to \tau^{ \pm }\nu \right)= \dfrac{s_{23}^2\left(1-s_{13}^2\right)+s_{13}^2}{2}\approx 0.3.$\\
Note that, $H^{\pm }\to \mu^{ \pm }\nu/ \tau^{\pm}\nu$ decay modes have nearly equal uncertainty as both depend on $\theta_{23}$
and $\theta_{13}$ .
\end{itemize}
\item Normal Hierarchy neutrino mass spectrum ($m_1\approx0$): For this spectrum $m_2=0.2 \ m_3$, that gives $ \sum_{j} m_j^2\approx m_3^2 $. The CP phase $\delta =\pi (0)$, will maximize $X_2 (X_3)$ and hence branching ratios.
\begin{itemize}
\item$X_1\approx m_2^2 c_{13}^2 s_{12}^2+m_3^2 s_{13}^2$ gives $\text{BR}\left(H^{\pm }\to e^{ \pm }\nu \right)\approx c_{13}^2 (0.2)^2 s_{12}^2+ s_{13}^2 \approx 0.037$.
\item$X_2\approx m_3^2 c_{13}^2 s_{23}^2 $ gives $ \text{BR}\left(H^{\pm }\to \mu^{ \pm }\nu \right)\approx c_{13}^2 s_{23}^2 \approx0.57$.
\item$X_3\approx m_3^2 c_{13}^2 c_{23}^2$ gives $ \text{BR}\left(H^{\pm }\to \tau^{ \pm }\nu \right)\approx c_{13}^2 c_{23}^2 \approx 0.53$.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
\end{itemize}
\bibliographystyle{utphys}
|
\section*{\refname}}{}{}{}
\makeatletter
\renewcommand\@biblabel[1]{\textbullet}
\makeatother
\graphicspath{{figures/}}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\fancyhf{}
\lhead{PRESENTED AT COMPUTER ASSISTED ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY MEETING 2015}
\begin{document}
{\fontsize{16}{19.2}\selectfont \textbf{PELVIS SURFACE ESTIMATION FROM PARTIAL CT FOR\\COMPUTER-AIDED PELVIC OSTEOTOMIES} }
\nohyphens{Robert Grupp MS$^{1*}$, Yoshito Otake PhD$^{1,2}$, Ryan Murphy MSE$^{3,4}$, Javad Parvizi MD$^{5}$,\\Mehran Armand PhD$^{3,4}$, Russell Taylor PhD$^{1}$}
$^{1*}$Department of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD, 21218, USA,\\grupp@jhu.edu
$^{2}$Graduate School of Information Science, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Nara, 630-0192, Japan
$^{3}$Department of Mechanical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD, 21218, USA
$^{4}$Research and Exploratory Development Department, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, MD, 20723, USA
$^{5}$Rothman Institute, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia PA 19107, USA\\
\textbf{INTRODUCTION}
The majority of pelvic osteotomy procedures are currently performed without acquiring preoperative CT scans.
For example, planning and diagnosis of Ganz periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is usually performed using anteroposterior (AP) and false profile radiographs (Ganz 1988).
Surgeons must then rely on their own experience and intraoperative radiographs to perform the osteotomy and reposition the fragment (Ganz 1988).
The repositioning task is difficult for novice surgeons and the interpretation of intraoperative radiographs is difficult even for experienced practitioners (Troelsen 2009).
Computer-aided surgical (CAS) systems commonly use preoperative CT scans and optical systems to track tools when performing pelvic osteotomies (Langlotz 1997, 1998).
The Biomechanical Guidance System is an example CAS system developed to also track the osteotomized fragment and provide the surgeon with real-time updates of radigraphic angles for characterization of acetabulum and predicted contact pressure around the hip (Murphy 2014).
These CAS systems typically require full pelvic CT information; however, this is not desirable since most PAO patients are adolescents or females of childbearing age, and radiation exposure to the reproductive organs is a concern.
It has been shown that a partial CT of the patient, in conjunction with a statistical shape model (SSM) of the full pelvis, may be used to estimate the complete pelvis (Chintalapani 2010).
This complete estimation of the pelvis could allow the surgeon to gain the benefits of 3D planning and navigation while exposing the patient to a reduced dose of radiation required by the partial CT.
For these CAS systems to compute a registration transform between the patient's pelvic surface and the CT surface, points on the patient's ilium are digitized via the use of an optically tracked pointing tool (Murphy 2014).
Any errors in the estimation of the patient's complete pelvic surface via the SSM will propagate into the registration transform.
In this paper, we present the result of a smooth extrapolation technique that preserves known anatomy with no modification and extends Chintalapani's work by providing a seamless transition to the estimated anatomy.
The constraints imposed by the smooth transition significantly reduce residual surface error.
We reduce radiation exposure by omitting CT slices both above and below the acetabulum, with the exception of a few slices of the superior iliac crest.
Using full female hip CTs, missing slices were simulated and a leave-one-out error analysis was conducted; we report on the accuracy of the two estimation methods.
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{extrap_example.pdf}
\caption{An example of extrapolation with the acetabulum and superior 5\% of the iliac crest used as priors.
Grey regions indicate surfaces known from prior CT, green regions represent extrapolated regions, and red regions represent the boundary between the two.
(a) A lateral view of a pelvis, completed with smooth extrapolation.
(b) (c) Zoomed-in views of the same subject, but with the cut-and-paste extrapolation.
(d) (e) Zoomed-in views of the same subject with smooth extrapolation.
Note the continuous, smooth, transitions in the smooth case, in contrast to the discontinuities in the cut-and-paste case.
}
\label{fig:extrap_example}
\end{figure}
\textbf{MATERIALS AND METHODS}
A SSM of the normal female pelvis was created using the pipeline described in (Grupp 2015).
Pelvis surfaces were modeled with triangular meshes generated by warping a single template mesh with displacement fields output from a deformable intensity-based volumetric registration.
The template mesh had been segmented beforehand and excluded the sacrum.
Initially, 70 hip CT volumes were considered, however the volumetric registration yielded 42 surface meshes of valid anatomy; this was determined by manual inspection.
A leave-one-out test was performed to evaluate the generalization capability of the SSM with complete pelvis anatomy used as prior.
During each iteration, one surface mesh is ``left out'' and a SSM is created from the remaining meshes.
The left out mesh is projected onto the modes of the SSM to obtain the optimal estimation of the left out mesh.
Surface error metrics are computed between the left out mesh and its estimate.
Two extrapolation methods were used to estimate complete pelvis surfaces given an incomplete surface prior and a SSM.
Both methods use a partial surface prior as input to the SSM, which then produces an estimate of the complete anatomy.
The first method keeps the partial prior fixed and ``copies and pastes'' the remaining portion from the SSM estimate.
This process often results in a discontinuous transition from the known prior into the estimate, resulting in poor aesthetics and additional error (Chintalapani 2010).
The second, smooth method, keeps the partial surface prior fixed, but uses a Thin Plate Spline (TPS) and common regions between the partial prior and SSM estimate to model the transformation between the partial surface prior and SSM estimate (Grupp 2015).
The remaining unknown surface from the SSM estimate is transformed by the TPS and joined with the partial surface prior (Grupp 2015).
The exact interpolation between knot points of the TPS guarantees continuity between the boundary of the partial surface prior and unknown surface region from the SSM, while also ensuring smoothness (Bookstein 1989).
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{normal_pelvis_modes.pdf}
\caption{The mean shape and first three principle modes of the statistical model of the normal female pelvis.}
\label{fig:normal_pelvis_modes}
\end{figure}
Another leave-one-out test was performed by simulating varying amounts of unknown anatomy, estimating the full anatomy, and computing surface error statistics in the extrapolated region.
All modes of the SSM were used during the extrapolation process.
The regions of known anatomy were defined as the axial slices that encompass the entire acetabulum and also superior axial slices of the iliac crest ranging from 0\% to 15\% of the entire pelvis height, in increments of 5\%.
Figure \ref{fig:extrap_example} depicts a pelvis with the acetabulum and the superior 5\% of the iliac crest known and the remaining surface extrapolated using the SSM.
\textbf{RESULTS}
The mean surface and first three principal modes ($\pm 3$ standard deviations) of a SSM constructed from all data are shown in Figure \ref{fig:normal_pelvis_modes}.
The SSM leave-one-out test conducted using complete anatomy of the pelvis showed a root mean square (RMS) surface error of 1.61 mm, a maximum surface error of 7.85 mm, and a RMS vertex error of 2.83 mm.
A specific example of the two extrapolation methods using a partial prior surface about the acetabulum and superior 5\% of the iliac crest is shown in Figure \ref{fig:extrap_example}.
The RMS and maximum surface errors computed using both extrapolation methods during the extrapolation leave-one-out test are shown in Figure \ref{fig:sur_dist}.
The smooth extrapolation method performed yielded an average improvement of 1.31 mm in RMS surface error over the cut-and-paste method and an average improvement of 3.16 mm in maximum surface error over the cut-and-paste method.
The minimum improvement in RMS and maximum surface error over the cut-and-paste approach was 0.68 mm and 1.21 mm, respectively, and coincided with the case of not retaining any of the superior iliac crest.
Figure \ref{fig:heat_map} highlights the distribution of surface errors over the course of the leave-one-out test for two different prior surface regions using the smooth approach, and for one prior surface region using the cut-and-paste approach.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{rms_sur_dist_extrap.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:rms_sur_dist_extrap}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{max_sur_dist_extrap.png}
\caption{}
\label{fig:max_sur_dist_extrap}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Surface errors between true surfaces and extrapolated surfaces computed in the leave-one-out test.
(a) RMS of mean surface errors.
(b) Average of maximum surface errors.} \label{fig:sur_dist}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{heat_map.pdf}
\caption{Mean surface errors present in extrapolated regions over the course of the leave-out experiment.
The mean shape is used for visualization and grey regions indicate surfaces known from prior CT.
Top: smooth extrapolation with only the acetabulum known as prior.
Center: smooth extrapolation with the acetabulum and top 5\% of the superior iliac crest known as prior.
Bottom: cut-and-paste extrapolation with the acetabulum and top 5\% of the superior iliac crest known as prior.
The additional constraint of the top 5\% of anatomy, in combination with the smooth extrapolation, reduces surface errors, whereas the cut-and-paste extrapolation is less effected.
}
\label{fig:heat_map}
\end{figure}
\textbf{DISCUSSION}
We have shown that the smooth extrapolation method may be successfully applied to normal female pelvis anatomy and that it out-performs the cut-and-paste approach.
As shown by Figures \ref{fig:sur_dist} and \ref{fig:heat_map}, if a superior portion of the iliac crest is obtained as part of the preoperative partial CT, then surface error is significantly reduced when compared to the case with no superior portion of the iliac crest.
When using complete anatomy as prior, the SSM has 1.61 mm RMS surface error, compared with 1.70 mm, 1.90 mm, 2.21 mm, and 3.50 mm RMS surface error (Figure \ref{fig:sur_dist}) in the extrapolated regions when estimating using the smooth extrapolation method and a prior consisting of the acetabulum and 15\%, 10\%, 5\%, and 0\% of the superior iliac crest.
Therefore, with a sufficient non-zero amount of the superior iliac crest used as prior, the smooth extrapolation method creates less than 1 mm of additional surface error to the generalization error of the SSM.
If used as input to a CAS system, smoothly extrapolated pelvis surfaces could result in more accurate patient-to-CT registration transformations than those computed using extrapolated surfaces via the cut-and-paste approach, especially when considering 2D/3D image-based registration (Otake 2012).
By reducing radiation exposure for the patient and maintaining navigational accuracy, computer-aided pelvic osteotomies have the capability to improve surgical outcomes for those suffering from dysplasia.
Future work will incorporate intraoperative radiographs to the extrapolation process, simulation of a CAS system's typical patient-to-CT registration using smoothly extrapolated surfaces as input, and creating a more robust SSM.
Moreover, construction of a SSM from dysplastic pelves has direct application to navigating PAO with a system such as the BGS (Murphy 2014).
Intraoperative radiographs would help to further reduce the uncertainty associated with the SSM estimates derived from partial surfaces.
With the creation of a robust dysplastic pelvis SSM, we hope to achieve an estimation method that has negligible errors and be realistically applied to relevant computer-assisted pelvic osteotomies.
\textbf{REFERENCES}
\vspace*{-12pt}
\begin{itemize}
\item Bookstein F, Principal warps: thin-plate splines and the decomposition of deformations, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 11(6), pp: 567-585, 1989.
\item Chintalapani G, Statistical atlases of bone anatomy and their applications, Johns Hopkins University, 2010.
\item Chintalapani G, Murphy R, Armiger R, Lepist{\"o} J, Otake Y, Sugano N, Taylor R, Armand M, Statistical atlas based extrapolation of CT data, SPIE Medical Imaging, pp: 762539-762539, 2010.
\item Ganz R, Klaue K, Vinh T, Mast J, A new periacetabular osteotomy for the treatment of hip dysplasias Technique and preliminary results, Clinical orthopaedics and related research 232, pp: 26-36, 1988.
\item Grupp R, Chiang H, Otake Y, Murhpy R, Gordon C, Armand M, Taylor R, Smooth extrapolation of unknown anatomy via statistical shape models, SPIE Medical Imaging, 2015 (to appear).
\item Langlotz F, Stucki M, B{\"a}chler R, Scheer C, Ganz R, Berlemann U, Nolte L, The first twelve cases of computer assisted periacetabular osteotomy, Computer Aided Surgery, 2(6), pp: 317-326, 1997.
\item Langlotz F, B{\"a}chler R, Berlemann U, Nolte L, Ganz R, Computer assistance for pelvic osteotomies, Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 354, pp: 92-102, 1998.
\item Murphy R, Armiger R, Lepist{\"o} J, Mears S, Taylor R, Armand M, Development of a biomechanical guidance system for periacetabular osteotomy, International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, pp: 1-12, 2014.
\item Otake Y, Armand M, Armiger R, Kutzer M, Basafa E, Kazanzides P, Taylor R, Intraoperative image-based multiview 2D/3D registration for image-guided orthopaedic surgery: incorporation of fiducial-based C-arm tracking and GPU-acceleration, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 31(4), pp: 948-962, 2012.
\item Troelsen A, Surgical advances in periacetabular osteotomy for treatment of hip dysplasia in adults, Acta Orthopaedica, 80(s332), pp: 1-33, 2009.
\end{itemize}
\textbf{DISCLOSURES}
None to report.
\end{document}
|
\section*{\large\refname
\@mkboth{\MakeUppercase\refname}{\MakeUppercase\refname}}%
\list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
{\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
\leftmargin\labelwidth
\advance\leftmargin\labelsep
\@openbib@code
\usecounter{enumiv}%
\let\p@enumiv\@empty
\renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
\sloppy
\clubpenalty4000
\@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
\widowpenalty4000%
\sfcode`\.\@m}
\let\fn\footnote
\renewcommand{\footnote}[1]{\linespread{1.1}\fn{#1}\linespread{1.29}}
\hyphenation{mani-folds mani-fold opera-tor bet-ween}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{epsfig}
\usepackage{verbatim}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{trees,er,snakes,shapes,mindmap}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{easyfig}
\usepackage{bbm}
\usepackage{cite}
\usepackage{slashed}
\usepackage{physics}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amsfonts}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{braket}
\usepackage{mathrsfs}
\usepackage{bm}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{placeins}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{caption}
\usepackage{tensor}
\usepackage{dsfont}
\newcommand{\section*{Appendices}\setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{equation}{0}{\section*{Appendices}\setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{equation}{0}
\renewcommand{\thesection}{\Alph{section}.}
\renewcommand{\thesubsection}{\Alph{section}.\arabic{subsection}.}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection\arabic{equation}}}
\newcommand\scalemath[2]{\scalebox{#1}{\mbox{\ensuremath{\displaystyle #2}}}}
\def\tyng(#1){\hbox{\tiny$\yng(#1)$}}
\newcommand{\partial}{\partial}
\def\mathbb{ I}{\mathbb{ I}}
\let\Oldsection\section
\renewcommand{\section}{\FloatBarrier\Oldsection}
\let\Oldsubsection\subsection
\renewcommand{\subsection}{\FloatBarrier\Oldsubsection}
\let\Oldsubsubsection\subsubsection
\renewcommand{\subsubsection}{\FloatBarrier\Oldsubsubsection}
\allowdisplaybreaks
\newcommand{\begin{equation}}{\begin{equation}}
\newcommand{\end{equation}}{\end{equation}}
\newcommand{\begin{equation}}{\begin{equation}}
\newcommand{\end{equation}}{\end{equation}}
\newcommand{\begin{array}}{\begin{array}}
\newcommand{\end{array}}{\end{array}}
\newcommand{\begin{eqnarray}}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\end{eqnarray}}{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\begin{eqnarray}}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\end{eqnarray}}{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\nonumber}{\nonumber}
\def\langle{\langle}
\def\rangle{\rangle}
\def\textstyle{1\over 2}{\textstyle{1\over 2}}
\def{\bar z}{{\bar z}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Ree}{\mathfrak{Re}}
\DeclareMathOperator{\Imm}{\mathfrak{Im}}
\begin{document}
\fontfamily{bch}\fontsize{11pt}{15pt}\selectfont
\begin{titlepage}
\begin{flushright}
\end{flushright}
\begin{center}
{\Large \bf Extended Dynamical Symmetries of Landau Levels in Higher Dimensions}\\
~\\
\vskip 1em
\centerline{ $ \text{\large{\bf{S. K\"{u}rk\c{c}\"{u}o\v{g}lu}}}^{a} \, \, $, $ \text{\large{\bf{G.\"{U}nal }}}^{b} \, \, $, $ \text{\large{\bf{İ. Yurdu\c{s}en}}}^{c} $}
\vskip 0.5cm
\centerline{\sl $^a$ Middle East Technical University, Department of Physics,}
\centerline{\sl Dumlupınar Boulevard, 06800, Ankara, Turkey}
\vskip 1em
\centerline{\sl $^b$ İzmir Institute of Technology, Department of Physics, IZTECH, 35430,}
\centerline{\sl İzmir, Turkey }
\vskip 1em
\centerline{\sl $^c$ Hacettepe University, Department of Mathematics, 06800, Beytepe,}
\centerline{\sl Ankara, Turkey}
\vskip 1em
\vskip .26cm
\begin{tabular}{r l}
E-mail:&\!\!\!{\fontfamily{cmtt}\fontsize{11pt}{15pt}\selectfont <EMAIL>}\\
&\!\!\!{\fontfamily{cmtt}\fontsize{11pt}{15pt}\selectfont <EMAIL> }\\
&\!\!\!{\fontfamily{cmtt}\fontsize{11pt}{15pt}\selectfont <EMAIL>}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\vskip 1 em
\begin{quote}
\begin{center}
{\bf Abstract}
\end{center}
\vskip 1em
Continuum models for time-reversal (TR) invariant topological insulators (TIs) in $d \geq 3$ dimensions are provided by harmonic oscillators coupled to certain $SO(d)$ gauge fields. These models are equivalent to the presence of spin-orbit (SO) interaction in the oscillator Hamiltonians at a critical coupling strength (equivalent to the harmonic oscillator frequency) and leads to flat Landau Level (LL) spectra and therefore to infinite degeneracy of either the
positive or the negative helicity states depending on the sign of the SO coupling. Generalizing the results of \cite{Haaker} to $d \geq 4$, we construct vector operators commuting with these Hamiltonians and show that $SO(d,2)$ emerges as the non-compact extended dynamical symmetry. Focusing on the model in four dimensions, we demonstrate that the infinite degeneracy of the flat spectra can be fully explained in terms of the discrete unitary representations of $SO(4,2)$, i.e. the {\it doubletons}. The degeneracy in the opposite helicity branch is finite, but can still be explained exploiting the complex conjugate {\it doubleton} representations. Subsequently, the analysis is generalized to $d$ dimensions, distinguishing the cases of odd and even $d$. We also determine the spectrum generating algebra in these models and briefly comment on the algebraic organization of the LL states w.r.t to an underlying ``deformed" AdS geometry as well as on the organization of the surface states under open boundary conditions in view of our results.
\vskip 1em
\vskip 5pt
\end{quote}
\end{titlepage}
\begin{comment}
\cite{Haaker},
\cite{LiWu},
\cite{Li:2011it}
\cite{Li:2012xja}
\cite{KaneMele2005}
\cite{QiandZhangPhysToday}
\cite{Hasan-Kane-10}
\cite{Qi-Zhang-11}
\cite{SchnyderRFL2008}
\cite{Kitaev2008}
\cite{RyuSFL2009}
\cite{QiHZ2008}
\cite{EstienneRB2012}
\cite{NeupertSRChMRB2012}
\cite{Haldane2011}
\cite{LiZhangWu2013}
\cite{ZhangHu2001}
\cite{KarabaliNair2002}
\cite{Bernevig2003}
\cite{HasebeKimura2003}
\cite{Zhang-H-K-1988}
\cite{Zhang-1992}
\cite{Govil:2013uta}
\cite{Govil:2014uwa}
\cite{Fernando:2015tiu}
\cite{Gunaydin:2016bqx}
\cite{Sperling:2018xrm}
\cite{Balachandran:2002bj}
\cite{Coskun:2016ybb}
vonKlitzing:1980pdk, Thouless:1982zz Kohmoto Laughlin Haldane:1988zza
Cappelli:1992yv Iso:1992aa Martinez:1993xv Dirac:1963ta
\end{comment}
\setcounter{footnote}{0}
\pagestyle{plain} \setcounter{page}{2}
\newpage
\section{Introduction}
There is ongoing intense interest in gaining further theoretical insights from new and diverse perspectives on the topological phases of matter discovered in the past decade or so. This is reflected in the vast and diverse literature on the subject \cite{Haaker, KaneMele2005, Bernevig:2006zz, QiandZhangPhysToday, Hasan-Kane-10, Qi-Zhang-11, SchnyderRFL2008, Kitaev2008, RyuSFL2009, QiHZ2008, EstienneRB2012,NeupertSRChMRB2012, Ryu-Takayanagi-2010, Furusaki-etal-2012, LiWu, Li:2011it, Li:2012xja, Asorey:2013wvh}. Integer and fractional quantum Hall (QH) states \cite{vonKlitzing:1980pdk, Tsui:1982yy, Thouless:1982zz, Kohmoto, Laughlin}, which were discovered in early 80's, may be interpreted as early examples, which carry distinct topological numbers distinguishing them from the ordinary states of matter. In the low energy limit, QH system admits an effective field theoretic description in terms of topological Chern-Simons (CS) gauge theory in $2+1$ dimensions \cite{Zhang-H-K-1988,Zhang-1992}. It is also known that QH states belong to a more general class of time reversal (TR) symmetry breaking systems, in which the Hall conductance is quantized (in units of $\frac{e^2}{h}$). More recent interest in the field is driven by the discovery of the new topological phases of matter in two and subsequently in three and higher dimensions, which respect the TR symmetry. First examples of TR-invariant systems in two-dimensions are topological insulators (TIs), which are constructed using the Bloch-wave band structure \cite{KaneMele2005} generalizing the earlier seminal work of Haldane \cite{Haldane:1988zza} by introducing the spin-orbit (SO) interaction and restoring the TR symmetry. In \cite{Bernevig:2006zz} (see also \cite{QiandZhangPhysToday}), Bernevig and Zhang formulated a continuum version of these two-dimensional TR invariant TIs. This is named as the quantum spin Hall effect (QSHE) and can be viewed as consisting of two integer QH states with opposite chirality, for which the charge Hall conductance vanishes, while the spin Hall conductance is quantized (in units of $\frac{e}{2 \pi}$).
New phases of matter with non-trivial topology in three and higher dimensions are also being investigated rigorously from several different directions in the recent past \cite{Hasan-Kane-10, Qi-Zhang-11, SchnyderRFL2008, Kitaev2008, RyuSFL2009, QiHZ2008}. Complementing the investigations of three dimensional TR invariant TIs using the Bloch wave band structure, Li and Wu \cite{LiWu} introduced an interesting continuum model for three and higher dimensional TR invariant TIs. The model proposed by these authors is described by Hamiltonians, in which the charged spin $1/2$ particles are non-minimally coupled to $SU(2) \simeq SO(3)$ and $SO(d)$, Aharanov-Casher type non-abelian gauge fields in three and $d$-dimensions, respectively. These Hamiltonians can also be expressed as that of three and $d$-dimensional harmonic oscillators with a spin-orbit (SO) term at a critical coupling strength, matching the frequency of the harmonic oscillator and has the property that, depending on the sign of the SO term, either the positive or the negative helicity component exhibits flat spectra. The latter is a characteristic of the Landau levels, and therefore the models proposed in \cite{LiWu} may be taken as the generalization of the TR invariant LLs of QSHE \cite{Bernevig:2006zz} to flat higher-dimensional spaces\footnote{These developments may be contrasted to the generalization of QH physics and LLs to higher-dimensional manifolds, where the charged particles are coupled to non-abelian gauge fields that have uniform strength on the given manifold \cite{ZhangHu2001, KarabaliNair2002,Bernevig2003, HasebeKimura2003, Coskun:2016ybb}. These systems are not TR-invariant as they generalize the standard QHE in two dimensions and are used as models of TR breaking TIs \cite{Hasebe:2014nia}.}. In addition to the flat spectra, these model feature other intriguing properties; for instance, in three dimensions LL wave functions satisfy quaternionic analyticity, generalizing the complex analytic property of the ordinary QHE wave functions in the symmetric gauge. However, they do also have features which deviate from the two-dimensional case; lack of full translational symmetry due to the non-abelian form of the gauge field, being one such example. Thus, it is not possible to exploit the Bloch wave function formalism to directly compute the bulk topological index. Nevertheless, authors of \cite{LiWu} have shown that, these models posses gapless helical Dirac surface states, which are robust against the TR invariant perturbations and therefore allow for the interpretation of the models as TR preserving TIs with a ${\mathbb Z}_2$ topological invariant. To be somewhat more concrete, as exhibited in \cite{LiWu, LiWuSup} through a numerical calculation in the three-dimensional case under open boundary conditions, flat spectra acquires dispersion and this clearly reveals the presence of the surfaces states. The spectrum of the latter can be linearized around the Fermi angular momentum and the surface Hamiltonian can be given in terms of the Dirac operator on the spherical boundary. This analysis easily generalizes to $d$-dimensions with surface states governed by the Dirac Hamiltonian on $S^{d-1}$. Each fully occupied LL contributes one branch of helical surface modes at the spherical boundary and the model is topologically ${\mathbb Z}_2$ non-trivial if an odd number of LLs are filled. A related model breaking the full rotational symmetry, but with similar findings is discussed in \cite{ Li:2012xja}, while the square root problem of LL for Dirac fermions is presented in \cite{Li:2011it}.
In \cite{Haaker} properties and structure of the wave functions of the three dimensional TI system are explored from an algebraic perspective and an underlying non-compact extended dynamical symmetry group that completely accounts for both the infinite degeneracy of the LLs in the positive helicity and the finite degeneracy in the negative helicity component is determined. In practice, authors of \cite{Haaker} reveal two vector operators involving the total angular momentum (orbital and spin) and commuting with the Hamiltonian, which resemble the Runge-Lenz vector of the Kepler problem \cite{Kepler}. Appropriately scaled form of these vector operators on the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian and the generators of the total angular momentum, span the noncompact Lie algebra $so(3,2)$. The Dirac {\it Singleton} \cite{Dirac:1963ta, FF} is a well-known unitary irreducible representation (UIR) of $so(3,2)$ and plays the central role in explaining the aforementioned infinite and finite degeneracies in the spectrum of this model. It may be noted that, knowledge on the algebraic structure of the TI wave functions could be very useful, since it could allow for a deeper understanding of {\it i.} the underlying geometric features and {\it ii.} the algebraic organization of the surface states. To elaborate on the first item, it is speculated in \cite{Haaker} that the underlying geometry of LLs in three dimensions could be related to some radially deformed form of $AdS_4$, rather than the flat space, since the extended symmetry group can be thought as a ``deformed" $SO(3,2)$, recalling that $SO(3,2)$ is the exact isometry group of $AdS_4$, while for the second we may recall the $W_{\infty}$ symmetry encountered in certain QH phases, which accounts for the incompressibility of the QH droplet and algebra of the edge states \cite{Ezawa, Cappelli:1992yv, Iso:1992aa, Martinez:1993xv}, whose generalization to TR invariant TIs would be very interesting.
In the present work, we extend the results of \cite{Haaker} to four and subsequently to $d$-dimensional models. Introducing the appropriate vector operators commuting with the Hamiltonian and obtaining their suitably scaled form acting on the energy eigenkets, the extended dynamical symmetry group in four dimensions is identified as $SO(4,2)$. We show in full detail how the infinite degeneracy of the energy spectrum in the positive helicity branch can be explained in terms of the discrete UIRs of $SO(4,2)$, which are also known as the {\it doubletons} \cite{Govil:2013uta, Govil:2014uwa, Sperling:2018xrm}. The finite degeneracy in the negative branch is also understood using the complex conjugate {\it doubleton} representations. In section $4$, we give the generalization of our analysis to the models in $d$-dimensions and reveal that the extended symmetry group is $SO(d,2)$, while the degeneracies are explained using the discrete series UIRs of $SO(d,2)$, which essentially generalize the {\it singleton} and the {\it doubleton} representations in $d=3$ and $d=4$ to higher odd and even dimensions, respectively \cite{Fernando:2015tiu, Gunaydin:2016bqx}.
Our results allow us to gain a broader perspective into the structure of the $d \geq 3$-dimensional LLs. In particular, we observe that the operator $A = \sum_{a<b} L_{ab} \Gamma_{ab} + \frac{d-1}{2}$, i.e. the spin-orbit coupling term (up to a constant shift) identifies with the $U(1)$ generator of $SO(d,2)$ w.r.t which the Lie algebra $so(d,2)$ has a three-graded decomposition. We may recall that the $SO(d,2)$ is the conformal group for $d$-dimensional Minkowski space-time and this particular $U(1)$ generator is identified as the conformal Hamiltonian and its spectrum as the conformal energy. The latter may also be interpreted as the $AdS_{d+1}$ energy via AdS/CFT duality \cite{Fernando:2015tiu, Gunaydin:2016bqx}. Thus, we have the picture that the extended dynamical symmetry $SO(d,2)$ of $d$-dimensional TR invariant TIs reveals the algebraic organization of the LL states w.r.t to the underlying ``deformed" $AdS_{d+1}$ geometry, where the eigenvalues of $A$ shift by $\pm 1$ under the action of $so(d,2)$ ladder operators, that are organized in accord with its three-grading. As we have noted in the preceding paragraph, the boundary Hamiltonian is given in terms of the Dirac operator on $S^{d-1}$ (for a discussion of Dirac operators on $S^{d-1}$ \cite{Balachandran:2002bj} can be consulted). It can therefore be expressed in terms of the operator $A$ instead. Although $SO(d,2)$ can no longer be considered as the extended dynamical symmetry group once the open boundary conditions are imposed, to the extent that it may be applied, it may serve as an effective spectrum generating algebra for the surface states as the eigenvalues of the boundary Hamiltonian shift by $\pm \frac{v_F}{R_0}$ under the action of $so(d,2)$ ladder operators, $v_F$ being the Fermi velocity and $R_0$ the radius at the open boundary. We present a brief discussion of these observations in the final section of the paper.
\section{The Model for Four-Dimensional LLs}
\subsection{Basics and Preliminary Remarks}
We may launch our discussion starting with the Hamiltonian of a four-dimensional ($4D$) harmonic oscillator coupled to an Aharanov-Casher type $SO(4)$ gauge field $G_a = 2 m \omega r_b S_{ab}$ in the form \cite{LiWu}
\begin{equation}
H = \frac{1}{2m} (p_a - G_a)^2 - m \omega^2 r_a^2 \,,
\label{H1}
\end{equation}
which may be expressed as the Hamiltonian for a simple harmonic oscillator (SHO) with the spin-orbit (SO) term at the coupling strength $\omega$ matching the SHO frequency as
\begin{equation}
H = \frac{p_a^2}{2m} + \frac{1}{2} m \omega^2 r_a^2 - \omega \sum_{a <b = 1 }^{4} L_{ab} \Gamma_{ab} \,.
\label{H2}
\end{equation}
In this expression $L_{ab} : = r_a p_b - r_b p_a \,, (a,b= 1,\cdots,4)$ are the orbital angular momentum operators, while $\Gamma_{ab}$ are proportional to the spin operator $S_{ab}$ in $4$-dimensions, as will be explicitly defined in what follows. Setting $\hbar = 1$, we may write the momentum operator as $p_a = -i \partial_a$. In terms of the representation theory of $SO(4)$, $L_{ab}$ carries the $(l, 0)$ irreducible representation (IRR) of $SO(4)$, while $S_{ab}$ carries the direct sum representation $(1/2, 1/2) \oplus (1/2, -1/2)$ (IRRs are given in the highest weight i.e. the Gelfand-Zeitlin notation). To be more concrete, let us introduce the $4$-dimensional Euclidean $\gamma$-matrices, $\gamma_a \,, (a= 1,\cdots,4)$ with the anti-commutation relations $\lbrace \gamma_a \,, \gamma_b \rbrace = 2 \delta_{ab}$. We may choose them to be of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\gamma_i =
\left (
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & - i \sigma_i \\
i \sigma_i & 0
\end{array}
\right )
\,, \quad
\gamma_4 = \left (
\begin{array}{cc}
0 & 1 \\
1 & 0
\end{array}
\right )
\,,\quad (i=1,2,3) \\
&&\gamma_5 = \gamma_1 \gamma_2 \gamma_3 \gamma_4 =
\left (
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & -1
\end{array}
\right ) \,.
\end{eqnarray}
Spin operator, $S_{ab}$, may be expressed as
\begin{equation}
S_{ab} := \frac{1}{2} \Gamma_{ab} : = -\frac{i}{4} \lbrack \gamma_a \,, \gamma_b \rbrack \,, \quad
S_{ab} = \left (
\begin{array}{cc}
S_{ab}^+ & 0 \\
0 & S_{ab}^-
\end{array}
\right ) \,, \quad S_{ab}^\pm = (S_{ij}, \mp \frac{1}{2} \sigma_i) = ( \frac{1}{2}\varepsilon_{ijk} \sigma_k, \mp \frac{1}{2} \sigma_i) \,.
\end{equation}
Total angular momentum is given as $J_{ab} = L_{ab} + S_{ab}$ and has the IRR content given by the decomposition of the product $(l,0)\otimes [(1/2,1/2) \oplus (1/2,-1/2)]$ as
\begin{equation}
\left (l+\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2} \right ) \oplus \left(l-\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2} \right ) \oplus \left (l+\frac{1}{2}, -\frac{1}{2} \right ) \oplus \left (l-\frac{1}{2}, - \frac{1}{2} \right ) \,.
\label{irr1}
\end{equation}
$SO(4)$ commutation relations are given in terms of generic generators $M_{ab}$ as
\begin{equation}
\lbrack M_{ab}, M_{cd} \rbrack = i (\delta_{ac} M_{bd} + \delta_{bd} M_{ac} - \delta_{ad} M_{bc} - \delta_{bc} M_{ad}) \,.
\label{genericcom1}
\end{equation}
$L_{ab}$, $S_{ab}$ and $J_{ab}$ satisfy (\ref{genericcom1}).
The Hamiltonian commutes with the total angular momentum operator $J_{ab}$. Its spectrum and eigenfunctions are given in \cite{LiWu, LiWuSup}. We briefly present some details in order to be self-contained and prepare for the developments that follow. Spectrum of the pure $4D$ SHO is given as $E_{4D \,, SHO} = \omega (2 n + \ell +2)$ and the corresponding energy eigenfunctions are of the form $\Psi(r, \theta, \phi, \psi) = R_{n \ell}(r) \, Y^l_{m_L m_R}(\theta, \phi, \psi)$, where $R_{n \ell}(r) = r^l e^{- \frac{1}{2} m \omega r^2} F(-n, l+2, m \omega r^2)$ with $n \in {\mathbb Z}_+$ is the radial wave function and $Y^\ell_{m_L m_R}(\theta, \phi, \psi)$ are the spherical harmonics in four dimensions.
Eigenvalues of the SO term can easily be worked out using the eigenvalues of the Casimir operators for the IRRs appearing in (\ref{irr1}).
We have
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{a<b} L_{ab} S_{ab}^\pm &=& \frac{1}{2} (J_{ab}^2 - L_{ab}^2- S_{ab}^{\pm 2})
=
\begin{dcases}
\quad \frac{l}{2} & \mbox{on} \left( l +\frac{1}{2} \,, \pm \frac{1}{2} \right) \,, \quad \mbox{i.e. spin} \, \uparrow \, \\
-\frac{l+2}{2} & \mbox{on} \left( l - \frac{1}{2} \,, \pm \frac{1}{2} \right) \,, \quad \mbox{i.e. spin} \, \downarrow
\end{dcases}
.
\label{SOterm_spec}
\end{eqnarray}
Spectrum of the Hamiltonian in (\ref{H2}) then follows as
\begin{equation}
E =
\begin{dcases}
2 \omega (n+1) \,, & \mbox{spin $\uparrow$} \\
2 \omega (n + l + 2) \,, & \mbox{spin $\downarrow$}
\end{dcases} \,,
\label{spec1}
\end{equation}
from which we observe that the spin up (positive SO branch) part has flat spectrum, i.e. it is independent of the orbital angular momentum $l$, and leads to an infinite degeneracy at each energy level. Spin down (negative SO branch) part of the spectrum is also degenerate, but not infinitely so. In the ensuing sections our main focus will be explaining the reason underlying this degeneracy. It is useful to note that the infinite degeneracy of the positive SO branch is a direct consequence of the critical SO coupling strength which matches with the SHO frequency $\omega$; in particular, changing the sign of the SO term in the Hamiltonian would flip the spectrum of the positive and negative SO branches, making the latter infinitely degenerate instead. Corresponding wave functions are $R_{nl}(r) {\cal Y}_{l; m_L \, m_R}^{l \pm \frac{1}{2}}(\theta, \phi, \psi)$ where $R_{n l}(r)$ is the same as before, while ${\cal Y}_{l; m_L \, m_R}^{l \pm \frac{1}{2}}(\theta, \phi, \psi)$ are the spin spherical harmonics in four dimensions.
In analogy with the discussion of \cite{Haaker} in three dimensions, we find it useful to introduce the operator
\begin{equation}
A = \sum_{a<b} L_{ab} \Gamma_{ab} + \frac{3}{2} \,.
\label{opA}
\end{equation}
Using equation (\ref{SOterm_spec}) eigenvalues of $A$ can be simply written as $l^\prime := l + \frac{3}{2}$ for spin up and $l^\prime := - l - \frac{1}{2}$, for spin down, respectively. Thus, we have $l^\prime = \pm \frac{3}{2} \,, \pm \frac{5}{2} \,, \cdots$. Evidently, $A$ commutes with the Hamiltonian and therefore its eigenvalues $l^\prime$ can be used in labeling the energy eigenstates. Since $SO(4) \simeq SU(2) \times SU(2)$, we can introduce $SU(2)$-left and $SU(2)$-right generators for the total angular momentum $J_{ab}$ as
\begin{equation}
L_i = \frac{1}{2} ( \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{ijk} J_{jk} + J_{i4}) \,, \quad R_i = \frac{1}{2} ( \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{ijk} J_{jk} - J_{i4}) \,,
\end{equation}
with the commutation relations
\begin{equation}
\lbrack L_i \,, L_j \rbrack = i \varepsilon_{ijk} L_k \,, \quad \lbrack R_i \,, R_j \rbrack = i \varepsilon_{ijk} R_k \,, \quad
\lbrack L_a ,, R_b \rbrack = 0 \,.
\end{equation}
Conventionally, generators of the Cartan subgroup of $SO(4)$ are taken as $(J_{12}, J_{34})$, while for $SU(2) \times SU(2)$ they are taken as
\begin{equation}
(L_3 , R_3) = \left ( \frac{1}{2}(J_{12} + J_{34}) \,, \frac{1}{2} (J_{12} - J_{34}) \right ) \,.
\label{su2su2}
\end{equation}
From (\ref{irr1}) and (\ref{su2su2}) we see that the fundamental representations $(1/2, 1/2)$ and $(1/2, -1/2)$ correspond respectively to $(L_i, R_i) \equiv (0\,, \frac{\sigma_i}{2}) $ and $(L_i, R_i) \equiv (\frac{\sigma_i}{2} \,, 0)$. In the $SU(2) \times SU(2)$ irreducible representation notation, $(j_1, j_2)$, these are labeled as $(0,1/2)$ and $(1/2,0)$, respectively.
We choose to label the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian in terms of the principal quantum number $n$ and the eigenvalues $l^\prime, m_L, m_R$ of $A$, $L_3$ and $R_3$, and denote, in the Dirac notation, these states as $|n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle$ with
\begin{eqnarray}
A |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& l^\prime |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
L_3 |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& m_L |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle \,, \\
R_3 |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& m_R |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle \,. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In terms of the $SU(2) \otimes SU(2)$ representation labels the direct sum representation in (\ref{irr1}) reads
\begin{equation}
\left ( \frac{l +1}{2} \,, \frac{l}{2} \right) \oplus \left ( \frac{l}{2} \,, \frac{l-1}{2} \right) \oplus
\left ( \frac{l}{2} \,, \frac{l+1}{2} \right) \oplus \left ( \frac{l-1}{2} \,, \frac{l}{2} \right) \,.
\end{equation}
From this, we immediately infer that $|m_L| \leq \frac{l+1}{2}$ and $|m_R| \leq \frac{l}{2}$, and $|m_L| \leq \frac{l}{2}$ and $|m_R| \leq \frac{l-1}{2}$ respectively, for the right chiral representations (i.e. first two summands in (\ref{irr1})). In terms of the eigenvalues of $l^\prime$ of $A$, we have the range of eigenvalues for $m_L$ and $m_R$ expressed as
\begin{equation}
|m_L|\leq \left ( \frac{|l^\prime|}{2} - \frac{1}{4} \right) \,, \quad |m_R|\leq \left ( \frac{|l^\prime|}{2} - \frac{3}{4} \right) \,.
\label{intmlmr}
\end{equation}
As for the range of values for $m_L$ and $m_R$ in the left chiral representations, we simply interchange $m_L$ and $m_R$ in (\ref{intmlmr}).
Trading the label $l$ for $l^\prime$, we can express the spectrum in (\ref{spec1}) as
\begin{equation}
E =
\begin{dcases}
2 \omega (n+1) \,, & \mbox{spin $\uparrow$} \\
2 \omega (n - l^\prime + \frac{3}{2}) \,, & \mbox{spin $\downarrow$}
\end{dcases} \,.
\label{spec2}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Extended Dynamical Symmetries}
In order to understand the infinite and the finite degeneracies of the positive and negative helicity branches of the spectrum (\ref{spec2}), we will reveal this $4D$ model has an extended non-compact dynamical symmetry group. To do so, working from now on with $m=1$ and $\omega= \frac{1}{2}$, generalizing the approach of \cite{Haaker}, we introduce two Hermitian vector operators commuting with the Hamiltonian $H$ and involve, in addition to the coordinates and momenta, the total angular momentum and the SO operator $A$. Explicitly, they are in the form
\begin{eqnarray}
M_a &=& \frac{1}{4} (r_a A + A r_a) + \frac{1}{2} (p_b J_{ab} + J_{ab} p_b) \,, \nonumber \\
N_a &=& \frac{1}{2} (p_a A + A p_a) - \frac{1}{4} (r_b J_{ab} + J_{ab} r_b) \,.
\label{vecopsMN}
\end{eqnarray}
It can be straightforwardly demonstrated that
\begin{equation}
\lbrack M_a \,, H \rbrack = 0 \,, \quad \lbrack N_a \,, H \rbrack = 0 \,,
\end{equation}
and $M_a$ and $N_a$ transform as vectors under the adjoint action of $J_{ab}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
ad J_{ab} \, M_c &:=& \lbrack J_{ab} \,, M_c \rbrack = i \delta_{ac} M_b - i \delta_{bc} M_a \,, \nonumber \\
ad J_{ab} \, N_c &: =& \lbrack J_{ab} \,, N_c \rbrack = i \delta_{ac} N_b - i \delta_{bc} N_a \,,
\label{adjvector}
\end{eqnarray}
by direct calculation. It is also useful to note that the commutators of these vector operators with $A$, take the form
\begin{equation}
\lbrack A \,, M_a \rbrack = - i N_a \,, \quad \lbrack A \,, N_a \rbrack = i M_a \,.
\label{AMN}
\end{equation}
A set of long and rather tedious calculations yield the commutation relations for the operators $M_a$ and $N_a$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\lbrack M_a \,, M_b \rbrack &=& - 2 i J_{cd} \left ( \delta_{ac} \delta_{bd} \left (H + \frac{3}{2} A - 1 \right) + \frac{1}{8} \varepsilon_{abcd} \gamma_5 \right) \,, \nonumber \\
\lbrack N_a \,, N_b \rbrack &=& - 2 i J_{cd} \left ( \delta_{ac} \delta_{bd} \left (H + \frac{3}{2} A - 1 \right) + \frac{1}{8} \varepsilon_{abcd} \gamma_5 \right) \,, \nonumber \\
\lbrack M_a \,, N_b \rbrack &=& 2 i \delta_{ab} A \left (H + \frac{3}{2} A - 1 \right) + i J_{ac}J_{bc} - i \delta_{ab} \sum_{c<d} J_{cd}^2 \,, \nonumber \\
&=& 2 i \delta_{ab} \left ( A (H + \frac{3}{2} A - 1 ) - \frac{1}{2} A^2 + \frac{3}{8} \right) + i J_{ac}J_{bc} \,.
\label{comMN}
\end{eqnarray}
We have used, $\sum_{c<d} J_{cd}^2 = A^2 - \frac{3}{4}$ to express the second line of the last commutator in (\ref{comMN}). We may form the following linear combinations of $M_a$ and $N_a$
\begin{eqnarray}
K^1_\pm &:=& \frac{1}{\sqrt2}(M_1 \pm i M_2 \mp i N_1 + N_2) \,, \nonumber \\
K^2_\pm &:=& \frac{1}{\sqrt2} (M_1 \mp i M_2 \mp i N_1 - N_2) \,, \\
K^3_\pm &:=& \frac{1}{\sqrt2}( M_3 \pm i M_4 \mp i N_3 + N_4 )\,, \nonumber \\
K^4_\pm &:=& \frac{1}{\sqrt2}(M_3 \mp i M_4 \mp i N_3 - N_4 ) \,, \nonumber
\label{KMN}
\end{eqnarray}
which fulfill the commutation relations
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\lbrack A \,,K^1_\pm \rbrack = \pm K^1_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack L_3 \,,K^1_\pm \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} K^1_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, K^1_\pm \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} K^1_\pm \,, \\
\lbrack A \,,K^2_\pm \rbrack = \pm K^2_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack L_3 \,, K^2_\pm \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} K^2_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,,K^2_\pm \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} K^2_\pm \,, \\
\lbrack A \,,K^3_\pm \rbrack = \pm K^3_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack L_3 \,, K^3_\pm \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} K^3_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, K^3_\pm \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} K^3_\pm \,, \\
\lbrack A \,,K^4_\pm \rbrack = \pm K^4_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack L_3 \,, K^4_\pm \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} K^4_\pm \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, K^4_\pm \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} K^4_\pm \,.
\label{extendedcom1}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Comparison of these commutation relations with those of $so(4,2)$ roots and Cartan generators as given in the next section in (\ref{comso42part1}) and (\ref{comso42part2}) suggests a correspondence between $L_\pm$, $R_\pm$, $K_\pm^i$, ($i=1,2,3,4$) and the roots $E_{\pm (e^i \pm e^j)}$ of $so(4,2)$. This is obvious for the $so(4)= su(2)_L \oplus su(2)_R$ subalgebra. For this proposed correspondence the operator $A$ needs to be identified with a particular Cartan generator of $so(4,2)$, as we will lay out in detail in the following section. Nevertheless, the commutation relations among $K_\pm^i$, as inferred from those of $M_a$ and $N_a$ in (\ref{comMN}) include nonlinear terms in $H$ and $A$ and does not immediately fit into the $so(4,2)$ commutation relations. For instance, we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\lbrack K_-^1 \,, K_+^1 \rbrack &=& 4 (J_{12} + A) \left (H + \frac{3}{2} A - 1 \right) + J_{34} - \sum_{c<d} J_{cd}^2 + (J_{12}+J_{34})(J_{12}-J_{34}) \,, \nonumber \\
&=& 4 (L_3 + R_3 + A) \left (H + \frac{3}{2} A - 1 \right) + (L_3 - R_3) - A^2 + \frac{3}{4} + 4 L_3 R_3 \,.
\label{KKcom1}
\end{eqnarray}
Such complications are encountered in several different contexts, for instance in the Kepler problem in identifying $SO(4)$ as the extended dynamical symmetry group of the Hydrogen atom \cite{Kepler}. It was also faced in the $3D$ case treated in \cite{Haaker}. This issue can be remedied by appropriately scaling the operators $K_\pm^i$ acting on the energy eigenstates $|n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle$. It turns out that the suitable scalings of $K_\pm^i$ can be obtained by exploiting the operator
\begin{equation}
S = 4 ( H + A - \frac{3}{2}) \,,
\end{equation}
as we will discuss in detail in the next section.
Then, $A, L_i, R_i$, and
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{S}}K_+^i \,, \quad K_-^i \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \,,
\end{equation}
generate the non-compact group $SO(4,2)$ on the energy eigenstates $|n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle$. Thus, we identify $SO(4,2)$ as the extended dynamical symmetry of the model described by the Hamiltonian in (\ref{H2}). In the next section, by providing the details of this result, we show how the infinite-fold degeneracy of the positive helicity branch can be labeled in terms of a particular discrete UIR of $SO(4,2)$. We will also see how the finite degeneracy of the negative helicity branch is explained using the same machinery and a related UIR.
\section{Discrete UIRs of $SO(4,2)$ and the Degenerate LL Spectrum}
Hermitian generators $M_{\mu \nu}$ of the $so(4,2)$ Lie algebra satisfy the commutation relations
\begin{equation}
\lbrack M_{\mu \nu} \,, M_{\rho \sigma} \rbrack = i (\eta_{\mu \rho} M_{\nu \sigma} + \eta_{\nu \sigma} M_{\mu \rho} - \eta_{\mu \sigma} M_{\nu \rho} - \eta_{\nu \rho} M_{\mu \sigma}) \,.
\end{equation}
Here, we use the metric convention $\eta_{\mu \nu} = \mbox{diag}(1,1,1,1,-1,-1)$, $(\mu \,, \nu= 1 \,, \cdots \,, 6)$.
Cartan subalgebra of $so(4,2)$ is generated by $(H_1,H_2, H_3) \equiv (M_{12}, M_{34}, M_{56})$. Introducing the three-component unit vectors $e^1,e^2,e^3$ with $(e^i)_j = \delta^i_j$, the roots may be expressed as
\begin{equation}
E_{\pm(e^1-e^2)} \,, \quad E_{\pm(e^2-e^3)} \,, \quad E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} \,, \quad E_{\pm(e^1+e^2)} \,, \quad E_{\pm(e^1-e^3)} \,, \quad E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} \,.
\label{rootsso42}
\end{equation}
It is useful to introduce the notation $E_{\pm \alpha^\mu}$ for the roots, with the labels given as $\pm \alpha^\mu := \pm(e^i \pm e^j)$ with $i<j$. In a standard short-hand notation of the Cartan-Weyl basis, commutation relations among the generators can be compactly expressed as \cite{Fuchs}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\lbrack H_i \,, H_j \rbrack = 0 \,, \quad \lbrack H_i \,, E_{\alpha^\mu} \rbrack = \alpha_{i}^\mu E_{\alpha^{\mu}} \,, \nonumber \\
&&\lbrack E_{\alpha^\mu} \,, E_{\alpha^\nu} \rbrack =
\begin{dcases}
N_{\alpha^\mu \alpha^\nu} E_{\alpha^\mu + \alpha^\nu} \,, \quad \mbox{if $\alpha^\mu + \alpha^\nu$ is a root} \\
(E_{\alpha^\mu} \,,E_{-\alpha^\mu} ) \alpha^\mu_{i} H_i \,, \, \mbox{if $\alpha^\mu + \alpha^\nu = 0$, and sum over $i$ is implied}, \\
0 \,, \quad \mbox{otherwise}
\end{dcases}
\end{eqnarray}
where $( E_{\alpha^\mu} \,, E_{\alpha^\nu} ) = \frac{1}{2} \mbox{Tr} \, E_{\alpha^\mu} E_{\alpha^\nu}$ and the normalized traces are given by
\begin{equation}
\mbox {Tr} \, M_{\mu \nu}M_{\rho \sigma} = 2 \eta_{\mu \rho} \eta_{\nu \sigma} - 2 \eta_{\mu \sigma} \eta_{\nu \rho} \,.
\end{equation}
Cartan subalgebra and the roots form the Cartan-Weyl basis for the fifteen generators of $so(4,2)$. Roots in (\ref{rootsso42}) can be expressed as linear combinations of the $M_{\mu \nu}$ as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{\pm(e^1-e^2)} &=& \frac{1}{2} (\mp i M_{13}+M_{23}-M_{14} \mp i M_{24}) \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\pm(e^2-e^3)} &=& \frac{1}{2} (M_{35} \pm i M_{45}-M_{46} \pm i M_{36}) \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} &=& \frac{1}{2} (M_{35} \pm i M_{45}+ M_{46} \mp i M_{36}) \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\pm(e^1+e^2)} &=& \frac{1}{2} (\pm i M_{23} + M_{13} \pm i M_{14} - M_{24}) \,, \\
E_{\pm(e^1-e^3)} &=& \frac{1}{2} (\pm i M_{25} - M_{26} + M_{15} \pm i M_{16}) \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} &=& \frac{1}{2} (\mp i M_{25} - M_{26} - M_{15} \pm i M_{16}) \,. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The subalgebra $so(4)$ of $so(4,2)$ has the Cartan generators $H_1, H_2$. In the $so(4) = su(2) \times su(2)$ basis, Cartan generators can be taken as $L_3$ and $R_3$, which are given in terms of $H_1$ and $H_2$ as
\begin{equation}
L_3 = \frac{1}{2} (H_1 + H_2) \,, \quad R_3 = \frac{1}{2} (H_1 - H_2) \,.
\end{equation}
The relevant part of the commutation relations among the generator can be summarized as
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\lbrack L_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1-e^2)} \rbrack = 0 \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1-e^2)} \rbrack = \pm E_{\pm(e^1-e^2)} \,, \\
\lbrack L_3 \,, E_{\mp(e^2-e^3)} \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} E_{\mp(e^2-e^3)} \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, E_{\mp(e^2-e^3)} \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} E_{\mp(e^2-e^3)} \,, \\
\lbrack L_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} \,, \\
\lbrack L_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1+e^2)} \rbrack = \pm E_{\pm(e^1+e^2)} \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1+e^2)} \rbrack = 0 \,, \\
\lbrack L_3 \,, E_{\mp(e^1-e^3)} \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} E_{\mp(e^1-e^3)} \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, E_{\mp(e^1-e^3)} \rbrack = \mp \frac{1}{2} E_{\mp(e^1-e^3)} \,, \\
\lbrack L_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} \,, \quad & \lbrack R_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} \rbrack = \pm \frac{1}{2} E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} \,,
\end{array}
\label{comso42part1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
\lbrack H_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1-e^2)} \rbrack = 0 \,, \quad & \lbrack E_{(e^1-e^2)} \,, E_{-(e^1-e^2)} \rbrack = H_1 -H_2 \,, \\
\lbrack H_3 \,, E_{\mp(e^2-e^3)} \rbrack = \pm E_{\mp(e^2-e^3)} \,, \quad& \lbrack E_{(e^2-e^3)} \,, E_{-(e^2-e^3)} \rbrack = - H_2 + H_3 \,, \\
\lbrack H_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} \rbrack = \pm E_{\pm(e^2+e^3)} \,, \quad& \lbrack E_{(e^2+e^3)} \,, E_{-(e^2+e^3)} \rbrack = - H_2 - H_3 \,, \\
\lbrack H_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1+e^2)} \rbrack = 0 \,,\quad & \lbrack E_{(e^1-e^3)} \,, E_{-(e^1-e^3)} \rbrack = - H_1 + H_3 \,, \\
\lbrack H_3 \,, E_{\mp(e^1-e^3)} \rbrack = \pm E_{\mp(e^1-e^3)} \,,\quad & \lbrack E_{(e^1+e^3)} \,, E_{-(e^1+e^3)} \rbrack = - H_1 - H_3 \,, \\
\lbrack H_3 \,, E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} \rbrack = \pm E_{\pm(e^1+e^3)} \,,\quad & \lbrack E_{(e^1+e^2)} \,, E_{-(e^1+e^2)} \rbrack = H_1 + H_2 \,.
\label{comso42part2}
\end{array}
\end{equation}
We are interested in the discrete UIRs of the $so(4,2)$ Lie algebra and the corresponding Lie group $SO(4,2)$. These are usually called the {\it doubletons} \cite{Govil:2013uta,Govil:2014uwa} in the literature and they are bounded from below. They can be built via their lowest weight states. In order to construct these UIRs, we take advantage of the maximally compact subgroup $SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R \otimes U(1)$ of $SO(4,2)$, which has the same Cartan subalgebra as that of $SO(4,2)$. The $U(1)$ part here is generated by $H_3 = M_{56}$, and it is usually called the conformal Hamiltonian in the literature \cite{Govil:2013uta,Govil:2014uwa}, while the $SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R$ is generated by
\begin{equation}
L_{i} = \frac{1}{2} \left ( \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{ijk} M_{jk} + M_{i4} \right) \,, \quad R_{i} = \frac{1}{2} \left ( \frac{1}{2} \varepsilon_{ijk} M_{jk} - M_{i4} \right) \,, \quad i = 1,2,3 \,.
\end{equation}
With respect to $H_3$, the Lie algebra $so(4,2)$ admits the three-graded decomposition \cite{Govil:2013uta,Govil:2014uwa}
\begin{equation}
so(4,2) \equiv {\cal L}^+ \oplus {\cal L}^0 \oplus {\cal L}^- \,,
\label{threegraded1}
\end{equation}
where ${\cal L}^0$ stands for the maximally compact subalgebra $su(2)_L \oplus su(2)_R \oplus u(1)$ and ${\cal L}^\pm$ contain the remaining generators, with the three-grading defined as
\begin{equation}
\lbrack {\cal L}^0 \,, {\cal L}^\pm \rbrack = {\cal L}^\pm \,, \quad \lbrack H_3 \,, {\cal L}^\pm \rbrack = \pm {\cal L}^\pm \,.
\label{threegrading1}
\end{equation}
Out of the six pairs of roots $E_{\pm (e^i \pm e^j)}$, we have $L_\pm = E_{\pm (e^1 + e^2)}$ which generate $su(2)_L$ together with $L_3$ and $E_{\pm (e^1 - e^2)}$ $su(2)_R$ together with $R_3$, while the remaining four pair of roots in ${\cal L}^\pm$ transform as a vector, i.e. in the IRR $(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})$ of $su(2)_L \oplus su(2)_R$ as it is already implied by the three-graded decomposition given in (\ref{threegraded1}). We note that these are complex vectors since $E_{\pm (e^i \pm e^j)}^\dagger = E_{\mp (e^i \pm e^j)}$.
In order to proceed, we may introduce the four pairs of annihilation and creation operators, which are split into two ``colors", namely $a$'s and $b$'s as
\begin{equation}
\lbrack a_\alpha \,, a_\beta^\dagger \rbrack = \delta_{\alpha \beta} \,, \quad \lbrack b_\alpha \,, b_\beta^\dagger \rbrack = \delta_{\alpha \beta} \,, \quad \alpha,\beta = 1,2 \,.
\end{equation}
In terms of these operators, $SU(2)_L$ and $SU(2)_R$ generators can be built in the form
\begin{equation}
L_{\alpha \beta} = a_\alpha^\dagger a_\beta - \frac{1}{2} {\delta}_{\alpha \beta} {\hat N}_a \,, \quad R_{\alpha \beta}= b_\alpha^\dagger b_\beta - \frac{1}{2} {\delta}_{\alpha \beta} {\hat N}_b \,,
\end{equation}
where ${\hat N}_a = a_i^\dagger a_i$ and ${\hat N}_b = b_i^\dagger b_i$ are the number operators in the colors $a$ and $b$. ${\cal L}^+$ and ${\cal L}^-$ are spanned by $a_i^\dagger b_j^\dagger$ and $a_i b_j$, respectively. There is indeed a one to one correspondence between the roots $E_{\pm (e^i \pm e^j)}$ and $a_i^\dagger b_j^\dagger$ and $a_i b_j$, which can be given explicitly as
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ll}
a_1^\dagger b_1^\dagger \equiv E_{e^1+e^3} \,, \quad & a_1 b_1 \equiv E_{-(e^1+e^3)} \,, \\
a_1^\dagger b_2^\dagger \equiv E_{e^2+e^3} \,, \quad & a_1 b_2 \equiv E_{-(e^2+e^3)} \,, \\
a_2^\dagger b_1^\dagger \equiv E_{-(e^2-e^3)} \,, \quad & a_2 b_1 \equiv E_{e^2-e^3} \,, \\
a_2^\dagger b_2^\dagger \equiv E_{-(e^1-e^3)} \,, \quad & a_2 b_2 \equiv E_{e^1-e^3} \,.
\end{array}
\label{abpairs}
\end{equation}
Fundamental spinor IRR of $so(4,2)$ is of dimension four. We may denote the generators of this representation by the $4 \times 4$ matrices
$\Sigma_{\mu \nu}^+$, whose relation to $\Gamma$-matrices of appropriate signature and dimension can be found in \cite{Govil:2013uta}. As it is well-known, this representation is not unitary but it may be used to induce the UIR that we are seeking for. To do so, we introduce a four component spinor of the form \cite{Sperling:2018xrm,Govil:2013uta,Govil:2014uwa}
\begin{equation}
\psi = \left (
\begin{array}{c}
a_1^\dagger \\
a_2^\dagger\\
b_1 \\
b_2
\end{array}
\right ) \,, \quad {\bar \psi} = \psi^\dagger \Gamma^6 = (- a_1, -a_2, b_1^\dagger, b_2^\dagger) \,.
\end{equation}
A Schwinger-type realization of the $so(4,2)$ algebra is then provided by $M_{\mu \nu} = {\bar \psi} \Sigma_{\mu \nu}^+ \psi$ and gives a unitary representation of $so(4,2) \equiv su(2,2)$ on the Fock space generated the action of $a_\alpha^\dagger$ $b_\alpha^\dagger$ on the vacuum state with unit conformal energy. The latter splits into a direct sum of infinite number of unitary irreducible representations \cite{Govil:2013uta,Govil:2014uwa}. We observe that in the oscillator basis, Cartan generator $H_3$ and a $SO(4,2)$ invariant operator ${\widehat N}$ take the forms \cite{Sperling:2018xrm, Govil:2013uta,Govil:2014uwa}:
\begin{eqnarray}
H_3 &=& M_{56} = {\bar \psi} \Sigma_{56} \psi = \frac{1}{2} ({\hat N}_a + {\hat N}_b +2) \,, \nonumber \\
{\hat N} &:=& {\bar \psi}\psi = - {\hat N}_a + {\hat N}_b -2 \,.
\end{eqnarray}
In order to explicitly construct the {\it doubleton} representations, let us consider the states labeled by IRRs of the maximally compact subalgebra $su(2)_L \oplus su(2)_R \oplus u(1)$, in the form $|h_3, J_L, J_R \rangle$ on which any combination of annihilation-creation pairs given in (\ref{abpairs}) naturally acts. Clearly, $|1,0,0 \rangle$ constitutes the vacuum state which is annihilated by all $a_i$ and $b_j$. This vacuum state is clearly specified by $N=-2$ eigenvalue of ${\widehat N}$ and has unit conformal energy, i.e. $h_3 = 1$. Based on this vacuum, we can introduce two representations of $so(4,2)$ with the lowest weight vectors, which are given as
\begin{eqnarray}
|1 + \frac{k}{2}, \frac{k}{2}, 0 \rangle \,, \quad N &=& - k -2 \,, \quad k \in {\mathbb Z} \,, \nonumber \\
|1 + \frac{k}{2}, 0, \frac{k}{2} \rangle \,, \quad N &=& k -2 \,, \quad k \in {\mathbb Z} \,.
\label{lws1}
\end{eqnarray}
The fact that these are the lowest weight vectors of a representation of $so(4,2)$ is easily observed since all $E_{-(e^i \pm e^j)} \subset {\cal L}^-$ annihilate these states as they are built up from combinations of $a_i b_j$. With the action of the ladder operators $E_{\pm (e^i \pm e^j)} \subset {\cal L}^\pm$ on either of the lowest weights given in (\ref{lws1}), infinite number of states are generated for any given value of $k$. In other words, for each value of $k$, two inequivalent unitary irreducible representations which are infinite-dimensional are generated in this manner. These are called the {\it doubletons} of $so(4,2)$ and the corresponding group $SO(4,2)$. Interchanging $su(2)_L$ and $su(2)_R$ swaps these inequivalent doubletons at a given value of $k$. We can label the {\it doubleton} representations via the eigenvalue $N = \mp k - 2$ of ${\widehat N}$. In order to label all the states in a given {\it doubleton}, in addition to the labels $h_3 ,J_L, J_R$, we also need the eigenvalues of $L_3$ and $R_3$, which we denote as $m_L$ and $m_R$. Thus, we label the states as $|h_3, J_L,J_R, m_L, m_R \rangle$. Roots in ${\cal L}^\pm$ shift $h_3$ to $h_3 \pm 1$ and each of $J_L$, $J_R$ by $ \pm \frac{1}{2}$. This means that the eigenvalue of ${\widehat N}$ is preserved under the action of the roots. In other words, ${\widehat N}$ commutes with all the generators, verifying that it is an invariant operator as previously claimed.
For the eigenvalues of $H_3$ and ${\widehat N}$, we may write in terms of $J_L$ an $J_R$
\begin{eqnarray}
h_3 &=& 1 +J_L +J_R \,, \nonumber \\
N &=& -N_a +N_b-2 = - 2 J_L + 2 J_R -2 = \mp k- 2 \,,
\label{h3n}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mp$ sign in the r.h.s. of the last equality on the second line specifies the two inequivalent {\it doubleton} representation given in (\ref{lws1}). Inverting these equations we have,
\begin{equation}
J_L = \frac{1}{2} h_3 \pm \frac{1}{4} k - \frac{1}{2} \,, \quad J_R = \frac{1}{2} h_3 \mp \frac{1}{4} k - \frac{1}{2} \,.
\end{equation}
Let us work with the doubleton representation that corresponds to the upper sign in (\ref{h3n}). Action of the roots on the states $|h_3, J_L,J_R, m_L, m_R \rangle$ have the explicit form
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{\pm (e^1 + e^2)} |h_3, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(\frac{1}{2} h_3 + \frac{1}{4} k \pm m_L + \frac{1}{2})(\frac{1}{2} h_3 + \frac{1}{4} k \mp m_L - \frac{1}{2})} |h_3, m_L \pm 1, m_R \rangle \,, \\
E_{\pm (e^1 - e^2)} |h_3, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(\frac{1}{2} h_3 - \frac{1}{4} k \pm m_R + \frac{1}{2})(\frac{1}{2} h_3 - \frac{1}{4} k \mp m_R - \frac{1}{2})} |h_3, m_L, m_R \pm 1 \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\pm (e^1 +e^3)}|h_3, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(\frac{1}{2} h_3 + \frac{1}{4} k +m_L \pm \frac{1}{2})(\frac{1}{2} h_3 - \frac{1}{4} k + m_R \pm \frac{1}{2})}|h_3 \pm 1, m_L \pm \frac{1}{2}, m_R \pm \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\pm (e^2 + e^3)} |h_3, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(\frac{1}{2} h_3 + \frac{1}{4} k + m_L \pm \frac{1}{2})(\frac{1}{2} h_3 - \frac{1}{4} k - m_R \pm \frac{1}{2})} |h_3 \pm 1, m_L \pm \frac{1}{2}, m_R \mp \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\mp (e^2 - e^3)} |h_3, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(\frac{1}{2} h_3 + \frac{1}{4} k - m_L \pm \frac{1}{2})(\frac{1}{2} h_3 -\frac{1}{4} k + m_R\pm \frac{1}{2})} |h_3 \pm 1, m_L \mp \frac{1}{2}, m_R \pm \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
E_{\mp (e^1 - e^3)} |h_3, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(\frac{1}{2} h_3 +\frac{1}{4} k - m_L \pm \frac{1}{2})(\frac{1}{2} h_3 - \frac{1}{4} k - m_R\pm \frac{1}{2})} |h_3 \pm 1, m_L \mp \frac{1}{2}, m_R \mp \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,. \nonumber
\label{doubletonbasis}
\end{eqnarray}
As for the {\it doubleton} representation with the lower sign in (\ref{h3n}), we can simply take $k \rightarrow - k$ in the coefficients provided above\footnote{We could have used a notation with $\pm k $ and $\mp k$ in the expression above to indicate these distinct doubleton representations, but that notation interferes with the $\pm$ and $\mp$'s associated to the root pairs, therefore we avoid the use of such a notation.}.
We are now in a position to state one of the most crucial result in this article. Namely, we observe that the infinitely degenerate states of the $4D$ model at each energy level on either of the chiral components can be labeled by one or the other of the {\it doubleton} representations of $SO(4,2)$ with $N=-3$ or $N=-1$, since for either of the two we can then match the eigenvalues $h_3 = \frac{3}{2} \,, \frac{5}{2} \,, \cdots$ of $H_3$ with the eigenvalues $l^\prime = \frac{3}{2} \,, \frac{5}{2} \,, \cdots $ of the operator $A$. In other words, spectrum of $A$ matches in a one to one and onto manner with that of $H_3$ on the states spanning these {\it doubleton} representations. Hence, from now on we make the identification $|h_3, m_L, m_R \rangle \equiv |\ell^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle$ for the UIRs with $N=-3$ or $N=-1$. Comparing (\ref{extendedcom1}) with (\ref{comso42part1}) and (\ref{comso42part2}) we further infer the identifications
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} K^1_+ \equiv E_{e^1 +e^3} \,, \quad \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} K^2_+ \equiv E_{-(e^1 - e^3)} \,, \quad \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} K^3_+ \equiv E_{e^2 +e^3} \,, \quad \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} K^4_+ \equiv E_{-(e^2 -e^3)} \,, \nonumber \\
&& K^1_- \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \equiv E_{-(e^1 +e^3)} \,, \quad K^2_- \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \equiv E_{(e^1 - e^3)} \,, \quad K^3_-\frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \equiv E_{-(e^2 +e^3)} \,, \quad K^4_- \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} \equiv E_{(e^2 -e^3)} \nonumber \,.
\label{KvE}
\end{eqnarray}
Acting on the states $|n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle$, $K_\pm^i$ pick an additional factor of $2 \sqrt{n + l^\prime \pm \frac{1}{2}}$ for $\ell^\prime > 0$ as can be seen using (\ref{KKcom1}), (\ref{KvE}) and (\ref{doubletonbasis}). Concretely, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
L_\pm |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{(\ell^\prime \pm 2 m_L + \frac{3}{2})( l^\prime \mp 2 m_L - \frac{1}{2})} |n, l^\prime, m_L \pm 1, m_R \rangle \,, \\
R_\pm |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{(\ell^\prime \pm 2 m_R + \frac{1}{2})(l^\prime \mp 2 m_R - \frac{3}{2})} |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \pm 1 \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
K_\pm^1|n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(l^\prime + \frac{1}{2} + 2 m_L \pm 1)(l^\prime - \frac{1}{2} + 2 m_R \pm 1 )(n + l^\prime \pm \frac{1}{2})} |n, l^\prime \pm 1, m_L \pm \frac{1}{2}, m_R \pm \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
K_\pm^2 |n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(l^\prime +\frac{1}{2} - 2 m_L \pm 1)(l^\prime - \frac{1}{2} - 2 m_R\pm 1)(n + l^\prime \pm \frac{1}{2})} |n, l^\prime \pm 1, m_L \mp \frac{1}{2}, m_R \mp \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
K_\pm^3|n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(l^\prime + \frac{1}{2} + 2 m_L \pm 1)(l^\prime - \frac{1}{2} - 2 m_R \pm 1)(n + l^\prime \pm \frac{1}{2})} |n, l^\prime \pm 1, m_L \pm \frac{1}{2}, m_R \mp \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,, \nonumber \\
K_\pm^4|n, l^\prime, m_L, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{(l^\prime + \frac{1}{2} - 2 m_L \pm 1)(l^\prime -\frac{1}{2} + 2 m_R\pm 1)(n + l^\prime \pm \frac{1}{2})}| n, l^\prime \pm 1, m_L \mp \frac{1}{2}, m_R \pm \frac{1}{2} \rangle \,. \nonumber
\label{Kbasis}
\end{eqnarray}
The foregoing discussion makes the identification of the extended symmetry generators with either of the $SO(4,2)$ {\it doubleton} representation with $N=-3$ or $N=-1$ manifest and the either of the representations can be used to enumerate the infinite fold degeneracy of the flat LL spectra of the model given in (\ref{spec2}).
For $\ell^\prime < 0$, i.e. the negative helicity component of the spectrum, energy levels are only finitely degenerate. We easily see from (\ref{spec2}) that at $E=3$, only possible value of $l^\prime$ is $-\frac{3}{2}$, while for $E=4$, the possible values for $\ell^\prime$ are $-\frac{3}{2}$ and $-\frac{5}{2}$ and in general for $E \geq 3$ the possible values of $\ell^\prime$ are $-\frac{3}{2}, -\frac{5}{2}, \cdots ,(\frac{3}{2} - E)$. To label these degenerate states, we essentially need the representations defined through their highest weight states, i.e. the complex conjugate representation. The latter can be obtained from the {\it doubletons} defined via (\ref{lws1}) by taking $(h_3, k) \rightarrow (- h_3 ,-k)$ and making the exchange\footnote{To be more precise, these representations are generated by $-M_{ab}^*$.} $J_L \leftrightarrow J_R$. Complex conjugate {\it doubleton} representations are bounded from above and those with $N = -3^*$ and $N=-1^*$ are the two inequivalent UIRs that may be used. The physical operators $K_{\pm}^i$ acting on these complex conjugate representations bring a factor $\sqrt{E + l^\prime -1 \pm \frac{1}{2}}$, where $E$ stands for the energy eigenvalue\footnote{Note that, in terms of the energy eigenvalues, the factor $\sqrt{(n + l^\prime \pm \frac{1}{2})}$ that appears in (\ref{Kbasis}) also takes the form $\sqrt{E + l^\prime -1 \pm \frac{1}{2}}$. We already know that, $K_\pm^i$ are commuting with the Hamiltonian, however the negative helicity part of the spectrum is not independent of $l^\prime$, therefore it is imperative to express this factor in terms of the energy to make the proper physical interpretation manifest, while it makes no difference to write it in terms of $n$ or $E$ for the positive helicity part as $E$ does not depend on $l^\prime$.}. We see that the $K_-^i$ annihilate the states with $l^\prime \leq \frac{3}{2}-E$, with $E = 3,4,\cdots$, fitting perfectly with the observed finitely degenerate spectrum.
Let us also recall that the spin operator $S_{ab}$ have the chiral components $S_{ab}^+$ and $S_{ab}^-$ and the spectrum (\ref{spec2}) is the same in each chiral branch.
These chiral parts are mapped to each other upon interchanging the left- and the right- generators of $SU(2)_L \times SU(2)_R$. From these facts, we immediately infer that, we can employ both of the {\it doubleton} representations with $N=-3$ and $N=-1$ one enumerating the infinite degeneracy in the left-chiral and the other in the right-chiral component for the flat spectra with positive helicity. Similarly both of the complex conjugate UIRs with $N = -3^*$ and $N=-1^*$ can be employed to label the negative helicity part of the spectrum. In this manner all the degeneracies in the spectrum (\ref{spec2}) are accounted for.
\section{Generalization to $d$-dimensions}
It is essentially rather straightforward to generalize the $4D$ model and the preceding developments to $d$-dimensions. With the
$SO(d)$ gauge field $G = 2 m \omega r_b S_{ab}$, (\ref{H1}) generalizes to
\begin{equation}
H_d = \frac{1}{2m} (p_a - G_a)^2 - \frac{d-2}{2} m \omega^2 r_a^2 \,,
\label{Hd1}
\end{equation}
while (\ref{H2}) has the same formal structure
\begin{equation}
H_d = \frac{p_a^2}{2m} + \frac{1}{2} m \omega^2 r_a^2 - \omega \sum_{a <b = 1 }^{d} L_{ab} \Gamma_{ab} \,,
\label{Hd2}
\end{equation}
where now $L_{ab} : = r_a p_b - r_b p_a \,, (a,b= 1,\cdots,d)$ are the orbital angular momentum operators that span the $(l,0,\cdots,0)$ IRR of $SO(d)$, which is of dimension ${\cal N} = (d + 2 l -2) \frac{(d+l+3)!}{l! (d-2)!}$. The Casimir operator in this IRR of $SO(d)$ satisfies $\sum_{a<b}L_{ab}^2 = l (l + d - 2) \mathds{1}_{{\cal N}}$. $\Gamma_{ab}$ are proportional to the spin operator $S_{ab}$ in $d$-dimensions and can be given in terms of the commutators of the $\Gamma$-matrices in $d$-dimensions as $S_{ab} := \frac{1}{2} \Gamma_{ab} : = -\frac{i}{4} \lbrack \Gamma_a \,, \Gamma_b \rbrack$. For $d$ odd, $d= 2k+1$, $\Gamma_a$ are of rank $k$; they are $2^k \times 2^k$ matrices and there are $2k+1$ of them. $SO(2k+1)$ has rank $k$ and $S_{ab}$ spans the fundamental spinor representation $(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}\,,\cdots \,, \frac{1}{2})$ of $SO(2k+1)$ which is $2^k \times 2^k$-dimensional. For $d$ even, $d=2k+2$, $\Gamma_a$ has rank $k$, $2^{k+1} \times 2^{k+1}$ matrices and $S_{ab}$ span a reducible representation of $SO(2k+2)$, which decomposes as $S_{ab} = S_{ab}^+ \oplus S_{ab}^-$ to the fundamental left- and right-chiral spinor representations $(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}\,,\cdots \,, \pm \frac{1}{2})$, which are each $2^k \times 2^k$-dimensional. The chiral projections to $S_{ab}^\pm$ can be obtained using the projection operators ${\cal P}^\pm = \frac{1}{2} (1 \pm \Gamma_{2k+3})$, where $\Gamma_{2k+3} := \Gamma_1 \Gamma_2 \cdots \Gamma_{2k+2}$. In terms of the $\Gamma$-matrices of rank $k$, we may write $S_{ab}^\pm \equiv (S_{ij}, S_{i 2k+2}) := (S_{ij}, \pm \frac{1}{2} \Gamma_i)$ with $i,j = 1,\cdots, 2k+1$. The facts listed above are well-known and the spectrum of $H$ is already given in \cite{LiWu, LiWuSup}. For completeness, we provide the essential results here, to lay out the foundations for the developments that will ensue. Eigenvalues of the SO term follows from a similar calculation as in the $4D$ case and they are given as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{a<b} L_{ab} S_{ab}^\pm &=&
\begin{dcases}
\quad \frac{l}{2} & \mbox{on} \left( l +\frac{1}{2} \,,\frac{1}{2}, \cdots \,, (\pm) \frac{1}{2} \right) \,, \quad \mbox{i.e. spin} \, \uparrow \,, \\
-\frac{l + d -2}{2} & \mbox{on} \left( l - \frac{1}{2} \,, \frac{1}{2} \,,\cdots \,, (\pm) \frac{1}{2} \right) \,, \quad \mbox{i.e. spin} \, \downarrow
\end{dcases}
\label{SOspecd}
\,.
\label{SOterm_spec_ddim}
\end{eqnarray}
It should be clear that the $(\pm)$ in (\ref{SOspecd}) distinguishes the left- and the right-chiral representations for $SO(2k+2)$; while for $SO(2k+1)$ only the upper sign appears. This gives the spectrum of $H_d$ in (\ref{Hd1}) or equally in (\ref{Hd2}) as
\begin{equation}
E =
\begin{dcases}
2 \omega \left (n + \frac{d}{4} \right) \,, & \mbox{spin $\uparrow$} \\
2 \omega \left (n + l + \frac{3}{4} d - 1 \right) = 2 \omega \left ( n - l^\prime + \frac{d}{4} + \frac{1}{2} \right) \,, & \mbox{spin $\downarrow$}
\label{specd}
\end{dcases} \,.
\end{equation}
Note that as in the $4D$ model, the spectrum in the positive helicity branch is flat, indicating an infinite-fold degeneracy for this part of the spectrum. We also stick to the choice of the parameter values $m=1$ and $\omega = \frac{1}{2}$. In analogy with the $3D$ \cite{Haaker} and $4D$ results, we may introduce the operator
\begin{equation}
A = \sum_{a < b} L_{ab} \Gamma_{ab} + \frac{d-1}{2} \,,
\label{opAd}
\end{equation}
whose eigenvalues may still be denoted as $l^\prime$. We have $l^\prime = l + \frac{d-1}{2}$ for the positive and $l^\prime = -l - \frac{d-3}{2}$ for the negative helicity components so that $ l^\prime = \pm \frac{d-1}{2} \,, \pm \frac{d+1}{2} \,, \cdots$. The eigenstates of the Hamiltonian $H_d$ can be denoted by the kets $|n, l^\prime\,,[s]_{SO(d)} \,, [m]_{SO(d)} \rangle$, where $[s]_{SO(d)}$ stands as a collective index for the $SO(d)$ UIR and $[m]_{SO(d)}$ as a collective index of the quantum numbers within this UIR of $SO(d)$ that unambiguously label these eigenstates.
Using the operator $A$, we can introduce the $d$-dimensional vector operators $M_a$ and $N_a$ exactly in the same formal form as given in (\ref{vecopsMN}), except that the indices $a,b$ are now taking values in the interval $(1,\cdots,d)$. Total angular momentum operators $J_{ab}= L_{ab} + S_{ab}$, $A$ and appropriately scaled linear combinations of $M_a$, $N_a$ span $\frac{1}{2}(d+2)(d+1)$-dimensional group, which can be identified with the non-compact group $SO(d,2)$.
This essentially works in the same manner, as we have laid out in detail for the $4D$ case. We may use the discrete unitary irreducible representations of $SO(d,2)$ defined through their lowest weight vectors to label the infinite degeneracy of the flat part of the spectrum in (\ref{specd}). $so(d,2)$ is of rank $k+1$ for $d=2k+1$ and of rank $k+2$ for $d = 2k+2$. The relevant discrete UIR of $so(d,2)$ can be constructed using the three-graded decomposition of the Lie algebra $so(d,2)$ w.r.t its maximally compact subalgebra \cite{Fernando:2015tiu, Gunaydin:2016bqx}
\begin{equation}
so(d,2) \equiv {\cal L}^+ \oplus {\cal L}^0 \oplus {\cal L}^- \,,
\label{threegrading2}
\end{equation}
where ${\cal L}^0$ stands for the maximally compact subalgebra $so(d) \oplus u(1)$. ${\cal L}^\pm$ which contains the remaining generators of $so(d,2)$, and the three-grading has the same structure as defined before in (\ref{threegrading1}). From the existing literature, it is readily known that the discrete unitary representations of $so(d,2)$ can be labeled by the eigenvalues of the $U(1)$- generator and these representations generalize the {\it singleton} representation of $so(3,2)$ for odd values of $d$ and the {\it doubleton} representations of $so(4,2)$ for even values of $d$ \cite{Fernando:2015tiu, Gunaydin:2016bqx}. For $d=2k+2$, the representations we need fall into the class in which the $SO(2k+2)$ subgroup carry the IRRs $(\frac{s}{2}, \frac{s}{2},\cdots\, \pm \frac{s}{2}) \equiv [s]_{SO(d)}$, where $s$ is a non-negative integer. Corresponding to each of these representations there is a UIR of $so(d,2)$ with the lowest weight vectors $|\frac{1}{2} (d+s-2)\,, (\frac{s}{2}, \frac{s}{2},\cdots\, \pm \frac{s}{2}) \rangle$, whose $U(1)$-charge, i.e. the eigenvalue of the $(k+2)^{th}$ Cartan generator $H_{k+2}$ is $\frac{1}{2} (d+s-2)$. Action of the operators in the ${\cal L}^-$ sector of the three-grading annihilate these lowest weight states, while the repeated action of operators ${\cal L}^+$ generates these UIRs. In particular, action of ${\cal L}^\pm$ shifts the eigenvalue of $H_{k+2}$ by $\pm 1$, and map $[s]_{SO(d)}$ to $[s\pm 1]_{SO(d)}$, while also changing the collective $[m]_{SO(d)}$ indices; ${\cal L}^\pm$ can be spanned by the roots of $so(d,2)$ in the Cartan-Weyl basis, whose organization is determined by the fact that roots in ${\cal L}^\pm$ should shift the eigenvalue of $H_{k+2}$ by $\pm 1$.
Among these UIRs, we need the one with $s=1$, whose $U(1)$ charge in the lowest weight sector matches with the lowest possible positive eigenvalue $\frac{d-1}{2}$ of $A$. Thus, the spectrum of $A$ matches with that of $H_{k+2}$ on these UIRs and the states in either of them with the lowest weights $|\frac{1}{2} (d-1)\,, (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2},\cdots\, \pm \frac{1}{2}) \rangle$ span the infinite degeneracy of the flat spectrum in (\ref{specd}). There are overall $2d$ different linear combinations $K_\pm^i$ ($i:1,\cdots,d$) of $M_a$'s and $N_a$'s such that $\frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} K_+^i$ span ${\cal L}^+$ and $ K_-^i \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}}$ span ${\cal L}^-$, where $S = H + A - \frac{1}{2} \left( \frac{d}{2} +1 \right)$ up to an overall constant which is immaterial for our present purposes. Just like the $4D$ case, we can associate one of these UIRs with the left- and the other with the right- chiral component to label and distinguish the degenerate spectrum. For the negative helicity states, energy disperses with the eigenvalues of $A$ and the degeneracy is finite. The complex conjugate representations, which are practically obtained by $h_{k+2} \rightarrow - h_{k+2}$, have the highest weight vectors $|- \frac{1}{2} (d-1)\,, (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2},\cdots\, \pm \frac{1}{2}) \rangle$ and can be used to label the degenerate states in this branch, noting that the unscaled operators $K_{-}^i$ annihilate the states with $l^\prime < \frac{d}{4} + \frac{1}{2} - E$, with $E$ taking on the values $ \frac{3}{4} d, \frac{3}{4} d + 1, \cdots$. For $d=4$, our previously determined result is immediately obtained, while, for instance, for $d=6$, negative helicity states have the lowest energy $\frac{9}{2}$ and therfore no states with $l^\prime < - \frac{5}{2}$ exist, in perfect agreement with the observed spectrum and degeneracy of the negative helicity states.
For odd values of $d$, the relevant representation of $so(d,2)$ is also labeled by the $U(1)$ charge, and has the value $\frac{d-1}{2}$ for the lowest weight state \cite{Fernando:2015tiu, Gunaydin:2016bqx}. The latter is given by $|\frac{1}{2} (d-1)\,, (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2},\cdots\, \frac{1}{2}) \rangle$, where the $(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2},\cdots\, \frac{1}{2})$ is the $2^{(\frac{d-1}{2})}$-dimensional fundamental spinor IRR of $SO(d)$. These states are annihilated by all the operators belonging to ${\cal L}^-$ of the three grading and a UIR of $so(d,2)$ is generated by the repeated application of the operators in ${\cal L}^+$. It can be readily noted that, as opposed to the infinite family of representations for even $d$ (corresponding to the pair of UIRs labeled by the integer $s$), for $d$ odd there is only a unique spinoral UIR of $so(d,2)$. For $d=3$, this is nothing but the Dirac {\it singleton} representation with spin $\frac{1}{2}$. In this UIR spectrum of $A$ identifies with that of the $U(1)$ generator, which may be taken as the $(k+1)^{th}$ Cartan generator $H_{k+1}$, and the states generated from the lowest weight $|\frac{1}{2} (d-1)\,, (\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2},\cdots\, \frac{1}{2}) \rangle$ completely label the infinite degeneracy of the flat spectrum. The rest of the correspondence is almost the same as that of even $d$ given in the previous paragraph, except that for $d$ odd, the operator $K_\pm^{2k+1}$ associated to the last root pair $E_{\pm e^k}$, in the form $E_{e^k} \equiv \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}} K_+^{2k+1}$ and $E_{-e^k} \equiv K_i^{2k+1} \frac{1}{\sqrt{S}}$ are obtained from the linear combinations of only the $(2k+1)^{th}$ components of $M_a$ and $N_a$, i.e. $K_\pm^{2k+1} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} (M_{2k+1} \mp i N_{2k+1})$, while the other $K_\pm^i$ are linear combinations that involve two components from each of $M_a$ and $N_a$ (\ref{KMN}). Thus, all $K_\pm^{i}$ shift the eigenvalue of $H_{k+1}$ by $\pm 1$, and $[s]_{SO(d)}$ to $[s\pm 1]_{SO(d)}$, while $[m]_{SO(d)}$ change accordingly under $K_\pm^{-}$, $(i \neq 2k+1)$, but remains unchanged under $K_\pm^{2k+1}$. For $d=3$, this result can be seen from the formula provided in \cite{Haaker} and is a characteristic discriminating odd $d$ from even $d$.
\section{Spectrum Generating Algebra}
Using the annihilation and creation operators
\begin{equation}
c_a = \frac{1}{2} r_a - i p_a \,, \quad c_a^\dagger = \frac{1}{2} r_a + i p_a \,, \quad \lbrack c_a \,, c_b^\dagger \rbrack = \delta_{ab} \,, \quad (a = 1\,,\cdots \,, d )\,,
\end{equation}
we may express the Hamitonian $H_d$ in (\ref{Hd2}) as
\begin{equation}
H = \frac{1}{2} \left ({\widehat N}_c + \frac{d}{2} \right) - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{a<b} L_{ab} \Gamma_{ab} \,,
\end{equation}
where ${\widehat N}=c_a^\dagger c_a$ and the orbital angular momentum operator can be expressed in terms of $c_a \,, c_a^\dagger$ as $L_{ab} = - i (c_a^\dagger c_b - c_b^\dagger c_a )$.
Generalizing the discussion given in \cite{Haaker}, we may introduce the operators ${\cal S}_\pm$, which are quadratic in $c_a$'s and $c_a^\dagger$'s as
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}_+ = - \frac{1}{2} c_a^\dagger c_a^\dagger \,, \quad {\cal S}_- = -\frac{1}{2} c_a c_a \,.
\end{equation}
Since, $\lbrack {\hat N} \,, {\cal S}_\pm \rbrack = \pm 2 {\cal S}_\pm$ and $\lbrack L_{ab} \,, {\cal S}_\pm \rbrack = 0$, we infer that ${\cal S}_\pm$ shifts the energy eigenvalues by $\pm 1$. It is straightforward to show that
\begin{equation}
\lbrack H \,, {\cal S}_\pm \rbrack = \pm {\cal S}_\pm \,, \quad \lbrack {\cal S}_+ \,,{\cal S}_- \rbrack = - 2 \left( H + \frac{A}{2} - \frac{d-1}{4} \right) \,.
\label{so21com}
\end{equation}
Upon identification of $ H + \frac{A}{2} - \frac{d-1}{4}$ with the ${\cal S}_3$ generator, (\ref{so21com}) corresponds to the $SO(2,1)$ commutation relations. In particular, ${\cal S}_3 \,, {\cal S}_\pm$ span the unitary irreducible representation of $SO(2,1)$ with the extremal weights $\Lambda = \frac{l^\prime}{2} + \frac{1}{4}$ for $\ell^\prime = \frac{d-1}{2}\,, \frac{d+1}{2} \,, \cdots$ and $\Lambda = - \frac{l^\prime}{2} + \frac{3}{4}$ for $l^\prime = - \frac{d-1}{2}\,, -\frac{d+1}{2} \,, \cdots$. In these representations of $SO(2,1)$, eigenvalues of the Casimir operator $\frac{1}{2}({\cal S}_+ {\cal S}_- + {\cal S}_-{\cal S}_+)- {\cal S}_3^2$ are given as $\Lambda (1 - \Lambda)$. Using this information and (\ref{so21com})
we easily find
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}_\pm | n \,, l^\prime, m_L \,, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{\left (n + \frac{1}{2} \pm \frac{1}{2}\right) \left(n + l^\prime \pm \frac{1}{2} \right )} | n \pm 1 \,, l^\prime, m_L \,, m_R \rangle \,, \quad l^\prime > 0 \,, \\
{\cal S}_\pm | n \,, l^\prime, m_L \,, m_R \rangle &=& \sqrt{\left (n + \frac{1}{2} \pm \frac{1}{2}\right) \left(n - l^\prime + 1 \pm \frac{1}{2} \right )} | n \pm 1 \,, l^\prime, m_L \,, m_R \rangle \,, l^\prime < 0 \\
&\equiv& \sqrt{\left (E + l^\prime - \frac{d}{4} \pm \frac{1}{2}\right) \left(E - \frac{d}{4} + \frac{1}{2} \pm \frac{1}{2} \right )} | E \pm 1 \,, l^\prime, m_L \,, m_R \rangle \,. \nonumber
\label{so21states}
\end{eqnarray}
General considerations on the UIRs of $SO(2,1)$ require that $\Lambda \geq \frac{1}{2}$ \cite{Perelomov}, and this is fulfilled in the present case since $|l^\prime| \geq \frac{d-1}{2}$. For both the positive and negative helicity components the lowest weight state is $| 0 \,, l^\prime, m_L \,, m_R \rangle$. Since the energy spectrum is $E = n - l^\prime + \frac{d}{4} + \frac{1}{2}$ for negative helicity states, it is readily inferred from the second line of (\ref{so21states}) that ${\cal S}_-$ annihilates the states with $l^\prime < \frac{d}{4} + \frac{1}{2} - E$ in accord with the result determined in the preceding section.
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
In this paper we have examined the degeneracies in the energy spectrum of $d \geq 4$-dimensional SHOs coupled to Aharanov-Casher type $SO(d)$ gauge fields. The Hamiltonians of these models can equally be expressed as SHOs, with a spin-orbit terms, whose coupling strength is tuned to the SHO frequency. With our choice of sign for the SO coupling the positive helicity part of the energy spectrum is flat and led to the interpretation of these models as TR invariant LLs in higher dimensions \cite{LiWu}, generalizing the QSHE \cite{Bernevig:2006zz}. Focusing on the $4D$ model, we have introduced two vector operators commuting the Hamiltonian and succeeded in demonstrating that the symmetry group $SO(4)$ of the model extends to the non-compact dynamical symmetry $SO(4,2)$ and that the discrete UIRs of this group, the so called {\it doubletons} specified via the invariants $N=-3$ and $N=-1$ provide the complete labeling of the infinite degeneracy of the flat spectrum. Subsequently, all of these results generalized to the models in $d$-dimensions and shown that the extended non-compact symmetry group is indeed $SO(d,2)$ and the infinite degeneracy of the flat spectra is completely accounted for by exploiting the discrete series UIRs of $SO(d,2)$, which generalize the {\it singleton} and the ${\it doubleton}$ representations in $d=3$ and $d=4$ to all odd and even dimensions, respectively.
Since $SO(d,2)$ is the isometry group of $AdS_{d+1}$, we may contemplate that the LL states are essentially organized w.r.t. an underlying radially ``deformed" AdS geometry rather than the flat space, due to the extended non-linear symmetry generated by the operators $J_{ab}$, $A$ and $K_\pm^i$, whose commutation relations involve non-linear terms as manifestly seen from (\ref{comMN}) and (\ref{KKcom1}). The spectrum of the operator $A$ in (\ref{opAd}) matches with that of the $U(1)$ generator in the UIR of $SO(d,2)$ in which the latter has the eigenvalue $\frac{d-1}{2}$ in the lowest weight states. Considering the $SO(d,2)$ as either the conformal group for $d$-dimensional Minkowski space-time or, as above, the isometry group of $AdS_{d+1}$, spectrum of the $U(1)$ generator corresponds to the conformal energy or the AdS energy \cite{Fernando:2015tiu, Gunaydin:2016bqx}. Under the action of $so(d,2)$ ladder operators, eigenvalues of $A$ shift by $\pm 1$ within the degenerate states, giving further evidence toward the aforementioned interpretation.
Finally, let us note that imposing open boundary conditions say at radius $R_0$, the flat spectrum is no longer maintained once the angular momentum value exceeds a critical value, which depends on the LL and can be numerically estimated for a given model, as it was done for $3D$ case in \cite{LiWu, LiWuSup}. Starting around this critical value, the energy spectrum becomes dispersive indicating the emergence of states localized on the boundary \cite{LiWu}. In fact, the energy spectrum at the surface can be linearized around the Fermi angular momentum and becomes essentially governed by the Hamiltonian
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{surface} &=& \frac{v_F}{R_0} \sum_{a<b} L_{ab} \Gamma_{ab} - \mu \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{v_F}{R_0} \left ( A - \frac{d-1}{2} \right) - \mu \,,
\label{Hsurface}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mu$ stands for the chemical potential. Although $SO(d,2)$ can no longer be considered as the precise extended dynamical symmetry in the presence of the boundary, (\ref{Hsurface}) shifts by $\pm \frac{v_F}{R_0}$ under the action of $so(d,2)$ ladder operators, which suggests the interpretation of $SO(d,2)$ as an effective spectrum generating algebra for the surface states. We think that these brief remarks merit further study and any future progress on them will be reported elsewhere.
\vskip 1em
\noindent{\bf \large Acknowledgments}
\vskip 1em
\noindent Part of S.K.'s work was carried out during his sabbatical stay at the physics department of CCNY of CUNY and he thanks V.P. Nair and D. Karabali for the warm hospitality at CCNY and the metropolitan area. S.K. acknowledges the financial support of the Turkish Fulbright Commission under the visiting scholar program and the METU research project GAP-105-2018-2809. G.Ü acknowledges the support of the TUBİTAK 2218 post doctoral scholarship program.
\vskip 1em
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The majority of massive galaxies in the local Universe have not been actively forming stars
for $\gtrsim10$ billion years. Their spectroscopic properties are consistent with
an intense starburst occurred in the early Universe followed by passive evolution
(e.g., \citealt{thomas05,gallazzi05,renzini06}).
The recent advent of sensitive near-IR spectrographs has allowed us to reach close to
their primary formation epoch. There are a handful of massive quiescent galaxies confirmed
out to $z=3.7$ \citep{glazebrook17,schreiber18}. Detailed photometric analyses suggest that they
indeed seem to form in a short and intense starburst, followed by rapid quenching
\citep{schreiber18}. However, the physics of this entire process still remains unclear.
A key parameter for characterizing quiescent galaxies is the stellar velocity dispersion,
which is an integrated motion of stars along the line of sight. It exhibits tight
correlations with other fundamental properties of galaxies (e.g., the fundamental plane; \citealt{djorgovski87}).
It is also the best predictor of stellar age with no residual correlation between size
and age at fixed velocity dispersion \citep{vanderwel09,graves09}.
The velocity dispersion measurement is observationally challenging due to the demanding
S/N ratio of rest-frame optical spectra. It has been measured out to $z=2.8$ with
the help of gravitational lensing effects \citep{hill16}. Although quiescent galaxies have been
confirmed at higher redshifts, their dynamical properties remain unknown. This is unfortunate
because dynamical information may also hold a key to understanding how these galaxies form.
This paper presents the spectroscopic confirmation of a massive quenching galaxy at
$z=4.01$, the most distant galaxy with suppressed star formation rate (SFR) known to date.
The paper further presents the measurement of its stellar velocity dispersion,
opening a new window to explore dynamical properties of massive galaxies at $z\sim4$.
A companion paper \citep{valentino19}
discusses star formation histories and progenitors of this and other galaxies at $z\sim4$ in detail.
We first
summarize our observation in Section 2, and then present spectral analyses in Section 3.
Measurements of the physical size and discussions of its dynamical properties are given in
Sections 4 and 5, respectively. Finally, we discuss implications of our results and
conclude the paper in Section 6.
We adopt $\rm H_0=70\ km\ s^{-1}\ Mpc^{-1}$, $\rm \Omega_M=0.3$,
and $\rm \Omega_\Lambda=0.7$, unless otherwise stated. Magnitudes are in the AB system.
\section{Observation}
\label{sec:observation}
\subsection{Target Selection}
\label{sec:target_selection}
We select massive quiescent galaxy candidates located at $z\sim4$ using deep multi-wavelength data available
in Subaru/XMM-Newton Deep Field. We have compiled $uBVRizJHK[3.6][4.5][5.8][8.0]$ photometry measured
in a consistent manner and applied a photometric redshift code from \citet{tanaka15} to infer redshifts
as well as SFR and stellar mass. Further details are given in \citet{kubo18}.
We define galaxies with $1\sigma$ upper limit of specific SFR below $10^{-9.5}\rm\ yr^{-1}$ as quiescent galaxies.
These candidates are typically $K\sim24$.
Among them, there is one outstandingly bright
galaxy with $K=21.9$, which is the subject of the paper. There is no nearby galaxy or galaxy cluster,
and this object is not strongly lensed.
Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum} (right panel) shows the SED of the object.
It is a massive galaxy at $z_{phot}\sim4$ exhibiting a prominent Balmer break, which is
indicative of a recent starburst a few hundred Myr ago. The SFR inferred from the fit
is low for its stellar mass; SFR$=24.0^{+21.7}_{-22.7}$ and $M_*=1.15^{+0.11}_{-0.10}\times10^{11}\rm\ M_\odot$,
giving a specific SFR of $\sim10^{-10}\rm\ yr^{-1}$. The object is about 1~dex below
the sequence of star forming galaxies on a SFR vs. $M_*$ diagram and
it is likely that this galaxy recently quenched (see \citealt{valentino19} for further discussions).
\subsection{Observation and Data Reduction}
\label{sec:data_reduction}
We were allocated the first half nights of the 20--21 December 2018 to follow-up the target
with Keck/MOSFIRE. The observing conditions were
good and the seeing was around 0.7 arcsec. Each exposure was 180 seconds long and
the classical ABBA nodding was applied along the slit. The total integration time was 7.75 hours.
A bright star was put in the mask, which allowed us to keep a track of changes in the observing conditions.
7\% of the exposures with low fluxes from the bright star were excluded due to poor seeing and/or poor alignment.
The data were processed in a standard manner using the MOSFIRE DRP 2018 release.
A0V stars were observed as spectrophotometric standards twice per night. The flux calibration vectors
derived from those stars were consistent at a few percent level on both nights.
The vectors were averaged and the mean flux calibration vector was applied to the extracted 1d spectra.
Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum} shows the spectrum. There are four prominent absorption lines, which
were identified as H$\gamma$ to H$\zeta$. There is also H$\eta$ on the edge. We confirm the redshift
to be $z=4.012\pm0.001$.
This proves the accuracy of our photometric redshift estimate ($z_{phot}=4.12$).
There is no emission line in the spectrum, and
$1\sigma$ upper limit on (unobscured) SFR from H$\gamma$ is $\lesssim8\rm\ M\odot\ yr^{-1}$.
There is no IR detection either.
All this confirms the quiescent nature of the galaxy (see \citealt{valentino19}).
\section{Spectral Fit}
\label{sec:spectral_fit}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=180mm]{spectrum.eps}
\caption{
{\bf Left:}
MOSFIRE $K$-band spectrum. The top panel shows the 2D spectrum. The A and B nods are in white and
the combined spectrum is in black. The bottom panel shows the extracted 1D spectrum.
The black and blue spectra are the object and noise spectra binned over approximately the resolution element, respectively.
The red spectrum is the best-fit model spectrum from {\tt ppxf}.
{\bf Right:}
Broad-band SED of the object. The red circles and blue squares are the observed and model
photometry, respectively. The spectrum is the best-fitting model spectrum from the photometric redshift code
\citep{tanaka15}.
}
\label{fig:spectrum}
\end{figure*}
We fit the observed MOSFIRE spectrum using {\tt ppxf} \citep{cappellari04,cappellari17}.
We use the simple stellar population models from \citet{vazdekis10} for the fit. We exclude all models that are older
than the age of the Universe at the redshift of the object. We also exclude models
with sub-solar metallicity as we are focusing on a massive galaxy. Since the rest-frame
spectral resolution of the MOSFIRE spectrum is slightly higher than that of the library, we apply
Gaussian smoothing to match the resolution. We use an additive correction function of
order 1 (i.e., linear) and no multiplicative correction.
Our results are not sensitive to the choices here.
The best-fit spectrum is shown in red in Fig.~\ref{fig:spectrum}. All observed Balmer absorption
lines are fit very well, and the overall fit has $\chi^2_\nu=1.2$.
In addition, thanks to the high S/N of
the spectrum ($S/N\sim5$ per resolution element),
we measure a velocity dispersion of $268\pm59\rm\ km\ s^{-1}$. The uncertainty
here is based on a Monte-Carlo simulation; we perturb the observed spectrum using the noise
spectrum and repeat the fits. The quoted uncertainty is the 68th percentile of the distribution
from the Monte-Carlo fits. If we use the Indo-US stellar spectral library \citep{valdes04} instead of Vazdekis
so that we do not need to smooth the MOSFIRE spectrum, we obtain a consistent stellar
velocity dispersion ($\sigma=252\pm77\rm\ km\ s^{-1}$). We also have confirmed that emission line in-filling
does not affect our measurement either; we repeat the fits by excluding H$\gamma$ and H$\delta$ and obtain
a fully consistent measurement, $\sigma=277\pm58\rm\ km\ s^{-1}$.
\section{Physical Size}
\label{sec:physical_size}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{size_meas1.eps}\hspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{size_meas2.eps}
\caption{
Size from HSC $i$-band plotted against size from {\it HST} $F160W$. The plotted are objects with $i$-band magnitudes
similar to that of the $z=4$ object. The solid line shows $r_{\rm eff,HSC} = r_{\rm eff,HST}$.
The left and right panels show objects at $z<1.5$ and $z>1.5$, respectively. The systematic offset and scatter
around it are shown in the figures.
}
\label{fig:size_meas}
\end{figure*}
In order to fully utilize the stellar velocity dispersion, we are interested in structural properties
of the $z=4$ galaxy, in particular its size. The typical rest-frame optical size of $z\sim4$ galaxies is very small
($r_{\rm eff}\sim0.5\rm\ kpc$; \citealt{kubo18}), and adaptive optics assisted observations or high spatial resolution
imaging with the Hubble Space Telescope ({\it HST}) are an ideal way to measure the size of the $z=4$ galaxy.
Unfortunately, there is no existing {\it HST} data for the galaxy and \citet{kubo18} did not observe the galaxy with AO.
However, a useful upper limit on the size can still be obtained from the ground-based data.
We use deep optical data from Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program (HSC-SSP; \citealt{aihara18,aihara19})
and demonstrate how well we can reproduce the sizes measured from {\it HST}.
The $i$-band image from HSC-SSP processed with the pipeline designed for LSST \citep{juric17,bosch18,ivezic19}
is used here to measure sizes due to superior seeing than the other bands.
We retrieve objects with similar $i$-band magnitudes to the $z=4$ galaxy ($i\sim24.3$) in UltraDeep-SXDS, which is the same field
as UDS, in which the $z=4$ galaxy is located, and run {\tt galfit} \citep{peng02,peng10} to measure their effective radii
adopting the Sersic profile.
We use the variance image to generate a sigma map and use the 'coadd PSF' \citep{bosch18} as an input PSF image.
The PSF has FWHM$=0.65$ arcsec. We perform a Monte-Carlo run by slightly perturbing the initial centroid,
position angle, effective radius and brightness. We fix the Sersic index to a randomly drawn value between 0.5 and 4
in each run.
We use the fit with the smallest $\chi^2$ as the best estimate and $\Delta\chi^2<1$ as the 68th percentile interval.
Fig.~\ref{fig:size_meas} compares the size measurements between HSC and {\it HST}. The {\it HST} sizes are taken from \citet{vanderwel14}
and are measured in the WFC3/F160W filter.
We split the sample into low and high redshift ranges using the photo-$z$ described in Section \ref{sec:target_selection}.
These two panels give a quantitative estimate of the rest-frame wavelength dependence of the size measurements.
Interestingly, we observe equally good correlation between the two measurements down to $\sim0.1$ arcsec in both plots.
If we define outliers as $|r_{\rm eff,HSC}-r_{\rm eff,HST}|>0.2$ arcsec, the outlier rate is about 4\% in both plots.
This good correlation is likely due to the depth of the HSC data (the $5\sigma$ depth is $\sim27$~mag) and also to the good PSF model.
Other studies also have shown that sizes can be measured to $\sim0.2$ FWHM \citep{vanderwel14}
for high S/N and adequate spatial sampling.
It is encouraging that there seems no major evidence for large morphological k-corrections in the size measurements.
We note that \citet{vanderwel14} also find that the wavelength dependence of size is not very strong for quiescent galaxies.
Adopting this size measurement procedure for the $z=4$ galaxy, we find the best size estimate
of $0.11 \pm 0.03$ arcsec ($0.76\pm0.20$ kpc). This size is fully consistent with the typical size of $z\sim4$
massive quiescent galaxies from \citet{kubo18}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:galfit} shows the object, best-fit model, and residual images, demonstrating an excellent fit.
Figs.~\ref{fig:size_meas} and \ref{fig:galfit} suggest that our estimate here is likely reasonable, but
to be fully conservative, we primarily use the upper limit on the size in what follows; $0.76+0.20$ (random) $+0.35$
(systematic corresponding to 0.05 arcsec observed scatter) $=1.3\rm\ kpc$.
The left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:re_vs_mstar} shows $r_{\rm eff}$ against stellar mass.
In addition to the $z=4$ galaxy, the figure also includes lower redshift galaxies for
comparison; quiescent galaxies at $z\sim2$ from a compilation of literature and
$0.6\lesssim z \lesssim1.0$ galaxies from the LEGA-C survey \citep{vanderwel16,straatman18} cross-matched with
the size measurements from \citet{vanderwel14}. Quiescent galaxies among the LEGA-C galaxies are selected
using the multi-band classification from \citet{laigle16}.
The $z=4.01$ galaxy is compact for its stellar mass, and it is physically smaller than $z\sim2$
and other lower redshift galaxies. This clear redshift trend is consistent with \citet{kubo18}.
In contrast, the stellar velocity dispersion of the $z=4$ galaxy plotted
in the right panel is largely consistent with those of the lower redshift galaxies.
There is a possible hint that low redshift galaxies from LEGA-C and SDSS
have a slightly lower velocity dispersion.
However, the difference, if any, is fairly modest.
This indicates that the stellar velocity dispersion has not significantly evolved
over the last 12 Gyr. This is an intriguing result because the size and mass
are known to evolve significantly over this time period.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=50mm]{galfit_image1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=50mm]{galfit_image2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=50mm]{galfit_image3.eps}
\caption{
The panels show, the $i$-band image from HSC, the best-fit {\tt galfit} model, and residual, from left to right.
The flux scales are the same in all the panels.
}
\label{fig:galfit}
\end{figure*}
\section{Dynamical Analysis}
\label{sec:dynamical_analysis}
Using the size from
the previous section, we estimate the galaxy's dynamical mass as
\begin{equation}
M_{dyn} = \frac{\beta(n)\ \sigma^2\ r_{\rm eff}}{G},
\end{equation}
\noindent
where $\beta$ is $\beta(n)=8.87-0.831n + 0.024n^2$ \citep{cappellari06}. As discussed in the same paper,
a constant $\beta=5.0$ also works well. Given the unconstrained $n$ for our object, we adopt $\beta=5$ here,
which yields $M_{dyn}=6.3\times10^{10}\rm\ M_\odot$ with an upper limit of $1.2\times10^{11}\ \rm M_\odot$.
Fig.~\ref{fig:mstar_vs_mdyn} (left panel) compares the stellar mass with the dynamical mass estimated here.
The stellar mass of the $z=4$ object is consistent with the dynamical mass.
We use the Chabrier IMF here \citep{chabrier03}.
This consistency is encouraging because this confirms the accuracy of our photometry-based estimate of stellar mass,
which then implies that assumptions employed such as the initial mass function are reasonable.
The $z=4$ galaxy is expected to increase its size and stellar mass with time through mergers.
\citet{marchesini14} estimated the likely stellar mass growth from abundance matching, and
\citet{kubo18} followed the size growth of these galaxies on the stellar mass evolutionary track from \citet{marchesini14}.
From these results, we can make a prediction for
how the galaxy will evolve in the $M_*$ vs. $M_{dyn}$ plane. If we assume that the velocity dispersion does not
change with time, which is the assumption also taken by, e.g., \citet{belli17}, the expected location of
the descendant of the $z=4$ galaxy is shown as the pink points (Fig,~\ref{fig:mstar_vs_mdyn}).
The expected evolutionary track shows an increase in the dynamical mass with a smaller increase
in the stellar mass. If minor mergers entirely drive the evolution and velocity dispersion does not change
over time, we expect $M_*\propto r_{\rm eff}^{0.5}\propto M_{dyn}^{0.5}$. As the size growth observed by \citet{kubo18}
is close to the maximum growth rate expected from minor mergers, the evolutionary track is indeed close to
$M_*\propto M_{dyn}^{0.5}$.
In the local Universe, early-type galaxies are known to show
a tight relationship between effective radius, mean intensity, and velocity dispersion (i.e., fundamental plane; \citealt{djorgovski87}).
The evolution of the fundamental plane is mostly due to the evolving stellar mass to luminosity ratio due to
stellar aging. The mass fundamental plane, which replaces luminosity with stellar mass, has been suggested
in the literature to largely remove that effect \citep{bezanson13b}.
Fig.~\ref{fig:mstar_vs_mdyn} (right panel) shows the mass fundamental plane.
The $z=4$ galaxy is located at the bottom left part of the distribution of the lower redshift galaxies
as expected from its small size and high stellar density.
The evolutionary track with constant velocity dispersion is along the locations of the lower redshift objects and the galaxy
will likely be among the most massive galaxies at each epoch.
This in turn implies that the velocity dispersion does not evolve significantly. If it had changed by
a factor of, e.g., 2 by $z=1$, the expected location of the descendant galaxy would be inconsistent
with the observed $z\sim1$ galaxies.
We also briefly discuss the classical fundamental plane. The interpretation of
its evolution is not straightforward, but assuming that the evolution in the fundamental plane is
entirely due to the luminosity evolution for simplicity, we find that the $z=4$ galaxy is $1.70^{+\infty}_{-0.46}$~dex
off in $\log I_{\rm eff}$ in the rest-frame $g$-band from the local relation (recall that we have only
an upper limit on size).
A simple stellar population model from \citet{bruzual03} predict a luminosity evolution of a factor
of $\sim~80$, or equivalently $\sim~1.9$~dex, adopting the luminosity-weighted age of $\sim0.2$ Gyr \citep{valentino19}
for the galaxy. The fundamental plane evolution therefore is consistent with the pure luminosity evolution,
although the uncertainty here is rather large and we do not discuss further at this point.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{re_vs_mstar.eps}\hspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=83mm]{sigma_vs_mstar.eps}
\caption{
{\bf Left:} Size plotted against stellar mass.
The $z=4$ galaxy is shown in red. The black points are quiescent galaxies at $z>1.5$
drawn from the literature; compilation by \citet{vandesande13}, which includes
\citet{vandokkum09,onodera12,toft12,bezanson13a}, and newer data from \citet{belli17} and Stockmann et al. (submitted).
Their mean redshift is around 2.
The shades show data from the LEGA-C survey, which covers $0.6\lesssim z\lesssim1.0$.
The dashed line shows the local relation from \citet{shen03}
based on data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS; \citealt{york00,strauss02}).
The solid and dotted lines in the bottom-right corner shows evolutionary tracks with $r_{\rm eff}\propto M_*$ and
$r_{\rm eff}\propto M_*^2$, respectively. They represent the major and minor merger tracks.
{\bf Right:} Stellar velocity dispersion plotted against stellar mass. The meaning of the symbols are the same as
in the left figure.
The blue dashed curve is a fit to SDSS galaxies \citep{zahid16}.
}
\label{fig:re_vs_mstar}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{mstar_vs_mdyn_rev.eps}\hspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=83mm]{mass_fp.eps}
\caption{
{\bf Left:} Stellar mass plotted against dynamical mass. The dotted line shows $M_{*}=M_{\rm dyn}$.
The black points are the lower redshift objects ($z\sim2$) as in Fig.~\ref{fig:re_vs_mstar}.
The shades are quiescent galaxies from LEGA-C, and the dashed curve is the running median of the distribution
of quiescent galaxies with sSFR$<10^{-10}\rm\ M_\odot\ yr^{-1}$ drawn from SDSS DR15 \citep{aguado19}.
SFR and stellar mass are from Granada FSPS fits \citep{ahn14}.
The red point is the $z=4$ object.
The pink points are the expected evolutionary track assuming constant velocity dispersion (see text for details).
{\bf Right:}
Mass fundamental plane. The dotted line is a fit from \citet{bezanson13b}.
The other symbols are the same as the left panel.
}
\label{fig:mstar_vs_mdyn}
\end{figure*}
\section{Summary and Discussion}
\label{sec:discussion}
We have presented spectroscopic confirmation of a massive galaxy being quenched at $z=4.01$,
which is the most distant example known to date. Thanks to the high S/N of the spectrum, we are able
to measure its stellar velocity dispersion, $268\pm59\rm\ km\ s^{-1}$. The size estimate based
on the deep optical data is $0.76\pm0.20\rm\ kpc$ with an upper
limit of $<1.3\rm\ kpc$, which is consistent with the typical size of massive quiescent galaxies
from \citet{kubo18}. Combining the velocity dispersion and size, we find that the dynamical
mass is consistent with the stellar mass inferred from photometry. Also, the galaxy is on
the mass fundamental plane and the expected evolutionary path of the galaxy is consistent with
the massive quiescent galaxies at lower redshifts.
The most striking finding of this work is that the stellar velocity dispersion of the massive
galaxy at $z=4.01$ is consistent with that of massive galaxies at lower redshifts.
This is in contrast to the very large velocity dispersion of a $z=2.2$ galaxy reported by \citet{vandokkum09},
$510^{+165}_{-95}\rm\ km\ s^{-1}$.
The $z=4$ galaxy is expected to increase its mass by a factor of $2.1_{-1.0}^{+2.2}$ \citep{marchesini14} and size
by a factor of $10.8_{-3.6}^{+5.3}$ \citep{kubo18} by $z=1$. However, the stellar velocity dispersion evolution is
significantly weaker; Fig.~\ref{fig:re_vs_mstar} (right) shows that even the most massive galaxies at lower
redshifts have only slightly larger velocity dispersion. This finding indicates that
the size and mass evolution does not significantly increase the total mass contained in
the core of these massive galaxies. This has significant implications for how galaxies increase their
size and mass; galaxies do not increase mass equally at all radii, and instead most of
the mass growth occurs in the outer parts perhaps through minor mergers, which also increases the effective radius.
This is fully consistent with the two-phase formation scenario \citep{naab07,oser10}.
In fact, simulations show only a mild evolution in velocity dispersion \citep{oser12},
in agreement with our observation here.
An interesting implication here is that the first of the two phases, namely the formation
of the dense core, may be completed as early as $z\sim4$.
It is, however, not clear whether the $z=4$ galaxy is a dispersion-dominated system.
Recent work finds that massive galaxies at $z\sim2$ exhibit significant rotational motion
\citep{toft17,newman18b}. Simulations predict a relatively small $V/\sigma$ if massive
galaxies at high redshifts form in starbursts triggered by dissipative mergers \citep{wuyts10}.
The reported large rotational motion favors formation through disk instabilities.
It is possible that the $z=4$ galaxy also rotates, potentially complicating the interpretation above.
But, given the absence of sufficient spatial resolution to resolve any rotational motion
from the MOSFIRE data nor even an ellipticity measurement from the imaging, we have to
await further observations to reveal $V/\sigma$ of the $z=4$ galaxy.
The large rotational motion, if present, has to be damped at lower redshifts because
the majority of the most massive galaxies in the local Universe are slow rotators (e.g., \citealt{veale17}).
Mergers may be able to do the job \citep{lagos18}.
Prior to this work, the most distant velocity dispersion measurements were made
at $z=2.6-2.8$ with a help of a gravitational lensing effect \citep{hill16,newman18a}.
This work makes a major leap in redshift without lensing and demonstrates that the current facilities
have an ability to confirm redshifts and measure the stellar velocity dispersion of
the brightest galaxies at $z>4$. Massive galaxies at such redshifts are rare, but
ongoing/upcoming massive imaging surveys will be able to construct a significantly
larger sample, which can then be followed up spectroscopically to further extend the work presented here.
\acknowledgments
This work is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP23740144 and JP15K17617.
FV and GEM acknowledges the Villum Fonden research grant 13160 “Gas to stars, stars to dust: tracing star formation across cosmic time”.
FV acnknowledges the Carlsberg Fonden research grant CF18-0388 “Galaxies: Rise And Death”.
The Cosmic Dawn Center (DAWN) is funded by the Danish National Research Foundation under grant No. 140.
ST and GEM acknowledge support from the European Research Council (ERC) Consolidator Grant funding scheme (project ConTExt, grant number: 648179).
MO acknowledges support by KAKENHI JP17K14257. KY acknowledges support by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP18K13578.
We thank the anonymous referee for a useful report, which helped improve the paper.
The HSC collaboration includes the astronomical communities of Japan and Taiwan, and Princeton University. The HSC instrumentation and software were developed by NAOJ, Kavli IPMU, the University of Tokyo, KEK, ASIAA, and Princeton University. Funding was contributed by the FIRST program from Japanese Cabinet Office, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Japan Science and Technology Agency, the Toray Science Foundation, NAOJ, Kavli IPMU, KEK, ASIAA, and Princeton University. This paper makes use of software developed for LSST. We thank the LSST Project for making their code available as free software at http://dm.lsst.org. This paper is based in part on data collected at the Subaru Telescope and retrieved from the HSC data archive system, which is operated by Subaru Telescope and ADC at NAOJ. Data analysis was in part carried out with the cooperation of CfCA, NAOJ.
Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck Society, and the Higher Education Funding Council for England. The SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/.
The SDSS is managed by the Astrophysical Research Consortium for the Participating Institutions. The Participating Institutions are the American Museum of Natural History, Astrophysical Institute Potsdam, University of Basel, University of Cambridge, Case Western Reserve University, University of Chicago, Drexel University, Fermilab, the Institute for Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, Johns Hopkins University, the Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, the Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, the Korean Scientist Group, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST), Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA), the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State University, Ohio State University, University of Pittsburgh, University of Portsmouth, Princeton University, the United States Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.
\facilities{Keck(MOSFIRE)}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum thermodynamics is an important growing field of research that focuses on the relations between two physical theories: classical thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. Nowadays, much attention has been dedicated to applications of quantum thermodynamics such as quantum information \cite{Popescu, Sagawa,Del Rio,Brandao} and catalysis \cite{Ng,Lostaglio, Aberg}. Moreover, the study of quantum thermodynamics is currently helping us in development of quantum thermal machines and quantum heat engines, especially in manipulation, management and production of heat and work \cite{Kosloff, Klimovsky,Quan,Roulet}.
The formalism of quantum thermodynamics is connected to the theory of open quantum systems. In other words, in quantum thermodynamics, the heat transfer is explained by a system-bath model. This model is important not only from a fundamental view, but also for the practical applications. Generally, there is a belief that open quantum systems are consistent with laws of equilibrium thermodynamics \cite{Nieuwenhuizen}. In this regard, Binder {\it et al.} formulated an appropriate framework for operational first law of thermodynamics for an open quantum system undergoing a general quantum process and presented it as a complete positive trace-preserving (CPTP) map \cite{Binder}.
One of the most important challenges in quantum thermodynamics is the investigation of fundamental concepts such as correlation, entanglement and non-locality in related processes. It is believed that the presence of correlation in quantum thermodynamics could be a valuable resource for many quantum information tasks \cite{Sapienza} and a crucial factor in quantum thermal machines and quantum heat engines \cite{Modi}.
In this context, many studies have been done to investigate the foundations of thermodynamics in the quantum domain \cite{Horodecki,Faist,Lostaglio1,Lostaglio2,Dahlsten}. For instance, Chiribella {\it et al.} analyzed the roots of the connection between entanglement and thermodynamics in the framework of general probabilistic theories. They showed that there is a duality between information erasure and entanglement generation \cite{Chiribella}. In quantum thermodynamics, entanglement is also connected to work extraction from multipartite systems \cite{Morris}. Actually, entangling unitary operations are capable of extracting more work than local operations from quantum systems. Alicki and Fannes demonstrated that non-local unitary operations are capable of increasing the amount of work extracted with respect to local operations in a large number of identical copies of a battery \cite{Alicki}. Francica {\it et al.} showed that how the presence of quantum correlations can influence work extraction in the closed quantum systems. They considered a bipartite quantum system and showed that it is possible to optimize the process of work extraction via the concept of ergotropy. They proved that the maximum extracted work is related to the existence of quantum correlations between the two parts of the system \cite{Francica}. Furthermore, heat capacity presented as an indicator of entanglement and investigated the issue of how the entanglement at the ground state of a system affects the third law of thermodynamics \cite{Wiesniak,Rieper}. Other thermodynamic quantities such as magnetic susceptibility \cite{Wiesniak2} and entropy \cite{Bauml} are also proposed as the entanglement witnesses.
However, the studies in this area have not addressed the possibility of long-distance heat transfer in a quantum fashion. Such a phenomenon can affect the performance of quantum thermal machines, quantum heat engines and related technologies. So, is it possible to observe this behavior in a thermodynamic process?
In the present study, we propose an experiment to investigate the possibility of a bizarre relationship in quantum thermodynamics. For this purpose, we consider a pair of spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ particles prepared in a spin-singlet state. The first particle is sent to Alice and the second one to Bob (the observers), who are far apart. Moreover, we consider three different setups in our proposed experiment: a) both particles in Alice and Bob's sides are coupled to two heat baths with different temperatures, b) only the particle in Alice's side is coupled to a heat bath and c) only the particle in Bob's side is coupled to a heat bath. Then, we study the first law of thermodynamics by using the concepts of ergotropy and adiabatic work in CPTP map in all three scenarios. Our results show that there could be a long-distance thermodynamic relationship between two entangled particles which is responsible for work extraction in a thermodynamic process.
In the remainder of the paper, we first review what called the operational first law of quantum thermodynamics. Then, we propose an experiment to investigate how the maximum work could be extracted from it. Moreover, we discuss about physical feasibility of our proposed experiment. Finally, the results are discussed in the conclusion section.
\section{Operational First Law of Quantum Thermodynamics}
The first law of thermodynamics explains that the change in the internal energy $(\Delta E)$ for a system consists of two terms: work $(W)$ and heat $(Q)$. Work extraction from a quantum system is a crucial issue in quantum thermodynamics. Therefore, we review some of the concepts necessary to investigate how much work can be extracted from a quantum state in a cyclic unitary evolution. A cyclic process, here, means that the Hamiltonians of the system at the initial and the end points of the process is identical \cite{Binder}.
We define the internal energy $E$ for the quantum state $\hat{\rho}$ of a system with the Hamiltonian $\hat{H}$ at time $t$ as $E(t)=\tr [\hat{\rho} (t) \hat{H}(t)]$ where $\hat{H}$ is defined as
\begin{align}
\hat{H}=\sum \varepsilon _n \vert \varepsilon _n \rangle \langle \varepsilon _n\vert \hspace{0.4cm} \text{;} \hspace{0.4cm} \varepsilon _{n+1}\geq \varepsilon _n \forall n
\end{align}
For the quantum state, we can write
\begin{align}
\label{eq2}
\hat{\rho}=\sum r_n \vert r_n\rangle\langle r_n\vert \hspace{0.5cm} \text{;} \hspace{0.4cm} r_{n+1}\leq r_n \forall n
\end{align}
To have the maximum work extraction in a cyclic unitary process, the density matrix of the system in Eq. (2) should end in the states known as passive states $\hat{\pi}$. These states are diagonal in the eigenbasis of $\hat{H}$ with decreasing populations for increasing energy levels, expressed as
\begin{align}
\hat{\pi}=\sum r_n \vert \varepsilon_n\rangle\langle \varepsilon_n\vert \hspace{0.5cm} \text{;} \hspace{0.4cm} r_{n+1}\leq r_n \forall n
\end{align}
We define ergotropy $ \mathcal{W}$, the maximum work that can be extracted from a non-passive state $\hat{\rho}$ concerning $\hat{H}$ via a cyclic unitary evolution $(\hat{\rho}\longmapsto \hat{\pi})$, as \cite{Binder,Solatnmanesh}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{W}=\tr\big[\hat{\rho}\hat{H}-\hat{\pi}\hat{H}\big]=\sum_{m,n} r_m \varepsilon_n \big[\vert \langle \varepsilon_n \vert r_m\rangle\vert^2- \delta_{mn}\big]
\end{align}
We now consider a non-cyclic unitary evolution in which the initial and the final Hamiltonians, $\hat{H}$ and $\hat{H}'$, are different where $\hat{H}'=\sum \varepsilon' _n \vert \varepsilon' _n \rangle \langle \varepsilon' _n\vert$ with $\varepsilon' _{n+1}\geq \varepsilon' _n$. We assume that the change in the Hamiltonian from $\hat{H}$ to $\hat{H}'$ is adiabatic. This means that the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian remain unchanged at each instant and the final state $\hat{\pi}'$ will be a passive state with respect to $\hat{H}'$, if the initial state $\hat{\pi}_m$ is passive with respect to $\hat{H}$. This evolution is unitary, so there is no heat transfer and any change in the internal energy $E$ is due to the adiabatic work which can be defined as
\begin{align}
\langle W\rangle_{\ad}=\tr\big[\hat{\pi}'\hat{H}' \big]-\tr \big[\hat{\pi}_m\hat{H}\big]
\end{align}
In a general quantum evolution $(\hat{\rho},\hat{H})\longmapsto (\hat{\rho}',\hat{H}')$, $\Delta E$ is given by
\begin{align}
\label{intE}
\Delta E=\tr\big[\hat{\rho}' \hat{H}'\big]-\tr\big[\hat{\rho} \hat{H}\big]
\end{align}
Considering the concepts of ergotropy and adiabatic work, and defining $\hat{\pi}_m=\sum r'_n \vert \varepsilon_n\rangle\langle\varepsilon_n\vert$, one can show that an operationally meaningful first law of thermodynamics could be introduced as \cite{Binder}
\begin{align}
\label{FL}
\Delta E= \Delta \mathcal{W}+\langle W\rangle_{\ad}+\langle Q\rangle_{\op}
\end{align}
where $\Delta\mathcal{W}=\mathcal{W}(\hat{\rho}',\hat{H}')-\mathcal{W}(\hat{\rho},\hat{H})$ shows a genuine out of equilibrium contribution and $\langle Q\rangle_{\op}=\tr\big[\hat{\pi}_m \hat{H}\big]-\tr\big[\hat{\pi} \hat{H}\big]$ denotes the heatlike term in $\Delta E$. So, it has been shown that any thermodynamic process that can be portrayed with a CPTP map, obeying Eq. \eqref{FL} introduced as operational first law of quantum thermodynamics (see \cite{Binder}).
\section{The Proposed Experiment}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[]{
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{1.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{2.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[]{
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{3.eps}}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Schematic for our proposed experiment: a) Both particles in Alice and Bob's sides are coupled to two heat baths with temperatures $T_{\A}$ and $T_{\B}$, respectively, which $T_{\B}> T_{\A}$; b) The particle in Alice's side is coupled to a heat bath with temperature $T_{\A}$; c) The same as (b) but for the observer Bob with thermal bath $T_{\B}$ .}
\end{figure}
Let us consider a pair of spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ particles prepared in a singlet-spin state as
\begin{align}
\label{0state}
\vert\psi\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \big(\vert +\rangle_{\A}\vert -\rangle_{\B} - \vert -\rangle_{\A}\vert +\rangle_{\B}\big)
\end{align}
where $\hat{\sigma}^{(m)}_z \vert \pm\rangle_m=\pm \vert \pm\rangle_m$, in which $\hat{\sigma}^{(m)}_z$ is the $z$ component of spin Pauli for $\A$ and $\B$ particles where the first particle is sent to Alice and the second one to her distant mate Bob, respectively. Then, we propose three different setups for our proposed experiment as given in FIG. 1.
As is well known, in the system-bath model, the total Hamiltonian can be written as
\begin{align}
\label{Hs}
\hat{H}=\hat{H}_{\s}+\hat{H}_{\varepsilon}+\hat{H}_{\Int}
\end{align}
where $\hat{H}_{\s}$, $\hat{H}_{\varepsilon}$ and $\hat{H}_{\Int}$ are the Hamiltonians of the system, the bath and the system-bath interaction, respectively. We define Hamiltonian of the system as
\begin{align}
\hat{H}_{\s}=\frac{\omega_{\A}}{2} \hat{\sigma}^{(\A)}_z \otimes I+ \frac{\omega_{\B}}{2} I \otimes \hat{\sigma}^{(B)}_z
\end{align}
where $\omega_{\A}$ and $\omega_{\B}$ are the frequencies of the particles in Alice and Bob's sides, respectively, which we assume that $\omega_{\A} > \omega_{\B}$ and $\hbar=1$. Furthermore, we consider a heat bath consisting of harmonic oscillators as the environment for our three setups. So, we have
\begin{align}
\hat{H}_{\varepsilon}=\sum_{j} \big(\frac{1}{2m_j}\hat{p}^2_j+\frac{1}{2}m_j \Omega^2_j \hat{q}^2_j\big)
\end{align}
where a Bosonic mode $j$ in the bath is described by its frequency $\Omega_j$, mass $m_j$, position $\hat{q}_j$ and momentum $\hat{p}_j$.
The interaction Hamiltonians for the three setups in FIG. 1 are respectively defined as \cite{Breuer}
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}^{(a)}_{\Int}=-\hat{D}^{(\A)} \otimes \sum_j c_j \hat{q}_j-\hat{D}^{(\B)} \otimes \sum_k c_k \hat{q}_k
\end{equation}
\begin{align}
\hat{H}^{(b)}_{\Int}=-\hat{D}^{(\A)} \otimes \sum_j c_j \hat{q}_j
\end{align}
\begin{align}
\hat{H}^{(c)}_{\Int}=-\hat{D}^{(\B)} \otimes \sum_k c_k \hat{q}_k
\end{align}
In the interaction Hamiltonians, $\hat{D}^{\A(\B)}$ is a dipole operator where can be defined as $\hat{D}^{\A(\B)}={\bf d} \hat{\sigma}^{\A(\B)}_- e^{-i \omega_{{\A}(\B)}t}+{\bf d}^* \hat{\sigma}^{\A(\B)}_+ e^{i \omega_{{\A}(\B)}t}$ in which ${\bf d}$ is the transition matrix element of the dipole operator and $\hat{\sigma}_{\pm}$ are the ladder operators. These Hamiltonians show that each dipole operator for the system is linearly coupled to the position coordinates of harmonic oscillators in the heat bath. Moreover, we consider an initial thermal state for the environment.
We now study the dynamics of the thermalization process in our proposed experiment using a master equation in the Lindblad form in which the norm and positive definiteness of the quantum state are preserved according to CPTP map \cite{Binder, Breuer}. The Lindblad form of master equation for the three setups of the experiment and the solution of them are given in Appendix A.
For the time-independent Hamiltonian of the system, we have $\langle W \rangle_{\ad}=0$ \cite{Binder}. Moreover, our calculations show that $\Delta E=\Delta E_{\A}+\Delta E_{\B}$ where $\Delta E$, $\Delta E_{\A}$ and $\Delta E_{\B}$ are the change in the internal energy for the first, second and third setups, respectively (see Appendix B for the details of calculations of the internal energies).
Considering Eq. (7), we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{F}
\Delta \mathcal{W}+\langle Q\rangle_{\op}=\Delta \mathcal{W}_{\A}+\Delta \mathcal{W}_{\B}+\langle Q\rangle_{\op}^{\A}+\langle Q\rangle_{\op}^{\B}
\end{equation}
where $\Delta \mathcal{W} (\langle Q\rangle_{\op})$, $\Delta \mathcal{W}_{\A} (\langle Q\rangle_{\op}^{\A})$ and $\Delta \mathcal{W}_{\B} (\langle Q\rangle_{\op}^{\B})$ are the ergotropy (the operational heat) in the first, second and third setups in FIG. 1, respectively.
After the thermalization process, the particles end up in passive states. Thus, according to the operational first law of thermodynamics Eq. \eqref{FL}, they lose ergotropy and gain operational heat $\langle Q\rangle_{\op}$ during the process. If we consider heat transfer as a {\it local process}, we expect to see that the total heat transfer in the first setup (FIG. 1(a)) should be equal to the sum of heat transfers in the other two setups (FIG. 1(b) and (c)), $\langle Q\rangle_{\op}=\langle Q\rangle_{\op}^{\A}+\langle Q\rangle_{\op}^{\B}$. So, regarding Eq. \eqref{F}, we expect to have
\begin{align}
\label{Main}
\Delta\mathcal{W}(t)=\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}(t)+\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}(t)
\end{align}
at a definite time $t$. The details of the calculation of $\Delta \mathcal{W}$ for obtaining heat transfer are given in Appendix C.
Taking into account the definition of ergotropy in Eq. (4), one can show that Eq. (16) can be written as
\begin{align}
\mathcal{W}_{\A}(0)+\mathcal{W}_{\B}(0)-\mathcal{W}(0)+\sum_n \varepsilon_n\big( \langle \varepsilon_n\vert \hat{\rho}-(\hat{\rho}_{\A}+\hat{\rho}_{\B})\vert \varepsilon_n \big) =\sum_n \varepsilon_n\big( \langle \varepsilon_n \vert \hat{\pi}-(\hat{\pi}_{\A}+\hat{\pi}_{\B}) \vert \varepsilon_n \rangle \big)
\end{align}
where $\hat{\rho}(\hat{\pi})$, $\hat{\rho}_{\A}(\hat{\pi}_{\A})$ and $\hat{\rho}_{\B}(\hat{\pi}_{\B})$ denote density matrices (passive states) of the system in the three setups, respectively. Our calculations show that at time near the decoherence time ($\simeq 10^{-7}$s), the left side of Eq. (17) is equal to
\begin{align}
(\frac{\omega_{\A}-\omega_{\B}}{2})(\frac{\eta _{\B}-1}{2 \bar{n}_{\B}+1}-1)
\end{align}
Also, the right side of Eq. (17) can be obtained as
\begin{align}
(\frac{\omega_{\A}-\omega_{\B}}{2})&\Big[\frac{\eta_{\B}-1}{2 \bar{n}_{\B}+1}+ (2 \bar{n}_{\B}+1) \frac{2\eta_{\B}}{\eta_{\B}-1} +(2 \bar{n}_{\A}+1) \frac{2\eta_{\A}}{\eta_{\A}-1} +(2 \bar{n}_{\A}+1)(2 \bar{n}_{\B}+1) \nonumber\\
&\times \frac{2\eta}{2(\bar{n}_{\B}-\bar{n}_{\A})+(\eta_{\B}-\eta_{\A})+2(\eta_{\B}\bar{n}_{\A}-\eta_{\A}\bar{n}_{\B})}\Big]
\end{align}
where $\eta_{\I}=e^{-\Gamma_{\I}t(2\bar{n}_{\I}+1)}$ ($\I=\A$ or $\B$) and $\eta=\eta_{\A}\eta_{\B}$. Furthermore, $\Gamma_{\I}$ and $\bar{n}_{\I}$ are the decoherence factor and the average number of the particles in the heat bath, respectively (see Appendix A).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{Ergo.eps}
\caption{The progress of $\mathcal{W}$ and $\mathcal{W}_\text{A}+\mathcal{W}_\text{B}$ (dashed lines) as well as $\Delta\mathcal{W}$ and $\Delta\mathcal{W}_\text{A}+\Delta\mathcal{W}_\text{B}$ (solid lines) with time. As time goes on, the entanglement is eliminated. So, $\mathcal{W}_A+\mathcal{W}_B$ approaches to the value of $\mathcal{W}$. $T_{\A}$ and $T_{\B}$ are considered as $100\text{K}$ and $300\text{K}$, respectively and $\omega_{\A}=2\times 10^{12} {\s}^{-1}$ and $\omega_{\B}=1\times 10^{12} {\s}^{-1}$.} \label{fig2}
\end{figure}
As is clear from Eqs. (18) and (19), Eq. \eqref{Main} does not hold in our proposed experiment (see solid plots in FIG. \ref{fig2}). Therefore, we can simply write $\langle Q\rangle_{\op}\neq\langle Q\rangle^{\A}_{\op}+\langle Q\rangle^{\B}_{\op}$, which means that the heat transfer in the thermalization process of Alice and Bob's baths are not independent from each other. As shown perfectly in dashed plots of FIG. \ref{fig2}, we expect that $\mathcal{W}=\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\mathcal{W}_{\B}$ after decoherence time due to the elimination of entanglement between the particles. Furthermore, from dashed plots in FIG. \ref{fig2}, we conclude that the system loses more ergotropy if the second and third setups are taken together, in comparison to the first setup. Therefore, in application, it is beneficial to extract work in the shape of ergotropy from a single particle rather than entangled ones simultaneously.
It is important to note our results are based on a main relation $\Delta E=\Delta E_{\A}+\Delta E_{\B}$. In other words, we studied our proposed experiment under the operational first law of thermodynamics. We believe that the traditional first law of thermodynamics is incapable of providing a complete description of what really happens in quantum thermodynamic processes. Let us, however, we briefly discuss the situations that are different from our model.
1) Pure dephasing model $\Delta E=\Delta E_{\A}=\Delta E_{\B}$=0 \cite{Breuer}: This model is a special case of a general model that we studied. Since system's Hamiltonian is time-independent ($\langle W\rangle_\mathrm{ad}=0$), according to the operational first law of thermodynamics, we have $\Delta\mathcal{W}=-\langle Q\rangle_\mathrm{op}$, $\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}=-\langle Q\rangle^{\A}_\mathrm{op}$ and $\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}=-\langle Q\rangle^{\B}_\mathrm{op}$. Therefore, if we consider the heat flow as a local process, we must have $\langle Q\rangle_\mathrm{op}=\langle Q\rangle^{\A}_\mathrm{op}+\langle Q\rangle^{\B}_\mathrm{op}$ and subsequently $\Delta\mathcal{W}=\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}$. When $\Delta\mathcal{W}\neq\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}$, we expect that the heat flow of the entangled particles are dependent to each other. So, the traditional first law of thermodynamics cannot describe such a system.
2) Other types of system-bath interactions with $\Delta E=\Delta E_{\A}+\Delta E_{\B}$: According to the operational first law of thermodynamics, for any system bath interaction that reaches this same expression for the internal energy, if decrease in ergotropy is different for different system-bath interaction, we have $\langle Q\rangle_\mathrm{op}\neq\langle Q\rangle^{\A}_\mathrm{op}+\langle Q\rangle^{\B}_\mathrm{op}$. So, we expect to observe the heat flow of the entangled particles is dependent to each other.
3) In a case with $\Delta E\neq\Delta E_{\A}+\Delta E_{\B}$: Such case had not been observed or reported. Also, we cannot name a system with this behavior. However, if such a case exists, it would be quite interesting. In this case for entangled particles with different changes in ergotropy for different system-bath interactions, we cannot predict how heat flow changes. Nevertheless, any energy transfer being dependent on different system-bath interactions for spatially entangled particles would be even more bizarre. If such cases exist, it will directly show long-distance energy transfers, independent of the first law of thermodynamics.
In the case of pure dephasing models in which internal energy does not change, the traditional first law of thermodynamics provides no description of what happens in the process. However, the operational form of the first law completely describes such systems using the concept of ergotropy \cite{Binder}. Interestingly, the pure dephasing model is a special case of the general model that we discuss. Moreover, so many studies showed that the traditional well-known heat is inconsistent with the thermodynamics of quantum systems, Clausius inequality and quantum second law of thermodynamics based on information theory \cite{Nieuwenhuizen,Solatnmanesh,Allahverdyan,Hilt}.
We should note that despite that we can gain work at the cost of losing coherences, however in this work, coherence alone is not enough, and the presence of entanglement is essential for reaching the main result of this work for spatially separated particles. For the first setup, in a case that entanglement is not included, for the two particles A and B, that has been sent to Alice and Bob sides, respectively, we always can separate the initial density matrix as $\hat{\rho}(0)=\hat{\rho}_{\A}(0)\otimes \hat{\rho}_{\B}(0)$. Since there are no correlations between the particles (they are spatially separated and there is no interaction between particles in the Hamiltonian), they remain separated and not entangled in all times. Thus, we have $ \hat{\rho}(t)=\hat{\rho}_{\A}(t)\otimes \hat{\rho}_{\B}(t)$. Now, regarding $\hat{H}_s=\hat{H}_{\A}+\hat{H}_{\B}$ we can calculate the ergotropy in all times as
\begin{align}
\mathcal{W}&=\tr [\hat{\rho} \hat{H}_s-\hat{\pi} \hat{H}_s]=\tr [\hat{\rho}_{\A}\hat{H}_{\A}\otimes \hat{\rho}_{\B}+\hat{\rho}_{\A}\otimes \hat{\rho}_{\B}\hat{H}_{\B} -\hat{\pi}_{\A}\hat{H}_{\A}\otimes \hat{\pi}_{\B}-\hat{\pi}_{\A}\otimes \hat{\pi}_{\B}\hat{H}_{\B}] \nonumber \\
&=\tr[\hat{\rho}_{\A}\hat{H}_{\A}-\hat{\pi}_{\A}\hat{H}_{\A}]+\tr[\hat{\rho}_{\B}\hat{H}_{\B}-\hat{\pi}_{\B}\hat{H}_{\B}]=\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\mathcal{W}_{\B}
\end{align}
As we can see in a case without an entanglement, we always have $\Delta\mathcal{W}=\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}$ that is in a complete agreement with Eq. \eqref{Main} and system's behavior differs with the case that entanglement is included and $\Delta\mathcal{W}\neq\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}$
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{SameTempBaths.eps}
\caption{The progress of $\Delta\mathcal{W}$, $\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}$ and $\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}$ with temperatures of Alice's and Bob's baths, in which the temperatures of the baths are the same.}\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{EvsTemp.eps}
\caption{The progress of $\mathcal{W}-\mathcal{W}_\text{A}-\mathcal{W}_\text{B}$ with time in a variety of temperature differences between two heat baths, $T_{\B}-T_{\A}$. For all plots $(T_{\A}+T_{\B})/2=450\text{K}$ and $\omega_{\A}=2\times 10^{12} {\s}^{-1}$ and $\omega_{\B}=1\times 10^{12} {\s}^{-1}$.}\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
For a better realization of the system's behavior, we plotted the changes of ergotropy versus the temperatures of the baths for the first setup, in which the temperatures of Alice's and Bob's baths are the same. Interestingly, FIG. \ref{fig3} clearly shows that the entangled system interacting with two baths with the same temperature tends to behave similarly to the system interacting with a single bath. Also, FIG. \ref{fig3} shows that with a higher temperature of thermal baths, the system loses more ergotropy during the thermalization process. In FIG. \ref{fig2} and FIG. \ref{fig3}, we observe that the progress of $\Delta\mathcal{W}$ is almost equivalent to $\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\A}+\Delta\mathcal{W}_{\B}$ {\it until} the state of the system thermalizes and the changes in ergotropy tend to the single bath setup. Accordingly, the interaction with the bath with a higher temperature is the limiting factor for the thermalization of the state of the system and affect the other particle-bath interaction. This limiting factor causes that in a setup with more differences in temperatures of the baths, we see more violations from Eq. \eqref{Main} rather than the case with baths in the same temperatures, as is shown in FIG. \ref{fig4}.
\section{Physical Feasibility of Our Proposed Experiment}
One of the most important challenges for the realization of our proposed experiment is the preparation of the singlet-spin state of a pair of spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ particles. In this regard, for example, the gate voltage control of the exchange interaction is used to prepare, manipulate, and measure two-electron spin states in a gallium arsenide (GaAs) double quantum dot. By placing two electrons in a single dot at low temperatures, the system is prepared in a singlet-spin state. The singlet-spin state is spatially separated by transferring an electron to an adjacent dot \cite{Petta}. Moreover, rapid adiabatic passage (RAP) can prepare an entangled singlet-spin state of two electrons \cite{Taylor}. RAP is a process that permits the transfer of a population between two applicable quantum states. This broad-spread technique originated in nuclear magnetic resonance but is used in virtually all fields such as laser-chemistry, modern quantum optics and quantum information processing \cite{Chen}.
Another critical challenge is the heat bath preparation. In this regard, a thermal source prepared by collecting emitted light of ionization processes in hot vapor of atoms like mercury and hydrogen \cite{Ou}. Passing laser beams through a fast rotating grounded glass is another useful way of making thermal sources \cite{Rousseau, Estes, Tirandaz}. Moreover, the electromagnetic field in an optical cavity can be considered as a bath. The field in the cavity can be prepared in the state we are interested in using the combination of the various frequencies of the field. It has been shown that the heat bath at different temperatures can be simulated by a careful superposition of bremsstrahlung spectra with different endpoint energies \cite{Mohr}. Harrington {\it et al.} showed that the heat bath can be created by mixing low-frequency noise up to near the qubit frequency with single-sideband modulation \cite{Harrington}. The laser cooling techniques are also used to generate a heat bath \cite{Marzoli,Poyatos}. Furthermore, laser detuning techniques and nanomechanical heat engines are contemporary methods for regulating the temperature of heat baths in desired limits \cite{Dechant, Blickle}.
To establish our thought experiment in the laboratory, after the preparation of the initial state, one can use the method introduced by Skrzypczyk {\it et al.} to simulate and study the system-bath interaction \cite{Skrzypczyk}. In this protocol, we are going through two stages: First, we transform the state of the system into a passive state without using the thermal bath. In the second stage, we transform the state of the system to a thermal state using the qubits of a thermal bath one by one.
In the first stage, we have our system $\hat{\rho}_s$ and a work storage device (a weight that can be raised or lowered) $\hat{\rho}_w$ initially in an uncorrelated state with the density operator $\hat{\rho}_s\otimes \hat{\rho}_w$. We expand $\hat{\rho}_s$ in terms of its eigenvalues $r_n$ and eigenvectors $\vert r_n\rangle$ in which $r_{n+1}\leq r_n$, according to Eq. \eqref{eq2}. Keeping in mind the energy eigenstates $\vert \varepsilon_n\rangle$ with corresponding eigenvalues $\varepsilon_n$, we apply the unitary transform
\begin{align}
\hat{V}=\sum_n\vert \varepsilon_n\rangle\langle r_n\vert\otimes \hat{\Gamma}_{\epsilon_n}
\end{align}
where $\epsilon_n=\langle r_n\vert \hat{H}_s\vert r_n\rangle-\varepsilon_n$ and $\hat{\Gamma}_{\epsilon_n}$ is the translation operator which acts on the position states of the weight as $\hat{\Gamma}_{\epsilon_n}\vert x\rangle=\vert x+\epsilon_n\rangle$. In this manner, $\hat{V}$ always conserves average energy. After applying the transformation, we have the final state as
\begin{align}
\hat{\sigma}_{sw}=\sum_n r_n \vert \varepsilon_n\rangle\langle\varepsilon_n\vert\otimes\hat{\Gamma}_{\epsilon_n}\hat{\rho}_w\hat{\Gamma}^\dagger_{\epsilon_n}
\end{align}
where the reduced state of the system is $\hat{\sigma}_s=\tr_w[\hat{\sigma}_{sw}]$, which is a passive state $\hat{\sigma}_s=\hat{\pi}_s$, and the reduced state of the weight is $\hat{\sigma}_w=\tr_s[\hat{\sigma}_{sw}]$. The change in the average energy of the system is $\Delta E=\tr[\hat{\pi}_s \hat{H}_s]-\tr[\hat{\rho}_s \hat{H}_s]$ which is equal to the change of the ergotropy of the system (Eq. (4)). Moreover, when the entropy of the system remains unchanged, the work extracted as ergotropy is equal to the free energy lost ($\Delta F$) by the system. So, we have
\begin{align}
\Delta F=F(\hat{\rho}_s)-F(\hat{\sigma}_s)=\Delta\mathcal{W}_s
\end{align}
In this stage, an experimentalist measures the free energy of the system, or the amount of work that stored in the weight to see the changes in ergotropy of the system for each setup.
In the second stage, in order to transform the passive state to a thermal state, one can apply $N$ steps, in each step transforming the state $\hat{\pi}_s=\sum_n r_n\vert \varepsilon_n\rangle\langle\varepsilon_n\vert$ into a new passive state $\hat{\pi}'_s=\sum_n r'_n\vert \varepsilon_n\rangle\langle\varepsilon_n\vert$, in which $r'_1=r_1+\delta r$ and $r'_0=r_0-\delta r$ in a situation that $\vert\delta r\vert\ll r_1\leq r_0$. To achieve the mentioned transformation, we take a qubit from a thermal bath with energy eigenstates as
\begin{align}
\hat{\rho}_\mathrm{Bath}=\frac{r'_0}{r'_0+r'_1}\vert 0\rangle\langle 0\vert+\frac{r'_1}{r'_0+r'_1}\vert 1\rangle\langle 1\vert,
\end{align}
where the ratio of the ground and excited state population matches with the states in $\hat{\pi}'_s$. Then, we apply the unitary transformation that swaps this qubit with the state of the system and translate the energy to weight for energy conservation. In our case of two-dimensional sub-space, this transformation maps
\begin{align}
\vert\varepsilon_0\rangle_s\vert 1\rangle_\mathrm{Bath}\vert x\rangle_w \rightarrow\vert \varepsilon_1\rangle_s\vert 0\rangle_\mathrm{Bath}\vert x+\epsilon\rangle_w
\end{align}
where for all $x$, $\epsilon=E_\mathrm{Bath}-(\varepsilon_1-\varepsilon_0)$. This transformation leaves the system in the state $\hat{\pi}'_s$. We should note that this unitary transformation commutes with the total Hamiltonian. Performing a sequence of $N$ same steps, interacting a system with a new thermal qubit in each step, makes the system ends up in a desired thermal state in $T$.
\section{Conclusion}
The effects of quantum features of a system on its thermodynamic performance appear currently to be a quite controversial issue. In this regard, many studies have been done to investigate the role of quantum correlations on applications of quantum thermodynamics such as quantum information, quantum thermal machines and quantum heat engines. Most works are now focusing on quantum correlations to improve the efficiency of quantum thermal machines. However, they have not addressed the possibility of the long-distance energy exchanges in the thermodynamic processes.
In this work, we proposed an experiment to investigate the possibility of a distant thermodynamic relationship between a pair of spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ particles prepared in a spin-singlet state in a system-bath interaction model. Our results show that the heat transfer for each entangled particle is not independent of the thermalization process that occurs for the other one. We proved that the existence of quantum correlations affects the thermodynamic behavior of entangled particles that are spatially separated. We showed that the system loses more ergotropy if the second and third setups are taken together, in comparison to the first setup in our proposed experiment. Furthermore, we fully explained the physical feasibility of the experiment in the laboratory.
There is a general belief that entanglement in quantum thermodynamics is related to work extraction from multipartite systems. In other words, entangling operations can extract more work than local operations from quantum systems. Also, the power and entanglement are related to each other in the work extraction process. The correlations could store and extract work. Moreover, it has been proved that the correlations in the forms of quantum mutual information and entanglement can affect the operation of thermal machines and heat engines.
According to this, the observation of distant thermodynamic relationships due to quantum correlations in this study affects the work extraction, the power generation and the cyclical or non-cyclical operations of thermal machines, such as engines and refrigerators. Especially, in this way, it could be possible to extract more work from thermal machines to enhance their efficiency and performance. Moreover, the correlations in quantum thermodynamics are very important in quantum information researches such as investigation of quantum discord and clarifying the concept of entropy and also relevant in thermodynamic transformations. Another important topic in quantum technology is charging a quantum battery including single and two-qubit battery. It is shown that the quantum correlations affect the process of charging a battery, i.e., storing energy in a quantum system for later use. Since all spin-spin $\frac{1}{2}$ interactions are possible to implement with trapped ions, the theoretical predictions for extracting ergotropy for the qubit battery is testable with current experimental techniques. Furthermore, entanglement between the subsystems is understood to play an important role in the kinematic description of thermalization processes.
The present study describes the fundamental concept of a thermodynamic holistic behavior for entangled quantum systems and explains the concept of discrepancy in thermodynamics of parts of an entangled quantum system in a new approach. Moreover, extracting work in the shape of ergotropy from an entangled quantum system may affect on new technological potentials of quantum thermodynamics.
We hope that experimental research groups will evaluate the results of our thought experiment in the future.
|
\section{Introduction}
Learning natural language generation (NLG) models heavily relies on annotated training data.
However, most available datasets are collected in a single language (typically English), which restricts deploying the applications to other languages.
In this work, we aim at transferring the supervision of a monolingual NLG dataset to unseen languages, so that we can boost performance for the low-resource settings.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.96\linewidth]{intro.pdf}
\caption{We use a monolingual (such as English) NLG dataset to fine-tune the pre-trained model \ours{}, and then evaluate it beyond the language for both source and target sides (e.g., Chinese, and French).}
\label{fig:intro}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Various methods have been proposed over the years to learn cross-lingual word embeddings~\cite{mikolov2013exploiting,xing2015normalized,conneau2017word} or sentence encoders~\cite{johnson2017google,xnli,xlm}, which try to encode multilingual texts into a shared vector space.
Despite achieving promising results on cross-lingual classification problems, cross-lingual pre-trained models purposed for NLG tasks remains relatively understudied.
The cross-lingual generation problem is challenging due to the following reasons.
First, it requires the models to understand multilingual input texts, and generate multilingual target sequences. So both the encoder and the decoder should be pre-trained together.
Second, the many-to-many nature of cross-lingual NLG increases language pairs with the square of the number of languages.
Third, the prediction space of cross-lingual NLG is much larger than classification tasks, which makes knowledge transfer of decoders quite critical.
Previous work mainly relies on machine translation (MT) to map texts to different languages.
The first strand of research directly uses MT in a pipeline manner~\cite{pipeline2010wan}.
For example, the inputs written in other languages are first translated to English, and fed into the NLG model that is trained by English data. Then the generated English texts are translated back to the target language.
Another strand of work uses MT to generate pseudo training data for other language pairs that are lack of annotations~\cite{xnhg,xsummacl}.
However, such methods have to use multiple MT systems, which renders them suffering from error propagation.
Moreover, because the pipeline-based methods do not explicitly share the same parameter space across languages, we can not directly transfer the task-specific supervision to other low-resource languages.
In this paper, we propose a cross-lingual pre-trained model (named as \ours{}) in order to transfer monolingual NLG supervision to other pre-trained languages by fine-tuning.
Specifically, \ours{} shares the same sequence-to-sequence model across languages, and is pre-trained with both monolingual and cross-lingual objectives.
The model not only learns to understand multilingual input, but also is able to generate specific languages by conditioning on the encoded semantics.
Figure~\ref{fig:intro} demonstrates how to use \ours{} to perform cross-lingual transfer for downstream tasks.
The proposed model enables us to fine-tune the pre-trained model on monolingual NLG training data, and then evaluate it beyond a single language, including zero-shot cross-lingual generation.
Besides, we explore several fine-tuning strategies to make a compromise between cross-lingual ability and task ability.
In addition, we introduce two cross-lingual NLG datasets (i.e., question generation, and abstractive summarization) for evaluation, which includes three languages, namely English, Chinese, and French.
Experimental results on the NLG tasks show that \ours{} achieves competitive performance compared with the machine-translation-based pipeline model in zero-shot cross-lingual settings.
\section{Related Work}
\paragraph{Cross-Lingual NLG}
Several previous methods have been proposed for cross-lingual abstractive summarization.
\namecite{xnhg} and \namecite{xsummacl} use translated documents or summaries as pseudo training data.
\namecite{ncls} incorporate monolingual summarization and machine translation to improve cross-lingual summarization.
However, the systems only conduct experiments that generate summaries with different languages from the input language, rather than transferring supervision signals across all language pairs.
\namecite{kumar2019cross} use training data annotated in multiple languages to jointly train a sequence-to-sequence model for question generation.
In contrast, our method can also be applied to zero-shot settings across languages.
\paragraph{Monolingual Pre-Training}
Various training objectives are designed to pretrain text encoders used for general-purpose representations, such as language modeling~\cite{elmo,gpt,bert,spanbert,xlnet}, auto-encoding~\cite{pretrain-dae}, and machine translation~\cite{mccann2017learned}.
Apart from pre-training encoders, several pre-trained models~\cite{unilm,mass} are proposed for generation tasks.
In comparison, our goal is to investigate a pre-training method for cross-lingual NLG tasks.
\paragraph{Cross-Lingual Pre-Training}
By pre-training BERT~\cite{bert} on corpus of multiple languages, it shows a surprising ability to produce cross-lingual representations~\cite{wu2019beto}.
More recently, \namecite{xlm} extend mask language modeling pre-training to cross-lingual settings, which shows significant improvements on cross-lingual classification and unsupervised machine translation.
By comparison, we pretrain both encoder and decoder for cross-lingual generation tasks, rather than only focusing on encoder.
\namecite{artetxe2018massively} use the sequence encoder of the multilingual translation model~\cite{johnson2017google} to produce cross-lingual sentence embeddings.
However, as shown in the experiments (Section~\ref{sec:exp}), it is difficult to control the target language by directly fine-tuning the pre-trained translation model on downstream NLG tasks.
\section{Methods}
\begin{figure*}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.98\linewidth]{ov.pdf}
\caption{Overview of the pre-training tasks and the pre-training protocol designed for \ours{}.
}
\label{fig:ov}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ov}, \ours{} is a pre-trained sequence-to-sequence model, which is based on Transformer~\cite{transformer}.
Both the encoder and the decoder are supposed to support multiple languages.
Following~\cite{xlm}, we use language tag embeddings to distinguish the source and target languages.
Given a sentence and its corresponding language tag, \ours{} encodes the input into vector representations.
By conditioning on the encoding vectors and a specific language tag, the decoder generates the output sequence in the target language.
\subsection{Pre-Training Tasks}
\paragraph{Monolingual MLM}
The masked language modeling (MLM)~\cite{bert} task aims at predicting the randomly masked words according to their context.
The objective pretrains the bidirectional encoder to obtain contextual representations.
Following~\cite{bert}, we randomly mask 15\% of the tokens in a monolingual sentence.
For each masked token, we substitute it with a special token \sptk{M}, a random token, or the unchanged token with probabilities of 0.8, 0.1, and 0.1, respectively.
Let $x$ denote a sentence from the monolingual training corpus, and $M_{x}$ the set of randomly masked positions.
The monolingual MLM loss is defined as:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{MLM}}^{(x)} = -\sum_{i \in M_{x}}\log p( x_i | x_{\setminus M_{x}}) \label{eq:mlm}
\end{align}
where $x_{\setminus M_{x}}$ is the masked version of input $x$.
The language tags are fed into the model for all pre-training tasks.
\paragraph{Denoising Auto-Encoding (DAE)}
We use the denoising auto-encoding (DAE) objective~\cite{dae} to pretrain the encoder-decoder attention mechanism.
Given sentence $x$ from the monolingual corpus, we use three types of noise to obtain the randomly perturbed text $\hat{x}$.
First, the word order is locally shuffled.
Second, we randomly drop tokens of the sentence with a probability of $0.1$.
Third, we substitute tokens with the special padding token \sptk{P} with a probability of $0.1$.
The pre-training objective is to recover the original sentence $x$ by conditioning on $\hat{x}$.
The DAE loss is computed via:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{DAE}}^{(x)} = -\log p(x|\hat{x}) = -\sum_{i = 1}^{|x|}{\log p(x_i | \hat{x}, x_{<i})}
\end{align}
where $x_{<i} = x_1,\cdots,x_{i-1}$.
\paragraph{Cross-Lingual MLM (XMLM)}
Similar to monolingual MLM, the masked token prediction task can be extended to cross-lingual settings~\cite{xlm}.
To be specific, given a parallel corpus, we concatenate the pair of bilingual sentences $(x,y)$ to a whole sequence, and use it as the input of MLM.
The language tags are also fed into the model to indicate the languages of tokens.
During training, we adopt the same masking strategy as monolingual MLM.
Apart from using monolingual context to predict the masked tokens, XMLM encourages the model to utilize the alignment of bilingual sentences, so that the model learns to map cross-lingual texts into a shared vector space.
Similar to \eqform{eq:mlm}, the cross-lingual MLM loss is:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{XMLM}}^{(x,y)} = -\sum_{i \in M_x}{\log p( x_i | x_{\setminus M_x} , y_{\setminus M_y})} \\
-\sum_{i \in M_y}{\log p( y_i | x_{\setminus M_x} , y_{\setminus M_y})}
\end{align}
where $M_x, M_y$ represent the masked positions of $x$ and $y$, respectively.
\paragraph{Cross-Lingual Auto-Encoding (XAE)}
If only DAE is used as the pre-training task for the decoder, we found that the model ignores the target language tag while generating just the same language as the input, caused by the spurious correlation issue~\cite{spuriouscorr}.
In other words, the DAE loss captures the spurious correlation between the source language tag and the target sentences, but we expect the language of generated sentences can be controlled by the target language tag.
To solve the above problem, we use machine translation as the cross-lingual auto-encoding (XAE) task, which decreases mutual information between the target sentences and the source language tag.
XAE can be viewed as the multilingual-version DAE task in the sense that both of them recover the sentence by conditioning on the encoded representations.
The cross-lingual auto-encoding loss is:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{XAE}}^{(x,y)} = -\log p(y|x) - \log p(x|y)
\end{align}
where $(x,y)$ is a pair of sentences in the parallel corpus.
\subsection{Pre-Training Protocol}
As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ov}(b), we propose a two-stage pre-training protocol for \ours{}.
The first stage pretrains the encoding components, where the model learns to encode multilingual sentences to a shared embedding space.
We consider using MLM and XMLM as the pre-training tasks.
The objective of the first stage is to minimize:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{1}= \sum_{(x,y) \in {\train_{\textnormal{p}}}} \mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{XMLM}}^{(x,y)} + \sum_{x \in {\train_{\textnormal{m}}}} \mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{MLM}}^{(x)}
\end{align}
where ${\train_{\textnormal{p}}}$ indicates the parallel corpus, and ${\train_{\textnormal{m}}}$ is the monolingual corpus.
Although the pre-trained encoder in the first stage enables the model to encode multilingual sentences. However, it cannot directly be used in cross-lingual NLG because: 1) encoder-decoder attention is not pre-trained; 2) the decoding algorithm is different between masked language modeling and autoregressive decoding, resulting in the mismatch between pre-training and fine-tuning.
Therefore, we conduct decoding pre-training in the second stage by using DAE and XAE as the tasks.
Besides, we only update decoder parameters and keep the encoder fixed.
The objective of the second stage is to minimize:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{2} = \sum_{(x,y) \in {\train_{\textnormal{p}}}}{\mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{XAE}}^{(x,y)}} + \sum_{x \in {\train_{\textnormal{m}}}}{\mathcal{L}_{\textnormal{DAE}}^{(x)}}
\end{align}
\subsection{Fine-Tuning on Downstream NLG Tasks}
In the fine-tuning procedure, let us assume that we only have English training data for downstream NLG tasks.
According to whether the target language is English, the directions of NLG can be categorized into two classes: any languages to non-English languages (Any-to-Others), and any languages to English (Any-to-English).
\paragraph{Fine-Tuning for Any-to-Others NLG}
Ideally, the model can be fine-tuned towards a new task without losing its cross-lingual ability.
However, we observe the catastrophic forgetting of target language controllability, if we fine-tune all the model parameters for Any-to-Others NLG.
So we keep the decoder and the word embeddings frozen and only update the encoder parameters during fine-tuning.
In practice, we found that the proposed fine-tuning method prevents the model from only decoding English words for the Any-to-Others setting.
\paragraph{Fine-Tuning for Any-to-English NLG}
For the Any-to-English NLG transfer, the decoder always generates English. So we can freeze the encoder parameters, and update the decoder parameters to retain the cross-lingual ability.
As an alternative way, we can also fine-tune all the parameters to obtain the best results on the English dataset while having a slight drop in performance.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{llccc}
\toprule
Data & Models & BL-4 & MTR & RG-L \\ \midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{En-QG} & \textsc{CorefNqg}$\dag$ & 15.16 & 19.12 & - \\
& \textsc{Mp-Gsn} & 16.38 & 20.25 & 44.48 \\
& \xlm{} & 16.94 & 21.87 & 46.45 \\
& \ours{} & \textbf{19.99} & \textbf{24.05} & \textbf{48.74} \\ \midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{Zh-QG} & \xlm{} & 23.41 & 23.32 & 47.40 \\
& \ours & \textbf{24.89} & \textbf{24.53} & \textbf{49.72} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Evaluation results of monolingual supervised question generation for English and Chinese. BL is short for BLEU, MTR for METEOR, and RG for ROUGE. The results with ``$\dag$'' are reported on different data splits.}
\label{table:en-en-qg}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Models & BL-4 & MTR & RG-L \\ \midrule
\xlm{} & 0.25 & 0.62 & 2.56 \\
\txlmt{} & 4.42 & 9.59 & 21.22 \\
\ggtpp{} & 9.95 & 14.92 & 29.37 \\
\ours & \textbf{16.37} & \textbf{18.74} & \textbf{34.93} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Evaluation results of zero-shot Chinese-Chinese question generation. Same shorthands apply as in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg}.}
\label{table:zh-zh-qg}
\end{table}
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:exp}
We conduct experiments over two cross-lingual NLG downstream tasks, i.e., cross-lingual question generation, and cross-lingual abstractive summarization.
We compare \ours{} with state-of-the-art cross-lingual pre-trained models, and machine-translation-based pipelines.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Models & Rel & Flu & Corr \\ \midrule
\xlm{} & 0~~ & 0~~ & 0~~ \\
\txlmt{} & 0.50~~ & 0.80~~ & 0.03~~ \\
\ggtpp{} & 1.31~~ & \textbf{1.43}* & 0.69~~ \\
\ours & \textbf{1.68}* & 1.29~~ & \textbf{0.89}* \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Human evaluation results of zero-shot Chinese-Chinese question generation. Rel is short for relatedness, Flu for fluency, and Corr for correctness. ``*'' indicates the improvements are significant at $p < 0.05$. }
\label{table:human-zh}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Models & Rel & Flu & Corr \\ \midrule
\xlm{} & 0~~ & 0~~ & 0~~ \\
\xlmt{} & 0.87~~ & 0.86~~ & 0.28~~ \\
\ours & \textbf{1.09}* & \textbf{0.95}~~ & \textbf{0.53}* \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Human evaluation results of zero-shot English-Chinese question generation. ``*'' indicates the improvements are significant at $p < 0.05$. Same shorthands apply as in Table \ref{table:human-zh}.}
\label{table:en-zh-qg}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Models & Rel & Flu & Corr \\ \midrule
\xlm{} & 1.00~~ & 1.20~~ & 0.40~~ \\
\txlm{} & 0.85~~ & 0.98~~ & 0.28~~ \\
\ours & \textbf{1.24}* & \textbf{1.47}* & \textbf{0.76}* \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Human evaluation results of zero-shot Chinese-English question generation. ``*'': the improvements are significant at $p < 0.05$. Same shorthands apply as in Table \ref{table:human-zh}.}
\label{table:zh-en-qg}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{llccc}
\toprule
Data & Models & RG-1 & RG-2 & RG-L \\ \midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{En-AS} & \xlm{} & 48.15 & 26.35 & 45.04 \\
& \ours & \textbf{48.76} & \textbf{26.82} & \textbf{45.57} \\ \midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{Fr-AS} & \xlm{} & 56.27 & 39.20 & 52.84 \\
& \ours & \textbf{57.84} & \textbf{40.81} & \textbf{54.24} \\ \midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{Zh-AS} & \xlm{} & 55.30 & 42.57 & 52.95 \\
& \ours & \textbf{57.65} & \textbf{44.93} & \textbf{54.95} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Evaluation results of supervised monolingual summarization. Same shorthands apply as in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg}.}
\label{table:mono-as}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{llccc}
\toprule
Models & RG-1 & RG-2 & RG-L \\ \midrule
\xlm{} & 14.53 & 1.80 & 13.43 \\
\txlmt{} & 30.58 & 12.01 & 27.44 \\
\ggtpp{} & 38.48 & 18.86 & 34.98 \\
\ours & \textbf{39.98} & \textbf{20.31} & \textbf{36.31} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Evaluation results of zero-shot French abstractive summarization. Same shorthands apply as in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg}.}
\label{table:fr-fr-as}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Models & RG-1 & RG-2 & RG-L \\ \midrule
\xlm{} & 0.71 & 0.28 & 0.70 \\
\txlmt{} & 26.39 & 13.11 & 23.98 \\
\ggtpp{} & 36.96 & 22.03 & 33.99 \\
\ours & \textbf{41.66} & \textbf{28.70} & \textbf{38.91} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Evaluation results of zero-shot Chinese abstractive summarization. Same shorthands apply as in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg}.}
\label{table:zh-zh-as}
\end{table}
\subsection{Training Details}
\paragraph{Pre-Training}
We use a pre-trained \ours{} with a 10-layer encoder and a 6-layer decoder. For every Transformer layer, we use 1024 hidden units, 8 attention heads, and GELU activations~\cite{gelu}.
In the first pre-training stage, we directly use the 15-language pre-trained XLM~\cite{xlm} to initialize the parameters of our encoder and decoder.
In the second stage, we use Wikipedia as the monolingual data for the DAE objective, and MultiUN~\cite{multiun} as the parallel data for the XAE objective.
The DAE loss is trained with a weight of $0.5$.
We train a two-language (English/Chinese) and a three-language (English/French/Chinese) \ours{} for two downstream NLG tasks, respectively.
Following~\cite{xlm}, we use the tokenizer provided by~\cite{chang2008optimizing} for Chinese, and Moses\footnote{\url{https://github.com/moses-smt/mosesdecoder}} for other languages, respectively. Then the words in all languages are split with a shared subword vocabulary learned by BPE~\cite{bpe}. We use Adam optimizer with a linear warm-up over the first 4,000 steps and linear decay for later steps, and the learning rate is set to $10^{-4}$.
The pre-training batch size is 64, and the sequence length is set to 256.
It takes about 30 hours to run 23,000 steps for the pre-training procedure by using 4 Nvidia Telsa V100-16GB GPUs.
\paragraph{Fine-Tuning}
For fine-tuning on downstream NLG tasks, we use Adam optimizer with a learning rate of $5\times10^{-6}$. We set the batch size as 16 and 32 for question generation and abstractive summarization, respectively. When the target language is the same as the language of training data, we fine-tune all parameters. When the target language is different from the language of training data, we fine-tune the Transformer layers of the encoder. We truncate the input sentences to the first 256 tokens. During decoding, we use beam search with a beam size of 3, and limit the length of the target sequence to 80 tokens.
\subsection{Question Generation}
We evaluate our model on zero-shot cross-lingual answer-aware question generation (QG). The goal is to generate a question that asks towards the answer with the given passage and the expected answer.
In the following experiments, we extend the QG task to the cross-lingual setting. By only using English QG training data, our goal is to generate questions in English or Chinese with the given passage-answer pair in English or Chinese.
We use SQuAD 1.1~\cite{squad1} as the English QG dataset.
It is a popular English question answering dataset containing over 100,000 questions and their corresponding annotated passages.
Following \cite{zhao-qg-2018}, we regard the original development set as the test set, and sample 5000 examples from the training data of two datasets as the development sets.
For Chinese QG, we follow the default data splits of WebQA~\cite{webqa}.
We regard the provided annotated evidence sentences as the input passages instead of entire documents.
To construct the input sequence, we view the whole input passage as a single sentence, and concatenate the passage and the answer into one sequence with a special token \sptk{S} between them.
During decoding Chinese, we utilize a subset of vocabulary, which is obtained from the passage sentences of the WebQA dataset.
\paragraph{English-English Question Generation}
We first conduct experiments on the supervised English-English QG setting. We compare our model to the following baselines:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{\textsc{CorefNqg}}~\cite{du-qg-2018} An attentional sequence-to-sequence model with a feature-rich encoder.
\item \textbf{\textsc{Mp-Gsn}}~\cite{zhao-qg-2018} A sequence-to-sequence model with self-attention and maxout pointer mechanism.
\item \textbf{\xlm}~\cite{xlm} State-of-the-art cross-lingual pre-trained Transformer. We initialize the sequence-to-sequence model with pre-trained XLM.
\end{itemize}
We evaluate models with BLEU-4 (BL-4), ROUGE (RG) and METEOR (MTR) metrics.
As shown in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg}, \ours{} outperforms the baselines,
which demonstrates that our pre-trained model provides a good initialization for NLG.
\paragraph{Chinese-Chinese Question Generation}
We conduct experiments on zero-shot Chinese-Chinese QG to evaluate the cross-lingual transfer ability. In this task, models are trained with English QG data but evaluated with Chinese QG examples.
We include the following models as our baselines:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{\xlm{}} Fine-tuning XLM with the English QG data.
\item \textbf{\txlmt{}} The pipeline of translating input Chinese sentences into English first, then performing En-En-QG with the XLM model, and finally translating back to the Chinese. We use the Transformer as the translator, which is also trained on the MultiUN dataset.
\item \textbf{\txlmt{} with Google Translator} Utilizing Google Translator in \txlmt{} for translation.
\end{itemize}
We evaluate models by both automatic evaluation metrics and human experts.
The automatic metrics scores are computed by regarding each Chinese character as a token.
For human evaluation, we consider three metrics: relatedness, fluency, and correctness, which are represented as integers ranged from 1 to 3.
We randomly select 100 passage-answer pairs from the English QG test set, and use the models to generate questions.
Then we present these examples to three experts to ask for the above scores.
In Table~\ref{table:zh-zh-qg} and Table~\ref{table:human-zh}, we present the results for the zero-shot Zh-Zh-QG.
The results of monolingual supervised models are also reported in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg} as reference.
In the automatic evaluation, our model consistently performs better than baselines in both zero-shot and monolingual supervised setting.
In the human evaluation, our model also obtains significant improvements in terms of relatedness and correctness.
\paragraph{English-Chinese Question Generation}
In the zero-shot English-Chinese question generation experiments, we use \xlm{} and \xlmt{} as our baselines.
\xlmt{} is a pipeline method that uses En-En-QG with \xlm{} to generate questions, and then translates the results to Chinese.
Because there are no annotations for En-Zh-QG, we perform human evaluation studies for this setting.
Table~\ref{table:en-zh-qg} shows the human evaluation results, where our model surpasses all the baselines especially in terms of relatedness and correctness.
\paragraph{Chinese-English Question Generation}
We also conduct experiments for zero-shot Chinese-English question generation, and adopt the same evaluation procedure to En-Zh-QG.
\txlm{} first translates Chinese input to English, and then conduct En-En-QG with \xlm{}.
As shown in Table~\ref{table:zh-en-qg}, human evaluation results indicate that \ours{} achieves significant improvements on the three metrics.
\subsection{Abstractive Summarization}
We conduct experiments on cross-lingual abstractive summarization (AS). AS is the task of converting the input sentences into summaries while preserving the key meanings.
For evaluation, we use English/French/Chinese Gigaword\footnote{LDC2011T07, LDC2011T10, LDC2011T13} to extract the first sentence and the headline of each article, and regard them as input document and predicted summaries, respectively.
For each language, we sample 500k/5k/5k examples for training/validation/test.
\paragraph{Zero-Shot Summarization}
In the zero-shot setting, we only use English data for training, and directly evaluate the model on other languages.
In Table~\ref{table:fr-fr-as} and Table~\ref{table:zh-zh-as}, we present the results for French/Chinese AS, which are evaluated by the ROUGE-1, ROUGE-2 and ROUGE-L metrics.
We also report the results of supervised AS in Table~\ref{table:mono-as} for reference.
We find that \ours{} outperforms all the baseline models on both French and Chinese AS.
Comparing with French, there is a larger gap between baselines and our model on zero-shot Chinese AS, which indicates that the error propagation issue is more serious on distant language pairs.
\subsection{Ablation Studies}
\paragraph{Effects of Pre-Training}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Models & BL-4 & MTR & RG-L \\ \midrule
\xlm{} & 0.25 & 0.62 & 2.56 \\ \midrule
\ours{} & \textbf{16.37} & \textbf{18.74} & \textbf{34.93} \\
~~~ $-$~XAE & 13.71 & 15.88 & 31.43 \\
~~~ $-$~DAE & 0.38 & 1.79 & 3.79 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Ablations for pre-training objectives, where models are evaluated on zero-shot Chinese-Chinese question generation. Same shorthands apply as in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg}.}
\label{table:ablation}
\end{table}
We conduct ablation studies for pre-training objectives, and the results can be seen in Table~\ref{table:ablation}.
We observe that our model greatly benefits from the DAE objective for the zero-shot Chinese question generation task.
The results also demonstrate that combining DAE and XAE can alleviate the spurious correlation issue and improves cross-lingual NLG.
\paragraph{Effects of Fine-Tuning Strategies}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\small
\begin{tabular}{lcccccc}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{Supervised En-En-QG} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Zero-Shot Zh-Zh-QG} \\
& BL-4 & MTR & RG-L & BL-4 & MTR & RG-L \\ \midrule
All & \textbf{19.99} & \textbf{24.05} & 48.74 & 6.82 & 14.84 & 21.77 \\
Dec & 16.37 & 20.91 & 44.51 & 0.21 & 1.25 & 2.05 \\
Enc & 19.62 & 23.66 & \textbf{48.78} & 15.72 & \textbf{18.89} & 34.82 \\
ET & 19.69 & 23.73 & 48.53 & \textbf{16.37} & 18.74 & \textbf{34.93} \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Effects of different fine-tuning strategies. Dec, Enc and ET represent fine-tuning the parameters of the decoder, the encoder, and the Transformer layers of the encoder, respectively. Same shorthands apply as in Table~\ref{table:en-en-qg}.}
\label{table:ft}
\end{table}
As shown in Table~\ref{table:ft}, we use the En-En-QG and Zh-Zh-QG tasks to analyze the effects of using different fine-tuning strategies.
It can be observed that fine-tuning encoder parameters, our model obtain an impressive performance for both English and Chinese QG, which shows the strong cross-lingual transfer ability of our model.
When fine-tuning all the parameters, the model achieves the best score for English QG, but it suffers a performance drop when evaluating on Chinese QG.
We find that fine-tuning decoder hurts cross-lingual decoding, and the model learns to only decode English words.
For only fine-tuning decoder, the performance degrades by a large margin for both languages because of the underfitting issue, which indicates the necessity of fine-tuning encoder.
\paragraph{Effects of Cross-Lingual Transfer}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.96\linewidth]{semi-cropped.pdf}
\caption{ROUGE-2 scores for few-shot French/Chinese abstractive summarization with different training data sizes.
}
\label{fig:semi}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{case.pdf}
\caption{Examples of generated questions by \ours{} and the baselines in four directions (En-En,En-Zh,Zh-En and Zh-Zh). ``*'': Because \xlm{} is not designed for cross-lingual NLG, it is hard to produce meaningful sentences for En-Zh-QG and Zh-Zh-QG.
}
\label{fig:case}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
We examine whether low-resource NLG can benefit from cross-lingual transfer.
We consider English as the rich-resource language, and conduct experiments for few-shot French/Chinese AS.
Specifically, we first fine-tune \ours{} on the English AS data, and then fine-tune it on the French or Chinese AS data.
We compare with the monolingual supervised model that \ours{} is only fine-tuned on the dataset of the target language.
As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:semi}, we can observe that the cross-lingual supervision improves performance for few-shot abstractive summarization.
As the training data size becomes larger, the performances of the two models are getting closer.
\subsection{Case Studies}
As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:case}, we present some examples generated by \ours{} and the baselines in four directions (En-En, En-Zh, Zh-En, and Zh-Zh).
When decoding on an unseen language, \xlm{} tends to generate random output, because it is not designed for cross-lingual NLG.
In terms of the pipeline model, we can observe that it suffers from the error propagation issue, especially when the source and target languages are all different from the training data.
For example, when the pipeline model performs Zh-Zh-QG, keywords are translated twice, increasing the risk of mistranslation.
In the second example, ``\textit{atomic bomb}'' is mistranslated to ``\textit{nuclear bomb}'', resulting in its low correctness.
On the contrary, by directly transferring English supervision signals to the other generation directions, the generated questions of \ours{} match the references better than baselines.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we propose a pre-training method for cross-lingual natural language generation (NLG) that can transfer monolingual NLG supervision signals to all pre-trained languages.
With the pre-trained model, we achieve zero-shot cross-lingual NLG on several languages by only fine-tuning once.
Experimental results show that our model outperforms the machine-translation-based pipeline model on several cross-lingual NLG tasks.
For future work, we would like to improve our pre-training method towards the fully unsupervised setting.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
Prof. Heyan Huang is the corresponding author. The work is supported by NKRD (No. 2018YFB1005100), NSFC (No. 61772076 and 61751201), NSFB (No. Z181100008918002), Major Project of Zhijiang Lab (No. 2019DH0ZX01), and Open fund of BDAlGGCNEL and CETC Big Data Research Institute Co., Ltd (No. w-2018018).
\bibliographystyle{aaai}
|
\section{The Assouad and Fano Methods for Minimax Lower Bounds}
In this precursor to the appendix, we review the Le Cam, Fano and Assouad
methods~\cite{Assouad83,Yu97, AgarwalBaRaWa12, Wainwright19} for proving lower
bounds for stochastic optimization. Each reduces estimation to
testing then uses information theoretic tools to bound the probability of error
in various hypothesis tests.
\subsection{Le Cam and Fano Methods}\label{sec:est-to-test}
We start with a lemma that provides the standard reduction from estimation to
testing that we extensively use in our proofs. This
is essentially~\cite[Ex.~7.5]{Duchi19}; we provide the proof
for completeness.
\begin{lemma}[From estimation to testing]
\label{lem:est-to-test}
Let $\mc{P}$ be a collection of distributions over $\mc{X}$ and
$L:\Theta\times\mc{P} \to \R_+$ satisfy
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\theta\in\Theta} L(\theta, P) = 0
~~ \mbox{for~} P \in \mc{P}.
\end{equation*}
For distributions $P, Q \in \mc{P}$, define the separation
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{sep}_L(P, Q; \Theta) := \sup\left\lbrace \delta \ge 0
\;\middle|\; \mbox{for all~}
\theta\in\Theta, \begin{array}{c} L(\theta, P) \leq \delta ~\mbox{implies}~
L(\theta, Q) \geq \delta \\
L(\theta, Q) \leq \delta ~\mbox{implies}~
L(\theta, P) \geq \delta
\end{array}\right\rbrace.
\end{equation*}
Let $\delta > 0$ and $\{P_v\}_{v\in\mc{V}} \subset \mc{P}$
be a family of distributions
indexed by a finite set $\mc{V}$ satisfying the separation condition
$\mathsf{sep}_L(P_v, P_{v'}; \Theta) \geq \delta$ for $v \neq v' \in
\mc{V}$. Then for $X_1^n \stackrel{\textup{iid}}{\sim} P$,
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\what{\theta}} \sup_{P\in\mc{P}} \mathbf{E}_P L(\what{\theta}(X_1^n), P) \geq
\delta \inf_{\psi}\P(\psi(X_1^n) \neq V),
\end{equation*}
where $\P$ is the joint distribution over the random index $V$ chosen
uniformly in $\mc{V}$ and $X_1^n \stackrel{\textup{iid}}{\sim} P_v$ conditional on $V = v$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $V
\sim \mathsf{Uniform}(\mc{V})$ and $X_1^n \mid (V = v) \stackrel{\textup{iid}}{\sim}{} P_v$. Then
for any
estimator $\what{\theta}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\sup_{P\in\mc{P}} \mathbf{E}_P L(\what{\theta}(X_1^n), P) & \geq
\frac{1}{|\mathcal{V}|}\sum_v \mathbf{E}_{P_v}L(\what{\theta}, P_v)
\geq \delta
\frac{1}{|\mathcal{V}|}\sum_v P_v(L(\what{\theta}, P_v) \geq \delta)
=
\delta \P(L(\what{\theta}(X_1^n), P_V) \geq \delta),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\P$ denotes the joint distribution of $X_1^n$ and $V$.
Define the test
$\psi(x_1^n) := \mathop{\rm argmin}_{v\in\mc{V}} L(\what{\theta}(x_1^n), P_v)$.
The separation assumption guarantees
that if $\psi(\theta) \neq v$ then
$L(\theta, P_v) \geq \delta$, so
\begin{equation*}
\P(L(\what{\theta}(X_1^n), P_V) \geq \delta) \geq \P\left(
\psi(X_1^n) \neq V \right).
\end{equation*}
Taking the infimum over all tests $\psi$ yields the result.
\end{proof}
With this, the classical Le Cam and Fano methods are straightforward
combinations of Lemma~\ref{lemma:opt-to-est} with (respectively) Le Cam's
lemma~\cite[Lemma 1]{Yu97} and Fano's inequality~\cite[Theorem
2.10.1]{CoverTh06}.
\begin{proposition}[Le Cam's method]
\label{prop:le-cam}
Let $P_0$ and $P_1$ be two distributions of $\mc{P}$ over $\mc{X}$. Let
$\delta > 0$ be such that $\mathsf{sep}_L(P_0, P_1, \Theta) \ge \delta$.
Then
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\what{\theta}}\sup_{P\in\mc{P}} \mathbf{E}_P L(\what{\theta}(X_1^n), P) \ge
\frac{\delta}{2}(1 - \norm{P^n_0 - P^n_1}_{\mathsf{tv}}).
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}[Fano's method]
\label{prop:fano}
Let $\mc{V}$ be a finite index set and $\{P_v\}_{v\in\mc{V}}$ a collection of
distributions contained by $\mc{P}$ such that $\min_{v\neq v'}\mathsf{sep}_L(P_v, P_{v'}, \Theta) \ge \delta$, then
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\what{\theta}}\sup_{P\in\mc{P}} \mathbf{E}_P L(\what{\theta}(X_1^n), P) \ge \delta\left(1 - \frac{\mathsf{I}(X_1^n;V) + \log 2}{\log |\mc{V}|} \right).
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
With these tools,
minimax lower bounds on the stochastic risk
$\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}$ in Section~\ref{sec:prelim} follow by
(i) demonstrating an appropriate loss $L$ and (ii) separation.
The next lemma, essentially present in the paper~\cite{AgarwalBaRaWa12}
(cf.~\cite{Duchi18}), reduces optimization to
testing by providing an appropriate separation function.
\begin{lemma}[From optimization to function estimation]
\label{lemma:opt-to-est}
Let $\mc{X}$ be a sample space, $\Theta\subset\R^d$, $\mc{F}$ be a
collection a functions $\R^d\times\mc{X} \to \R$, and $\mc{P}$ be a
collection of distributions over $\mc{X}$. Let $\mc{V}$ index
$\{P_v\}_{v\in\mc{V}} \subset \mc{P}$. For
$F\in\mc{F}$, define
$f_v(\theta) := \mathbf{E}_{P_v}[F(\theta, X)]$ and
for each $v, v' \in \mc{V}$, set
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v', \Theta) := \inf_{\theta\in\Theta}
\left\lbrace f_v(\theta) + f_{v'}(\theta) - \inf_{\theta \in \Theta}
f_v(\theta)
- \inf_{\theta \in \Theta}
f_{v'}(\theta) \right\rbrace.
\end{equation*}
If
$\mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v', \Theta) \ge \delta \ge 0$
for all $v \neq v' \in \mc{V}$, then
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \mc{F}) \ge \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \mc{F}, \mc{P})
\ge \frac{\delta}{2}\inf_{\psi}\P(\psi(X_1^n) \neq V).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We construct an appropriate loss $L$ and
apply
Lemma~\ref{lem:est-to-test}. Define
$L(\theta, P) := f_P(\theta) - \inf_{\theta \in \Theta}
f_P(\theta)$. By construction,
$L(\theta, P) \ge 0$ and $\inf_{\theta \in \Theta}L(\theta, P) = 0$
for all $\theta \in \Theta$ and $P \in \mc{P}$. Let
$v\neq v' \in\mc{V}$.
Then if $L(\theta, P_v) = f_v(\theta) - \inf_{\theta \in \Theta} f_v(\theta)
\le \frac{1}{2} \mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v', \Theta)$,
it is evidently the case that $f_{v'}(\theta) - \inf_{\theta \in \Theta}
f_{v'}(\theta) \ge \frac{1}{2} \mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v', \Theta)$, so that
$\mathsf{sep}_L(P_v, P_{v'}, \Theta) \ge \frac{1}{2}\mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v',
\Theta)$. The distributions $\{P_v\}_{v\in\mc{V}}$ are
$\delta/2$-separated, allowing
application of Lemma~\ref{lem:est-to-test}.
\end{proof}
Our general strategy for proving lower bounds on $\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}$ is as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Choose a function $F\in\mc{F}$ and define $\mc{V}$ and
$\{P_v\}_{v\in\mc{V}} \subset \mc{P}$ such that
$\mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v', \Theta) \ge \delta > 0$.
\item Lower bound the testing error
$\inf_{\psi} \P(\psi(X_1^n) \neq V)$, and choose
the largest separation $\delta$ to make this testing error a positive
constant.
\end{itemize}
To showcase this proof technique, we prove that
minimax stochastic risk for $1$-dimensional optimization has
lower bound $1 / \sqrt{n}$; we use this to address technicalities
in later proofs.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:1-d}
Let
$\mc{F}^{d=1} = \{f:\R \times \mc{X} \to \R \mid f(\cdot, x)
~ \mbox{is} ~ \mbox{convex} ~ \mbox{and}~ 1\mbox{-Lipschitz}\}$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}([-1, 1], \mc{F}^{d=1}) \ge \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{6 n}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Theta = [-1, 1]$ and $\mc{X} = \{\pm 1\}, \mc{V} = \{\pm 1\}$.
To see the separation condition, let $F(\theta, x) := |\theta - x|$. For
$\delta \in [0, \frac{1}{2}]$, we define $P_v$ s.t.\ if $X\sim P_v$ we
have
\begin{equation*}
X = \begin{cases}
1 \mbox{~~with probability~~} \frac{1 + v\delta}{2} \\
- 1 \mbox{~~with probability~~} \frac{1 - v\delta}{2}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
We have
$f_{v}(\theta) = \frac{1+\delta}{2}|\theta - v| +
\frac{1-\delta}{2}|\theta + v|$ and
$\inf_\theta f_{v}(\theta) = \frac{1-\delta}{2}$.
To lower bound the separation, note that
\begin{equation*}
f_1(\theta) + f_{-1}(\theta) - \inf_{\Theta}f_1 - \inf_{\Theta}f_{-1} =
|\theta - 1| + |\theta+1| - (1-\delta) \ge \delta.
\end{equation*}
This yields $\mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(1, -1, \Theta) \ge \delta$.
We lower bound the testing error via Proposition~\ref{prop:le-cam}:
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\psi:\mc{X}^n\to \{\pm 1\}}\P(\psi(X_1^n)\neq V) =
\frac{1}{2}(1 - \tvnorm{P_1^n - P_{-1}^n}) \ge
\frac{1}{2}\left(1-\sqrt{\frac{n}{2}\dkl{P_1}{P_{-1}}}\right),
\end{equation*}
where the rightmost inequality is Pinsker's inequality. Noting that
$\dkl{P_1}{P_{-1}} = \delta\log\frac{1+\delta}{1-\delta} \le 3\delta^2$
for $\delta \in [0, \frac{1}{2}]$ and
setting $\delta = 1 / \sqrt{6n}$ yields the result.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The Assouad Method}\label{sec:assouad}
Assouad's method reduces the problem
of estimation (or optimization) to one of multiple binary hypothesis tests.
In this case, we index a set of distributions $\mc{P} = \{P_v\}_{v \in
\mc{V}}$ on a set $\mc{X}$ by the hypercube $\mc{V} = \{\pm 1\}^d$. For
a function $F : \R^d \times \mc{X} \to \R$, we define
$f_v(\theta) := \mathbf{E}_{P_v}[F(\theta, X)]$. Then for
a vector $\delta \in \R^d_+$,
following \citet[Lemma 5.3.2]{Duchi18}, we say that
the functions $\{f_v\}$ induce a $\delta$-separation in Hamming
metric if
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:hamming-separation}
f_v(\theta) - \inf_{\theta \in \Theta} f_v(\theta)
\ge \sum_{j = 1}^d \delta_j \indic{\mathop{\rm sign}(\theta_j) \neq v_j}.
\end{equation}
With this condition, we have the following generalized
Assouad method~\cite[Lemma 5.3.2]{Duchi18}.
\begin{lemma}[Generalized Assouad's method]\label{lem:assouad}
Let $X_1^n \stackrel{\textup{iid}}{\sim} P_V$, where $V \sim \mathsf{Uniform}(\{\pm 1\}^d)$. Define
the averages
\begin{equation*}
\P_{+j} := \frac{1}{2^{d-1}} \sum_{v : v_j = 1} P_v^n
~~ \mbox{and} ~~
\P_{-j} := \frac{1}{2^{d-1}} \sum_{v : v_j = -1} P_v^n.
\end{equation*}
Assume that the collection $\{f_v\}$ for $f_v =
\mathbf{E}_{P_v}[F(\cdot, X)]$ induces a
$\delta$-separation~\eqref{eqn:hamming-separation}. Then letting
$\mc{F} = \{F\}$, the single function $F$,
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \mc{F}, \mc{P})
\ge \frac{1}{2} \sum_{j = 1}^d \delta_j (1 - \tvnorm{\P_{+j} - \P_{-j}}).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\noindent
\section{Proofs for Section~\ref{sec:warm-up}}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:lp-ball-q12}}
\label{prf:prop-lp-ball-q12}
We use the general information-theoretic framework of reduction from estimation
to testing presented in Section~\ref{sec:est-to-test} to prove the lower
bound.
\paragraph{Separation}
Let us consider the sample space ${\cal X} = \{\pm e_j\}_{j\leq d}$ and the
function $F(\theta, x) := \theta^\top x$ ; $F$ belongs to
$\F{\gamma}{1}$. Let $\delta \in [0, 1/2]$, for $v \in \{\pm 1\}^d$, we
define $P_v$ such that for $X\sim P_v$ we have
\begin{equation*}
X =
\begin{cases}
v_j e_j & ~~\mbox{with probability}~~ \frac{1+\delta}{2d} \\
- v_j e_j & ~~\mbox{with probability}~~ \frac{1-\delta}{2d}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
We then have $f_v(\theta) = \frac{\delta}{d}\theta^\top v$. By duality,
\begin{equation*}
f_v^\ast := \inf_\Theta f_v = - \frac{\delta}{d} \sup_{\theta \in
\ball{p}{0}{1}} v^\top\theta = - \frac{\delta}{d} \|v\|_{p^\ast},
\end{equation*}
where $p^\ast$ is such that $1/p + 1/p^\ast = 1$. For $v, v' \in \{\pm 1\}^d$,
we thus have:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v,v',\Theta) = \inf_{\theta \in \Theta}
f_v(\theta) + f_{v'}(\theta) - f_v^\ast - f_{v'}^\ast & =
\inf_{\theta \in \ball{p}{0}{1}}\frac{\delta}{d}(\theta^\top(v+v') +
\|v\|_{p^\ast} +
\|v'\|_{p^\ast}) \\
& = \frac{\delta}{d} (\|v\|_{p^\ast} + \|v'\|_{p^\ast} -\|v+v'\|_{p^\ast}) \\
& = 2\frac{\delta}{d} \left[d^{1/p^\ast} - (d-\mathrm{d}_\mathrm{Ham}(v,
v'))^{1/p^\ast} \right],
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\mathrm{d}_\mathrm{Ham}(v, v')$ is the Hamming distance between $v$ and
$v'$. The Gilbert-Varshimov bound~\cite[Lemma 7.5]{Duchi19} guarantees the
existence of a $d/2$ $\ell_1$-packing of $\{\pm 1\}^d$ of size at least
$\exp(d/8)$. Let $\mathcal{V}$ be such a packing; we have that, for a numerical
constant $c_0 > 0$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sep}
\forall v\neq v' \in \mathcal{V}, \mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v',\Theta) \ge c_0 \delta d^{-1/p}.
\end{equation}
Applying Lemma~\ref{lemma:opt-to-est} yields
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \ge \frac{c_0}{2}\delta
d^{-1/p}\inf_{\psi}\P(\psi(X_1^n)\neq V).
\end{equation*}
\paragraph{Bounding the testing error} We bound the testing error with Fano's
inequality and upper bounding the mutual information $\mi{X}{V}$. Using the
identity $\delta\log\frac{1+\delta}{1-\delta} \le 3\delta^2$, it holds
\begin{equation*}
\mi{X_1^n}{V} \le n\max_{v, v'} \dkl{P_v}{P_{v'}} \leq 3n\delta^2,
\end{equation*}
and, recalling that $\log |\mathcal{V}| \ge d/8$ yields
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\psi}\P(\psi(X_1^n)\neq V) \ge \left(1 -
\frac{3n\delta^2 + \log 2}{d / 8}\right).
\end{equation*}
In the case that $d \ge 32 \log 2$, choosing $\delta = \sqrt{\frac{d}{48n}}$
yields the desired lower-bound. In the case that $d < 32 \log 2$, with
$\mc{F}^{d=1}$ as in Lemma~\ref{lem:1-d}, that any $1$-dimensional
optimization problem may be embedded into a $d$-dimensional problem
yields
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \ge \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}([-1, 1], \mc{F}^{d=1})
\gtrsim \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}.
\end{equation*}
This gives the lower bound for all $d\in\mathbf{N}$.
To conclude the proof, we establish an upper bound on the minimax regret. We
consider the regret guarantee of~\eqref{eqn:md-regret} for
$h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2}\norms{\theta}_2^2$. Since $p\ge 2$, it holds that for all
$\theta\in\R^d, \norms{\theta}_2 \le d^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{p}}\norms{\theta}_p$ and
thus
$\sup_{\theta, \theta'\in\Theta}\bregman{h}{\theta}{\theta'} \le d^{\frac{1}{2}
- \frac{1}{p}}$. On the other hand, since $r \in [1, 2]$,
$\norms{g}_2 \le \norms{g}_r \le 1$. A straightforward optimization of the
stepsize $\alpha$ yields the upper bound on $\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma)$. \qed
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:lp-ball-q2infty}}
\label{prf:prop-lp-ball-q2infty}
The proof is very similar to Proposition~\ref{prop:lp-ball-q12} so we forego
some of the details.
\paragraph{Separation}
We consider ${\cal X} = \{\pm 1\}^d$ and
$F(\theta, x) := \eta \theta^\top x$---we will decide the value of $\eta$
later in the proof. For $v \in \{\pm 1\}^d$, we define $P_v$ such that for $X\sim P_v$
we have
\begin{equation*}
X_j = \begin{cases}
v_j & \text{with probability} \frac{1+\delta}{2} \\
- v_j & \text{with probability} \frac{1-\delta}{2}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
This yields $f_v(\theta) = \eta \delta \theta^\top v$. Considering
again the Gilbert-Varshimov packing $\mc{V} \subset \{\pm 1 \}^d$, we lower bound
the separation
\begin{equation*}
\mbox{for all~~} v\neq v'\in\mc{V}, \mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v', \Theta) = \inf_{\theta \in \Theta} f_v(\theta) + f_{v'}(\theta) - f_v^\ast -
f_{v'}^\ast \geq c_0 \eta \delta d^{1/p^\ast}.
\end{equation*}
\paragraph{Bounding the testing error} Noting that
\begin{equation*}
\dkl{P_v}{P_{v'}} = \sum_{j \le d}\mathbf{1}_{v_j = v'_j}
\delta\log\frac{1+\delta}{1-\delta} \le 3d\delta^2,
\end{equation*}
and have $\mi{X_1^n}{V} \le 3nd\delta^2$. For $F$ to remain in $\F{\gamma}{1}$,
we must have that for all $ x\in\mathcal{X}, \eta \|x\|_r \leq 1$; noting that
$\|x\|_r = d^{1/q}$, we choose $\eta = d^{-1/q}$. In the case that
$d \ge 32 \log 2$, choosing $\delta = 1/\sqrt{48n}$ yields the minimax
lower-bound
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \gtrsim
\frac{d^{\frac{1}{p^\ast}}d^{-\frac{1}{q}}}{\sqrt{n}} =
\frac{d^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{p}}d^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{q}}}{\sqrt{n}}.
\end{equation*}
In the case that $d < 32\log 2$, we once again refer Lemma~\ref{lem:1-d}, which
concludes the proof for the lower bound on the minimax stochastic risk.
For the upper bound, we turn to~\eqref{eqn:md-regret}, with
$h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2}\norms{\theta}_2^2$. It holds again that
$\sup_{\theta, \theta'\in\Theta} \bregman{h}{\theta}{\theta'} \le d^{1/2 -
1/p}$. Since $r \ge 2$, we have that
$\sup_{\norms{g}_r \le 1}\norms{g}_2 = d^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{r}}$ and choosing
the stepsize $\alpha$ to optimize~\eqref{eqn:md-regret} yields the upper bound
on the minimax regret. \qed
\section{Proofs for Section~\ref{sec:general}}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{th:qc-not-qc}}
\label{sec:proof-qc-not-qc}
The upper bound is simply
Corollary~\ref{cor:ub}.
For the lower bound, similar to our warm-up in Section~\ref{sec:warm-up}, we
consider ``sparse'' gradients, though instead of using Fano's method
we use
Assouad's method to more carefully relate the geometry of the norm
$\gamma$ and constraint set $\Theta$.
Let $a$ be such that $\mathsf{Rec}(a) \subset \Theta$. We consider the sample
space $\mc{X} := \{\pm e_j\}_{j\leq d}$ and functions
\begin{equation*}
F(\theta, x) := \sum_{j\leq d}\frac{1}{\gamma(e_j)}|x_j||\theta_j - a_jx_j|.
\end{equation*}
For any $x\in\mc{X}$, the subdifferential $\partial_\theta F(\theta, x)$
has at most one non-zero
coordinate; the orthosymmetry of $\gamma$ implies $F\in\F{\gamma}{1}$. Let
$p \in \R^d_+$ (to be specified presently)
be such that $\mathbf{1}^\top p=1$ and for $1\leq j
\leq d$, let $\delta_j \in [0, 1/2]$. We define the distributions
$P_v$ on $\mc{X}$ by
\begin{equation*}
X = \begin{cases}
v_j e_j & \mbox{with~probability~} \frac{p_j(1+\delta_j)}{2} \\
-v_j e_j & \mbox{with~probability~} \frac{p_j(1-\delta_j)}{2}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
With this choice, we evidently have
\begin{equation*}
f_v(\theta) = \mathbf{E}_{X\sim P_v}F(\theta, X) = \sum_{j\leq
d}\frac{p_j}{\gamma(e_j)}\left[\frac{1+\delta_j}{2}|\theta_j - a_j v_j| +
\frac{1-\delta_j}{2}|\theta_j + a_j v_j|\right]
\end{equation*}
and immediately that $\inf_\Theta f_v = \sum_{j\leq d}
\frac{p_ja_j}{\gamma(e_j)}(1-\delta_j)$. As a consequence,
we have the Hamming separation (recall Eq.~\eqref{eqn:hamming-separation})
\begin{equation*}
f_v(\theta) - \inf_\Theta f_v = \sum_{j\leq d}
\frac{p_ja_j\delta_j}{\gamma(e_j)} \mathbf{1}_{\mathop{\rm sign}(\theta_j) \neq v_j},
\end{equation*}
which allows us to apply Assouad's method via Lemma~\ref{lem:assouad}.
Using the same notation as Lemma~\ref{lem:assouad}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\tvnorm{\P^n_{+j} - \P^n_{-j}}^2 \le \frac{1}{2}\dkl{\P^n_{+j}}{\P^n_{-j}} \le
\log 3 \cdot np_j\delta_j^2.
\end{equation*}
Choosing $\delta_j = \min\lbrace\frac{1}{2},
\frac{1}{2\sqrt{np_j\log(3)}}\rbrace$ yields the lower bound
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \ge \frac{1}{8}\sum_{j\leq d}\frac{a_j}{\gamma(e_j)}
\min\left\lbrace p_j, \frac{\sqrt{p_j}}{\sqrt{n\log 3}}\right\rbrace,
\end{equation*}
and by taking $p_j = (\frac{a_j}{\gamma(e_j)})^2 / \norms{a /
\gamma(e_\cdot)}_2^2$, we obtain for any $a \in \Theta$ that
\begin{align*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \ge
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\mathsf{Rec}(a), \gamma)
& \geq \frac{1}{8}\sum_{j \leq d} \frac{a_j}{\gamma(e_j)}
\min\left\lbrace \frac{a_j^2}{\gamma(e_j)^2\norms{a /
\gamma(e_\cdot)}_2^2}, \frac{1}{\sqrt{n\log 3}}\frac{a_j}{\gamma(e_j) \norms{a /
\gamma(e_\cdot)}_2}\right\rbrace \\
& = \frac{1}{8 \ltwo{a / \gamma(e.)}^2}
\sum_{j = 1}^d \frac{a_j^2}{\gamma(e_j)^2}
\min\left\{ \frac{a_j}{\gamma(e_j)},
\frac{\ltwos{a / \gamma(e.)}}{\sqrt{n \log 3}}\right\}.
\end{align*}
For notational simplicity, define the set $T :=
\{\theta / \gamma(e.) \mid \theta \in \Theta\}$, which is evidently
orthosymmetric and convex (it is a diagonal scaling of $\Theta$). Then
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:intergalactic-planetary}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\ge \sup_{u \in T}
\frac{1}{8 \ltwo{u}^2}
\sum_{j = 1}^d u_j^2 \min\left\{u_j, \frac{\ltwo{u}}{\sqrt{n \log 3}}
\right\}.
\end{equation}
For any vector $u \in \R_+^d$ and $c < 1$, if we define $J = \{j \in [d] \mid
u_j \ge \frac{c}{\sqrt{d}} \ltwo{u}\}$, then
\begin{equation*}
\ltwo{u}^2 = \ltwo{u_J}^2 + \ltwo{u_{J^c}}^2
\le \ltwo{u_J}^2 + \ltwo{u}^2 \sum_{j \in J^c} \frac{c^2}{d}
\le \ltwo{u_J}^2 + c^2 \ltwo{u}^2,
~~ \mbox{i.e.} ~~
\ltwo{u_J} \ge \sqrt{1 - c^2} \ltwo{u}.
\end{equation*}
Now, fix $k \in \mathbf{N}$. If in the supremum~\eqref{eqn:intergalactic-planetary}
we consider any vector $u \in T, u \ge 0$ satisfying $\norm{u}_0 \le k$,
then setting the index set $J = \{j : u_j \ge \ltwo{u} / \sqrt{n \log 3}\}
= \{j : u_j \ge \ltwo{u} / \sqrt{k (n/k) \log 3}\}$
we have
\begin{align*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\ge
\frac{1}{8 \ltwo{u}^2}
\sum_{j = 1}^d u_j^2 \min\left\{u_j,
\frac{\ltwo{u}}{\sqrt{n \log 3}}
\right\}
\ge
\frac{1}{8 \ltwo{u}^2}
\sum_{j \in J} u_j^2 \frac{\ltwo{u}}{\sqrt{n \log 3}}
\ge \frac{1}{8} \left(1 - \frac{k}{n \log 3}\right)
\frac{\ltwo{u}}{\sqrt{n \log 3}}.
\end{align*}
Taking a supremum over $u$ with $\norm{u}_0 \le k$ gives the theorem.
\subsection{Proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:qc-wlp}}
\label{sec:proof-cor-qc-not-qc}
Given proof of Theorem~\ref{th:qc-not-qc}, the proof is nearly
immediate. Let $p \in [1, 2], \beta \in \left(\R_+ \setminus \{0\}\right)^d$
and $\gamma(v) = \norm{\beta \odot v}_p$. For the lower bound,
the final display of the proof of Theorem~\ref{th:qc-not-qc} above
guarantees the lower bound
$\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\ge \frac{1}{16} \ltwo{u} / \sqrt{n}$ for all $u
\in \{\theta / \gamma(e.) \mid \theta \in \Theta\}$ and $n \ge 2d$.
We first observe that
$\mathsf{QHull}{}\left(\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}\right) = \{v, \norm{\beta \odot v}_2 \leq
1\}$. Thus, the upper bound in Theorem~\ref{th:qc-not-qc} is
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) \le \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\sup_{\theta\in\Theta}
\sup_{g: \norm{\beta \odot g}_2 \leq 1} \theta^\top g.
\end{equation*}
Using
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{g: \norm{\beta \odot g}_2 \leq 1} u^\top g =
\sup_{z: \norm{z}_2 \leq 1} u^\top\left(z / \beta\right) = \norm{u / \beta}_2,
\end{equation*}
and recalling $\beta_j = \gamma(e_j)$ concludes the proof. \qed
\section{Proofs for Section~\ref{sec:not-qc}}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{th:sharp-md}}\label{prf:th-sharp-md}
Let us tackle the first case stated in the theorem; we reduce the second case to
the first one by scaling the dimension.
\subsubsection{Case $1 \leq p \leq 1 + 1/ \log(2d)$}
We always have the lower bound $1 / \sqrt{n}$ by Lemma~\ref{lem:1-d} by
reducing to a lower-dimensional problem, so we assume without loss of
generality that $d \ge 8$.
\paragraph{Separation}
Let us consider $\mathcal{V}= \{\pm e_j\}_{j\leq d}$. For $v = \pm e_j \in
\mathcal{V}$, we define $P_v$ on $X\in\{\pm 1\}^d$ by choosing coordinates
of $X$ independently via
\begin{equation*}
X_j =
\begin{cases}
1 & \mbox{~~with probability~~} \frac{1+\delta v_j}{2} \\
-1 & \mbox{~~with probability~~} \frac{1-\delta v_j}{2}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Immediately, we have $\mathbf{E}_{P_v}X = \delta v$. For $x\in\{\pm 1\}^d$,
we define $F(\theta, x) := d^{-1/p^\ast}\dotp{\theta}{x}$, so $F
\in \F{\gamma}{1}$, $f_v(\theta) = \mathbf{E}_{P_v}F(\theta, X) = \delta
d^{-1/p^\ast}\dotp{\theta}{v}$, and a calculation gives that $f_v^\ast
:= \inf_{\Theta} f_v = - \delta d^{-1/p^\ast}$. For $v\neq v' \in
\mc{V}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathsf{d}_{\textup{opt}}(v, v', \Theta) = \inf_{\theta \in \Theta}
f_v(\theta) + f_{v'}(\theta) - f_v^\ast - f_{v'}^\ast & =
d^{-1/p^\ast} \delta \inf_{\theta \in
\Theta}\left(\dotp{(v+v')}{\theta} + 2\right) \\
& = \delta d^{-1/p^\ast}(2 - \|v+v'\|_{p^\ast}) \\
& \geq (2-\sqrt{2})\delta d^{-1/p^\ast}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Lemma~\ref{lemma:opt-to-est} yields
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \ge \frac{2-\sqrt{2}}{2}\delta d^{-1/p^\ast}
\inf_{\psi:\mc{X}^n \to \mc{V}}\P(\psi(X_1^n) \neq V).
\end{equation*}
It now remains to bound the testing error.
\paragraph{Bounding the testing error} Noting that $|\mc{V}| = \log(2d)$, we
lower bound the testing error via Fano's inequality
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\psi:\mc{X}^n \to \mc{V}}\P(\psi(X_1^n) \neq V) \ge \left(1-\frac{\mathsf{I}(X_1^n;V) + \log 2}{\log(2d)}\right).
\end{equation*}
For any $v\neq v'\in\mc{V}$, we have for $\delta \in [0, \frac{1}{2}]$ that
\begin{equation*}
\dkl{P_v}{P_{v'}} = \delta\log\frac{1+\delta}{1-\delta} \le 3\delta^2.
\end{equation*}
We can thus bound the mutual information between $X_1^n$ and $V$
\begin{equation*}
\mi{X_1^n}{V} \le n\max_{v\neq v'}\dkl{P_v}{P_{v'}} \le 3n\delta^2.
\end{equation*}
In the case that $d < 8$, the lower bound holds trivially via
Lemma~\ref{lem:1-d}. In the case that $d\ge 8$, assuming that
choosing $\delta^2 = \frac{\log(2d)}{6n} \wedge \frac{1}{2}$
yields
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:lb-log2d}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \geq
\frac{2-\sqrt{2}}{2} d^{-1/p^\ast}
\min\left\{\sqrt{\frac{\log(2d)}{6n}}, \frac{1}{2}\right\}
\left(1 - \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{4}\right),
\end{equation}
which is valid for all $p\in[1, 2]$. In the case that
$1\leq p \leq 1+1/\log(2d)$, we note that
$d^{-1/p^\ast} = 1 / d^{\frac{p-1}{p}} \geq 1/e$, which yields
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \geq c \cdot
\sqrt{\frac{\log (2d)}{n}} \wedge 1
\end{equation*}
for a numerical constant $c_0 > 0$.
To conclude, we need to establish the upper bound. Let us choose
$a = 1 + 1/\log(2d)$,
$\frac{\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} \|\theta\|_a \sup_{g \in
\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}\|g\|_{a^\ast}}}{\sqrt{a-1}\sqrt{n}}$ upper bounds the
minimax regret. Since $a > p$, $\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} \|\theta\|_a = 1$. We
have $a^\ast = \log(2d) + 1$ and $p^\ast \geq a^\ast$. We have
\begin{equation*}
\|g\|_{a^\ast} \leq d^{\frac{1}{a^\ast} - \frac{1}{p^\ast}} \|g\|_{p^\ast}
\leq d^{\frac{1}{a^\ast}},
\end{equation*}
because $g\in \ball{p^\ast}{0}{1}$. We note that $d^{1/a^\ast} =
\exp\left(\frac{\log d}{\log(2d) + 1}\right) \leq e$. Noting that $1 /
\sqrt{2(a-1)} = \sqrt{\log(2d) / 2}$ concludes this case. \qed
\subsubsection{Case $1 + 1/\log(2d) < p \leq 2$}
Let $d_0 \leq d$. We can embed a function $F_{d_0}:\R^{d_0}\times {\cal X} \to \R$
as a function $F:\R^d \times {\cal X} \to \R$ by letting $\pi_{d_0}$ denote the
projection onto the first $d_0$-components, and defining
\begin{equation*}
F(\theta, x) =
F_{d_0}(\pi_{d_0}\theta, x).
\end{equation*}
If the subgradients of $F_{d_0}$ lie in $\ball{p^\ast}{0}{1}$, so do those of
$F$. Similarly, if $\theta_0 \in \{\tau \in \R^{d_0}, \|\tau\|_p \leq 1 \}$
then $\theta = (\theta_0, \mathbf{0}_{d_0+1:d}) \in \ball{p}{0}{1}$. As such,
any lower bound for the $d_0$-dimensional problem implies an identical one for
all $d\ge d_0$-dimensional problems. For $1 + 1/\log(2d) < p \leq 2$, let us
define $d_0 = \lceil 1/2 \exp(\frac{1}{p-1}) \rceil$, so $d_0 \leq d$ as
desired. In the case that $p > 1 + 1/\log 16$, Lemma~\ref{lem:1-d} yields the
desired lower bound. In the case that $p \le 1 + 1 / \log 16$, we have that
$d_0 \geq 8$, and the lower
bound~\eqref{eqn:lb-log2d} holds so that for a numerical constant
$c > 0$,
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \geq c
d_0^{-1/p^\ast} \cdot \sqrt{\frac{\log(2d_0)}{n}} \wedge 1.
\end{equation*}
We have that $d_0^{-1/p^\ast} \geq (1/2)^{\frac{1}{p} - 1}\exp(-1/p) \geq
\sqrt{2/e}$. This yields the final lower bound
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \geq c \cdot
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2(p-1) n}} \wedge 1.
\end{equation*}
Proposition~\ref{prop:rate-md}
yields the upper bound and concludes this proof. \qed
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{th:regret-ub-lp}}\label{prf:th-regret-ub-lp}
Let $A \succ 0$ be a positive semi-definite matrix for the distance
generating function $h_A(\theta) = \frac{1}{2} \theta^\top A \theta$ defined above,
and let $q = \frac{p}{p-1}$ be the conjugate to $p$. We choose linear functions
$F_i(\theta) := \dotp{g_i}{\theta}$ where $g_i \in \ball{q}{0}{1}$. In this
case, letting $\{\theta_i\}_{i\leq n}$ be the points mirror descent plays, the
regret with respect to $\theta \in\R^d$ is
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, A}(\theta) =
\sum_{i\leq n} F_i(\theta_i) - F_i(\theta) = \sum_{i\leq n}
\dotp{g_i}{(\theta_i - \theta)},
\end{equation*}
so that
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}^\ast_{n, A}
:=
\sup_{\norm{\theta}_p \le 1}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n,A}(\theta)
= \normbigg{\sum_{i \le n} g_i}_q
+ \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i \le n} \norm{g_i}_{A^{-1}}^2
- \frac{1}{2} \normbigg{\sum_{i \le n} g_i}_{A^{-1}}^2.
\end{equation*}
Now, we choose linear functions $f_i$ so that the regret is large.
To do so, choose vectors
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:choose-u-v}
u \in \mathop{\rm argmax}_{\norm{x}_q \le 1} \dotp{x}{A^{-1} x}
~~ \mbox{and} ~~
v \in \mathop{\rm argmin}_{\norm{x}_q = 1} \dotp{x}{A^{-1} x}.
\end{equation}
Now, we choose the vectors $g_i \in \R^d$ so
that for a $\delta \in [0, 1]$ to be chosen,
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $g_i = u$ for $n/4$ of the indices $i \in [n]$
\item $g_i = -u$ for $n/4$ of the indices $i \in [n]$
\item $g_i = v$ for $\frac{n}{4}(1+\delta) n$ of the indices $i \in [n]$
\item $g_i = -v$ for $\frac{n}{4}(1-\delta)$ of the indices $i \in [n]$.
\end{enumerate}
With these choices, we obtain the regret lower bound
\begin{align}
\mathsf{Regret}^\ast_{n, A}
& \geq
\sup_{\delta \le 1}
\left[
\frac{n}{2}\delta \norm{v}_q
+ \frac{n}{4}\dotp{u}{\invert{A}u} -
\frac{\delta^2n^2}{8}\dotp{v}{\invert{A}v}
\right] \nonumber \\
& \ge \frac{n}{4} \cdot \left[\dotp{u}{A^{-1} u} + \min\left\{
1, \frac{2\norm{v}_q}{n \dotp{v}{A^{-1} v}}\right\}
\norm{v}_q\right].
\label{eqn:regret-with-A-q}
\end{align}
\newcommand{\opnormpq}[1]{\norm{#1}_{\ell_p \to \ell_q}}
\newcommand{\opnormqtwo}[1]{\norm{#1}_{\ell_q \to \ell_2}}
\newcommand{\opnormqtwos}[1]{\norms{#1}_{\ell_q \to \ell_2}}
\newcommand{\opnormtwoq}[1]{\norm{#1}_{\ell_2 \to \ell_q}}
\newcommand{\opnormtwoqs}[1]{\norms{#1}_{\ell_2 \to \ell_q}}
We now consider two cases. In the first, $A$ is large enough that
$\norm{v}_q \ge \frac{1}{2} n \dotp{v}{A^{-1} v}$. Then the regret
bound~\eqref{eqn:regret-with-A-q} becomes
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}^*_{n,A} \ge \frac{n}{4} \left[
\dotp{u}{A^{-1} u} + \norm{v}_q\right]
\ge \frac{n}{4},
\end{equation*}
as $\norm{v}_q = 1$ by the construction~\eqref{eqn:choose-u-v}. This gives the
first result of the theorem. For the second claim, which holds in the case that
$\norm{v}_q < \frac{1}{2} n \dotp{v}{A^{-1} v}$, we consider the operator norms of
general invertible linear operators. For a mapping $T : \R^d \to \R^d$, define
the $\ell_p$ to $\ell_q$ operator norm
\begin{equation*}
\opnormpq{T} := \sup_{x \neq 0} \frac{\norm{T(x)}_q}{\norm{x}_p}.
\end{equation*}
Then the construction~\eqref{eqn:choose-u-v} evidently yields
\begin{equation*}
\dotp{u}{A^{-1}u}
= \opnormqtwos{A^{-1/2}}^2
~~~ \mbox{and} ~~~
\frac{\norm{v}_q^2}{\dotp{v}{A^{-1} v}}
= \sup_{x \neq 0} \frac{\norms{A^{1/2} x}_q^2}{
\norm{x}_2^2}
= \opnormtwoqs{A^{1/2}}^2.
\end{equation*}
Revisiting the regret~\eqref{eqn:regret-with-A-q}, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}^*_{n,A} \ge
\frac{n}{4} \cdot \left[
\opnormqtwo{A^{-1/2}}^2
+ \frac{2}{n} \opnormtwoq{A^{1/2}}^2\right]
\ge \sqrt{\frac{n}{2}} \opnormqtwos{A^{-1/2}} \opnormtwoqs{A^{1/2}},
\end{equation*}
where we have used that $ab \le \frac{1}{2} a^2 + \frac{1}{2} b^2$ for all $a, b$.
But for any invertible linear operator, standard results
on the Banach-Mazur distance~\cite[Corollary~2.3.2]{Vershynin09}
imply that
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{A \succ 0}
\opnormtwoq{A} \opnormqtwo{A^{-1}} \ge
d^{1/2 - 1/q}.
\end{equation*}
This gives the result. \qed
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{th:regret-sgm-wlp}}
\label{sec:proof-th-regret-sgm-wlp}
The proof follows similar lines as the one we show in
Appendix~\ref{prf:th-regret-ub-lp} but choosing different $u, v \in
\R^d$. Let $\alpha \geq 0$ be a stepsize. We consider linear functions $F_i(\theta)
:= \dotp{g_i}{\theta}$ with $\norm{\beta \odot g_i}_1 \leq 1$. Let
$\{\theta_i\}_{i\leq n}$ be the iterates of online gradient descent. The regret
with respect to $\theta\in\R^d$ is
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \alpha}(\theta) = \sum_{i\leq n}\dotp{g_i}{(\theta_i - \theta)}.
\end{equation*}
This yields
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \alpha}^\ast = \sup_{\norm{\theta}_\infty \leq 1} \mathsf{Regret}_{n,
\alpha}(\theta) = \norm{\sum_{i\leq n} g_i}_1 +
\frac{\alpha}{2}\sum_{i\leq n}\norm{g_i}_2^2 -
\frac{\alpha}{2}\norm{\sum_{i\leq n} g_i}_2^2.
\end{equation*}
Let $k = \arg\min_{j\leq d}\beta_j$, we choose
\begin{equation*}
u = e_k / \beta_k ~~\mbox{and}~~ v = \frac{\mathbf{1}}{\norm{\beta}_1}.
\end{equation*}
For $\delta\in[0, 1]$, we now choose the vectors $g_i \in \R^d$ as follows:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item $g_i = u$ for $n/4$ of the indices $i\in[n]$.
\item $g_i = -u$ for $n/4$ of the indices $i\in[n]$.
\item $g_i = v$ for $\frac{n}{4}(1 + \delta)$ of the indices $i\in[n]$.
\item $g_i = -v$ for $\frac{n}{4}(1-\delta)$ of the indices $i\in[n]$.
\end{enumerate}
For this construction, we lower bound the regret
\begin{equation}\label{eq:regret-lb-wlp}
\begin{split}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \alpha}^\ast & \ge \sup_{0\leq \delta \leq 1} \left\lbrace
\frac{n\delta}{2}\norm{v}_1 + \frac{n\alpha}{4} \norm{u}^2_2 -
\frac{\alpha \delta^2 n^2}{8}\norm{v}_2^2 \right\rbrace \\
& \ge \frac{n\alpha}{4}\norm{u}_2^2 +
\frac{n\norm{v}_1}{4}\min\left\lbrace 1,
\frac{2\norm{v}_1}{n\alpha\norm{v}_2^2}\right\rbrace.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
If the stepsize is too small (i.e. $\alpha \le
\frac{2}{n}\frac{\norms{v}_1}{\norms{v}^2_2}$) then \eqref{eq:regret-lb-wlp}
becomes
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \alpha}^\ast \geq \frac{nd}{4\norm{\beta}_1}.
\end{equation*}
In the other case that $\alpha > \frac{2}{n}\frac{\norms{v}_1}{\norms{v}^2_2}$,
\eqref{eq:regret-lb-wlp} yields
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \alpha}^\ast \geq \frac{n}{4\alpha}\norm{u}_2^2 +
\frac{\norm{v}_1^2}{\norm{v}_2^2} \frac{\alpha}{2} \geq
\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}\frac{\sqrt{nd}}{\min_{j\leq d}\beta_j},
\end{equation*}
which is the desired result. \qed
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Aditya Grover, Annie Marsden and Hongseok Namkoong for valuable
comments on the draft as well as Quentin Guignard for pointing us to the
Banach-Mazur distance for Theorem~\ref{th:regret-ub-lp}.
\section{Preliminaries}\label{sec:prelim}
We begin by defining the minimax framework in which we analyze procedures,
review standard stochastic subgradient methods, and introduce the relevant
geometric notions of convexity we require.
\paragraph{Minimax rate for convex stochastic optimization}
We measure the complexity of families of problems in two familiar ways:
stochastic minimax complexity and regret~\cite{NemirovskiYu83, AgarwalBaRaWa12,
CesaBianchiLu06}. Let $\Theta \subset \R^d$ be a closed convex set, $\mc{X}$ a
sample space, and $\mc{F}$ a collection of functions $F:\R^d\times{\cal X}\to\R$.
For a collection $\mc{P}$ of distributions over $\mc{X}$,
recall~\eqref{eqn:problem} that $f_P(\theta) := \int F(\theta, x) dP(x)$
is the expected loss of the point $\theta$. Then the \emph{minimax stochastic
risk} is
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \mc{F}, \mc{P})
:= \inf_{\what{\theta}_n} \sup_{F \in \mc{F}}
\sup_{P \in \mc{P}} \mathbf{E}\left[ f_P(\what{\theta}_n(X_1^n))
- \inf_{\theta \in \Theta} f_P(\theta) \right],
\end{equation*}
where the expectation is taken over $X_1^n \stackrel{\textup{iid}}{\sim} P$ and the infimum ranges
over all measurable functions $\what{\theta}_n$ of $\mc{X}^n$. A related notion
is the average \emph{minimax regret}, which instead takes a supremum over
samples $x_1^n \in \mc{X}^n$ and measures losses instantaneously. In this case,
an algorithm consists of a sequence of decisions
$\what{\theta}_1, \what{\theta}_2, \ldots, \what{\theta}_n$, where
$\what{\theta}_i$ is chosen conditional on samples $x_1^{i-1}$, so that
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \mc{F}, \mc{X})
:= \inf_{\what{\theta}_{1:n}} \sup_{F \in \mc{F},
x_1^n \in \mc{X}^n, \theta \in \Theta} \frac{1}{n}
\sum_{i = 1}^n \left[F\!\left(\what{\theta}_i\left(x_1^{i-1}\right), x_i\right)
- F\!\left(\theta, x_i\right)\right].
\end{equation*}
In the regret case we may of course identify $x_i$ with individual functions
$F$, so this corresponds to the standard regret. In both of these definitions,
we do not constrain the point estimates $\what{\theta}$ to lie in the
constraint sets---in language of learning theory, improper predictions---but
in our cases, this does not change regret by more than a constant factor. As
online-to-batch conversions make clear~\cite{CesaBianchiCoGe04}, we always have
$\minimax^{\mathsf{S}} \le \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}$; thus we typically provide lower
bounds on $\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}$ and upper bounds on $\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}$.
We study functions whose continuity properties
are specified by a norm $\gamma$ over $\R^d$, defining
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:func-family}
\mc{F}^{\gamma, r}
:= \left\{F : \R^d \times \mc{X} \to \R
\mid
\mbox{for~all~} \theta \in \R^d,
g\in\partial_\theta F(\theta, x), \gamma(g) \leq r \right\},
\end{equation}
which is equivalent to the Lipschitz condition $|F(\theta, x) - F(\theta',
x)| \le r\gamma^*(\theta - \theta')$, where $\gamma^*$ is the dual norm to
$\gamma$. For a given norm $\gamma$ ($\gamma$ as a mnemonic for gradient),
we use the shorthands
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) := \sup_\mathcal{X} \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta,
\mathcal{F}^{\gamma, 1}, \mathcal{X}) \mbox{~~and~~}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) := \sup_{\mathcal{X}}
\sup_{\mathcal{P}\subset \mathcal{P}(\mathcal{X})} \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta,
\mathcal{F}^{\gamma, 1}, \mathcal{P})
\end{equation*}
as the Lipschitzian properties of $\mc{F}$ in relation to $\Theta$
determine the minimax regret and risk.
\paragraph{Stochastic gradient methods, mirror descent, and regret}
Let us briefly review the canonical algorithms for solving the
problem~\eqref{eqn:problem} and their associated convergence guarantees.
For an algorithm outputing points $\theta_1, \ldots, \theta_n$, the
\emph{regret} on the sequence $F(\cdot, x_i)$ with respect to a point $\theta$
is
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_n(\theta) := \sum_{i = 1}^n [F(\theta_i, x_i) - F(\theta, x_i)].
\end{equation*}
Recalling the definition $\breg{h}{\theta}{\theta_0} = h(\theta) -
h(\theta_0) - \dotp{\nabla h(\theta_0)}{(\theta - \theta_0)}$ of the Bregman
divergence, the mirror descent algorithm~\cite{NemirovskiYu83,BeckTe03}
iteratively sets
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:smd}
g_i \in \partial_\theta F(\theta_i, x_i)
~~ \mbox{and~updates}~~
\theta^{\mathsf{MD}}_{i + 1}
:= \mathop{\rm argmin}_{\theta \in \Theta}
\left\{g_i^\top \theta + \frac{1}{\alpha} \bregman{h}{\theta}{\theta_i}
\right\}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha > 0$ is a stepsize.
When the function $h$ is $1$-strongly convex with respect to a norm
$\norm{\cdot}$ with dual norm $\dnorm{\cdot}$,
the iterates~\eqref{eqn:smd} and the iterates~\eqref{eq:da} of
dual averaging satisfy
(cf.~\cite{BeckTe03, CesaBianchiLu06, Nesterov09})
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:md-regret}
\mathsf{Regret}_n(\theta)
\le \frac{\bregman{h}{\theta}{\theta_0}}{\alpha}
+ \frac{\alpha}{2} \sum_{i \le n} \dnorm{g_i}^2
~~\mbox{for any}~ \theta\in\Theta.
\end{equation}
One recovers the classical stochastic gradient method with the choice
$h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2} \ltwo{\theta}^2$, which is strongly convex with
respect to the $\ell_2$-norm, while the $p$-norm
algorithms~\cite{Gentile03,Shalev07}, defined for $1 < p \le 2$, use
$h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2(p - 1)} \norm{\theta}_p^2$, which is strongly convex
with respect to the $\ell_p$-norm $\norm{\cdot}_p$.
As we previously stated in our definitions of minimax risk and regret, we do
not constrain the point estimates to lie in the constraint set $\Theta$,
which is equivalent to taking $\Theta = \R^d$ in the updates~\eqref{eqn:smd}
or~\eqref{eq:da}. The regret bound~\eqref{eqn:md-regret} still holds when
considering unconstrained updates, whenever $\theta\in\Theta$, and the
regret of the algorithm with respect to a constraint set $\Theta$ is simply
$\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} \mathsf{Regret}_n(\theta)$. Even with unconstrained
updates, the form~\eqref{eqn:md-regret} still captures small regret for all
common constraint sets $\Theta$~\cite{Shalev07}.
To make clear, let $\Theta \subset \R^d$ be the $\ell_1$-ball; taking
$h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2(p-1)} \norm{\theta}_p^2$ for
$p = 1 + \frac{1}{\log(2d)}$, $q = \frac{p}{p-1} = 1 + \log(2d)$, and
$\theta_0 = 0$ guarantees
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{\lone{\theta} \le 1} \mathsf{Regret}_n(\theta)
\le \frac{2}{\alpha}\sup_{\lone{\theta} \le 1}h(\theta)
+ \frac{\alpha}{2} \sum_{i \le n} \norm{g_i}_q^2
\le \frac{2\log(2d)}{\alpha}
+ \frac{e^2 \alpha}{2} \sum_{i = 1}^n \linf{g_i}^2.
\end{equation*}
Assuming $\linf{g_i} \le 1$ for all $i$ and taking
$\alpha = \frac{2}{e}\sqrt{\log(2d) / n}$ gives the familiar
$O(1) \cdot \sqrt{n \log d}$ regret.
We frequently focus on distance generating functions of
the form $h(\theta) =
\frac{1}{2}\theta^\top A\theta$ for a fixed positive semi-definite matrix $A$. For an
arbitrary $A$, we will refer to these methods as \textbf{Euclidean gradient methods{}} and for a
diagonal $A$ as \textbf{diagonally-scaled gradient methods{}}. It is important to note that, in this case,
the mirror descent update is the stochastic gradient
update with $\invert{A}g$, where $g$ is a stochastic subgradient.
We shall
refer to all such methods as \textbf{methods of linear type}.
\paragraph{Quadratic convexity and orthosymmetry}
For a set $\Theta$, we let $\Theta^2 := \{\theta^2, \theta\in\Theta\}$ denote
its square. The set $\Theta$ is \emph{quadratically convex} if $\Theta^2$ is
convex; typical examples of quadratically convex sets are weighted $\ell_p$
bodies for $p\geq 2$ or hyperrectangles. We let $\mathsf{QHull}(\Theta)$ be the
quadratic convex hull of $\Theta$, meaning the smallest convex and quadratically
convex set containing $\Theta$. The set $\Theta \subset \R^d$ is
\emph{orthosymmetric} if it is invariant to flipping the signs of any
coordinate. Formally, if $\theta\in\Theta$ then $s \in \{\pm 1\}^d$ implies
$(s_j \theta_j)_{j\leq d} \in \Theta$. We extend this notion to norms: we say
that a norm $\gamma$ is orthosymmetric if $\gamma(g) = \gamma(|g|)$ for all
$g$. Similarly, we will say that a norm $\gamma$ is quadratically convex if
$\gamma$ induces a quadratically convex unit ball.
\section{Discussion}
In this paper, we provide concrete recommendations for when one should use
adaptive, mirror or standard gradient methods depending on the geometry of
the problem. While we emphasize the importance of adaptivity, the picture is
not fully complete: for example, in the case of quadratically convex
constraint sets, while the best diagonal pre-conditioner achieves optimal
rates, the extent to which adaptive gradient algorithms find this optimal
pre-conditioner remains an open question. Another avenue to explore involves
the many flavors of adaptivity---while the minimax framework assumes
knowledge of the problem setting (e.g.\ a bound on the domain or the
gradient norms), it is often the case that such parameters are unknown to
the practitioner. To what extent can adaptivity mitigate this and achieve
optimal rates, and is minimax (i.e.\ worst-case) optimality truly the right
measure of performance? Finally, we close with a parting message about the
value and costs of adaptive and related methods. One should turn to adaptive
gradient methods (at most) in settings where methods of linear type are
optimal. It is as our mothers told us when we
were children: if you want steak, don't order chicken.
\newpage
\subsection{General quadratically convex constraints}\label{sec:general}
We now turn to the more general case that $\Theta$ is an arbitrary convex,
compact, quadratically convex and orthosymmetric set. We combine two techniques
to develop the results. The first essentially builds out of the ideas of
\citet{DonohoLiMa90} in Gaussian sequence estimation, which shows that the
largest hyperrectangle in $\Theta$ governs the performance of linear estimators;
this gives us a lower bound. The key second technique is in the upper bound,
where a strong duality result holds because of the quadratic convexity of
$\Theta$---allowing us to prove minimax optimality of diagonally scaled
Euclidean procedures. As in the previous section, we divide our analysis into
cases depending on whether the gradient norm $\gamma$ is quadratically convex or
not (the analogs of $r \lessgtr 2$ in Propositions~\ref{prop:lp-ball-q12}
and~\ref{prop:lp-ball-q2infty}).
We begin with the lower bound, which relies on rectangular structures
in the primal $\Theta$ and dual gradient spaces. For the proposition,
we use a specialization of the function families~\eqref{eqn:func-family}
to rectangular sets, where for $M \in \R_+^d$ we define
\begin{equation*}
\mc{F}^M := \left\{ F : \R^d \times \mc{X} \to \R
\mid \mbox{for~all~} \theta \in \R^d,
g \in \partial_\theta f(\theta, x),
\max_{j \le d} \frac{|g_j|}{M_j} \le 1 \right\}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{proposition}[Duchi et al.~\cite{DuchiJoMc13}, Proposition 1]
\label{prop:lb}
Let $M \in \R_+^d$ and $\mc{F}^M$ be as above.
Let $a \in \R_+^d$ and assume the hyperrectangular
containment $\prod_{j=1}^d [-a_j, a_j] \subset \Theta$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \mc{F}^M)
\geq \frac{1}{8\sqrt{n \log 3}}
\sum_{j=1}^d M_j a_j.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\noindent
We begin the analysis of the general case by studying the rates of
diagonally-scaled gradient methods{}.
\subsubsection{Diagonal re-scaling in gradient methods}
As we discuss in Section~\ref{sec:prelim}, diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} (componentwise
re-scaling of the subgradients) are equivalent to using
$h_\Lambda(\theta) := \frac{1}{2} \dotp{\theta}{\Lambda \theta}$ for
$\Lambda = \mathrm{diag}(\lambda) \succeq 0$ in the mirror descent
update~\eqref{eqn:smd}. In this case, for any norm $\gamma$ on the gradients,
the minimax regret bound~\eqref{eqn:md-regret} becomes
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} \mathsf{Regret}_{n,\Lambda}(\theta) \le
\frac{1}{2n} \left[
\sup_{\theta \in \Theta} \theta^\top \Lambda \theta
+ \sum_{i \le n} g_i^\top \Lambda^{-1} g_i \right]
\le \frac{1}{2n}
\left[\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} \theta^\top\Lambda\theta
+ n\sup_{g\in\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}}g^\top \Lambda^{-1} g \right].
\end{equation*}
The rightmost term of course upper bounds the minimax regret, so we may take an
infimum over $\Lambda$, yielding
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:adagrad-regret}
\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) \leq
\frac{1}{2n} \inf_{\lambda \succeq 0}
\sup_{\theta\in\Theta}
\sup_{g\in\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}} \bigg[
\sum_{j\leq d}\lambda_j
\theta_j^2 + n\sum_{j\leq d} \frac{1}{\lambda_j} g^2_j \bigg]
\end{equation}
The regret bound~\eqref{eq:adagrad-regret} holds without assumptions on $\Theta$
or $\gamma$. However, in the case when $\Theta$ is quadratically convex,
strong duality allows us to simplify this quantity:
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:minimax-thm}
Let $V, \Theta \subset \R^d$ be convex, quadratically convex and compact
sets. Then
\begin{equation*}
\inf_{\lambda \succ 0} \sup_{\theta \in \Theta, v\in V}
\left\lbrace \lambda^\top \theta^2 + \left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^\top
v^2\right\rbrace = \sup_{\theta \in \Theta, v\in V} \inf_{\lambda \succ 0}
\left\lbrace\lambda^\top \theta^2 + \left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^\top
v^2\right\rbrace.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The quadratic convexity of the sets $\Theta$ and $V$ implies that a
(weighted) squared $2$-norm becomes a linear functional when lifted to the
squared sets $\Theta^2 := \{\theta^2 \mid \theta \in \Theta\}$ and
$V^2$. Indeed, defining $J : \R^{2d}_+ \times \R^d_+ \to \R$, $J(\tau,
w, \lambda) := \lambda^\top \tau + (\frac{1}{\lambda})^\top w$, the
function $J$ is concave-convex: it is linear (a fortiori concave) in
$(\tau, w)$ and convex in $\lambda$. Thus, using that the set
$\{\lambda\in\R^d_+ \}$ is convex and $\Theta^2 \times V^2$ is convex
compact (because $\Theta$ and $V$ are quadratically convex compact),
Sion's minimax theorem~\cite{Sion58} implies
\begin{align*}
\inf_{\lambda \succ 0}
\sup_{\theta \in \Theta, v\in V} \left\lbrace \lambda^\top \theta^2 +
\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^\top v^2\right\rbrace
& = \inf_{\lambda \succ
0} \sup_{\tau \in \Theta^2, w \in V^2} \left\lbrace \lambda^\top \tau +
\left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^\top w\right\rbrace
\\
& = \sup_{\tau \in \Theta^2, w \in V^2} \inf_{\lambda \succ 0}
\left\{\lambda^\top \tau + \left(\frac{1}{\lambda}\right)^\top w \right\}.
\end{align*}
Replacing $\tau$ with $\theta^2$ and $w$ with $v^2$ gives the result.
\end{proof}
Proposition~\ref{prop:minimax-thm} provides a powerful hammer
for diagonally scaled Euclidean optimization algorithms, as we
can choose an optimal scaling for any \emph{fixed} pair $\theta, g$, taking
a worst case over such pairs:
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:ub} Let $\Theta$ be a convex, quadratically convex,
compact set. Then
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\theta, \gamma)
\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}
\sup_{g \in \mathsf{QHull}\left(\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}\right),
\theta\in\Theta}\theta^\top g,
\end{equation*}
and diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} achieves this regret.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
We upper bound the minimax regret~\eqref{eq:adagrad-regret} by taking
a supremum over the quadratic hull
$g \in \mathsf{QHull}\left(\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}\right)$, which
contains $\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}$.
Using that for $a, b > 0$, $\inf_{\lambda > 0} a\lambda + b / \lambda
= 2\sqrt{ab}$ and applying Proposition~\ref{prop:minimax-thm}
gives the proof.
\end{proof}
\noindent
The corollary
allows us to provide concrete upper and lower bounds on minimax
risk and regret, with the results differing slightly based on whether
the gradient norms are quadratically convex.
\input{qc-qc}
\input{qc-not-qc}
We conclude this section by generalizing our results to constraint sets that
are rotations of orthosymmetric and quadratically convex sets. This is for
example the case when features are sparse in an appropriate basis
(e.g.\ wavelets~\cite{Mallat08}). Unsurprisingly, methods of linear type
retain their optimality properties.
\begin{corollary}
Let $\Theta_0$ be a compact, orthosymmetric, convex and
quadratically convex set. Let $U\in\mathcal{O}_n(\R)$ be a rotation
matrix and $\Theta := U\Theta_0 = \{U\theta \mid \theta\in\Theta_0
\}$. Consider the collection
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{F} := \{ F :\R^d\times{\cal X} \to \R, \forall x
\in{\cal X}, \forall \theta\in\R^d, \forall g\in\partial_\theta
f(\theta, x), \gamma(U^Tg) \leq 1 \}.
\end{equation*}
A method of linear type is minimax rate optimal
for the pair $(\Theta, \mc{F})$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
There is a bijective mapping between $\mathcal{F}$ and $\F{\gamma}{1}$: for
$F\in\mathcal{F}$, $\theta_0\in\Theta_0$, and $x\in{\cal X}$, we define
$\widetilde{F}(\theta_0, x) := F(U\theta_0, x)$.
$\mathop{\rm dom} \widetilde{F} \supset \Theta_0$ and its subdifferential is
\cite[Thm.~4.2.1]{HiriartUrrutyLe93}
\begin{equation*}
\partial_\theta \widetilde{F}(\theta_0, x) = U^\top\partial_\theta
F(U\theta_0, x).
\end{equation*}
Since $\widetilde{F}$ falls within the scope of Theorems~\ref{th:qc-qc} or
Corollary~\ref{cor:qc-wlp}, there exists a diagonal re-scaling $\Lambda^\ast$
that achieves the optimal rate. We conclude the proof by observing that a
diagonally re-scaled stochastic gradient update on $\widetilde{F}$
corresponds to the update $\theta_{i+1} = \theta_i - U\Lambda^\ast U^\top g_i$
where $g_i \in \partial_\theta F(\theta_i, X_i)$.
\end{proof}
\section{Introduction}
We study stochastic and online convex optimization in the following setting:
for
a collection $\{F(\cdot, x), x \in \mc{X}\}$ of convex functions
$F(\cdot, x) : \R^d \to \R$ and distribution $P$ on $\mc{X}$, we wish to solve
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:problem}
\mathop{\rm minimize}_{\theta \in \Theta}
~ f_P(\theta) := \mathbf{E}_P\left[F(\theta, X)\right]
= \int F(\theta, x) dP(x),
\end{equation}
where $\Theta \subset \R^d$ is a closed convex set. The geometry of the
underlying constraint set $\Theta$ and structure of subgradients
$\partial F(\cdot, x)$ of course impact the performance of algorithms for
problem~\eqref{eqn:problem}. Thus, while stochastic subgradient methods are a
\emph{de facto} choice for their simplicity and scalability~\cite{RobbinsMo51,
NemirovskiJuLaSh09, BottouCuNo18}, their convergence guarantees depend on the
$\ell_2$-diameter of $\Theta$ and $\partial F(\cdot, x)$, so that for
non-Euclidean geometries (e.g.\ when $\Theta$ is an $\ell_1$-ball) one can
obtain better convergence guarantees using mirror descent, dual averaging or the
more recent adaptive gradient methods~\cite{NemirovskiYu83, NemirovskiJuLaSh09,
BeckTe03, Nesterov09, DuchiHaSi11}. We revisit these ideas and precisely
quantify optimal rates and gaps between the methods.
Our main contribution is to show that the geometry of the constraint set and
gradients interact in a way completely analogous to
\citeauthor{DonohoLiMa90}'s classical characterization of optimal estimation
in Gaussian sequence models~\cite{DonohoLiMa90}, where one observes a vector
$\theta \in \Theta$ corrupted by Gaussian noise, $Y = \theta + \mathsf{N}(0,
\sigma^2 I)$. For such problems, one can consider linear
estimators---$\what{\theta} = AY$ for a $A \in \R^{d\times d}$---or
potentially non-linear estimators---$\what{\theta} = \Phi(Y)$ where
$\Phi:\R^d \to \Theta$. When $\Theta$ is quadratically convex, meaning the
set $\Theta^2 := \{(\theta_j^2) \mid \theta \in \Theta\}$ is convex,
\citeauthor{DonohoLiMa90} show there exists a minimax rate optimal linear
estimator; conversely, there are non-quadratically convex $\Theta$ for which
minimax rate optimal estimators $\what{\theta}$ must be nonlinear in $Y$.
To build our analogy, we turn to stochastic and
online convex optimization. Consider \citeauthor{Nesterov09}'s dual
averaging, where for a strongly convex $h : \Theta \to \R$, one
iterates for $k = 1, 2, \ldots$ by receiving a (random) $X_k \in \mc{X}$,
choosing $g_k \in \partial F(\theta_k, X_k)$, and for a stepsize
$\alpha_k > 0$ updating
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:da}
\theta_{k+1} := \mathop{\rm argmin}_{\theta \in \Theta}
\bigg\{ \sum_{i\leq k}g_i^\top \theta
+ \frac{1}{\alpha_k} h(\theta)\bigg\}.
\end{equation}
When $\Theta = \R^d$ and $h$ is Euclidean, that is, $h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2}
\dotp{\theta}{A\theta}$ for some $A \succ 0$, the updates are linear in the
observed gradients $g_i$, as $\theta_k = -\alpha_k A^{-1} \sum_{i \le k}
g_i$. Drawing a parallel between $\Phi$ in the Gaussian sequence
model~\cite{DonohoLiMa90} and $h$ in dual averaging~\eqref{eq:da}, a natural
conjecture is that a dichotomy similar to that for the Gaussian sequence
model holds for stochastic and online convex optimization: if $\Theta$ is
quadratically convex, there is a Euclidean $h$ (yielding ``linear'' updates)
that is minimax rate optimal, while there exist non-quadratically convex
$\Theta$ for which Euclidean distance-generating $h$ are arbitrarily
suboptimal. We show that this analogy holds almost completely, with the
caveat that we fully characterize minimax rates when the
subgradients lie in a quadratically convex set or a weighted $\ell_r$
ball, $r \ge 1$.
(This issue does not arise for
the Gaussian sequence model, as the observations $Y$ come from
a fixed distribution, so there is no notion of alternative norms
on $Y$.)
More precisely, we prove that for compact, convex, quadratically convex,
orthosymmetric constraint sets $\Theta$, subgradient methods with a fixed
diagonal re-scaling are minimax rate optimal. This guarantees that for a
large collection of constraints (e.g.\ $\ell_2$ balls, weighted
$\ell_p$-bodies for $p\geq 2$, or hyperrectangles) a diagonal
re-scaling suffices. This is important in machine learning problems of
appropriate geometry, for example, in linear classification problems where
the data (features) are sparse, so using a dense predictor $\theta$ is
natural~\cite{DuchiHaSi11, DuchiJoMc13}. Conversely, we show that if the
constraint set $\Theta$ is a (scaled) $\ell_p$ ball, $1 \le p < 2$, then,
considering unconstrained updates~\eqref{eq:da},
the regret of the best method of linear
type can be $\sqrt{d / \log d}$ times larger than the minimax
rate. As part of this, we provide new
information-theoretic lower bounds on optimization for general convex
constraints $\Theta$. In contrast to the frequent practice in literature of
comparing regret upper bounds---prima facie illogical---we
demonstrate the gap between linear and non-linear methods must hold.
Our conclusions relate to the growing literature in adaptive algorithms
\cite{BartlettHaRa07, DuchiHaSi11, OrabonaCr10, CutcoskySa19}. Our results
effectively prescribe that these adaptive algorithms are useful when the
constraint set is quadratically convex as then there is a
minimax optimal diagonal
pre-conditioner. Even more, different sets suggest
different regularizers. For example, when the constraint set is a
hyperrectangle, AdaGrad has regret at most $\sqrt{2}$ times that of
the best post-hoc pre-conditioner, which we show is minimax optimal, while
(non-adaptive) standard gradient methods can be $\sqrt{d}$
suboptimal on such problems. Conversely, our results strongly recommend
against those methods for non-quadratically convex constraint sets.
Our results thus clarify and explicate the work
of~\citet{WilsonRoStSrRe17}: when the geometry of $\Theta$ and $\partial F$
is appropriate for adaptive gradient methods or Euclidean algorithms, one
should use them; when it is not---the constraints $\Theta$ are
not quadratically convex---one should not.
\section{The need for adaptive methods}\label{sec:adaptivity}
We have so far demonstrated that diagonal re-scaling is sufficient to
achieve minimax optimal rates for problems over quadratically convex
constraint sets. In practice, however, it is often the case that we do not
know the geometry of the problem in advance, precluding selection of the
optimal linear pre-conditioner. To address this problem, adaptive gradient
methods choose, at each step, a (usually diagonal) matrix $\Lambda_i$
conditional on the subgradients observed thus far, $\{g_l\}_{l\le i}$. The
algorithm then updates the iterate based on the distance generating function
$h_i(\theta) := \frac{1}{2} \dotp{\theta}{\Lambda_i\theta}$. In this section, we
present a problem instance showing that when the ``scale'' of the
subgradients varies across dimensions, adaptive gradient methods are crucial
to achieve low regret. While there exists an optimal pre-conditioner, if we
do not assume knowledge of the geometry in advance,
AdaGrad~\cite{DuchiHaSi11} achieves the minimax optimal regret while
standard (non-adaptive) subgradient methods can be $\sqrt{d}$ suboptimal
on the same problem.
We consider the following setting: $\Theta = \ball{\infty}{0}{1}$ and
$\gamma_\beta(g) = \norm{\beta \odot g}_1$, for an arbitrary
$\beta \in \R^d, \beta\succ 0$. Intuitively, $\beta_j$ corresponds to the
``scale'' of the $j$-th dimension. On this problem, a straightforward
optimization of the regret bound~\eqref{eqn:md-regret} guarantees that
stochastic gradient methods achieve regret
$\sqrt{dn} / \min_j \beta_j$. We exhibit a problem instance (in
Appendix~\ref{sec:proof-th-regret-sgm-wlp}) such that, for any
stepsize $\alpha$, online gradient descent attains this worst-case regret.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:regret-sgm-wlp}
Let $\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \alpha}(\theta) = \sum_{i\leq n} g_i^\top(\theta_i - \theta)$
denote the regret of the online gradient descent method with stepsize
$\alpha\geq 0$ for linear functions $F_i(\theta) = \dotp{g_i}{\theta}$. For
any choice of $\alpha \geq 0$ and $\beta \succ 0$, there exists a sequence of
vectors $\{g_i\}_{i\leq n} \subset \R^d$, $\gamma_\beta(g_i) \le 1$ and point
$\theta\in\Theta$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \alpha}(\theta) \ge \frac{1}{2}\min\left\lbrace
\frac{dn}{2\norm{\beta}_1},
\frac{\sqrt{2dn}}{\min_{j\leq d}\beta_j}
\right\rbrace.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
In contrast, AdaGrad~\cite{DuchiHaSi11} achieves regret
$\sqrt{n}\ltwo{1/\beta}$, demonstrating suboptimality gap as
large as $\sqrt{d}$ for some choices of $\beta$.
Indeed, let $\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \mathsf{AdaGrad}}(\theta)$ be the regret of
AdaGrad. Then
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n, \mathsf{AdaGrad}}(\theta) \leq 2\sqrt{2}\sum_{j\leq
d}\sqrt{\sum_{i\leq n} g_{i, j}^2}.
\end{equation*}
(see~\cite[Corollary~6]{DuchiHaSi11}), and by Cauchy-Schwarz,
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{j\leq d} \sqrt{\sum_{i\leq n} g_{i, j}^2} = \sum_{j\leq d}
\frac{1}{\beta_j} \sqrt{\sum_{i\leq n} \beta_j^2 g_{i, j}^2} \leq
\norm{1/\beta}_2 \sqrt{\sum_{i\leq n} \norm{\beta \odot g_i}^2_2} \leq
\sqrt{n}\norm{1/\beta}_2.
\end{equation*}
To concretely consider different scales across dimensions, we choose
$\beta_j = j$. Theorem~\ref{th:regret-sgm-wlp} guarantees that there exists a
collection of linear functions such that stochastic gradient methods suffer
regret $\Omega(1)\sqrt{dn}$. Given that
$\norms{1/\beta}_2 \le \sqrt{\zeta(2)} \le \pi/\sqrt{6}$,
AdaGrad achieves regret
$O(1)\sqrt{n}$---amounting to a suboptimality gap of order
$\sqrt{d}$---exhibiting the need for adaptivity.
This $\sqrt{d}$ gap is also the largest possible over
subgradient methods, which may achieve regret
$\sqrt{d \sum_{i \le n} \ltwo{g_i}^2}
\le \sqrt{d} \sum_{j \le d} \sqrt{\sum_{i \le n} g_{i,j}^2}$ for
$\Theta = \ball{\infty}{0}{1}$.
Finally, we note in passing that AdaGrad is
minimax optimal on this class of problems via a straightforward application of
Theorem~\ref{th:qc-qc}.
\section{Beyond quadratic convexity -- the necessity of non-linear methods}
\label{sec:not-qc}
For $\Theta \subset \R^d$ quadratically convex, the results in
Section~\ref{sec:qc} show that methods of linear type achieve optimal rates
of convergence. When the constraint set is not quadratically convex, it is
unclear whether methods of linear type are sufficient to achieve optimal
rates. As we now show, they are not: we exhibit a collection of problem
instances where the constraint set is orthosymmetric, compact, and convex
but not quadratically convex. On such problems, the constraint set has
substantial consequences; for some non-quadratically convex sets $\Theta$,
methods of linear type (e.g.\ the stochastic gradient method) can be minimax
rate-optimal, while for other constraint sets, all methods of linear type
must have regret at least a factor $\sqrt{d / \log d}$ worse than the
minimax optimal rate, which (non-linear) mirror descent with
appropriate distance generating function achieves.
To construct these problem instances, we turn to simple non-quadratically
convex constraint sets: $\ell_p$ balls for $p\in[1, 2]$. We measure
subgradient norms in the dual $\ell_{p^\ast}$ norm, $p^* =
\frac{p-1}{p}$. Our analysis consists of two steps: we first prove sharp
minimax rates on these problem instances and show that mirror descent with
the right (non-linear) distance generating function is minimax rate
optimal. These results extend those of~\citet{AgarwalBaRaWa12}, who provide
matching lower and upper bounds for $p \geq 1 + c$ for a fixed numerical
constant $c > 0$. In contrast, we prove sharp minimax rates for all $p \geq
1$. To precisely characterize the gap between linear and non-linear methods,
we show that for any linear pre-conditioner, we can exhibit functions for
which the regret of Euclidean gradient methods{} is nearly the simple upper regret bound of
standard gradient methods, Eq.~\eqref{eqn:md-regret} with $h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2}
\ltwo{\theta}^2$. Thus, when $p$ is very close to $2$ (nearly quadratically
convex), the gap remains within a constant factor, whereas when $p$ is close
to $1$, the gap can be as large as $\sqrt{d / \log d}$.
\subsection{Minimax rates for $p$-norm constraint sets, $p\in[1, 2]$}
For $p\in[1,2]$, we consider the constraint set $\Theta = \ball{p}{0}{1}$ and
bound gradients with norm $\gamma = \|\cdot\|_{p^\ast}$. We begin by proving
sharp minimax rates on this collection of problems and show that, in
these cases, non-linear mirror descent is minimax optimal.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:sharp-md}
Let $p \in [1, 2]$, $\Theta = \ball{p}{0}{1}$ and $\gamma =
\|\cdot\|_{p^\ast}$.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item If $1 \leq p \leq 1 + 1 / \log(2d)$, then
\begin{equation*}
1 \wedge \sqrt{\frac{\log(2d)}{n}}
\lesssim \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\le \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\lesssim
1 \wedge \sqrt{\frac{\log(2d)}{n}}.
\end{equation*}
Mirror descent~\eqref{eqn:smd} with distance
generating function $h(\theta) := \frac{1}{2(a-1)}\|\theta\|_a^2$ for
$a = 1 + \frac{1}{\log(2d)}$ achieves the optimal rate.
\item If $1 + 1/\log(2d) < p \le 2$, then
\begin{equation*}
1 \wedge \sqrt{\frac{1}{n (p-1)}}
\lesssim \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\le
\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) \lesssim
1 \wedge \sqrt{\frac{1}{n
(p-1)}}
\end{equation*}
Mirror descent with distance generating function $h(\theta) :=
\frac{1}{2(p-1)}\|\theta\|_p^2$ achieves the optimal rate.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
To prove the theorem, we upper bound the regret of mirror
descent with norm-based distance generating functions
(cf.~\cite[Corollary 2.18]{Shalev12}),
which follows immediately from the regret
bound~\eqref{eqn:md-regret}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:rate-md}
Let $\Theta$ be closed convex, $\gamma$ a norm, and $1 < a \le 2$,
$a^* = \frac{a}{a-1}$. Mirror descent with distance generating function
$h(\theta) := \frac{1}{2(a-1)}\|\theta\|_a^2$ and stepsize $\alpha =
\frac{\sup_{\theta \in \Theta}\|\theta -
\theta_0\|_a}{\sqrt{n}\sup_{g\in\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}}\|g\|_{a^*}}$
achieves regret
\begin{equation*}
\minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) \le
\frac{\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} \|\theta\|_a
\sup_{g\in\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}} \|g\|_{a^\ast}}{\sqrt{n(a-1)}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\noindent
We present the full proof of Theorem~\ref{th:sharp-md} in
Appendix~\ref{prf:th-sharp-md}. We obtain the lower bound with the familiar
reduction from estimation to testing and Assouad's method (see
Appendix~\ref{sec:assouad}).
\subsubsection{Arbitrary gradient norms}
When the norm $\gamma$ on the gradients defines a non-quadratically convex norm
ball $\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}$---for example, when the gradients belong to an
$\ell_r$-norm ball for $r\in[1, 2]$---our results become slightly less
general. Nonetheless,
when $\gamma$ is a weighted $\ell_r$-norm ball (for $r \in [1, 2]$),
diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} are minimax rate optimal, as Corollary~\ref{cor:qc-wlp} will show;
when the norms $\gamma$ are arbitrary we have a slightly more complex
result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:qc-not-qc}
Let $\Theta$ be an orthosymmetric, quadratically convex, convex and
compact set and $\gamma$ an arbitrary norm. Recall the definition
$(\frac{\theta}{\gamma(e.)})_j = \theta_j /
\gamma(e_j)$. Then for any $k \in \mathbf{N}$,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{8 \sqrt{n \log 3}}
\left(1 - \frac{k}{n \log 3} \right)
\sup_{\theta\in\Theta,
\norm{\theta}_0 \le k}
\norm{\frac{\theta}{\gamma(e_\cdot)}}_2
& \le \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \\
& \le \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) \le
\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\sup_{\theta\in\Theta} \sup_{g\in
\mathsf{QHull}\left(\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}\right)} \dotp{\theta}{g}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\noindent
Corollary~\ref{cor:ub} gives the upper bound in the theorem. The lower
bound consists of an application of Assouad's method~\cite{Assouad83}, but,
in parallel to the warm-up examples, we construct well-separated functions
with ``sparse'' gradients. See Appendix~\ref{sec:proof-qc-not-qc} for a
proof.
We can develop a corollary of this result when the norm $\gamma$ is a
weighted-$\ell_r$ norm (for $r\in[1, 2]$). While these do not induce
quadratically convex norm balls, meaning the results of the previous
section do not apply, the previous theorem still guarantees that diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} are
minimax rate optimal.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:qc-wlp}
Let the conditions of Theorem~\ref{th:qc-not-qc} hold and assume that
$\gamma(g) = \norm{\beta \odot g}_r$ with $r\in[1, 2]$, $\beta_j > 0$ and
$(\beta \odot g)_j = \beta_j g_j$. Then for $n \ge 2d$,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{16} \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}
\sup_{\theta\in\Theta}
\norm{\frac{\theta}{\gamma(e_\cdot)}}_2 \le \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\le \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) \le
\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\sup_{\theta\in\Theta}
\norm{\frac{\theta}{\gamma(e_\cdot)}}_2.
\end{equation*}
There exists $\lambda^\ast \in \R^d_+$ such that diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} with
$\lambda^\ast$ achieve this rate.
\end{corollary}
\noindent
A minor modification of Theorem~\ref{th:qc-not-qc} gives the lower
bound, while we obtain
the upper bound by noting that the quadratic hull of a weighted-$\ell_r$ norm
ball for $r\in[1, 2]$ is the weighted-$\ell_2$ norm ball. The dual norm of
$\gamma(g) = \norm{\beta \odot g}_2$ being $\gamma^\ast(g) = \norm{g /
\beta}_2$, the upper bound holds by duality. See
Appendix~\ref{sec:proof-cor-qc-not-qc} for the (short) precise proof.
Theorem~\ref{th:qc-qc} and Corollary~\ref{cor:qc-wlp} show that for a large
collection of norms $\gamma$ on the gradients, diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} is minimax rate optimal.
Arguing that diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} are minimax rate optimal when $\gamma$ is neither a
weighted-$\ell_r$ norm nor induces a quadratically convex unit ball remains an
open question, though weighted-$\ell_r$ norms for $r \in [1, \infty]$ cover the
majority of practical applications of stochastic gradient methods.
\subsubsection{Orthosymmetric and quadratically convex gradient norms}
\newcommand{\mathsf{Rec}}{\mathsf{Rec}}
We now provide lower bounds on minimax risk
complementary to Corollary~\ref{cor:ub}, focusing first on the case
that the gradient norm $\gamma$ is quadratically convex.
\begin{assumption}\label{ass:gamma-qc}
The norm $\gamma$ is orthosymmetric and quadratically convex,
meaning $\gamma(s \odot v) = \gamma(v)$ for all $s \in \{\pm 1\}^d$
and $\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}$ is
quadratically convex.
\end{assumption}
With this, we have the following theorem, which shows that diagonally-scaled
gradient methods are minimax rate optimal, and that the constants are sharp
up to a factor of $9$, whenever the gradient norms are quadratically convex.
While the constant $9$ is looser than that \citet{DonohoLiMa90} provide for
Gaussian sequence models, this theorem highlights the essential structural
similarity between the sequence model case and stochastic optimization
methods.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:qc-qc} Let Assumption~\ref{ass:gamma-qc} hold and let $\Theta$ be
quadratically convex, orthosymmetric, and compact.
Then
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{8 \sqrt{\log 3}}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}
\sup_{\theta \in \Theta} \gamma^*(\theta) \le \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\le \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma) \le \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}
\sup_{\theta \in \Theta} \gamma^*(\theta).
\end{equation*}
There exists $\lambda^\ast \in \R^d_+$ such that diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} with
$\lambda^\ast$ achieve this rate.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For the upper bound, we use Corollary~\ref{cor:ub}. Because
$\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}$ is quadratically convex, we have
$\mathsf{QHull}(\ball{\gamma}{0}{1}) = \ball{\gamma}{0}{1}$, so that
$\sup_{g \in \mathsf{QHull}(\ball{\gamma}{0}{1})} \theta^\top g = \gamma^*(\theta)$,
giving the upper bound. The lower bound uses Proposition~\ref{prop:lb}. Define
the hyperrectangle $\mathsf{Rec}(\theta) := \prod_{j \le d} [-|\theta_j|,
|\theta_j|]$, so that, by orthosymmetry of $\Theta$,
$\Theta \supset \mathsf{Rec}(\theta)$ for all $\theta \in \Theta$. Additionally,
recalling the notation~\eqref{eqn:func-family} of $\mc{F}^{\gamma,1}$ and
$\mc{F}^M$, if $M \in \R^d_+$ satisfies $\gamma(M) \le 1$ then, by
orthosymmetry of $\gamma$, $\mc{F}^{\gamma,1} \supset \mc{F}^M$.
Thus \begin{equation*} \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \ge \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\mathsf{Rec}(\theta), \gamma) \ge \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\mathsf{Rec}(\theta), \mc{F}^M) \ge \frac{1}{8\sqrt{n \log
3}} \sum_{j \le d} |\theta_j| M_j \end{equation*} for all
$M \in \ball{\gamma}{0}{1} \cap \R_+^d$ and $\theta \in \Theta$. Taking a
supremum over $M \in \ball{\gamma}{0}{1}$ and $\theta \in \Theta$, we
have \begin{equation*} \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma) \ge \frac{1}{8\sqrt{n\log
3}} \sup_{\theta \in \Theta} \sup_{\gamma(M) \le 1} \theta^\top M
= \frac{1}{8\sqrt{n\log
3}} \sup_{\theta \in \Theta} \gamma^*(\theta). \qedhere \end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Exhibiting hard problems for Euclidean gradient methods{}}
Theorem~\ref{th:sharp-md} shows that (non-linear) mirror descent methods are
minimax rate-optimal for $\ell_p$-ball constraint sets, $p \in [1, 2]$, with
gradients contained in the corresponding dual $\ell_{p^*}$-norm ball ($p^* =
\frac{p}{p-1}$). For problems and $p$, standard subgradient methods achieve
worst-case regret $O(d^{1/2 - 1/p^\ast} / \sqrt{n})$. This is sharp: in the
next theorem, we show that for any method of linear type, we can construct a
sequence of (linear) functions such that the method's regret is at least
this familiar upper bound of standard subgradient methods, precisely
quantifying the gap between linear and non-linear methods for this problem
class.
\begin{theorem}
\label{th:regret-ub-lp}
Let $\mathsf{Regret}_{n,A}(\theta) = \sum_{i = 1}^n g_i^\top (\theta_i -
\theta)$ denote the regret of the (Euclidean)
online mirror descent method with
distance generating function $h_A(\theta) = \frac{1}{2} \dotp{\theta}{A
\theta}$ for linear functions $F_i(\theta) =
\dotp{g_i}{\theta}$. For any $A \succeq 0$ and $p \in [1,
2]$ with $q = \frac{p}{p-1}$, there exists a sequence of vectors
$g_i \in \R^d$, $\norm{g_i}_q \le 1$, and point $\theta \in \R^d$
with $\norm{\theta}_p \le 1$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathsf{Regret}_{n,A}(\theta) \ge
\frac{1}{2} \min\left\{n / 2, \sqrt{2n} \cdot d^{1/2 - 1/q} \right\}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\noindent
We provide the proof in Appendix~\ref{prf:th-regret-ub-lp}. These results
explicitly exhibit a gap between methods of linear type and non-linear
mirror descent methods for this problem class. In contrast to the frequent
practice in literature of simply comparing regret upper bounds---prima facie
illogical---we demonstrate the gap indeed must hold.
In combination with Theorem~\ref{th:regret-ub-lp},
Proposition~\ref{prop:rate-md} precisely characterizes the gap between
linear and non-linear mirror descent on these problems for all values of
$p\in[1, 2]$. Indeed, when $p=1$, for any pre-conditioner $A$, there exists
a problem on which Euclidean gradient methods{} has regret at least $\Omega(1)\sqrt{d / n}$. On
the same problem, non-linear mirror descent has regret at most
$O(1)\sqrt{\log d / n}$, showing the advertised $\sqrt{d / \log d}$
gap. When $p \ge 2 - 1 / \log d$ (so $\Theta$ is nearly quadratically convex),
the gap reduces to at most a constant factor.
\section{Minimax optimality and quadratically convex constraint sets}
\label{sec:qc}
We begin our contributions by considering quadratically convex constraint
sets, providing lower bounds on the minimax risk and matching upper bounds
on the minimax regret of convex optimization over such sets. We further show
that these are attained by diagonally-scaled gradient methods{}. While the analogy with the Gaussian
sequence model is nearly complete, in distinction to the work
of~\citeauthor{DonohoLiMa90} (where results depend solely on the constraints
$\Theta$), our results necessarily depend on the geometry of the
subdifferential. Consequently, we distinguish throughout this section
between quadratically and non-quadratically convex geometry of the
gradients.
To set the stage and preview our contributions, we begin our study with the
familiar case of $\Theta = \ball{p}{0}{1}$ and norm on the subgradients
$\gamma = \norms{\cdot}_r$ (mnemonically, $\gamma$ for gradients), with
$p\in [2, \infty]$ (so that $\Theta$ is quadratically convex) and $r \ge 1$. We
then turn to arbitrary quadratically convex constraint sets and first show
results in the case of general quadratically convex norms on the
subgradients. We conclude the section by proving that, when the subgradients do
not lie in a quadratically convex set but lie in a weighted $\ell_r$ ball (for
$r\in[1, 2]$), diagonally-scaled gradient methods{} are still minimax rate optimal.
\subsection{A warm-up: $p$-norm constraint sets for $p \ge 2$}
\label{sec:warm-up}
The results for the basic case that the constraints $\Theta$ are an
$\ell_p$-ball while the gradients belong to a different $\ell_r$-ball
are special cases of the theorems to come, the proofs (appendicized) are simpler
and provide intuition for the later results. We distinguish
between two cases depending on the value of $r$ in the gradient norm. The case
that $r \in [1, 2]$ corresponds roughly to ``sparse'' gradients, while the case
$r \ge 2$ corresponds to harder problems with dense gradients. We provide
information theoretic proofs of the following two results in
Appendices~\ref{prf:prop-lp-ball-q12} and~\ref{prf:prop-lp-ball-q2infty},
respectively.
\begin{proposition}[Sparse gradients]
\label{prop:lp-ball-q12}
Let $\Theta = \ball{p}{0}{1}$ with $p\geq 2$ and $\gamma(\cdot)
= \norm{\cdot}_r$
where $r \in [1, 2]$.
Then
\begin{equation*}
1 \wedge \frac{d^{\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{p}}}{\sqrt{n}}
\lesssim \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\le \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\lesssim 1 \wedge \frac{d^{\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{p}}}{\sqrt{n}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}[Dense gradients]
\label{prop:lp-ball-q2infty} Let
$\Theta = \ball{p}{0}{1}$ with $p\geq 2$ and $\gamma(\cdot) = \|\cdot\|_r$
with $r \geq 2$. Then
\begin{equation*}
1 \wedge \frac{d^{\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{p}} d^{\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{r}}}{\sqrt{n}}
\lesssim \minimax^{\mathsf{S}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\le \minimax^{\mathsf{R}}(\Theta, \gamma)
\lesssim 1 \wedge
\frac{d^{\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{p}} d^{\frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{r}}}{\sqrt{n}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
In both cases, the stochastic gradient method achieves the regret upper bound
via a straightforward optimization of the regret bounds~\eqref{eqn:md-regret}
with $h(\theta) = \frac{1}{2} \ltwo{\theta}^2$. That is, a method of linear type is
optimal.
|
\section{Appendix}
This supplemental material is organized as follows.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:derivation}, we present the derivation of the phase-space distribution inequalities.
A generalization of the correlation measurement scheme to multi-mode scenarios is provided in Sec.~\ref{sec:generalization}.
\section{Derivation of the inequality conditions}
\label{sec:derivation}
\subsection{Chebyshev’s integral inequality}
For the derivation of our phase-space-distribution inequalities we will make use of the Chebyshev's integral inequality; see, e.g.,~\cite{mitrinovic_1970}.
Therefore, we will briefly state and explain this inequality.
Consider two functions $f$ and $g$ which are integrable and monotone in the same sense on $(a,b)$, and a positive function $p$ which is integrable on the same interval.
Then the Chebyshev's integral inequality
\begin{align}
\int_a^b p(x) f(x) g(x)dx \int_a^b p(x) dx \geq
\int_a^b p(x) f(x)dx \int_a^b p(x) g(x)dx,
\end{align}
holds.
In the case that $p(x)$ is a probability distribution on $(a,b)$ the inequality reduces to
\begin{align}\label{eq:ChebyshevSupp}
\int_a^b p(x) f(x) g(x)dx \geq
\int_a^b p(x) f(x)dx \int_a^b p(x) g(x)dx.
\end{align}
For deriving our nonclassicality conditions, $p(x)$ will be the displaced and phase-averaged $P$ function of a classical quantum state and $f$, $g$ are the normal-ordered expectation values which are related with the $s$-parametrized phase-space distributions.
\subsection{Derivation}
Here, we present the detailed derivation of our phase-space-distribution inequality.
We start from the expression of the $s$-parametrized phase-space functions \cite{cahill_1969a}
\begin{align}\label{eq:sSupp}
P(\alpha;s)=\frac{2}{\pi(1-s)}\left\langle {:}\exp\left(-\frac{2}{1-s}\hat n(\alpha)\right){:}\right\rangle
\end{align}
where $\hat n(\alpha)=\hat D(\alpha)\hat a^\dagger \hat a \hat D(\alpha)^\dagger=(\hat a^\dagger-\alpha^*)(\hat a-\alpha)$ is the displaced photon-number operator, $\hat D(\alpha)$ is the coherent displacement operator, and ${:}\dots{:}$ denotes the normal-order prescription; cf., e.g., \cite{vogel_2006}.
We explicitly write this expectation value of in terms of the Glauber-Sudarshan $P$ function of the input state
\begin{align}
P(\alpha;s)=\frac{2}{\pi(1-s)}\int d^2\beta P(\beta) \exp\left(-\frac{2}{1-s} |\beta-\alpha|^2\right).
\end{align}
In a first step, we substitute $\gamma=\beta-\alpha$, introduce $\eta_s=2/(1-s)$, and split the exponential function of the integrand into two separate functions
\begin{align}
P(\alpha;s)=\frac{\eta_s}{\pi}\int d^2\gamma P(\gamma+\alpha) \exp\left(-k\eta_s |\gamma|^2\right) \exp\left(-(1-k)\eta_s |\gamma|^2\right),
\end{align}
with $k\in(0,1)$.
We note that the exponential functions in integrand are not dependent on the phase but only on the amplitude of $\gamma$.
Therefore, we can change to polar coordinates, $\gamma=r\exp(i\varphi)$ and $\alpha=r_\alpha\exp(i\varphi_\alpha)$, and rearrange the integral to
\begin{align}
P(\alpha;s)&=\frac{\eta_s}{\pi}\int_0^\infty dr \tilde P(r;\alpha) \exp\left(-k\eta_s r^2\right) \exp\left(-(1-k)\eta_s r^2\right),\\
\mathrm{with}\quad\tilde P(r;\alpha)&=\int_0^{2\pi} d \varphi r P\left(\sqrt{r^2+r_\alpha^2+2r r_\alpha\cos (\varphi_\alpha-\varphi)},\varphi+\mathrm{arctan2}\left(r_\alpha\sin(\varphi_\alpha-\varphi),r+r_\alpha\cos(\varphi_\alpha-\varphi)\right)\right)
\end{align}
where the function $\mathrm{arctan2}$ is defined as
\begin{align}
\mathrm{arctan2}(y,x)=
\begin{cases}
\mathrm{arctan}(\frac{y}{x}) & \mathrm{if}\quad x>0\\
\mathrm{arctan}(\frac{y}{x})+\pi & \mathrm{if}\quad x<0 \quad\mathrm{ and }\quad y\geq 0\\
\mathrm{arctan}(\frac{y}{x}) -\pi & \mathrm{if}\quad x<0 \quad\mathrm{ and }\quad y< 0\\
+\frac{\pi}{2} & \mathrm{if}\quad x=0 \quad\mathrm{ and }\quad y>0\\
-\frac{\pi}{2} & \mathrm{if}\quad x=0 \quad\mathrm{ and }\quad y<0\\
\mathrm{undefined} & \mathrm{if}\quad x=0\quad \mathrm{ and }\quad y=0
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
Here, it is important to stress that for any classical state $\tilde P(r;\alpha)$ is a probability distribution with respect to the variable $r$, i.e., $\tilde P(r;\alpha)\geq 0$ $\forall r$ and $\int_0^\infty dr \tilde P(r;\alpha)=1$.
Now we have everything at hand in order to apply Chebyshev’s integral inequality \eqref{eq:ChebyshevSupp} to the above integral expression.
In particular, by comparing the two equations, we identify $r$ with $k$, $\tilde P(r;\alpha)$ with $p(x)$, $\exp\left(-k\eta_s r^2\right)$ with $f(x)$, and $\exp\left(-(1-k)\eta_s r^2\right)$ with $g(x)$.
Applying Eq.~\eqref{eq:ChebyshevSupp} then yields
\begin{align}
P(\alpha;s)=&\frac{\eta_s}{\pi}\int_0^\infty dr \tilde P(r;\alpha) \exp\left(-k\eta_s r^2\right) \exp\left(-(1-k)\eta_s r^2\right)\\ &\stackrel{\mathrm{cl}}\geq
\frac{\eta_s}{\pi}\int_0^\infty dr \tilde P(r;\alpha) \exp\left(-k\eta_s r^2\right)
\int_0^\infty dr \tilde P(r;\alpha) \exp\left(-(1-k)\eta_s r^2\right),
\end{align}
which has to be fulfilled for any classical state, i.e., states with a non-negative $P$ function.
By resubstituting and rearranging the above expression we obtain
\begin{align}
P(\alpha;s)\stackrel{\mathrm{cl}}\geq\frac{\eta_s}{\pi}\int d^2\beta \exp\left(-k\eta_s|\beta-\alpha|^2\right) P(\beta)\int d^2\beta \exp\left(-(1-k)\eta_s|\beta-\alpha|^2\right) P(\beta).
\end{align}
If we now recall the definition of the $s$-parametrized phase-space distributions in Eq.~\eqref{eq:sSupp}, we arrive at our final inequality conditions
\begin{align}
P(\alpha;s)-\frac{\pi(1-s)}{2(1-k)k} P(\alpha;s_k) P(\alpha;s_{(1-k)})\stackrel{\mathrm{cl}}\geq 0
\end{align}
with $s_k=1-2/(k\eta_s)$ (or $s_k=1-(1-s)/k$), which is our main result -- connecting different $s$-parametrized phase-space distributions to each other.
Any violation of this inequality is a direct signature of the nonclassicality of the corresponding quantum state.
\section{Multimode generalization}
\label{sec:generalization}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{Multiplexing.pdf}
\caption{
General setup of multiplexed (MP) detection of the displaced quantum state.
This scheme generalizes the correlation measurement in the Fig. 3 a) of the main manuscript to $N$ detection channels.
}
\label{fig:multiplexing}
\end{figure}
Here, we generalize the relation between correlation measurements and the introduced phase-space-distribution inequalities to general multiplexing (MP) scenarios [cf. Fig \ref{fig:multiplexing}], which is the setting of a usual multiplexed detection scheme \cite{paul_1996,kok_2001,achilles_2003,fitch_2003,castelletto_2007,schettini_2007,sperling_2015,bohmann_2018}.
The multiplexing step transforms the input state [cf. Eq. (1) of the Letter] to an $N$-mode output state
\begin{align}
\hat \rho_{\mathrm{out}}= \int d^2\beta P(\beta)|u_1\beta,\dots, u_N\beta\rangle\langle u_1\beta,\dots, u_N\beta|,
\end{align}
where the $u_i$ are the splitting rations with $\sum_{i=1}^N |u_i|^2=1$.
The zero-count probability of the displaced state in each channel is given by $p_i(\alpha,\eta |u_i|^2)=\langle{:}\exp[-\eta |u_i|^2 \hat n(\alpha)]{:}\rangle$ with $\eta$ being the detection efficiency of the detectors.
We note that from each $p_i$ we can sample a corresponding $s$-parametrized phase-space distribution with $s_i=1-2/(\eta |u_i|^2)$ and the coincident zero-count detection of all channels, $p_{1,\dots,N}(\alpha,\eta)$, corresponds to the sampling of a distribution with $s=1-2/\eta$; cf. Eq.~(7) in the main manuscript.
By applying Chebyshev's integral inequality \cite{mitrinovic_1970} $N{-}1$ times, we obtain the multimode zero-count condition
\begin{align}\label{eq:click}
p_{1,\dots,N}(\alpha,\eta)-\prod_{i=1}^N p_{i}(\alpha,\eta |u_i|^2 )\stackrel{\mathrm{cl}}\geq 0.
\end{align}
It is easy to see that this multimode consideration is not restricted to the consideration of correlation measurements only, but can be applied to any $s$-ordered phase-space distribution, which yields the multimode generalization of Eq.~(5) in the Letter
\begin{align}
P(\alpha;s)-\left(\frac{\pi}{\eta_s}\right)^{N-1}\prod_{i=1}^N k_i^{-1} P(\alpha;s_{k_i}) \stackrel{\mathrm{cl}}\geq 0,
\end{align}
with $\sum_{i=1}^N k_i=1$ and $k_i=|u_i|^2$.
\end{widetext}
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Main Results}
This paper concerns the restriction theory of the cone in $\mathbb{R}^3$. Let $\Gamma$ be the truncated light cone $\Gamma= \{\xi_1^2+\xi_2^2= \xi_3^2, 1/2\leq \xi_3\leq 1\}$, and let $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$ denote its $R^{-1}$-neighborhood. Cover $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$ by {\color{black} finitely overlapping} sectors $\theta$ of angular width $R^{-1/2}$, where each sector is a rectangular box of dimensions about $R^{-1} \times R^{-1/2} \times 1$. {\color{black}If $ \hat f$ has support on $N_{R^{-1}} (\Gamma)$, we consider a set of functions $\{f_{\theta}\}$ such that: (a) $\hat f_\theta$ is supported on $\theta$ and (b) $f = \sum_{\theta} f_{\theta}$. For example{\color{black}\footnote{\color{black}We remark that what we prove about $\{f_{\theta}\}$ in this paper is uniform as long as (a) and (b) are satisfied, i.e. does not depend on the particular choice of $\{f_{\theta}\}$.
}} here is a natural way to choose $\{f_{\theta}\}$: let} $\psi_\theta$ be a smooth partition of unity {\color{black}subordinate} to {\color{black}the} covering {\color{black}$\{\theta\}$}, and define $f_\theta$ by $\hat f_\theta = \hat f \psi_\theta$. We prove the following sharp square function estimate for this decomposition.
\begin{theorem}\label{sq fun} (Square function estimate)
For any $\epsilon > 0$, $R \ge 1$ {\color{black}and} any function $f$ whose Fourier transform is supported on $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$, we have
$$\|f\|_{L^4({\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3})} \leq C_{\epsilon} R^{\epsilon} \left\|(\sum_\theta |f_{\theta}|^2)^{1/2} \right\|_{L^4{\color{black} (\mathbb{R}^3)}}.$$
\end{theorem}
This type of square function estimate was considered by Mockenhaupt \cite{M} who proved that it implies the cone multiplier conjecture in $\mathbb{R}^3$, and by Mockenhaupt--Seeger--Sogge \cite{MSS} {\color{black} (in a slightly different form)} who {\color{black} essentially} showed that it implies the local smoothing conjecture for the wave equation in 2+1 dimensions. Here we recall the local smoothing conjecture, and we refer to \cite{M} and \cite{LV} for more information about the cone multiplier conjecture. The local smoothing conjecture was formulated by Sogge in \cite{S}. If $u$ is a solution to the wave equation on $\mathbb{R}^n$, a local smoothing inequality bounds $\| u \|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^n \times [1, 2])}$ in terms of the Sobolev norms of the initial data. In particular, the local smoothing conjecture in 2 + 1 dimensions is the following estimate.
\begin{theorem} \label{locsmooth} (Local smoothing in 2+1 dimensions) Suppose that $u(x,t)$ is a solution of the wave equation in $2+1$ dimensions, with initial data $u(x,0) = u_0(x)$ and $\partial_tu(x,0) = u_1(x)$. Then for any $p \ge 4$, and any $\alpha > \frac{1}{2} - \frac{2}{p}$,
\begin{equation} \label{locsmootheqn} \| u \|_{L^p (\mathbb{R}^2 \times [1,2])} \le C_\alpha \left( \| u_0 \|_{p, \alpha} + \| u_1 \|_{p, -1 + \alpha} \right).\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\noindent Theorem \ref{locsmooth} follows by combining Theorem \ref{sq fun} with {\color{black} the arguments in} \cite{MSS}.
In \cite{S}, Sogge formulated the local smoothing conjecture, and he noticed that Bourgain's proof of the boundedness of the circular maximal operator in \cite{B} can be used to establish ``local smoothing'' estimates with a nontrivial gain of regularity. The critical case of Theorem \ref{locsmooth} is when $p=4$ and $\alpha$ is close to zero. Mockenhaupt, Seeger, and Sogge \cite{MSS} proved that (\ref{locsmootheqn}) holds for $p=4$ with $\alpha > 1/8$, and this was improved afterwards by several authors (\cite{TV}, \cite{W2}{\color{black}, \cite{L}}).
In \cite{W}, Wolff proved the local smoothing conjecture for $p \geq 74$ in the full range\footnote{To be more specific, Sogge originally made the conjecture for $\alpha$ in the range $\alpha > \frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{p}$ and Wolff confirmed Sogge's conjecture for $p\geq 74$ and $\alpha$ in this range. Later in the work \cite{HNS} of Heo, Nazarov and Seeger it was conjectured further that when $p>4$ the conjecture should hold for $\alpha \geq \frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{p}$.} of $\alpha$. In that paper, Wolff introduced the idea of decoupling. His method was extended to higher dimensions by {\L}aba--Wolff \cite{LW} and refined by {\color{black}Garrig{\'o}s--Seeger \cite{GS}\cite{GS2} and Garrig{\'o}s--Schlag--Seeger \cite{GSS}.} Then in \cite{BD}, Bourgain and Demeter proved a sharp decoupling estimate for the cone in every dimension, in particular proving the local smoothing conjecture {\color{black}in $2+1$ dimensions} for $p \ge 6$ in the full range of $\alpha$. The sharp decoupling estimate for the cone does not, however, imply the full range of local smoothing estimates -- at the end of the introduction we will discuss what the issue is.
In a different direction, Lee and Vargas \cite{LV} proved a sharp $L^3$ square function estimate using multilinear restriction.
\subsection{Proof Strategy}
One new feature of our approach is that we prove a stronger estimate which works better for induction on scales. We need a little notation to state this estimate. The precise details and definitions are provided in Section 3. First we recall the {\color{black} locally constant property} of $f$. For each sector $\theta$, we let $\theta^*$ denote the dual rectangular box: since $\theta$ has dimensions $1 \times R^{-1/2} \times R^{-1}$, $\theta^*$ has dimensions $1 \times R^{1/2} \times R$. We call such a $\theta^*$ a plank. Recall that $|f_\theta|$ is roughly constant{\color{black}\footnote{\color{black} Such kind of ``locally constant'' heuristic will be used a few times in the current paper. To justify this intuition one can use Corollary 4.3 in \cite{BD2}. See also Lemma~\ref{lem: locally constant} and Lemma~\ref{lem: convolution} in Section \ref{secparab} of the current paper.}} on each translated copy of $\theta^*$. {\color{black} In this paper we tile $\mathbb{R}^3$ with translated copies of $\theta^*$.} The restriction of $f_\theta$ to one translated copy of $\theta^*$ is called a {\color{black} \emph{wave packet}}. In addition to the sectors $\theta$, we will consider larger angular sectors $\tau$ with any angle between $R^{-1/2}$ and 1. We write $d(\tau)$ to denote this angle, which we call the {\color{black}\emph{aperture}} of $\tau$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.5]
\pgfmathsetmacro{\thickx}{0.1}
\pgfmathsetmacro{\thicky}{0.05}
\draw (0,0) arc(170:10:2cm and 0.4 cm) coordinate[pos=0] (a);
\draw (0,0) arc(-170:-10:2cm and 0.4cm) coordinate (b);
\draw (0,0) arc(-170: -90: 2cm and 0.4cm) coordinate(c);
\draw (0,0) arc(-170: -70: 2cm and 0.4cm) coordinate(d);
\coordinate(mid) at ([yshift=-4cm]$(a)!0.5!(b)$);
\coordinate(start) at ($(mid)!0.5!(a)$);
\draw (start)--(a);
\draw[dashed] (start) arc(170:10:1cm and 0.2cm) coordinate[pos=0] (aa);
\draw (start) arc(-170: -10: 1cm and 0.2cm) coordinate (bb);
\draw (start) arc(-170: -90: 1cm and 0.2cm) coordinate (cc);
\draw(start) arc(-170: -70: 1cm and 0.2cm) coordinate (dd);
\draw (bb)--(b);
\coordinate (t) at (\thickx, \thicky);
\coordinate (c1) at ($(c)+ (t)$);
\coordinate (cc1) at ($(cc)+(t)$);
\coordinate (d1) at ($(d)+(t)$);
\coordinate (dd1) at ($(dd)+(t)$);
\draw[black] (c)--(c1);
\draw[black] (c1)--(cc1);
\draw[black] (cc)--(cc1);
\draw[black](c)--(cc);
\draw[black](d)--(dd);
\draw[black](d)--(d1);
\draw[black](dd)--(dd1);
\draw[black] (d1)--(dd1);
\draw[black] (c)--(d);
\draw[black](cc)--(dd);
\draw[black](c1)--(d1);
\draw[black] (cc1)--(dd1);
\node[left, black] at ($(d)!0.5!(dd)$) {$\tau$};
\draw[|<->|, black] ($(c1)+( 0, 0.1)$)--($(d1)+(0, 0.1)$);
\node[above, black] at ($(c1)!0.5!(d1)$) {$ d(\tau)$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
For each $\tau$, we define\footnote{This definition works best if $\tau$ is honestly tiled by $\theta$. In general we abuse the notation a bit: Throughout this paper, by writing ``summing over $\theta \subset \tau$'', we really mean ``summing over all $\theta \in A(\tau)$'' where the collection $A(\tau)$ is chosen as follows: Each $A(\tau)$ only contains those $\theta$'s who intersect $\tau$, and all $A(\tau)$ form a disjoint union $\{\theta\} = \bigsqcup_{\tau} A(\tau)$.
$f_\tau = \sum_{\theta \subset \tau} f_\theta$, and we define $\tau^*$ to be the dual rectangle to $\tau$. If $d(\tau) = s$, then $\tau^*$ has dimensions $1 \times s^{-1} \times s^{-2}$, and $|f_\tau|$ is roughly constant on each translated copy of $\tau^*$. Next we define $U_{\tau,R}$ to be a scaled copy of $\tau^*$ with diameter $R$. If $d(\tau) = s$, then $U_{\tau,R}$ has dimensions $R s^2 \times R s \times R$. Note that if $\theta \subset \tau$ and if $T$ is a translated copy of $\theta^*$ which passes through the center of $U_{\tau,R}$, then $T \subset {\color{black}10}U_{\tau,R}$, where $10 U_{\tau,R}$ means the dilation of $U_{\tau,R}$ by a factor of $10$ with respect to its centroid. For each $\tau$, we tile {\color{black} $\mathbb{R}^3$} by translated copies of $U_{\tau,R}$.
$${\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3} = \bigsqcup_{U \textrm{ a translated copy of } U_{\tau,R}} U. $$
\noindent This tiling is natural because for each $\theta \subset \tau$, the support of each wave packet of $f_\theta$ is essentially contained in $\sim 1$ tiles $U$ in the tiling. Here two quantities $A\sim B$ means that $A\leq C_1B\leq C_2A$ for some positive absolute constants $C_1$ and $C_2$. We write $\sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}}$ to denote the sum over all the translated copies $U$ of $U_{\tau,R}$ in the tiling of {\color{black} $\mathbb{R}^3$}.
{\color{black}If $U$ is a translated copy of $U_{\tau,R}$, then we define the square function $S_U f$ associated with $U$ to be
$$S_U f = (\sum_{\theta \subset \tau}|f_{\theta}|^2)^{1/2} |_U.$$}
We can now state our main estimate.
\begin{theorem} \label{main} Suppose that $f$ has Fourier support on $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$. Then
\begin{equation} \label{L4strong} \| f \|_{L^4({\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3})}^4 \le C_\epsilon R^\epsilon \sum_{R^{-1/2} \le s \le 1} \sum_{d(\tau) = s} \sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}} |U|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_U f} \|_{L^2}^4 .\end{equation}
Here the sum over $s$ is over dyadic values of $s$ in the range $R^{-1/2} \le s \le 1$.
\end{theorem}
Let us take a moment to digest the right-hand side of this estimate. {\color{black}For this discussion, suppose that $f$ is essentially supported on one $B_R$.} We start with the term where $s = R^{-1/2}$. In this case $\tau$ is one of the original sectors $\theta$ of aperture $R^{-1/2}$, $U_{\tau,R}$ is equal to $\theta^*$, and ${\color{black}|S_U f| = |f_\theta| \big|_U}$. Since $|S_U f| = |f_\theta|$ is roughly constant on $U$, $$|U|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_U f} \|_{L^2}^4 \sim \| {\color{black}S_U f} \|_{L^4}^4.$$ If the functions $f_\theta$ are essentially supported on disjoint regions, we would have
$$\| f \|_{L^4}^4 \sim \sum_{d(\theta) = R^{-1/2}} \sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}} \| {\color{black}S_U f} \|_{L^4}^4,$$ which matches the term $s = R^{-1/2}$ on the right-hand side of (\ref{L4strong}). Next consider the term where $s=1$. In this case, there is only one $\tau$ which covers all of $\Gamma$, and the contribution to the right-hand side is {\color{black}essentially} $|B_R|^{-1} \| S_{B_R} f \|_{L^2}^4 \sim |B_R|^{-1} \| f \|_{L^2(B_R)}^4$. If $|f|$ is roughly constant on the whole $B_R$, then we would have $${\color{black}\| f \|_{L^4(\mathbb{R}^3)}^4 \sim } \| f \|_{L^4(B_R)}^4 \sim |B_R|^{-1} \| f \|_{L^2(B_R)}^4 \sim |B_R|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_{B_R} f} \|_{L^2(B_R)}^4,$$ which matches the term $s = 1$ on the right-hand side of (\ref{L4strong}). Finally we consider the intermediate values of $s$. It may happen that $f = f_\tau$ for some $\tau$ and that $f$ is essentially supported on a particular translated copy $U$ of $U_{\tau,R}$ and that $|f|$ is roughly constant on $U$. In this case, $${\color{black}\| f \|_{L^4(\mathbb{R}^3)}^4 \sim} \| f_\tau \|_{L^4({\color{black}U})}^4 \sim |U|^{-1} \| f_\tau \|_{L^2(U)}^4 \sim |U|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_U f} \|_{L^2}^4,$$ which is the term corresponding to $U$ on the right-hand side of (\ref{L4strong}).
The proof of Theorem \ref{main} is based on a new Kakeya-type estimate, which controls the overlapping of the planks in the wave packet decomposition of $f$.
\begin{lemma}\label{incidenceintro} Suppose that $\hat f$ has support on $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$. Let $g$ denote the {\color{black}(squared)} square function $g=\sum_{d(\theta)=R^{-1/2}} |f_{\theta}|^2$. Then
$$\int_{\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3} |g|^2 \lesssim \sum_{R^{-1/2} \leq s\leq 1} \sum_{d(\tau)=s} \sum_{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}} {\color{black} |U|^{-1}} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4,$$
where $A\lesssim B$ means that $A\leq C B$ for some absolute positive constant $C$.
\end{lemma}
\noindent Recall that each function $|f_\theta|$ is morally constant on the translated copies of $\theta^*$, where each $\theta^*$ is a $1 \times R^{1/2} \times R$ plank. The estimate in Lemma \ref{incidenceintro} is a Kakeya-type bound on the overlapping of these planks. The new feature of this estimate compared to previous Kakeya-type estimates is the structure of the right-hand side, which is designed to match the right-hand side of Theorem \ref{main}. The terms on the right-hand side keep track of how planks are packed into the rectangular boxes $U$. If the planks are spread out in the sense that each box $U$ does not contain too many planks, then it gives a strong bound.
In \cite{W}, Wolff connected Kakeya-type estimates for overlapping planks to incidence geometry problems in the spirit of the Szemer\'edi--Trotter problem. He adapted the cutting method from incidence geometry to this setting and he used it to estimate the overlaps of planks. He applied those geometric estimates at many scales to prove his results on local smoothing. In \cite{BD}, Bourgain and Demeter apply multilinear Kakeya estimates at many scales to prove decoupling. In this paper, we apply Lemma \ref{incidenceintro} at many scales to prove Theorem \ref{main}.
Lemma \ref{incidenceintro} is proven using Fourier analysis. By Plancherel, $\int |g|^2 = \int |\hat g|^2$. Roughly speaking, we decompose {\color{black}the} Fourier space, and the contributions of different regions to $\int |\hat g|^2$ correspond to the different terms on the right-hand side of Lemma \ref{incidenceintro}. This approach to proving Kakeya-type estimates is based on some work of Orponen in projection theory \cite{O} and {\color{black}is related} to Vinh's work \cite{V} about incidence geometry over finite fields. It builds on \cite{GSW}, which applies similar ideas to rectangles and tubes instead of planks.
\subsection{Local estimates}
{\color{black}Our Theorem \ref{main} and Lemma \ref{incidenceintro} have ``local'' counterparts involving polynomially decaying weights that are essentially supported on a given box. For any box $B_R$ of diameter $R$, define the weight $$w_{B_R, E} (x) = (1+\frac{\mathrm{dist} (x, B_R)}{R})^{-E}.$$
Here is the local version of Theorem \ref{main}.
\begin{theorem} \label{mainlocal} If $f$ has Fourier support on $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$, then for any $E > 0$,
\begin{equation} \label{L4strong'} \| f \|_{L^4(B_R)}^4 \le C_{\epsilon, E} R^\epsilon \sum_{R^{-1/2} \le s \le 1} \sum_{d(\tau) = s} \sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}} |U|^{-1} \| {w_{B_R, E} \cdot \color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4 .\end{equation}
Here the sum over $s$ is over dyadic values of $s$ in the range $R^{-1/2} \le s \le 1$.
\end{theorem}
In the above theorem, the sum on the right-hand side is also ``morally localized''. It is $$\sum_{R^{-1/2} \le s \le 1} \sum_{d(\tau) = s} \sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}, U \subset 100B_R} |U|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_U f} \|_{L^2}^4$$
plus some decaying error term. To prove Theorem \ref{mainlocal}, we multiply $f$ by a rapidly decaying bump function $\phi_R$ adapted to $B_R$ such that $|\phi_R|> \frac{1}{C} >0$ on $B_R$ and $\hat \phi_R$ is supported on the ball $B_{R^{-1}}$ centered at the origin, and then we apply Theorem \ref{main} to the decomposition $\phi_R f = \sum_{\theta} \phi_R f_{\theta}$.
}}
\subsection{Relationship with decoupling}
While working on this project, we were strongly influenced by ideas related to decoupling, but the proof given here does not use the decoupling theorem per se. It does make use of a nice observation that Bourgain and Demeter used to reduce the decoupling theorem for the cone to the decoupling theorem for the paraboloid (See \cite{BD}{\color{black}. Similar ideas can also be traced back to the iteration argument of Pramanik--Seeger \cite{PS}}). Instead of working with a truncated cone of height 1, {\color{black}Bourgain and Demeter} worked with a truncated cone of height $1/K$ for a large constant $K$, denoted $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$. This shorter truncated cone can be approximated by a parabola at various scales. We will also work with $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$, allowing us to bring into play some estimates for the parabola.
As we mentioned above, sharp decoupling theorems do not imply the full range of local smoothing estimates or the square function estimate. Let us explain a little further what the issue is. The decoupling theorem for the cone gives the following bounds, which are sharp for every $p$ between 2 and $\infty$:
\begin{equation} \label{decp<6} \| f \|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^3)} \le C_\epsilon R^\epsilon \left(\sum_{d(\theta) = R^{-1/2}} \| f_\theta \|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^3)}^2 \right)^{1/2} \textrm{ if } 2 \le p \le 6, \end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{decp>6} \| f \|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^3)} \le C_\epsilon R^{\frac{1}{4} - \frac{3}{2p} + \epsilon} \left(\sum_{d(\theta) = R^{-1/2}} \| f_\theta \|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^3)}^2 \right)^{1/2} \textrm{ if } p \ge 6. \end{equation}
\noindent For any given $p$, (\ref{decp>6}) implies local smoothing for that $p$. But the inequality (\ref{decp>6}) cannot hold for any $p < 6$ because the power of $R$ would be negative. The power of $R$ in a decoupling inequality cannot be negative because of the following example: suppose that for each $\theta$, $| f_\theta |$ is approximately the characteristic function of $B_R$, and at each point $|f| \sim \left( \sum_\theta |f_\theta|^2 \right)^{1/2}$. In this case, $\| f \|_{L^p} \sim \left(\sum_\theta \| f_\theta \|_{L^p}^2 \right)^{1/2}$ for all $p$. This example is not a counterexample for local smoothing, but to prove local smoothing for some $p < 6$ we have to do better than inequality (\ref{decp<6}) in some scenarios: for instance, if the supports of $f_\theta$ are {\color{black}essentially} disjoint at time 0. Roughly speaking, we need to improve the bound (\ref{decp<6}) when $p < 6$ and when each $f_\theta$ is {\color{black}essentially} supported on a sparse region of $B_R$. Theorem \ref{main} makes this precise.
There are similar issues in the problem of decoupling into small caps, which was studied in \cite{DGW}. For instance, consider an exponential sum of the form
$$f(x_1, x_2) = \sum_{j=1}^N a_j e \left( \frac{j}{N} x_1 + \frac{j^2}{N^2} x_2 \right), \textrm{ with } |a_j| \le 1 \textrm{ for all } j. \eqno{(*)}$$
\noindent The decoupling theorem for the parabola gives a sharp bound on $ \| f \|_{L^p(B_{N^2})}$ for every $p$. But suppose we want to bound $ \| f \|_{L^p(B_R)}$ for some $R < N^2$. If we divide the parabola into arcs $\theta$ of length $R^{-1/2}$, then each $f_\theta$ is a sum of $\sim N R^{-1/2}$ terms of $(*)$. It's not hard to estimate the largest possible value of $\| f_\theta \|_{L^p(B_R)}$ for each $p$. Combining this bound for $\| f_\theta \|_{L^p(B_R)}$ with decoupling gives an upper bound for $\| f \|_{L^p(B_R)}$, but it is not sharp. When $\| f_\theta \|_{L^p(B_R)}$ is close to its largest value, then $|f_\theta|$ is concentrated on a sparse region of $B_R$. The argument in \cite{DGW} exploits this sparsity to improve the bound from decoupling and give sharp estimates for $\| f \|_{L^p(B_R)}$ for every $p$. The proof of the main theorem here builds on that proof.
The paper \cite{DGW} also considers a decoupling problem in which the cone is divided into small squares instead of sectors. This problem was raised by Bourgain and Watt \cite{BW} in their work on the Gauss circle problem. The paper \cite{DGW} shows that the square function estimate Theorem \ref{sq fun} implies a sharp estimate for this decoupling problem.
\vskip10pt
{\bf Acknowledgements.} We would like to thank Ciprian Demeter for sharing his ideas and for many helpful conversations. He proposed the problem of decoupling into small caps and suggested improving decoupling when each $f_\theta$ is concentrated in a sparse region. We would also like to thank Misha Rudnev for sharing thoughtful comments about \cite{GSW} which helped us in this project. We would like to thank Terence Tao for helpful comments that improved the exposition of the proof of Proposition 3.4. We would like to thank Zhipeng Lu and Xianchang Meng for pointing out several typos in an earlier version. {\color{black} LG was supported by a Simons Investigator Award. HW was supported by the Simons Foundation grant for David Jerison. RZ was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number DMS-1856541. He would like to thank Andreas Seeger for helpful historical remarks about square functions and local smoothing. Part of this work was done when RZ was visiting MIT and he would like to thank MIT for the warm hospitality.}
We would like to thank the anonymous referees for their thorough readings and many helpful suggestions.
\section{Proof of the square function estimate from Theorem \ref{main}}
In this section, we explain how Theorem \ref{main} implies the square function estimate Theorem \ref{sq fun}, and we {\color{black} discuss} how {\color{black}the latter} implies {\color{black}the} local smoothing {\color{black}Theorem} \ref{locsmooth}. First we recall the statement of Theorem \ref{sq fun}:
\begin{theorem*}
For any function $f$ whose Fourier transform is supported on $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$, we have
$$\|f\|_{L^4({\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3})} \leq C_{\epsilon} R^{\epsilon} \|(\sum_{d(\theta)=R^{-1/2}} |f_{\theta}|^2)^{1/2}\|_{L^4{\color{black}(\mathbb{R}^3)}}.$$
\end{theorem*}
\begin{proof}
Let $U$ be a translated copy of $U_{\tau,R}${\color{black}. Recall that}
$${\color{black}\|S_U f\|_{L^2}^2 = \int_U \sum_{\theta\subset \tau}|f_{\theta}|^2.}$
By Cauchy--Schwarz,
$$ \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4 \leq |U| \int_{U} ( \sum_{\theta\subset \tau}|f_{\theta}|^2 )^2.$$
Therefore,
\begin{align*}
\sum_{d(\tau)=s}~~\sum_{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4
&\leq \sum_{d(\tau)=s} \int_{{\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} (\sum_{\theta\subset \tau} |f_{\theta}|^2)^2\\
&\leq \int_{{\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} (\sum_{\theta} |f_{\theta}|^2)^2. \qedhere
\end{align*}
Summing in $s$ (dyadic numbers) contributes an additional $\log R$ factor compared to Theorem~\ref{main}.
\end{proof}
{\color{black}Essentially by} \cite{MSS}, the square function estimate in Theorem \ref{sq fun} implies {\color{black}the local smoothing Theorem \ref{locsmooth}} for the wave equation in 2+1 dimensions. This implication was sketched in Proposition 6.2 of \cite{TV}. One technical difference is that the square function considered in \cite{MSS} was the one in terms of ``small caps'' $\zeta$, $R^{-1/2}$-squares on $\Gamma$. Instead of the Littlewood--Paley estimate corresponding to equally spaced decompositions in $\mathbb{R}^2$ used in \cite{MSS} (see (1.9) and the following first two lines on page 214 of \cite{MSS}), one needs such an estimate for angular decompositions. In the $L^4$ case, such an angular square function estimate was proved by C{\'o}rdoba (see ii) on the first page of \cite{C}). Another proof\footnote{See Proposition 4.6 in \cite{CS}. That proposition has two parameters and C{\'o}rdoba's estimate (up to an $R^{\varepsilon}$-loss) can be viewed as a simpler one-parameter variant. See also the remark in the end of Section 4 in \cite{CS}} by Carbery--Seeger could be found in \cite{CS}.
\section{Outline of the proof of the main theorem} \label{secoutline}
In this section, we give an overview of the proof of Theorem \ref{main} and outline the rest of the paper. First we review the statement of Theorem \ref{main}, and present it in a more detailed way.
Let $\Gamma$ be the truncated light cone $\Gamma= \{\xi_1^2+\xi_2^2= \xi_3^2, 1/2\leq |\xi_3|\leq 1\}$. We now precisely define the sectors discussed in the introduction.
For each point $\xi \in \Gamma$ with $\xi_3 = 1$, we define a basis of $\mathbb{R}^3$ as follows: the core line direction is $\mathbf{c}(\xi)= (\xi_{1}, \xi_{2}, 1)$, the normal direction is $\mathbf{n}(\xi)= (\xi_{1},\xi_{2}, -1),$ and the tangent direction is $\mathbf{t}(\tau)=(-\xi_{2}, \xi_{1}, 0)$. Now for each such $\xi$, and each $s < 1$, we define the sector with direction $\xi$ and aperture $s$ as follows:
$$ \tau(s, \xi) =\{ \omega \in \mathbb{R}^3: 1 \le \mathbf{c}(\xi) \cdot \omega \le 2 \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{n}(\xi) \cdot \omega| \le s^2 \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{t}(\xi) \cdot \omega | \le s \}. $$
\noindent Here $s= d(\tau)$ is the aperture of $\tau$ as described in the introduction.
For each $s$, We choose $10 s^{-1}$ evenly spaced $\xi$ in the circle $\Gamma \cap \{ \xi_3 = 1\}$, and we let $\mathbf{S}_{s}$ be the set of $\tau(s, \xi)$ for these $\xi$. It is straightforward to check that these form a finitely overlapping cover of $N_{s^2}(\Gamma)$.
In the introduction, we considered a finitely-overlapping cover of $N_{R^{-1}} \Gamma$ by sectors $\theta$ with dimensions $\sim R^{-1} \times R^{-1/2} \times 1$. The set of these sectors is $\mathbf{S}_{R^{-1/2}}$.
For each $\tau = \tau(s, \xi)$, and each $\rho \ge s^{-2}$, we define a box $U_{\tau,\rho}$ as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{defUtau} U_{\tau,\rho} = \{ x \in \mathbb{R}^3: |\mathbf{c}(\xi) \cdot x| \le \rho s^{2} \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{n}(\xi) \cdot x| \le \rho \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{t}(\xi) \cdot {\color{black}x} | \le \rho s \}. \end{equation}
The box $U_{\tau,\rho}$ is approximately the convex hull of the union of $\theta^*$ over all sectors $\theta \subset \tau$ with $d(\theta) = \rho^{-1/2}$. In other words, $U_{\tau,\rho}$ is approximately the smallest rectangular box such that for any $\rho^{-1/2}$-sector $\theta\subset \tau$, if a translated copy of $\theta^{*}$ intersects $U_{\tau,\rho}$, then it must lie in $10 U_{\tau,\rho}$. We tile {\color{black}$\mathbb{R}^3$} by translated copies of $U_{\tau,\rho}$.
{\color{black} If $U$ is a translated copy of $U_{\tau,\rho}$, then we define $S_U f$ by
\begin{equation} \label{defSUf} S_U f= (\sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{\rho^{-1/2}}: \theta \subset \tau} |f_{\theta}|^2)^{1/2} |_U. \end{equation}
As written, this definition appears to depend upon $U$, $\tau$, and $\rho$. But in fact the parameters $\rho$ and $\tau$ can be read off from $U$. The parameter $\rho$ is the diameter of $U$. The aperture $d(\tau) = s$ can be read off from the dimensions of $U$, which are $\rho s^2 \times \rho s \times \rho $. And the direction $\xi$ of $\tau$ can be read off from the direction of $U$. To illustrate this, suppose that $U$ is $B_r$ - a ball of radius $r$. The diameter of $U$ is $r$, and so $\rho = r$. The dimensions of $U$ are $r \times r \times r$, and so $d(\tau) = 1$. Since $\tau$ has aperture 1, it covers all of $\Gamma$. Therefore,
$$ S_{B_r} f = (\sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{r^{-1/2}}} |f_\theta|^2)^{1/2} \big|_{B_r}. $$
In particular, $|S_{B_1}f|$ is just $|f|$ restricted to ${B_1}$.}
We define $S(r, R)$ as the smallest constant such that for every function $f$ with $\text{supp}\hat{f}\subset N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$,
\begin{equation}\label{induct coeff}
\sum_{B_r\subset {\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} |B_r|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_{B_r}f}\|_{L^2(B_r)}^4 \leq S(r, R) \underset{ R^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1 }{\sum}~~\sum_{\tau \in \mathbf{S}_s}~~ \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau, R}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4.
\end{equation}
On the left-hand side of inequality~(\ref{induct coeff}), $\sum_{B_r\subset {\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}}$ means {\color{black}the} sum over the balls $B_r$ in a finitely overlapping cover of $\mathbb{R}^3$. On the right-hand side of inequality~(\ref{induct coeff}), the first sum, $\sum_{R^{-1/2}\leq s\leq 1}$, means {\color{black}the} sum over dyadic numbers $s$ between $R^{-1/2}$ and $1$. The last sum, $\sum_{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau, R}}$, means the sum over a set of translates of $U_{\tau, R}$ which tile $\mathbb{R}^3$.
{\color{black}By H\"older's inequality, $S(r, R)<\infty$ for any $0< r, R < \infty$. We will only consider $S(r, R)$ when $r\leq R$.} Theorem \ref{main} is equivalent to the bound $S(1,R) \le C_\epsilon R^\epsilon$ since {\color{black}$|S_{B_1}f| = |f|$ on any $B_1$ and} $|f|$ is morally constant on {\color{black}$B_1$}. We will derive Theorem \ref{main} from a series of bounds for $S(r,R)$.
In Section \ref{secincid}, we prove the Kakeya-type estimate Lemma \ref{incidenceintro}, and we use it to prove
\begin{lemma}\label{ball inflation} For {\color{black}any} $r \ge 10$, {\color{black}$r_1 \in [r, r^2]$,}
$$S({\color{black}r_1}, r^2)
{\color{black}\leq C}.$$
\end{lemma}
Next we bring into play a trick from the proof of decoupling for the cone in \cite{BD}: instead of working with $\Gamma$ we work with a subset of $\Gamma$ that lies close to a short parabolic cylinder. We let $P$ denote an arc of a parabola of length $\sim 1$ lying in $\Gamma$. For any $K \ge 10$, we define $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ to be the $1/K$-neighborhood of $P$ {\color{black}in $\Gamma$}. We will eventually choose $K$ to be a large constant {\color{black}depending on $\epsilon$} (which remains fixed as $R \rightarrow \infty$). The precise formula for $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ is designed to make Lorentz rescaling work in a clean way, and we give the formula in Section \ref{lorentz} when we discuss Lorentz rescaling. We can define a sector $\tau \subset \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ and its aperture $d(\tau)$ in the same way as before (again see Section \ref{lorentz}). Then we define $S_K(r,R)$ as the smallest constant such that (\ref{induct coeff}) holds for every $f$ with $\text{supp } \hat f \subset N_{R^{-1}} (\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$. Since $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}} \subset \Gamma$, $S_K(r,R) \le S(r,R)$. On the other hand, since $K$ will be {\color{black}a} chosen constant, $S_K(r,R)$ is almost {\color{black}equal} to $S(r,R)$ and we can use it equally well to prove Theorem \ref{main}.
If $R = K$, then $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$ is the $1/K$-neighborhood of the parabolic arc $P$, and the restriction theory for the parabola can be used to study $S_K(1,K)$. In Section \ref{secparab} we use this idea to prove the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{small ball} For any $K \ge 10$, any ${\color{black}1\le } r \le K$, and any $\delta > 0$,
$S_K(r, K) \leq C_{\delta} K^{\delta}$.
\end{lemma}
Theorem \ref{main} will follow by combining Lemma \ref{ball inflation} and Lemma \ref{small ball} with a {\color{black}Lorentz} rescaling argument.
We review the Lorentz rescaling in Section \ref{lorentz}. We use it in Section \ref{secusingrescaling} to prove the following lemma, which relates $S_K(r,R)$ for various values of $r, R$:
\begin{lemma}\label{general}
For any $r_1< r_2 \leq r_3$,
$$S_K(r_1, r_3)\leq \log r_2 \cdot S_K(r_1, r_2)\max_{r_2^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1}S_K(s^2r_2, s^2 r_3).$$
\end{lemma}
This lemma is an important motivation for working with $S_K(r,R)$. It allows Lemma \ref{ball inflation} and Lemma \ref{small ball} to be applied at many different scales. A key point of studying Theorem \ref{main} instead of trying to prove Theorem \ref{sq fun} directly is that it allows this multiscale analysis to come into play.
Assuming the lemmas, we now prove bounds on $S_K(r,R)$ and use them to deduce Theorem~\ref{main}.
\begin{prop} \label{inductiveprop} For any $\epsilon > 0$, there exists $K = K(\epsilon)$ so that for any $1 \le r \le R$, we have
$$ S_K(r,R) \le {\widetilde C}_\epsilon (R/r)^\epsilon. $$
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} First we note that if $r > R^{1/2}$, then Lemma \ref{ball inflation} tells us that $ S_K(r,R) \le S(r, R) \le C$, and so the conclusion holds.
Let $K=K(\epsilon) > 10$ be a constant depending only on $\epsilon$ that we will choose below. (The constant $K(\epsilon)$ will depend on $\epsilon$ and on the constants in Lemma \ref{ball inflation} and Lemma \ref{small ball}.)
We apply induction on the ratio $R/r$.
Our base case is when $R/r\leq \sqrt{K}$. We have already checked the proposition in case $r > R^{1/2}$. If $r \le R^{1/2}$ and $R/r \le \sqrt{K}$, then $R \le K$. In this case, since $K$ is a constant depending only on $\epsilon$, it is straightforward to check that $S_K(r, R)$ is bounded by a constant $\tilde C_K = \tilde C_\epsilon$. This finishes the base case.
Next we proceed with the induction. Given a pair $(r, R)$, our induction hypothesis is the following: for any pair $(r', R')$ with $R'/r'\leq R/2r$, we have $S_K(r', R')\leq \tilde{C}_{\epsilon}(R'/r')^{\epsilon}$.
The proof of the induction has two cases, depending on whether $r \le K^{1/2}$.
If $r\leq K^{1/2}$, we apply Lemma~\ref{general} with $r_1 = r$, $r_2 = K^{1/2}r$, and $r_3 = R$, which gives
$$S_K(r, R) \leq \log K \cdot S_K(r, K^{1/2}r) \max_{r_2^{-1/2}\leq s\leq 1} S_K(s^2K^{1/2} r, s^2R). $$
\noindent We bound the first $S_K$ factor using Lemma \ref{small ball}, and we bound the second $S_K$ factor using induction. These bounds give
$$S_K(r, R) \leq \log K \cdot S_K(r, K^{1/2}r) \max_{r_2^{-1/2}\leq s\leq 1} S_K(s^2K^{1/2} r, s^2R) \leq \log K \cdot C_{\delta} {\widetilde C}_{\epsilon}K^{\delta} (\frac{R}{K^{1/2} r})^{\epsilon}.$$
\noindent We choose $\delta = \epsilon/{\color{black}4}$, and then we choose ${\color{black}K=}K(\epsilon)$ large enough so that $\log K \cdot C_{\epsilon/{\color{black}4}}K^{-\epsilon/{\color{black}4}} \leq 1$, and the induction closes {\color{black}in this case}.
Now suppose $r \ge K^{1/2}$. Recall from the start of the proof that we may assume $r \le R^{1/2}$. We apply Lemma \ref{general} with $r_1 = r$, $r_2 = r^2$, and $r_3 = R$, which gives
$$S_K(r, R) \leq 2\log r \cdot S_K(r, r^2) \max_{r^{-1}\leq s \leq 1} S_K(s^2 r^2, s^2 R). $$
We bound the first $S_K$ factor using Lemma \ref{ball inflation} and we bound the second $S_K$ factor using induction, giving
$$S_K(r, R) \leq 2\log r \cdot S_K(r, r^2) \max_{r^{-1}\leq s \leq 1} S_K(s^2 r^2, s^2 R) \leq 2\log r \cdot {\color{black}C} {\widetilde C}_{\epsilon
(\frac{R}{r^2})^{\epsilon}.$$
\noindent We choose $K = K(\epsilon)$ large enough so that for all $r \ge K^{1/2}$, we have $2\log r\cdot {\color{black}C} r^{-{\color{black} \epsilon}} \leq 1$, and the induction closes {\color{black}in this case}.
\end{proof}
Finally we show how Proposition \ref{inductiveprop} implies Theorem \ref{main}.
\begin{proof}
Proposition \ref{inductiveprop} implies that for every $\epsilon > 0$, we can choose $K = K(\epsilon)$ so that $S_K(1, R) \le C_\epsilon R^\epsilon$ for all $R$. Suppose that the support of $\hat f$ is contained in $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}) \subset B_3$. Since $|f|$ is morally constant on unit balls, we have\footnote{Strictly speaking, one need to apply Lemma~\ref{lem: locally constant} and Lemma~\ref{lem: convolution} to justify the first ``$\lesssim$'' in inequality~(\ref{SKmain}). This is similar to the arguments in Section~\ref{secparab} where we do in full details.}
\begin{equation} \label{SKmain} \int_{{\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} |f|^4 \lesssim \sum_{B_1 \subset {\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} \| f \|_{L^2(B_1)}^4 {\color{black}=\sum_{B_1 \subset \mathbb{R}^3} \|S_{B_1}f\|_{L^2(B_1)}^4} \le C_\epsilon R^\epsilon \underset{ R^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1 }{\sum}~~\sum_{d(\tau)=s}~~ \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4. \end{equation}
This inequality is essentially Theorem \ref{main} except that we assumed that $\hat f$ is supported on $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$ instead of $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$. Since $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$ can be covered by $O(K) = O_\epsilon(1)$ affine copies of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$, we can reduce Theorem \ref{main} to (\ref{SKmain}). Here are the details.
Take $\{A_j\}_{1\leq j\lesssim K}$ to be a collection of linear transformations such that $\Gamma \subset \bigcup A_j (\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$. Here each $A_j$ is a composition of a scaling by a factor $\sim 1$ and a rotation in the $(\xi_1, \xi_2)-$plane\footnote{One can choose $\lesssim 1$ rotations $R_k$ such that $\bigcup_{k} R_k(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$ covers $\Gamma(h)= \Gamma\cap \{ h\leq \xi_3\leq h+K/10\}$ for some $h\sim 1$. Then we choose $\lesssim K$ dilations $D_l$ such that $\Gamma\subset \bigcup_{l} D_l (\Gamma(h))$. We define $A_j = D_l R_k$. for some $l$ and $k$.}. Similarly, we can arrange that $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)\subset \bigcup A_j \big( N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}) \big)$.
Let ${\color{black}\{\psi_j\}}$ be a ${\color{black}C^{\infty}}$ partition of unity subordinate to this covering. {\color{black}This partition of unity only depends on $K$.}
If $f$ is a function whose Fourier transform is supported on $N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma)$, then $\hat f=\sum_j \psi_j \hat f$. Define $f_j$ by $\hat f_j = \psi_j \hat f$ {\color{black}and ${\hat f_{j,\theta}} = \psi_j {\hat f_{\theta}}$}. The support of $\hat f_j$ is contained in $A_j (N_{R^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}))$. Since (\ref{SKmain}) is invariant under rotations and approximately invariant under rescaling by a factor $\sim 1$, (\ref{SKmain}) holds for each function $f_j$.
Now {\color{black}by} the triangle inequality and H\"{o}lder's inequality,
\begin{align*}
\|f\|_{L^4({\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3})}^4 & \lesssim K^3 \sum_j \|f_j\|_{L^4({\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3})}^4 \\
&\lesssim K^3 C_{\epsilon} R^{\epsilon} \sum_j \underset{R^{-1/2}\leq s\leq 1}{\sum}~~\sum_{d(\tau)=s} ~~\underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f_{j}}\|_{L^2}^4\\
&\lesssim K^3 C_{\epsilon} R^{\epsilon} \underset{R^{-1/2}\leq s\leq 1}{\sum}~~
\sum_{d(\tau)=s}~~\underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} ( \sum_j\|{\color{black}S_U f_{j}}\|_{L^2}^2)^2\\
&\lesssim_{{\color{black}K}} C_{\epsilon} R^{\epsilon} \underset{R^{-1/2}\leq s\leq 1}{\sum}~~\sum_{d(\tau)=s} \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4.
\end{align*}
{\color{black}To see the last inequality, note that $f_{j, {\color{black}\theta}} = f_{{\color{black}\theta}} * {\check \psi_j}$ and ${\check \psi_j}$ is rapidly decaying outside the ball of radius $K$ centered at the origin. Hence, by Lemma~\ref{lem: convolution}, each $\|f_{j, {\color{black}\theta}}\|_{L^2 (B_1)} \lesssim_K \|f_{{\color{black}\theta}}\|_{L^2 (w_{B_1, E})}$ for any polynomially decaying weight $w_{B_1, E}$. It suffices to take $E$ large enough.}
Since $K$ is a constant only depending on $\epsilon$, this gives Theorem \ref{main}. \end{proof}
\section{ A Kakeya-type estimate} \label{secincid}
In this section, we prove the Kakeya-type estimate Lemma \ref{incidenceintro}, and we use it to prove Lemma \ref{ball inflation}. First we recall the statement.
\begin{lemma*} Suppose that $\hat f$ has support on $N_{r^{-2}}(\Gamma)$. Let $g$ denote the {\color{black}(squared)} square function $g=\sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{r^{-1}}} |f_{\theta}|^2$. Then
$$\int_{\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3} |g|^2 \lesssim \sum_{R^{-1/2} \leq s\leq 1} \sum_{\tau \in \mathbf{S}_s} \sum_{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,R}} {\color{black} |U|^{-1}} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4.$$
\end{lemma*}
(Comparing with the statement in the introduction, we use $r^2$ in place of $R$. This makes the algebra in the proof a little simpler, and it connects with the notation in Lemma \ref{ball inflation}.)
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{incidenceintro}]
Suppose that $\text{supp } \hat f\subset N_{r^{-2}}(\Gamma)$. Recall that
$$ g=\sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{r^{-1}}}|f_{\theta}|^2. $$
The Fourier transform of $|f_{\theta}|^2$ is supported on the Minkowski sum $\tilde{\theta}=\theta + (-\theta)$. The set $\tilde{\theta}$ is itself a plank of dimensions $\sim r^{-2}\times r^{-1}\times 1$ centered at the origin. Notice that while the original sectors $\theta$ are disjoint, the planks $\tilde \theta$ are not disjoint. The way that they overlap plays an important role in the proof.
The Minkowski sum $\tilde \theta (\xi) = \theta(\xi) + (- \theta(\xi))$ is approximately equal to the following rectangular box:
$$ \tilde \theta(\xi) \approx
\{ \omega \in \mathbb{R}^3: |\mathbf{c}(\xi) \cdot \omega| \le 1 \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{n}(\xi) \cdot \omega| \le r^{-2} \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{t}(\xi) \cdot \omega | \le r^{-1} \}, $$
where two convex sets $A\approx B$ means that $A\subset 10 B\subset 100A$.
The overlapping of the boxes $\tilde \theta$ is best described in terms of similar rectangular boxes at smaller scales. For any {\color{black}dyadic} $\sigma$ in the range $r^{-1} \le \sigma \le 1$, and any $\xi$ as above, we define a box $\Theta = \Theta(\sigma, \xi)$ by
\begin{equation} \label{defTheta}
\Theta(\sigma, \xi) =\{\omega: | \mathbf{c}(\xi)\cdot \omega |\leq \sigma^2 \textrm{ and }| \mathbf{n}(\xi)\cdot \omega|\leq r^{-2} \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{t}(\xi)\cdot \omega| \leq r^{-1} \sigma\}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Notice that $\Theta(1, \xi)$ is equal to $\tilde \theta(\xi)$, and for $\sigma < 1$, $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset \tilde \theta(\xi)$. At the other extreme, $\Theta(r^{-1}, \xi)$ is essentially the ball of radius $r^{-2}$ centered at the origin, regardless of $\xi$.
If we intersect $\Theta(\sigma, \xi)$ with the slab $ \{ (1/2) \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le \sigma^2 \}$, then it lies in the $r^{-2}$-neighborhood of the light cone. Let $\Gamma(\sigma^2)$ denote the part of the light cone where $(1/2) \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le \sigma^2$. Each $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ (1/2) \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le \sigma^2 \}$ is a sector of $N_{r^{-2}}(\Gamma(\sigma^2))$, just as $\theta$ is a sector of $N_{r^{-2}}(\Gamma)$. The number of such sectors needed to cover $N_{r^{-2}}(\Gamma(\sigma^2))$ is $\sim \sigma r$. If $| \xi - \xi'| > \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$, then $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \Theta (\sigma, \xi') \cap \{ (1/2) \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le \sigma^2 \}$ is empty. Conversely, if $| \xi - \xi' | < \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$ then $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ (1/2) \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le \sigma^2 \}$ is comparable to $\Theta (\sigma, \xi') \cap \{ (1/2) \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le \sigma^2 \}$. By symmetry, the same holds when we intersect with $\{ - \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le - (1/2) \sigma^2 \}$ at the other side of the light cone. Now by convexity, we conclude that if $| \xi - \xi'| \le \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$, then $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset 2 \Theta(\sigma, \xi')$.
For each dyadic $\sigma$ in the range $r^{-1} \le \sigma \le 1$, let $\mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ be a set of $\sim \sigma r$ planks of the form $\Theta(\sigma, \xi)$ with the directions $\xi$ evenly spaced in the circle. (The letters $\mathbf{CP}$ stand for centered plank.) The size of $\mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ is chosen so that for any $\Theta(\sigma, \xi)$, we can choose $\Theta(\sigma, \xi') \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ so that $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset 2 \Theta(\sigma, \xi')$. We define $\mathbf{CP}$ as a union over dyadic scales: $ \mathbf{CP} = \cup_{r^{-1} \le \sigma \le 1} \mathbf{CP}_\sigma. $ Since $\Theta(1, \xi)$ is the same as $\tilde \theta(\xi)$, $\mathbf{CP}_1 = \mathbf{S}_{r^{-1}}$. On the other hand, $\mathbf{CP}_{r^{-1}}$ is a set with one element, which is essentially the ball of radius $r^{-2}$ around the origin.
For a given $\theta(\xi)$ and a given scale $\sigma$, there are $\sim 1$ ${\color{black}\Theta =} \Theta(\sigma, \xi') \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ with $\Theta \subset 2 \tilde \theta$. To see this, note on the one hand that $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset \tilde \theta(\xi)$, and we can choose $\Theta(\sigma, \xi') \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ so that $\Theta(\sigma, \xi') \subset 2 \Theta (\sigma, {\color{black}\xi})$. On the other hand, $\tilde \theta (\xi) \cap N_{r^{-2}}(\Gamma(\sigma^2))$ is essentially equal to the sector $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ (1/2) \sigma^2 \le \omega_3 \le \sigma^2 \}$, and so $2 \tilde \theta (\xi)$ contains $\Theta (\sigma, \xi')$ only if $| \xi - \xi' | \lesssim \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$.
In our proof, $r$ remains fixed but we have to consider various scales $\sigma$. To simplify notation, we abbreviate $\mathbf{S}_{r^{-1}}$ as $\mathbf{S}$. Now for each scale $\sigma$, for each $\theta = \theta(\xi) \in \mathbf{S} = \mathbf{S}_{r^{-1}}$, we associate one $\Theta = \Theta(\sigma, \xi') \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ with $|\xi' - \xi| \le \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$. For each $\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$, we let $\mathbf{S}_\Theta$ be the set of all $\theta \in \mathbf{S}$ which are associated with $\Theta$. So for each $\sigma$, $\mathbf{S}= \bigsqcup_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma} \mathbf{S}_\Theta$. If $\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta$, then $\Theta \subset 2 \tilde \theta$.
Let $\Omega = \cup_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}} \tilde \theta \sim \cup_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_1} \Theta$. Since $(|f_\theta|^2)^\wedge$ is supported on $\tilde \theta$, it follows that $\hat g$ is supported on $\Omega$. We break $\Omega$ into pieces associated with different scales $\sigma$ as follows. We define $\Omega_{\le \sigma} = \cup_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma} \Theta$. Then we define $\Omega_\sigma = \Omega_{\le \sigma} \setminus \Omega_{\le \sigma/2}$ if $\sigma > r^{-1}$, and we define $\Omega_{r^{-1}} = \Omega_{\le r^{-1}}$, so that
$$\Omega = \bigsqcup_{r^{-1} \le \sigma \le 1} \Omega_\sigma. $$
\noindent (Here $\bigsqcup$ denotes a disjoint union, and the union is over dyadic $\sigma$.)
Now if $\omega \in \Omega_\sigma$, we bound $|\hat g(\omega)|$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{decgomega} | \hat g(\omega) | = |\sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}} ( |f_\theta|^2)^\wedge (\omega)| \le \sum_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma} | \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta} ( |f_\theta|^2)^\wedge (\omega) | . \end{equation}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemTheta1} If $\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ makes a non-zero contribution to the right-hand side of (\ref{decgomega}) for an $\omega\in \Omega_{\sigma}$, then $\omega \in 4 \Theta$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Suppose that $ \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta} ( |f_\theta|^2)^\wedge (\omega) $ is non-zero. Then we must have $\omega \in \tilde \theta$ for some $\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta$.
Suppose $\theta = \theta(\xi)$ and $\Theta = \Theta(\sigma, \xi')$. Since $\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{\Theta}$, we know that $| \xi - \xi'| \le \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$ and so $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset 2 \Theta$.
We claim that $\tilde \theta \cap \Omega_{\le \sigma}$ is contained in $2 \Theta(\sigma, \xi)$. This will finish the proof, because $\omega \in \tilde \theta \cap \Omega_{\le \sigma} \subset 2 \Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset 4 \Theta (\sigma, \xi')$.
To check the claim, we have to understand the geometry of the set $\Omega_{\le \sigma}$. To picture the set $\Omega_{\le \sigma}$, we found it helpful to consider the intersection of $\Theta(\sigma, \xi)$ with the plane $\omega_3 = h$. We assume $|h| \le \sigma^2$ -- otherwise the intersection is empty. The intersection $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \}$ is a rectangle with dimensions $r^{-1} \sigma \times {\color{black}\sqrt{2}} r^{-2}$, and the long side of the rectangle is tangent to the circle of radius $h$ around the origin at the point $h \xi$. Therefore, $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ \omega_3 = h\}$ is contained in the annulus $ \{h^2 \le \omega_1^2 + \omega_2^2 \le h^2 + r^{-2} \sigma^2\}$. If we rotate $\xi$, the rectangle $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ \omega_3 = h\}$ rotates also, and the union of these rotated rectangles over all $\xi$ is equal to this annulus. Therefore, if $h \le \sigma^2$, $\Omega_{\le \sigma} \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \}$ is approximately equal to this annulus:
\begin{equation}\label{Omega<sig} \Omega_{\le \sigma} \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \} \sim \{ \omega: \omega_3 = h, h^2 \le \omega_1^2 + \omega_2^2 \le h^2 + r^{-2} \sigma^2\}. \end{equation}
On the other hand, $\tilde \theta(\xi) \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \} = \Theta(1, \xi) \cap \{\omega_3 = h \}$ is a rectangle of dimensions $\sim r^{-1} \times r^{-2}$ which is tangent to the circle of radius $h$ at $h \xi$. The intersection of this rectangle with the annulus above is contained in a shorter rectangle with the same center and with dimensions $\sigma r^{-1} \times r^{-2}$, which in turn is contained in $2 \Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \}$. Since this holds for every $h$ with $|h| \le \sigma^2$, we see that $\tilde \theta(\xi) \cap \Omega_{\le \sigma} \subset 2 \Theta(\sigma, \xi)$ as claimed.
\end{proof}
Using Lemma \ref{lemTheta1}, we can rewrite inequality (\ref{decgomega}): if $\omega \in \Omega_{\sigma}$, then
\begin{equation} \label{decgomega2} | \hat g(\omega) | \le \sum_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma, \omega \in 4 \Theta} | \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta} ( |f_\theta|^2)^\wedge (\omega) | . \end{equation}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemTheta2} For any $\omega \in \Omega_\sigma$, the number of $\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ so that $\omega \in 4 \Theta$ is bounded by a constant $C$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Building on the description of $\Omega_{\le \sigma}$ in (\ref{Omega<sig}) above, we see that if $|h| \le \sigma^2/4$, then $\Omega_\sigma \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \}$ is approximately given by
\begin{equation}\label{annulus'} \{ h^2 + (1/4) r^{-2} \sigma^2 \le \omega_1^2 + \omega_2^2 \le h^2 + r^{-2} \sigma^2 \}. \end{equation}
If $ \sigma^2/4 \le |h| \le \sigma^2$, then $\Omega_\sigma \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \}$ is approximately given by
\begin{equation}\label{annulus''} \{ h^2 \le \omega_1^2 + \omega_2^2 \le h^2 + r^{-2} \sigma^2 \}. \end{equation}
Let $C_{h, \rho}$ be the circle defined by $\omega_3 = h$ and $\omega_1^2 + \omega_2^2 = \rho^2$ with $|h| \le \sigma^2$ and $\rho$ chosen {\color{black}such that $C_{h, \rho}$ lies} in (\ref{annulus'}) or (\ref{annulus''}). These circles cover $\Omega_\sigma$.
For any $\xi$, we will compute in the next two paragraphs that the fraction of {\color{black}$C_{h, \rho}$} contained in $4 \Theta(\sigma, \xi)$ is $\lesssim \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$. There are $\sim \sigma r$ different $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$. By circular symmetry, each frequency $\omega \in C_{h, \rho}$ lies in $4 \Theta$ for approximately the same number of $\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$, and so each frequency $\omega$ lies in $4 \Theta$ for $\le C$ different $\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$.
We first do the case $|h| \le \sigma^2/4$. Recall that $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \cap \{ \omega_3 =h \}$ is a rectangle with dimensions $r^{-1} \sigma \times r^{-2}$ which is tangent to the circle of radius $|h|$. Suppose for now that $r^{-1} \sigma \le |h|$. If $A, B$ are the two endpoints of this rectangle and $O$ is the origin, then the angle $AOB$ is approximately $r^{-1} \sigma / |h|$. The angle between the rectangle $\Theta \cap \{\omega_3=h\}$ and the circle $C_{h,\rho}$ is approximately equal to the angle $AOB$. Therefore, the arc length of $4 \Theta \cap C_{h, \rho}$ is bounded by
$$ \textrm{Length }(4 \Theta \cap C_{h, \rho} ) \lesssim r^{-1} \sigma^{-1} |h|. $$
\noindent Since the length of $C_{h, \rho}$ is $2\pi \rho \sim |h|$, the fraction of $C_{h, \rho}$ contained in $4 \Theta$ is $\lesssim r^{-1} \sigma^{-1}$ as desired.
If $|h| {\color{black}<} r^{-1} {\color{black}\sigma}$, then the angle $AOB$ is $\sim 1$, and the length of $4 \Theta \cap C_{h, \rho}$ is approximately $r^{-2}$. In this case the length of $C_{h, \rho}$ is $2\pi \rho \sim r^{-1} \sigma$, and so the fraction of $C_{h, \rho}$ covered by $4 \Theta$ is still $\lesssim r^{-1} \sigma^{-1}$.
Finally, suppose that $\sigma^2/4\leq |h| \leq \sigma^2$. In this case $4 \Theta \cap C_{h, \rho}$ has arc length $\sim \sigma r^{-1}$ (the long side of the rectangle $\Theta \cap \{ \omega_3 = h \}$. Since the length of $C_{h, \rho}$ is $2\pi\rho \sim |h| \sim \sigma^2$, the fraction of $C_{h, \rho}$ covered by $4 \Theta$ is again $\lesssim \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$.
\end{proof}
Remark. If $\omega \in \Omega_\sigma$ and $|\omega_3|$ is much smaller than $\sigma^2$, then $\omega$ lies in two rather different $\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$, and maybe also on other $\Theta$ neighboring these two. This is because a point outside a circle lies on two lines tangent to the circle.
\vskip5pt
Applying Cauchy--Schwarz to (\ref{decgomega2}) and using Lemma \ref{lemTheta2} we see that if $\omega \in \Omega_\sigma$, then
\begin{equation} \label{decgomega3} | \hat g(\omega) |^2 \lesssim \sum_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma, \omega \in 4 \Theta} | \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta} ( |f_\theta|^2)^\wedge (\omega) |^2 . \end{equation}
We let $\eta_\Theta$ be a smooth function which is {\color{black}$\geq 1$} on $4 \Theta$ and decays {\color{black}rapidly} outside $4 \Theta$. Summing over all dyadic $\sigma$, we see that for every frequency $\omega$,
$$ | \hat g(\omega)|^2 \lesssim \sum_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}} \left| \eta_\Theta(\omega) \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta} ( |f_\theta|^2)^\wedge (\omega)\right|^2. $$
Now we integrate and use Plancherel, giving
$$ \int |g|^2 \lesssim \sum_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}} \int | \eta_\Theta^\vee * \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{{\color{black}\Theta}}} |f_\theta|^2 |^2. $$
Now we can choose $\eta_\Theta$ so that $| \eta_\Theta^\vee (x)| \lesssim |\Theta^*|^{-1}$ for all $x$, and $\eta_\Theta^\vee$ is supported on $\Theta^*$. Therefore, it is natural to break up the right integral into translated copies of $\Theta^*$:
$$ \int |g|^2 \lesssim \sum_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}} \sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} \Theta^*} \int_U | \eta_\Theta^\vee * \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{{\color{black}\Theta}}} |f_\theta|^2 |^2. $$
In the last integral, for each $x \in U$, we have
$$ | \eta_\Theta^\vee * \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta} |f_\theta|^2(x) | \lesssim |U|^{-1} \int \eta_U \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{{\color{black}\Theta}}} |f_\theta|^2 , $$
\noindent where $\eta_U(z)=|\Theta^*| \cdot \max_{y\in z+ \Theta^* - U} |\eta_{\Theta}^{\vee}(y)|$ is a bump function with $\|\eta_U\|_{\infty} \sim 1$ supported on $2U$. We remark that the arguments presented here exploit the locally constant property. We shall discuss another variant of this property in Lemma~\ref{lem: locally constant}.
Therefore,
$$ \int |g|^2 \lesssim \sum_{\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}} \sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} \Theta^*} |U|^{-1} \left( \int \eta_U \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta} |f_\theta|^2 \right)^2. $$
We associate $\Theta(\sigma, \xi)$ to $\tau(\sigma^{-1} r^{-1}, \xi)$. This gives a bijection from $\mathbf{CP}_\sigma$ to $\mathbf{S}_s$ with $s = \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$. If $\Theta(\sigma, \xi) \subset 2 \tilde\theta(\xi')$, then we saw above that $| \xi - \xi'| \lesssim \sigma^{-1} r^{-1}$, and so $\theta(\xi') \subset 4 \tau(\sigma^{-1} r^{-1}, \xi)$. In particular, if $\theta \in \mathbf{S}_\Theta$, then $\theta \subset 4 \tau$. Also $\Theta(\sigma, \xi)^*$ is comparable to $U_{\tau(\sigma^{-1} r^{-1}, \xi), r^2}$, which we can see by comparing the definition of $U_{\tau,r^2}$ in (\ref{defUtau}) with the definition of $\Theta$ in (\ref{defTheta}). Rewriting the last inequality in terms of $\tau \in \mathbf{S}_s$ instead of $\Theta \in \mathbf{CP}_\sigma$, we get
$$ \int |g|^2 \lesssim \sum_{r^{-1} \le s \le 1} \sum_{\tau \in \mathbf{S}_s} \sum_{U \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,r^2}} |U|^{-1} \left(\int \eta_U \sum_{\theta \subset \tau} |f_\theta|^2 \right)^2. $$
{\color{black}By the definition of $S_U f$,}
$$ \sum_{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau, r^2}} (\int \eta_U \sum_{\theta \subset \tau} | f_\theta|^2)^2 \lesssim \sum_{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,r^2} } \| S_{U} f \|_{L^2}^4.$$
Plugging this in, we get
$$ \int |g|^2 \lesssim
\underset{r^{-1}\leq s \leq 1}{\sum} ~ \underset{d(\tau)=s}{\sum} ~ \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,r^2}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|S_Uf\|_{L^2}^4.
$$
This proves Lemma \ref{incidenceintro} by taking $r = R^{\frac{1}{2}}$. \end{proof}
We use this Kakeya-type estimate as well as local orthogonality to prove Lemma \ref{ball inflation}. First we recall local orthogonality, and then we recall the statement of Lemma \ref{ball inflation}.
Local orthogonality is written using a weight functions localized a given ball. For a ball $B_R$ of radius $R$, define the weight
$$w_{B_R, E} (x) = (1+\frac{\mathrm{dist} (x, B_R)}{R})^{-E}.$$
\begin{lemma}[Local $L^2$ orthogonality lemma, essentially Proposition 6.1 in \cite{BD2}]\label{localorthogonality} Suppose that $f \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^n)$. Suppose that $f = \sum_\theta f_\theta$, where $\mathrm{supp} {\hat f_{\theta}} \subset \theta$ in the Fourier space. In this statement the sets $\theta$ are arbitrary. Suppose that $r > 0$ and that each $\xi \in \mathbb{R}^n$ lies in $N_{r^{-1}(\theta)}$ for at most $M$ different sets $\theta$ appearing in the sum. Then for any $E>0$,
$$\|f\|_{L^2 (B_r)}^2 \lesssim_{M, E} \sum_{\theta\in\mathcal{I}} \|f_{\theta}\|_{L^2 (w_{B_r, E})}^2.$$
\end{lemma}
To prove Lemma~\ref{localorthogonality}, it suffices to take a function $\psi_{B_r}$ such that $ \psi_{B_r}\gtrsim 1 $ on $B_r$, $|\psi_{B_r}(x)|\leq C_E (1+r^{-1}\text{dist}(x, B_r))^{-E/2}$, and $\hat{\psi}_{B_r}\subset B(0, r^{-1})$. Then $\|f\|_{L^2(B_r)}\lesssim \|f\psi_{B_r} \|_{L^2}$. We apply Plancherel's theorem and observe that the support of $\widehat{f}_{\theta}\ast \widehat{\psi}_{B_r}$ lies in $N_{r^{-1}}(\theta)$.
Now we turn to the proof of Lemma \ref{ball inflation}. Unwinding the definition of $S(r,R)$, Lemma \ref{ball inflation} says
\begin{lemma*}
{\color{black}If} $\hat f$ is supported on $N_{r^{-2}}(\Gamma)$ {\color{black}and $r_1 \in [r, r^2]$}, then
\begin{equation} \label{eqballinfl} \sum_{{\color{black}B_{r_1}}\subset {\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} |{\color{black}B_{r_1}}|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_{B_{r_1}} f}\|_{L^2({\color{black}B_{r_1}})}^4
{\color{black}\lesssim} \underset{ r^{-1} \leq s \leq 1 }{\sum}~~\sum_{d(\tau)=s}~~ \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau, r^2}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4. \end{equation}
\end{lemma*}
\begin{proof} [Proof of Lemma \ref{ball inflation}] As in Lemma \ref{incidenceintro}, let $g = \sum_{\theta \in \mathbf{S}_{r^{-1}}} |f_\theta|^2$. The functions $f_\theta$ have essentially disjoint Fourier support. Since $r\leq r_1$, each point $\xi$ lies in $\lesssim 1$ many $N_{r_1^{-1}}(\theta)$.
We choose $E$ sufficiently large (for instance $E = 10$). Then we apply the local $L^2$ orthogonality Lemma \ref{localorthogonality}, on each ${\color{black}B_{r_1}}$:
$$ \| {\color{black}S_{B_{r_1}} f} \|_{L^2({\color{black}B_{r_1}})}^2 {\color{black}=\int_{B_{r_1}} \sum_{d(\tau) = r_1^{-1/2}} |f_{\tau}|^2} \lesssim {\color{black}\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} w_{B_{r_1}, E}\cdot} {\color{black}\sum_{d(\tau) = r_1^{-1/2}} \sum_{\theta \subset \tau} |f_{\theta}|^2}
\sim \int_{{\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} {\color{black}w_{B_{r_1}, E}\cdot}g. $$
By Cauchy--Schwarz, we get
$$ |{\color{black}B_{r_1}}|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_{B_{r_1}} f} \|_{L^2({\color{black}B_{r_1}})}^4 \lesssim \int_{{\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} {\color{black}w_{B_{r_1}, E/2}\cdot}|g|^2. $$
Summing over $B_{r_1}$,
$$ \sum_{{\color{black}B_{r_1}}\subset {\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} |{\color{black}B_{r_1}}|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_{B_{r_1}} f}\|_{L^2({\color{black}B_{r_1}})}^4 \lesssim \int_{{\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} |g|^2. $$
Lemma \ref{incidenceintro} bounds $\int_{{\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} |g|^2$ by the right-hand side of (\ref{eqballinfl}).
\end{proof}
{\color{black}
\section{The Lorentz rescaling}\label{lorentz}
Lorentz transformations are the symmetries of our problem, and they have been used in many earlier papers on this topic (cf. for instance \cite{W} and \cite{BD}). Here we review {\color{black}the Lorentz} rescaling and check the properties that we will need in our rescaling argument in the next {\color{black}two sections}.
The {\color{black}piece $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$} is defined to work well with Lorentz transformations, and we now record the formula. This formula and the Lorentz rescaling generally look nicest in a rotated coordinate system where the light cone is given by the equation $2 {\color{black} \nu_1\nu_3} = {\color{black} \nu_2^2}$. Here ${\color{black} \nu_2} = \xi_1$, ${\color{black} \nu_1} = 2^{-1/2} (\xi_3 - \xi_2)$ and ${\color{black} \nu_3} = 2^{-1/2}(\xi_3 + \xi_2)$.
In these coordinates, if we intersect the light cone with the plane ${\color{black} \nu_3}=1$ then we get the parabola ${\color{black} \nu_1} = (1/2) {\color{black} \nu_2^2}$. So the light cone is actually the cone over a parabola.
Now $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ is defined as follows.
$$\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}=\{ 2{\color{black} \nu_1 \nu_3}={\color{black} \nu_2^2}, 1-\frac{1}{K}\leq {\color{black} \nu_3}\leq 1, |\frac{{\color{black} \nu_2}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}}|\leq 1\}.$$
For any real number $\eta$ with $|\eta| < 1$ and $0 < s < 1$ satisfying $-1 \leq {\color{black}\eta} \pm s \leq 1$, we can define a \emph{surface sector} $\Lambda \subseteq \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{defnoftauandtheta}
\Lambda = \Lambda (\eta, s) = \{({\color{black} \nu_1}, {\color{black} \nu_2}, {\color{black} \nu_3}) \in \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}: |\frac{{\color{black} \nu_2}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}}-{\color{black}\eta}| < s \}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Here $s$ is the {\it aperture} of $\Lambda$, also denoted by $d(\Lambda)$. For each $\Lambda$, let $\eta(\Lambda)$ denote the $\eta$ in \eqref{defnoftauandtheta}.
Each surface sector $\Lambda$ is closely associated to a sector $\tau = \tau(\Lambda)$, which is a rectangular box containing $\Lambda$ with smallest comparable dimensions. The sector $\tau(\Lambda)$ is approximately the convex hull of $\Lambda$ in the sense that $\frac{1}{10} \tau(\Lambda)\subset \text{ConvexHull}(\Lambda) \subset 10\tau(\Lambda)$. Similarly, starting with any sector $\tau$, there is an associated surface sector $\Lambda_\tau = \tau \cap \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$. The aperture of $\Lambda_\tau$ and the aperture of $\tau$ are approximately the same.
For any surface sector $\Lambda \subset \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ there is a Lorentz transformation $\mathcal{L}$ which maps $\Lambda$ diffeomorphically onto $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$. (The precise definition of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ was arranged to make this work.) The formula for ${\color{black}\mathcal{L}}$ is as follows.
{\color{black} Let} $\mathcal{L} : \Lambda(d(\Lambda), \eta) \rightarrow \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ {\color{black}be} defined as (away from $\{z=0\}$):
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rll}
{\color{black} \nu_3} & \mapsto & {\color{black} \nu_3},\\
\frac{{\color{black} \nu_2}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}} & \mapsto & \frac{1}{d(\Lambda)}(\frac{{\color{black} \nu_2}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}} - \eta(\Lambda)),\\
\frac{{\color{black} \nu_1}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}} & \mapsto & \frac{1}{d(\Lambda)^2}(\frac{{\color{black} \nu_1}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}} - \eta(\Lambda)\cdot \frac{{\color{black} \nu_2}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}} + \frac{\eta(\Lambda)^2}{2}).
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
We can see that $\mathcal{L}$ is actually a linear transformation:
\begin{equation} \label{lortrans}
\left\{
\begin{array}{rll}
{\color{black} \nu_3} & \mapsto & {\color{black} \nu_3},\\
{\color{black} \nu_2} & \mapsto & \frac{1}{d(\Lambda)}({\color{black} \nu_2} - \eta(\Lambda){\color{black} \nu_3}),\\
{\color{black} \nu_1} & \mapsto & \frac{1}{d(\Lambda)^2}({\color{black} \nu_1} - \eta(\Lambda){\color{black} \nu_2} + \frac{\eta(\Lambda)^2}{2}{\color{black} \nu_3}).
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
This linear transformation $\mathcal{L}$ is called {\color{black}a} Lorentz rescaling.
Suppose that $\tau$ is a sector with $d(\tau) = s$, and let $\Lambda = \Lambda_\tau$. {\color{black} We then} study the rescaling map $\mathcal{L}$ defined in (\ref{lortrans}). We will need to keep track of how this change of variables affects the characters in our inequalities, like sectors $\tau' \subset \tau$ and the regions $U_{\tau,R}$.
First, if $\Lambda' \subset \Lambda$ is a smaller surface sector, then $\mathcal{L}( \Lambda')$ is a surface sector of aperture $\sim s^{-1} d(\tau')$.
More precisely, since $\Lambda' \subseteq \Lambda$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{containmentbetweeentautildeandtau}
[{\color{black}\eta(\Lambda')}- d(\Lambda'), \eta(\Lambda') + d(\Lambda')] \subseteq [\eta(\Lambda)- d(\Lambda), \eta(\Lambda) + d(\Lambda)].
\end{equation}
\noindent By the above definition of $\mathcal{L}$, we can see that $\mathcal{L}(\Lambda')$ is defined as
$$\{({\color{black} \nu_1}, {\color{black} \nu_2}, {\color{black} \nu_3}) \in \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}: \frac{{\color{black} \nu_2}}{{\color{black} \nu_3}} \in [\frac{1}{d(\Lambda)}(\eta(\Lambda') - \eta(\Lambda)) - \frac{d(\Lambda')}{d(\Lambda)}, \frac{1}{d(\Lambda)}(\eta(\Lambda') - \eta(\Lambda)) + \frac{d(\Lambda')}{d(\Lambda)}] \}.$$
We see that (\ref{containmentbetweeentautildeandtau}) implies the above range of ${\color{black} \nu_2 / \nu_3}$ is in $[-1, 1]$, and that $\mathcal{L}(\Lambda')$ is a {\color{black} surface sector} of aperture $\frac{d(\Lambda')}{d(\Lambda)}$ lying inside the whole $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}} = \mathcal{L}(\Lambda)$.
Next we consider how $\mathcal{L}$ affects sectors $\tau' \subset \tau$. Suppose that $\Lambda_{\tau'}$ is a surface sector associated to $\tau'$. Note that $\tau'$ is approximately the convex hull of $\Lambda_{\tau'}$. Since taking convex hulls commutes with linear transformations, we see that $\mathcal{L}(\tau')$ is approximately the convex hull of $\mathcal{L}(\Lambda_{\tau'})$, which is a sector of aperture $\sim s^{-1} d(\tau')$.
Next we consider $\mathcal{L}(N_{R^{-1}}({\color{black}\Lambda}))$ for some $R > s^{-2}$. Note that $N_{s^2}(\Lambda)$ is approximately $\tau(\Lambda)$, but if $R > s^{-2}$ then $N_{s^2}(\Lambda)$ is far from being a convex set. The $R^{-1}$-neighborhood of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ is covered by sectors $\theta \subset \tau$ with $d(\theta) = R^{-1/2}$. Therefore, $\mathcal{L}(N_{R^{-1}}({\color{black}\Lambda}))$ is covered by sectors $\mathcal{L}(\theta)$ with aperture $\sim s^{-1} R^{-1/2}$. The union of these sectors is the $s^{-2} R^{-1}$-neighorhood of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$. In summary
$\mathcal{L}(N_{R^{-1}}({\color{black}\Lambda}))$ is approximately $N_{s^{-2} R^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$.
Next we consider how the adjoint transformation, $\mathcal{L}^*$, behaves on physical space. It is standard that the adjoint transformation behaves naturally with respect to taking duals, so, if $\theta$ is a sector, then we have $\mathcal{L}(\theta)^* = \mathcal{L}^* (\theta^*)$.
Finally we consider how $\mathcal{L}^*$ affects the sets $U_{\tau,R}$.
Recall from (\ref{defUtau}) that if $\tau = \tau(s, \xi)$, then
\begin{equation} \label{defUtau'} U_{\tau, R} = \{ x \in \mathbb{R}^3: |\mathbf{c}(\xi) \cdot x| \le R s^{2} \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{n}(\xi) \cdot x| \le R \textrm{ and } | \mathbf{t}(\xi) \cdot {\color{black}x} | \le R s \}. \end{equation}
\noindent There is an equivalent more conceptual description, which is useful for understanding $\mathcal{L}^* (U_{\tau, R})$.
\begin{equation} \label{defUtau'} U_{\tau, R} \approx \textrm{Convex Hull } ( \cup_{\theta \subset \tau, d(\theta) = R^{-1/2}} \theta^* ). \end{equation}
Now let $\tau$ again denote a fixed sector with $d(\tau)=s$ and let $\mathcal{L}$ be the Lorentz rescaling that takes $\Lambda_\tau$ to $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$.
\begin{lemma} \label{LUtau} For any sector $\tau' \subset \tau$ and any $R \ge s^{-2}$,
$$ \mathcal{L}^* (U_{\tau', R}) = U_{\mathcal{L}(\tau'), s^2 R}. $$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{align*}
\mathcal{L}^* (U_{\tau', R}) \approx& \mathrm{Convex Hull } ( \cup_{\theta \subset \tau', d(\theta) = R^{-1/2}} \mathcal{L}^* \theta^* )\\
\approx & \textrm{Convex Hull } ( \cup_{\theta \subset \tau', d(\theta) = R^{-1/2}} \mathcal{L}(\theta)^* )\\
\approx & \textrm{Convex Hull } ( \cup_{\theta \subset \mathcal{L}(\tau'), d(\theta) = s^{-1} R^{-1/2}} \theta^* ) \approx U_{\mathcal{L}(\tau'), s^2 R}. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
We have now gathered enough background about Lorentz rescaling to carry out our Lorentz rescaling arguments in the next {\color{black}two sections}.
\section{The Proof of Lemma~\ref{small ball}} \label{secparab}
In this section, we prove Lemma~\ref{small ball}. First we prove several lemmas about the ``locally constant property'' of $f_{\theta}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: locally constant}
Let $\theta\subset \mathbb{R}^n$ be a compact convex set which is symmetric about a center point $c(\theta)$.
If $\text{supp} \hat{f}_{\theta}\subset \theta$ and $T_{\theta}=\theta^*=\{x: |x\cdot (y-c(\theta))| \leq 1 \text{~for ~ all~} y\in \theta\}$, then there exists {\color{black}a positive} function $\eta_{T_{\theta}}$ satisfying:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\eta_{T_{\theta}}$ is essentially supported on $10T_{\theta}$ and rapidly decays away from it: for any integer $N\geq 0$, there exists a constant $C_N$ such that $\eta_{T_{\theta}}(x)\leq C_N (n(x, 10T_{\theta}))^{-N}$ where $n(x, 10T_{\theta})$ is the smallest positive integer $n$ such that $x \in n\cdot 10T_{\theta}$,
\item $\|\eta_{T_{\theta}}\|_{L^1}\lesssim 1$,
\item
\begin{equation}\label{locally constant}
|f_{\theta}|\leq \sum_{T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} c_T \chi_T\leq |f_{\theta}|\ast \eta_{T_{\theta}}
\end{equation}
{\color{black}where $c_T$ is defined as $\max_{x\in T} |f_{\theta}|(x)$} and the sum $\sum_{T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}}$ is over a finitely overlapping cover $\{T\}$ of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with each $T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We bound $|f_{\theta}|$ by
\begin{equation}
|f_{\theta}|\leq \sum_{T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} c_{T}\chi_T{\color{black}.}
\end{equation}
Let $\phi_{\theta}$ be a smooth bump function supported on $2\theta$ and $\phi_{\theta}=1$ on $\theta$.
Since $\text{supp} \hat{f}_{\theta}\subset \theta$, we have $\hat{f}_{\theta}=\hat{f}_{\theta}\phi_{\theta}$ and $f_{\theta}= f_{\theta}\ast \phi_{\theta}^{\vee}$. Let $\eta_{T_{\theta}}(x) =\underset{t\in x+10T_{\theta}}{\max} |\phi_{\theta}^{\vee}|(t)$. By non stationary phase, $\phi_{\theta}^{\vee}$ is a function essentially supported on $T_{\theta} =\theta^*$, $|\phi_{\theta}^{\vee} (x)|\leq C_N (n(x, T_{\theta}))^{-N}$ and $\|\phi_{\theta}^{\vee}\|_{L^1}\sim 1$, so $\eta_{T_{\theta}}$ satisfies (1) and (2).
For any $T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}$,
\begin{align*}
\max_{x\in T} |f_{\theta}|(x)&\leq \max_{x\in T}\int |f_{\theta}|(y) |\phi_{\theta}^{\vee}(x-y)|dy\\
&\leq \min_{x\in T} \int|f_{\theta}|(y) \eta_{T_{\theta}}(x-y) dy
\end{align*}
because for each $y$, $\underset{x\in T}{\max} |\phi_{\theta}^{\vee}|(x-y) \leq \underset{x\in T}{\min} ~~ \underset{t\in x-y+10T_{\theta}}{\max}|\phi_{\theta}^{\vee}|(t)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: convolution}
Let $\eta_{T_{\theta}}$ be defined as in Lemma~\ref{lem: locally constant} and $T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}$, then for any integer $N>0$,
there exists a {\color{black}positive} function $w_{T} =1 $ on $10T$ and $w_{T}(x)\leq C_N(1+\text{dist}(x, T))^{-N}$ such that for any $1\leq p<\infty$, \begin{equation}\label{convolution}
\int_T (|f_{\theta}|\ast \eta_{T_{\theta}} )^p \lesssim_p \int |f_{\theta}|^p w_T.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We only need to prove the lemma for $N$ sufficiently large (depending on $p$).
The function $\eta_{T_{\theta}}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\eta_{T_{\theta}} \leq \sum_{T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} C_T \chi_T
\end{equation}
where $C_{T} \cdot |T| \lesssim_N n(T, T_{\theta})^{-N}$ for any large integer $N>0$ and $n(T, T_{\theta})$ is the smallest $n\geq 1$ such that $ T\subset nT_{\theta}$.
By H\"{o}lder's inequality,
\begin{align*}
\int_T (|f_{\theta}| \ast \eta_{T_{\theta}})^p &\leq \int_{T} (\sum_{T'\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} |f_{\theta}|\ast C_{T'}\chi_{T'} )^p\\
&{\color{black}=}\int_T (\sum_{T'\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} n(T', T_{\theta})^{-\frac{4(p-1)}{ p}} \cdot
n(T', T_{\theta})^{\frac{4(p-1)} {p}} |f_{\theta}|\ast C_{T'} \chi_{T'})^p
\\
&\lesssim (\sum_{T'\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} n(T', T_{\theta}) ^{-4})^{p-1}\cdot \sum_{T'\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} n(T', T_{\theta})^{4(p-1)} \int_T(|f_{\theta}|\ast C_{T'}\chi_{T'})^p\\
&\lesssim \sum_{T'\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}} n(T', T_{\theta})^{4(p-1)} \int_T(|f_{\theta}|\ast C_{T'} \chi_{T'})^p.
\end{align*}
Let $\chi_{T - T'}(x)$ be the characteristic function {\color{black}of} the Minkowski sum $T-T'= T+ (-T')$. Then by Young's inequality,
\begin{align*}
\int_T (|f_{\theta}|\ast C_{T'} \chi_{T'})^p & \leq \int ((|f_{\theta}|\chi_{T-T'} )\ast (C_{T'}\chi_{T'}))^p \\
&\lesssim_N n(T', T_{\theta})^{-pN}. \int_{T-T'} |f_{\theta}|^p
\end{align*}
It suffices to choose $w_T(x)\sim_N \sum_{ \tilde{T}\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T} n(\tilde{T}, T)^{-N} \chi_{\tilde{T}}(x)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor: convolution}
If $U$ is tiled by $T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}$, then for any $1\leq p<\infty$,
\begin{equation}
\int_U (|f_{\theta}|\ast \eta_{T_{\theta}} )^p \lesssim_p \int |f_{\theta}|^p w_U
\end{equation}
where $w_U{\color{black}\geq 0}$ is essentially supported on $10U$ and rapidly decays {\color{black}away from it}.
\end{cor}
Remark. It is important that $w_U$ can be taken uniformly independent of the choice of $T$. To see this, simply notice that if $x \in nU$ and $x \notin (n-1)U$ then $x$ cannot be in $(n-1)T$ for any $T \subset U$. Moreover for any $m$, a point $x$ lies in $mT$ for $\lesssim m^3$ different $T$ in a given tiling $\{T\}_{T\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\theta}}$ of $\mathbb{R}^3$.
\begin{lemma}\label{iterate}
Let $\theta_1,\theta_2\subset \tau $ be two sectors of aperture $d(\theta_1)=d(\theta_2)={\color{black}K^{-1/2}}$, and $\text{dist}(\theta_1, \theta_2)\sim d(\tau) =s>{\color{black}K^{-1/2}}$, then for any {\color{black}functions $\mathrm{supp} \hat{f}_{\theta_1}\subset N_{\frac{1}{K}}\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}} \cap \theta_1$ and $\mathrm{supp} \hat{f}_{\theta_2}\subset N_{\frac{1}{K}}\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}} \cap \theta_2$},
$$\sum_{{\color{black}B_{K^{1/2}}}\subset \mathbb{R}^3}
\int_{B_{K^{1/2}}} |f_{\theta_1}f_{\theta_2}|^2 \lesssim {\color{black}s^{-1}} \sum_{{\color{black} B_K \subset \mathbb{R}^3}} |{\color{black} B_K}|^{-1}
\int |f_{\theta_1}|^2 {\color{black} w_{B_K}} \int |f_{\theta_2}|^2 {\color{black} w_{B_K}}.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is essentially a bilinear-Kakeya-style\footnote{Bilinear Kakeya is an elementary statement stating: Let $|\Bbb{T}_1|$ and $|\Bbb{T}_2|$ be two finite families of infinite strips in $\Bbb{R}^2$ such that each strip has width $1$. Assume further that each $T_1 \in \Bbb{T}_1$ and each $T_2 \in \Bbb{T}_2$ have their directions $\sim 1$-separated, then $\int_{\Bbb{R}^2} (\sum_{T_1 \in \Bbb{T}_1} \chi_{T_1})\cdot(\sum_{T_2 \in \Bbb{T}_2} \chi_{T_2}) \lesssim |\Bbb{T}_1|\cdot|\Bbb{T}_2|$.} estimate in $\mathbb{R}^2$
plus the locally constant property in Lemma~\ref{lem: locally constant}. This proof is a simple case of the ball inflation theorem (Theorem 9.2 in \cite{BD2}) in the proof of the Bourgain--Demeter decoupling theorem.
Since {\color{black}$\mathrm{supp} \hat{f}_{\theta_j}\subset N_{\frac{1}{K}}\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}} \cap \theta_j$ for $j = 1, 2$}, the Fourier support of $f_{\theta_j}$ lies inside a box $\tilde{\theta}_j$ of dimensions {\color{black}$K^{-1/2} \times K^{-1} \times K^{-1}$} with a common {\color{black}$K^{-1}$}--side on the $\nu_3$--direction {\color{black}(Recall the $(\nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3)$-coordinate system and the equation of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ from Section \ref{lorentz})}. And $T_{\tilde{\theta}_j}=\tilde{\theta}_j^*$ becomes a {\color{black}slab} of dimensions {\color{black}$K^{1/2} \times K \times K$}. Since $\text{dist}(\tilde{\theta_1}, \tilde{\theta_2}) = \text{dist}(\theta_1, \theta_2)=s$,
for each $T_1\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\tilde{\theta}_1}, T_{2}\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\tilde{\theta}_2}$ and $T_1, T_2\subset {\color{black}B_K}$, {\color{black}we have} $|{\color{black}T_1 \cap T_2}| {\color{black} \sim} {\color{black}K^{1/2}\cdot (s^{-1}K^{1/2})\cdot K = s^{-1}K^2}$. {\color{black}Hence the key inequality $|T_1 \cap T_2| \sim s^{-1} |B_K|^{-1} |T_1| |T_2|$ holds{\footnote{\color{black}Note: All arguments in this paper work if we dilate a convex body by a constant. If we replace $B_K$ by the slightly bigger $B_{10K}$, then it is possible for $T_1$ and $T_2$ to miss each other, hence we can only obtain ``$\lesssim$''instead of the above ``$\sim$''. However we only use ``$\lesssim$'' in the inequality below so ``$\lesssim$'' is good enough to have.}}.}
Using Lemma~\ref{lem: locally constant}, now we are ready to bound
\begin{align*}
\sum_{{\color{black}B_{K^{1/2}}}\subset {\color{black}B_K}}
\int_{B_{K^{1/2}}} |f_{\theta_1}f_{\theta_2}|^2 &\leq \sum_{\color{black}\substack{B_{K^{1/2}} \subset B_K \\ T_1\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\tilde{\theta}_1}, {\color{black}B_{K^{1/2}}}\cap {\color{black}T_1} \neq \emptyset \\ T_2\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\tilde{\theta}_2}, {\color{black}B_{K^{1/2}}}\cap T_2 \neq \emptyset}} |{\color{black}B_{K^{1/2}}}| c_{T_1}^2 c_{ T_2}^2\\
&{\color{black}\lesssim s^{-1}} |{\color{black}B_{K}}|^{-1} (\int_{\color{black}B_{K}} \sum_{T_1\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\tilde{\theta}_1}} c_{ T_1}^2 \chi_{T_1})(\int_{\color{black}B_{K}} \sum_{T_2\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} T_{\tilde{\theta}_2} }c_{T_2}^2 \chi_{T_2})\\
&\leq {\color{black}s^{-1}} |{\color{black}B_{K}}|^{-1} \int_{\color{black}B_{K}} ( |f_{\theta_1}|\ast \eta_{T_{\tilde{\theta}_1}} )^2 \int_{\color{black}B_{K}} ( |f_{\theta_2}|\ast \eta_{T_{\tilde{\theta}_2}} )^2 \\
\text{(Corollary~\ref{cor: convolution})}&\lesssim {\color{black}s^{-1}} |{\color{black}B_{K}}|^{-1} \int |f_{\theta_1}|^2 w_{\color{black}B_{K}} \int |f_{\theta_2}|^2 w_{\color{black}B_{K}}. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem: parabola}
Let $f$ be a function whose Fourier transform is supported on the $\frac{1}{K}$-neighborhood of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$. For any $\delta > 0$
\begin{equation}\label{F4}
\|f\|_{L^4(\mathbb{R}^3)}^4 \leq C_{\delta} K^{\delta} \sum_{K^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1}\sum_{d(\tau)=s} \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau,K}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
{\color{black}We induct on $K$. The base case $K \lesssim_{\delta} 1$ is easy by H\"{o}lder's inequality.}
Let $1\ll K_0 \ll K^{\delta/{\color{black}10}}$. We tile $N_{\frac{1}{K}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$ with sectors $\tau$ of aperture $\frac{1}{K_0}$ and width $\frac{1}{K}$ and decompose $f=\sum_{d(\tau)=\frac{1}{K_0}} f_{\tau}$.
Now $N_{\frac{1}{K}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$ is the $\frac{1}{K}$-neighborhood of an arc of a parabola of length 1, and each $\tau$ is the $\frac{1}{K}$-neighborhood of an arc of the parabola of length $\frac{1}{K_0}$.
The Bourgain--Guth argument \cite{BG} says the following.
At each point $f(x)=\sum_{\tau} f_{\tau}(x)$. Let $\tau^*$ {\color{black}satisfy} $\max_{\tau} |f_{\tau}|(x) = |f_{\tau^*}|(x)$. If $|f_{\tau^*}|(x)\geq 1/10 |f|(x)$, then $|f|^4(x)\lesssim \sum_{\tau} |f_{\tau}|^4(x)$. Otherwise, there exists {\color{black}a} $\tau^{**}$ such that $\text{dist} (\tau^{**},\tau^*)\geq 1/K_0$ and $|f_{\tau^*}|(x)\geq |f_{\tau^{**}}|(x) \geq \frac{1}{2K_0} |f|(x)$.
Hence,
\begin{align*}
|f|^4 \lesssim \sum_{d(\tau)=1/K_0} |f_{\tau}|^4+ K_0^4 \sum_{\text{dist}(\tau_1, \tau_2)\geq 1/K_0} |f_{\tau_1}f_{\tau_2}|^2.
\end{align*}
For the {\color{black}integral of the} first term, we rescale $\tau$ to be the $K^{-1}K_0^2$-neighborhood of $\Gamma_{1/K}$ (the rescaling argument here is similar to the one in the proof of Lemma~\ref{general} in Section~\ref{secusingrescaling}, which we {\color{black}will} do with full details), then we apply {\color{black}the} induction {\color{black}hypothesis} on the scale $K/K_0^2<K$.
For the {\color{black}integral of the} second term, we decompose $f_{\tau_j}=\sum_{\theta_j\subset \tau_j, d(\theta_j)=K^{-1/2}} f_{\theta_j}$, $j=1,2$. The functions $f_{\theta_1}f_{\theta_2}$ are essentially orthogonal because they have almost disjoint Fourier support, as in the Fefferman--C{\'o}rdoba proof of restriction for the parabola {\color{black}\cite{F}\cite{C0}}.
Since $\text{dist}(\tau_1, \tau_2) \geq \frac{1}{K_0}$, the Minkowski sum $(\theta_1+\theta_2) \cap (\theta_1' +\theta_2') = \emptyset$ for $\theta_j, \theta_j' \subset \tau_j$, $j=1,2$, unless $\theta_1'\subset K_0 \theta_1$ and $\theta_2'\subset K_0 \theta_2$. Hence
\begin{align*}
\sum_{B_{K^{1/2}}\subset \mathbb{R}^3}\int_{B_{K^{1/2}}} |f_{\tau_1}f_{\tau_2}|^2 &\leq K_0^2 \sum_{B_{K^{1/2}}\subset \mathbb{R}^3} \sum_{\text{dist}(\theta_1, \theta_2)\geq 1/K_0} \int_{B_{K^{1/2}}} |f_{\theta_1}f_{\theta_2}|^2\\
(\text{Lemma~\ref{iterate}}) &\lesssim K_0^3\sum_{B_K \subset \mathbb{R}^3} |B_K|^{-1} \sum_{\text{dist}(\theta_1, \theta_2)\geq 1/K_0}\int |f_{\theta_1}|^2 w_{B_K} \int |f_{\theta_2}|^2 w_{B_K}\\
&\lesssim K_0^3 \sum_{B_K\subset \mathbb{R}^3} |B_K|^{-1} \|S_{B_K}f\|_{L^2}^4. \qedhere
\end{align*}
The right-hand side of the final line corresponds to the $s=1$ term of the right-hand side of \eqref{F4}.
\end{proof}
We recall the statement of Lemma~\ref{small ball}. Unwinding the definition of $S_K(r,K)$ it says the following:
\begin{prop}\label{thm: parabola}
Let $f$ be a function whose Fourier transform is supported on the $\frac{1}{K}$-neighborhood of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$. For any $\delta > 0$ and any $r\leq K$,
\begin{equation}\label{parabola}
\sum_{B_r\subset {\color{black}\mathbb{R}^3}} |B_r|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_{B_r} f}\|_{L^2(B_r)}^4 \leq C_{\delta} K^{\delta} \sum_{K^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1}\sum_{d(\tau)=s} \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau{\color{black}, K}}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
{\color{black}\begin{proof}
We take advantage that $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ is well-approximated by a parabola at the scale $1/K$ and use an approach similar to Fefferman--C{\'o}rdoba's to bound the left-hand side of (\ref{parabola}) by (essentially) the left-hand side of (\ref{F4})\footnote{\color{black}Alternatively, one can blackbox the $L^4$ angular square function estimate by C{\'o}rdoba \cite{C} and have a slightly shorter proof. We present a self-contained proof here.}.
Since the smallest aperture in this proposition is $K^{-1/2}$, we use $\theta$ to denote a sector on $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ of aperture $K^{-1/2}$ in the current proof.
Let $A_1, \ldots, A_{1000}$ be disjoint sets of $\theta$ such that each $\theta$ is in one of them and:
Within each $A_j$, if the Minkowski sum $(\theta_1 + \theta_2) \cap (\theta_1 '+ \theta_2 ') \neq \emptyset$, then $(\theta_1, \theta_2) = (\theta_1 ', \theta_2 ')$ or $(\theta_2 ', \theta_1 ').$ (*)
Similar to Fefferman--C{\'o}rdoba's proof, we show that if we take each $A_j$ to be a collection of sectors that are enough separated and on a short enough arc, then (*) holds. In fact, it suffices to justify (*) when the constraint $(\theta_1 + \theta_2) \cap (\theta_1 '+ \theta_2 ') \neq \emptyset$ is replaced by the weaker one below: $\pi_3((\theta_1 + \theta_2)) \cap \pi_3 ((\theta_1 '+ \theta_2 ')) \neq \emptyset$. Here $\pi_3$ is the standard projection to the first two coordinates in the $(\nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3)$-coordinate system.
But the projection of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ onto the first two coordinates is contained in the $\frac{2}{K}-$neighborhood of the parabola $\nu_2^2 = 2\nu_1$, and the projection of each $\theta$ is the corresponding cap inside that neighborhood. We use $Error$ to denote a number (the ``error term'') whose absolute value is $\leq 4K^{-1}$. If $x_1 + x_2 = a + Error$ and $x_1^2 + x_2^2 = b + Error$ with $a, b \leq 2$, then $(x_1 - x_2)^2 = 2b-a^2 + 7Error$. Hence $|x_1 - x_2| = \sqrt{|2b-a^2|} + 3\sqrt{Error}$. This would imply that the pair $(x_1, x_2)$ is determined by the pair $(a, b)$, up to a swap in order and up to changing within $100$ adjacent caps $\theta$.
We use $\tau$ to denote caps with aperture $r^{-1/2} \geq K^{-1/2}$ in the current proof. Consider the decomposition $f_j = \sum_{\theta \in A_j} f_{\theta}$ and let $f_{j, \tau} = \sum_{\theta \subset \tau, \theta \in A_j} f_{\theta}$.
By the property (*) and Plancherel, we have for a fixed $j$,
\begin{align}\label{tauFC}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |f_j|^4 & = \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |\sum_{\tau} f_{j, \tau}|^4 \nonumber\\
& = \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \sum_{\tau_1, \tau_2, \tau_3, \tau_4: (\text{supp} f_{j, \tau_1} + \text{supp} f_{j, \tau_2}) \cap (\text{supp} f_{j, \tau_3} + \text{supp} f_{j, \tau_4}) \neq \emptyset} f_{j, \tau_1} f_{j, \tau_2} \bar{f}_{j, \tau_3} \bar{f}_{j, \tau_4} \nonumber\\
& = \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} \sum_{\tau_1, \tau_2} n_{\tau_1, \tau_2}|f_{j, \tau_1} f_{j, \tau_2}|^2 \nonumber\\
& \sim \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} (\sum_{\tau} |f_{j, \tau}|^2)^2
\end{align}
where $n_{\tau_1, \tau_2} = 1$ if $\tau_1 = \tau_2$ and $n_{\tau_1, \tau_2} = 4/2 = 2$ if $\tau_1 \neq \tau_2$.
By (\ref{tauFC}) we have
\begin{align}
\sum_{B_r\subset \mathbb{R}^3} |B_r|^{-1} \|S_{B_r} f\|_{L^2(B_r)}^4
& \lesssim \sum_{j=1}^{1000}\sum_{B_r\subset \mathbb{R}^3} |B_r|^{-1} \|S_{B_r} f_j\|_{L^2(B_r)}^4\nonumber\\
& \leq \sum_{j=1}^{1000} \sum_{B_r\subset \mathbb{R}^3} \|S_{B_r} f_j\|_{L^4(B_r)}^4\nonumber\\
& = \sum_{j=1}^{1000} \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} (\sum_{\tau} |f_{j,\tau}|^2)^2\nonumber\\
& \sim \sum_{j=1}^{1000} \int_{\mathbb{R}^3} |f_j|^4\nonumber\\
(\text{Lemma ~\ref{lem: parabola}}) & \leq C_{\delta}K^{\delta} \sum_{j=1}^{1000} \sum_{K^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1}\sum_{d(\tau)=s} \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau{\color{black}, K}}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f_j}\|_{L^2}^4\nonumber\\
& \lesssim C_{\delta}K^{\delta} \sum_{K^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1}\sum_{d(\tau)=s} \underset{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau{\color{black}, K}}}{\sum} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4. \qedhere
\end{align}
\end{proof}}
\section{The proof of Lemma~\ref{general}} \label{secusingrescaling}
Now we prove Lemma~\ref{general} using the Lorentz rescaling. First we recall the statement.
\begin{lemma*}
For any $r_1< r_2 \leq r_3$,
$$S_K(r_1, r_3)\leq \log r_2 \cdot S_K(r_1, r_2)\max_{r_2^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1}S_K(s^2r_2, s^2 r_3).$$
\end{lemma*}
\begin{proof} Suppose that $\hat f$ is supported on $N_{r_3^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$. To bound $S_K(r_1, r_3)$, we need to bound
$$ \sum_{B_{r_1}\subset {\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3}} |B_{r_1}|^{-1} \|{\color{black} S_{B_{r_1}} f}\|_{L^2(B_{r_1})}^4 .
$$
We can apply the definition of $S_K(r_1, r_2)$ {\color{black} and get}
$$ \sum_{B_{r_1}\subset {\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3}} |B_{r_1}|^{-1} \|{\color{black} S_{B_{r_1}} f}\|_{L^2(B_{r_1})}^4 \le S_K(r_1, r_2) \sum_{r_2^{-1/2} \le s \le 1} \sum_{d(\tau) = s} \sum_{{\color{black}U_1 \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau, r_2}}} |U_1|^{-1} \|{\color{black} S_{U_1} f} \|_{L^2{\color{black}(U_1)}}^4 .$$
Recall that if $U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{ \tau,r}$, then $S_U f=( \underset{d(\theta')=r^{-1/2}, \theta'\subset \tau}{\sum} |f_{\theta'}|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}|_{U}$. In particular, $S_{B_r} f= ( \underset{d(\theta')=r^{-1/2} }{\sum} |f_{\theta'}|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}|_{B_r}$.
Using Lorentz rescaling, we will prove the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}\label{rescaling} For any sector $\tau$ with $d(\tau) = s$,
\begin{equation}\label{before}
\sum_{{\color{black}U_1 \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau, r_2}
} |U_1|^{-1} \|{\color{black} S_{U_1}} f\|_{L^2(U_1)}^4 \leq S_K(s^2r_2, s^2r_3) \sum_{r_3^{-1/2}\leq s'\leq s} ~~\sum_{d(\tau')=s', \tau' \subset \tau} ~~\sum_{{\color{black} U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau', r_3}
} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2{\color{black}(U)}}^4.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
We defer the proof of Lemma \ref{rescaling} {\color{black}to the end of this section}. If we plug in Lemma \ref{rescaling} and expand everything, then we get Lemma \ref{general}:
$$ \sum_{B_{r_1}\subset {\color{black} \mathbb{R}^3}} |B_{r_1}|^{-1} \|{\color{black} S_{B_{r_1}} f}\|_{L^2(B_{r_1})}^4 \leq \log r_2 S_K(r_1, r_2) {\color{black} \max_{r_2^{-1/2}\leq s \leq 1}} S_K(s^2 r_2, s^2r_3) \sum_{r_3^{-1/2}\leq s'\leq 1}\sum_{d(\tau')=s'} \sum_{U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau', r_3}} |U|^{-1}\|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2{\color{black}(U)}}^4. $$
\noindent The factor $\log r_2$ appears here for the following reason: after we expand, each sector $\tau'$ will appear at most $\log r_2$ times, because $\tau'$ lies in $\tau$ for at most $\log r_2$ sectors $\tau$ with $r_2^{-1/2} \le d(\tau) \le 1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof} [Proof of Lemma \ref{rescaling}] The definition of $S_K(s^2 r_2, s^2 r_3)$ says that if $\hat h$ is supported on $N_{s^{-2} r_3^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$, then
\begin{equation} \label{Sonh}
\sum_{{\color{black}B_{s^2 r_2}}} |B_{s^2 r_2}|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_{B_{s^2 r_2}} h} \|_{L^2(B_{s^2 r_2})}^4 \le S_K(s^2 r_2, s^2 r_3) \sum_{s^{-1} r_2^{-1/2} \le d(\tau'') \le 1} \sum_{{\color{black}U'' \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau'', s^2 r_3}}} |U''|^{-1} \| {\color{black}S_{U''} h} \|_{L^2{\color{black}(U'')}}^4.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, Lemma \ref{rescaling} says that if $\tau$ is a sector of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ with $d(\tau) = s$, and $\hat f_\tau$ is supported on $N_{r_3^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}) \cap \tau$, then
\begin{equation}\label{SonfU2}
\sum_{{\color{black}U_1 \mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau, r_2}}} |U_1|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_{U_1} f} \|_{L^2(U_1)}^4 \leq S_K(s^2r_2, s^2r_3) \sum_{r_3^{-1/2}\leq s'\leq s} ~~\sum_{d(\tau')=s', \tau' \subset \tau} ~~\sum_{{\color{black}U\mathbin{\!/\mkern-5mu/\!} U_{\tau', r_3}}} |U|^{-1} \|{\color{black}S_U f}\|_{L^2}^4.
\end{equation}
To connect them, we begin with a Lorentz transformation $\mathcal{L}$ so that $\mathcal{L}: \tau \cap \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}} \rightarrow \Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ is a diffeomorphism. This $\mathcal{L}$ is constructed in Section \ref{lorentz}, where it is shown that $\mathcal{L}$ takes $N_{r_3^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}) \cap \tau$ to $N_{s^{-2} r_3^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$. Now we define $h$ by $\hat{h} = \hat{f}_{{\color{black}\tau}}(\mathcal{L}^{-1}(\cdot))${\color{black}. Moreover let ${\hat h_{\tau''}} = {\hat f_{\tau '}} (\mathcal{L}^{-1} (\cdot))$ where $\mathcal{L} (\tau') = \tau''$, see the item (1) below. We} see that $\hat h$ is supported on $N_{s^{-2} r_3^{-1}}(\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}})$ and so $h$ obeys (\ref{Sonh}). When we unwind the Lorentz transformations, we claim that (\ref{Sonh}) becomes (\ref{SonfU2}), which proves the lemma. To see that this unwinding works as desired, we check how each piece transforms.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\tau' \subset \tau$ is a sector of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ with aperture $d(\tau')$, then $\mathcal{L}(\tau')$ is a sector $\tau''$ of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$ with $d(\tau'') = s^{-1} d(\tau')$, as we showed in Section \ref{lorentz}. {\color{black}In particular, $\mathcal{L}$ transforms a $\theta' \subset \tau$ with aperture $d(\theta')=r_3^{-1/2}$ into a sector with aperture $s^{-1} r_3^{-1/2}$, which appears in the definition of $S_{U''}h$.
}
\item $\mathcal{L}^*(U_{\tau', r_3}) = U_{\tau'', s^2 r_3}$. Since $\tau'' = \mathcal{L}(\tau')$, this follows from Lemma \ref{LUtau}.
\item $\mathcal{L}^* (U_{\tau, r_2}) = B_{s^2 r_2}$. Note that $\mathcal{L}(\tau)$ is the sector corresponding to all of $\Gamma_{\frac{1}{K}}$, which is essentially the unit ball. We will denote this sector just by $B_1$. By Lemma \ref{LUtau}, $\mathcal{L}^* (U_{\tau, r_2}) = U_{B_1, s^2 r_2}$. By definition, the right-hand side is the convex hull of the union of $\theta^*$ over all sectors $\theta$ of aperture $\sim s^{-1} r_2^{-\frac{1}{2}}$, and this is approximately the ball of radius $s^2 r_2$.
\item The Jacobian factors from the change of variables work out the same on the left-hand side and the right-hand side. Since both sides involve a volume to the power $-1$ times an $L^2$ norm to the power 4, the Jacobian factors are the same on both sides of the inequality. \qedhere
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\vskip.25in
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Atoms have long served as testbeds for precision measurements and low-energy tests of fundamental physics. Searches for new physics, including potential candidate particles for dark matter, are ongoing using, for example, the technology of atomic magnetometers \cite{Budker2014}, atomic clocks \cite{Nicholson2015, Derevianko2014}, and atom interferometers \cite{Hamilton2015}. A comprehensive recent review of the role of atoms and molecules in these searches can be found in \cite{Safronova2018}.
A particular class of these atomic physics experiments has exploited the symmetry-violating properties of the weak interaction to study atomic parity nonconservation (PNC), and thus potentially probe both electroweak Standard Model physics and potential new physics. A number of these measurements have reached the 1\% level of experimental accuracy \cite{Antypas2019, Wood1997, Vetter1994, Meekhof1993}. Since electroweak effects in neutral atoms scale rapidly with the atomic number, $Z$, such atomic-physics-based tests have focused on heavy atoms, and require independent theoretical wavefunction calculations in the relevant atomic systems to link measured experimental observables to fundamental parameters \cite{Khriplovich}.
Cesium, the heaviest stable alkali element, is an example of an atomic system where very high-precision \textit{ab initio} atomic theory \cite{Porsev2009, Dzuba2012} has come together with precise experimental efforts \cite{Wood1997} to provide an important low-energy test of electroweak physics. More recently, significant progress has been made in \textit{ab initio} calculational techniques for multi-valence atomic systems \cite{Safronova2008, Safronova2009}. In the trivalent thallium system, an existing high-precision PNC measurement \cite{Vetter1994}, coupled with high-precision calculations \cite{Kozlov2001}, has yielded another atomic-physics-based electroweak test. Current theory accuracy lags that of experiment by roughly a factor of two, so that modest further improvements in multi-valence theory will have a significant impact. In a close experiment/theory collaboration, we have completed a series of precise measurements of atomic properties of thallium and its trivalent cousin indium \cite{Ranjit2013, Augenbraun2016, Vilas2018}, which have served as benchmarks for ongoing calculational efforts \cite{Safronova2013}. In particular, by comparing a series of excited-state polarizability measurements in indium to theoretical predictions from two complementary calculational approaches, we were able to show that a configuration interaction (CI) approach, combined with the coupled-cluster (CC), all-orders method to the three-valence system gave better agreement with experiment than the pure CC method \cite{Vilas2018}.
Recently, Porsev \textit{et al.} have undertaken a new \textit{ab initio} calculation of the atomic structure of tetravalent lead \cite{Porsev2016}. Two high-precision parity nonconservation optical rotation experiments were completed in the 1990s \cite{Meekhof1993, Phipp1996}, but the atomic theory accuracy at that time in this complicated system was estimated to have an uncertainty near 10\%, limiting the potential impact of the measurements on testing electroweak parameters. The 2016 theory work \cite{Porsev2016} improves the precision of the PNC calculation by better than a factor of two. Testing the accuracy of this new calculation and guiding forward further improvements will require a similar suite of benchmark measurements in lead. Beyond some energy level measurements and hyperfine structure measurements in $^{207}$Pb \cite{Bouazza2001, Persson2018}, measurements of atomic properties such as transition amplitudes and polarizabilities at the 1\% level of accuracy do not exist for this element.
Here we present a new measurement and accompanying \textit{ab initio} calculation of the lead ground-state $^3\!P_0 \rightarrow \,^3\!P_2$ electric quadrupole ($E2$) transition amplitude. We intend to follow up this result with future measurements of lead excited-state polarizability within the $6s^2 6p 7s$ manifold (see Fig.~\ref{fig_structure}) using similar techniques and apparatus used for our earlier polarizability work in thallium and indium. Thus, we also include relevant \textit{ab initio} polarizability calculations in Sec.~\ref{theory}.
In the present transition amplitude work, we measure the ratio of the $E2$ amplitude to the that of the ground-state $^3\!P_0 \rightarrow \, ^3\!P_1$ magnetic dipole ($M1$) transition amplitude. This allows us experimentally to eliminate a number of common factors responsible for measured absorptivity of both transitions and extract a ratio of quantum-mechanical amplitudes. Because the $M1$ amplitude is precisely calculable without detailed wavefunction knowledge \cite{Porsev2016}, we ultimately can determine the $E2$ amplitude (proportional to the transition quadrupole moment) from our experimental ratio measurement. Comparative absorptivity measurements have been completed recently \cite{Rafac1998, Antypas2013, Damitz2019} in Cs, producing high-precision determinations of transition amplitude ratios for electric dipole (E1) transitions, but to our knowledge this is the first such measurement using E1-forbidden transitions.
The $E2$ transition linestrength is roughly a factor of 30 weaker than that of the already-weak $M1$ transition. In this work, a highly sensitive optical polarimetry technique \cite{Meekhof1995, Majumder1999, Kerckhoff2005} was used to measure the Faraday rotation signals of the two transitions in an identical longitudinal magnetic field. An analogous precision measurement of the $E2$/$M1$ amplitude ratio within the Tl $6p_{1/2} \rightarrow 6p_{3/2}$ transition was completed in our laboratory using a similar technique some years ago \cite{Majumder1999}. In Sec.~\ref{background}, we outline the atomic structure details involved with extracting transition amplitude information from the observed Faraday rotation lineshapes. Secs.~\ref{experiment} and \ref{results} include a description of the experimental apparatus, method, and data analysis. Sec.~\ref{theory} outlines the \textit{ab initio} theoretical calculation of the electric quadrupole matrix element, and also the atomic polarizability of several relevant excited states of lead. We conclude with a comparison of experiment to theory.
\section{Atomic Structure and Faraday Rotation Lineshape}
\label{background}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\columnwidth]{structure}
\caption{Low-lying energy levels of $^{208}$Pb, with the $M1$ and $E2$ transitions shown in red and blue, respectively.}
\label{fig_structure}
\end{figure}
For these spectroscopic studies, we made use of an isotopically enriched (99.9\%) sample of $^{208}$Pb ($I=0$), providing us with a simple, single-feature spectroscopic lineshape for both transitions studied. Fig. \ref{fig_structure} shows an energy level diagram for the relevant states. Due to the intrinsically weak nature of the $E2$ transition, there is no detectable direct absorption feature, even at the highest sample temperature and density we can achieve. We therefore choose to focus on the real, rather than imaginary, part of the refractive index, and measure the milliradian-sized Faraday rotation lineshape induced by a small longitudinal magnetic field. The observed optical rotation results from the difference in the Zeeman-shifted refractive indices, $n_\pm$, for right and left-circularly-polarized electric field components driving $\Delta m = \pm 1$ transitions originating from the $|^3\!P_0, \, m = 0 \rangle$ ground state. The Faraday rotation signal can be written
\begin{equation}
\label{eq1}
\Phi_F(\omega)=\frac{\omega \ell}{2c} (n_+(\omega) - n_-(\omega)),
\end{equation}
where $\ell$ is the interaction path length through the optically active medium, $\omega$ is the laser frequency, $c$ is the speed of light, and $n_{\pm}$ represents the dispersive real part of the refractive index for a given circular polarization.
The application of a small magnetic field, ${\bf B} = B_0\hat{z}$, parallel to the laser propagation direction causes equal and opposite Zeeman shifts to the resonant frequency of the circular polarization components, $\omega \rightarrow \omega_0 \pm \frac{\mu_B g_J B_0}{\hbar}$, where $\mu_B=\frac{|e| \hbar}{2m_e}$ is the Bohr magnetion, $e$ is the electron charge, $m_e$ is the electron mass, and $g_J$ is the Land\'{e} $g$-factor for a given transition. When the Zeeman shift is small compared to the linewidth, we can approximate
\begin{equation}
\label{eqderivapprox}
n_+(\omega) - n_-(\omega) \approx \frac{\mathrm{d} n(\omega)}{\mathrm{d}\omega} \; \left(\frac{2 \mu_B g_J B_0}{\hbar}\right).
\end{equation}
In Sec.~\ref{errors}, we explore the differences between the derivative approximation and the (exact) difference forms of the resonance lineshape in order to assess potential systematics associated with the lineshape model. According to Eq.~(\ref{eqderivapprox}), the Faraday rotation lineshape follows a symmetric derivative-of-dispersion shape. Its amplitude is also proportional to the atomic density, $N$, and the appropriate quantum mechanical linestrength factor, $\langle T \rangle^2$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq3}
n(\omega) \propto N \langle T \rangle^2 \; \frac{2 \mu_B g_J B_0}{\hbar} \; \frac{\text{d}}{\text{d}\omega}\left( \frac{ \omega - \omega_0}{(\omega - \omega_0)^2 + \Gamma^2/4}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma$ is the homogeneous linewidth (due here to collisional broadening). Finally, we must convolve this function with a normalized Gaussian, accounting for the velocity distribution of the atomic ensemble. We define the convolved lineshape, $\mathcal{L}$, as follows:
\begin{align}
\label{eqL}
\mathcal{L} (\omega,\omega_0, \Gamma, \sigma) &\equiv \frac{\mathcal{C}}{\sigma\sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \frac{\text{d}}{\text{d}\omega}\left( \frac{ \omega - \omega^\prime}{(\omega - \omega^\prime)^2 + \Gamma^2/4}\right) \nonumber \\
&\times \exp{\left[\frac{-(\omega^\prime - \omega_0)^2}{2\sigma^2}\right]} d\omega^\prime,
\end{align}
where $\sigma$, the Doppler width, is proportional to the laser frequency and the root-mean-square velocity of the hot atoms. Our experimental optical rotation spectra are carefully calibrated in terms of radians. We fit our spectra to a lineshape of the form of Eq.~(\ref{eqL}) (see Sec.~\ref{results}) allowing the amplitude scaling factor $\mathcal{C}$ to link the numerical value of the integrand on resonance (which itself is a function of the component widths) to the peak value of the experimental spectrum. Making use of Eqs.~(\ref{eq1}--\ref{eq3}) and ignoring a number of common numerical factors and fundamental constants, we find the following expression for the ratio of Faraday rotation amplitude factors:
\begin{equation}
\label{Eqratio}
\frac{\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm E2}}{\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm M1}} = \frac{\omega_{\mathrm E2}}{\omega_{\mathrm M1}} \frac{(B_0 \ell N)_{\mathrm E2} \; g_J^{\mathrm{E2}}}{(B_0 \ell N)_{\mathrm{M1}} \; g_J^{\mathrm M1}}
\frac{\lvert \langle ^3\!P_2,m=1 | E2 | ^3\!P_0 \rangle \rvert^2}{\lvert \langle ^3\!P_1,m=1 | M1 | ^3\!P_0 \rangle \rvert^2}.
\end{equation}
Here $\omega_{\mathrm E2}$ ($\omega_{\mathrm M1}$) is the resonant frequency for the \SI{939}{\nano\meter} (\SI{1279}{\nano\meter}) transition.
To find the matrix elements in~\eref{Eqratio} for many-electron states, we define the electric quadrupole and magnetic dipole moment operators, $Q_\nu$ and ${\bm \mu}$ as the sum of one-particle operators,
\begin{eqnarray}
Q_{\nu} &=& -|e| \sum_{i=1}^{N_e} \left[ r_i^2\,C_{2\nu}({\bf n}_i) \right], \nonumber \\
{\bm \mu} &=& -\frac{\mu_B}{c} \sum_{i=1}^{N_e} [{\bf j}_i + {\bf s}_i] ,
\label{eq:Qdef}
\end{eqnarray}
where $N_e$ is the number of the electrons in the atom, ${\bf n}_i \equiv {\bf r}_i/r_i$, and $r_i$ is the radial position of the $i$th electron. ${\bf j}_i$ and ${\bf s}_i$ are the unitless total angular momentum and spin of the $i$th electron, as defined in~\cite{Sobelman1979}, and $C_{2\nu}({\bf n}_i)$ are the normalized spherical harmonics~\cite{Varshalovich}. While the sums in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Qdef}) extend over all electrons, in practice the valence $p$ electrons provide the main contribution to the matrix elements for the case of Pb.
Though, in general, each amplitude factor is proportional to the interaction length, we work hard to ensure that both laser beams traverse nearly identical physical paths through the cell. We also alternate scans in a sequence that minimizes drift-related systematic errors associated with density and magnetic field changes (see Sec.~\ref{results}). We have inserted into Eq.~(\ref{Eqratio}) matrix elements for the $E2$ and $M1$ transitions that reflect the $|\Delta m| = 1$ selection rule appropriate to the transitions we study. We make use of the fact that the matrix elements are the same for $\Delta m = +1$ and $\Delta m = -1$ for both the $E2$ and $M1$ transitions. It is possible, when the laser beam propagation direction is not precisely collinear with the B-field axis, for the $E2$ transition to exhibit small $\Delta m = \pm 2$ components, and potential consequences of this are discussed below in Sec.~\ref{errors}.
Assuming then that the relevant path length, atomic density, and magnetic field are identical for sequential laser scans for the two transitions, so that $(B_0 \ell N)_{\rm E2} = (B_0 \ell N)_{\rm M1}$, we arrive at an expression for the (unitless) quantum mechanical transition amplitude ratio, $\chi$, in terms of experimental amplitudes, resonant frequencies, and $g$-factors:
\begin{equation}
\chi \equiv \left| \frac{ \langle ^3\!P_2,m=1 | E2\, | ^3\!P_0 \rangle}{\langle ^3\!P_1,m=1 | M1\, | ^3\!P_0 \rangle} \right|=
\sqrt{\frac{\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{E2}} \; \omega_{\mathrm{M1}} \; g_J^{\mathrm{M1}} }{\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{M1}} \; \omega_{\mathrm{E2}} \; g_J^{\mathrm{E2}}}}.
\label{Eqfinal}
\end{equation}
A comparison of this expression with the theory prediction will be presented below in Sec.~\ref{discussion}.
The $g$-factors are well known \cite{Porsev2016}, so that the statistical uncertainty in our ratio, $\chi$, is entirely determined by the results of our lineshape fits which determine $\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{E2}}$ and $\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{M1}}$.
\section{Experimental Details}\label{experiment}
\subsection{Furnace and Vapor Cell}\label{furnace}
A schematic of the experimental layout is shown in Fig. \ref{fig_schematic}. The centerpiece of the experiment is the furnace, in the middle of which sits a 1-inch-diameter, 6-inch-long evacuated quartz vapor cell, containing a small quantity of isotopically enriched $^{208}$Pb (99.9\% purity). The quartz cell windows are welded to the body at \SI{10}{\degree} angles to eliminate the possibility of etalon effects in the optical path. Because of the inherent low vapor pressure of lead and the weak transition amplitudes being studied, we focus on temperatures in the 800--940\si{\celsius} range where the density is sufficiently high for easily detectable optical rotation signals. This is achieved using four ceramic clamshell heaters, which surround a meter-long ceramic tube that contains the cell. The tube is sealed at both ends with endcaps that include fused silica windows, and is evacuated and backfilled with \SI{20}{\torr} of argon in order to minimize optical beampath fluctuations due to convective air currents. A function generator operating at 10~kHz drives four audio amplifiers, which in turn drive the heaters. The frequency is sufficiently high that it does not interfere with the lock-in detection and signal analysis described below. Two thermocouple probes are positioned at the center of the vapor cell and one of the edges, which provide a temperature estimate, as well as a measure of temperature uniformity. A software \emph{p-i-d} servo loop controls the amplitude of the function generator signal, allowing us to set and stabilize the oven temperature. The furnace contains a pair of Helmholtz coils to apply the magnetic field used to create the Faraday rotation signal, and the entire assemply is enclosed in $\mu$-metal magnetic shielding. The roughly 100-fold reduction in ambient field afforded by the shielding is sufficient to bring magnetic field fluctuations to a negligible level, especially since we take the difference between sequential magnetic field-on and field-off laser scans.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{schematic}
\caption{Schematic of the experimental setup. Two commercial external cavity diode lasers (ECDLs) are scanned across the transitions' center frequencies in a sequence determined by computer-controlled shutters. The laser scans are monitored using a pair of Fabry-P\'{e}rot cavities. A calcite prism linearly polarizes the light before the furnace, after which the polarization is modulated and analyzed using a second calcite prism. The transmitted light is separated using a diffraction grating prior to detection. See text for further details.}
\label{fig_schematic}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Optical Setup}\label{setup}
Two commercial external cavity diode lasers (ECDLs) at \SI{939}{\nano\meter} ($E2$) and \SI{1279}{\nano\meter} ($M1$) (Toptica DL pro series and Sacher Lasertechnik Lynx series, respectively) pass through optical isolators before a small fraction of each is directed into one of two Fabry-P\'{e}rot (FP) cavities which monitor the frequency scan range and linearity. The confocal FP cavities (finesse near 30) are constructed with invar spacers, and contained inside insulated boxes for passive thermal stabilization. The cavity free spectral ranges for the $E2$ and $M1$ lasers were independently calibrated and measured to be \SI{361.0(2)}{\mega\hertz} and \SI{501.0(3)}{\mega\hertz}, respectively. A pair of shutters allow measurements of the two transition to be made in quick succession. The beam paths are combined using a dichroic filter, and directed first through a calcite prism polarizer, then into the furnace and through the vapor cell interaction region.
Upon exiting the furnace, the laser beams pass through a 1-cm-diameter, 5-cm-long glass rod with a large Verdet constant (``Faraday glass'') which is contained within a solenoid to which we can apply AC and DC currents, thus either modulating or tilting the laser polarization. We typically drive the solenoid with \SI{2}{\ampere} of AC current at $\omega = 2\pi \times 500~$\si{\hertz}, which results in a polarization modulation amplitude of a few milliradians. The laser beams then traverse a second, crossed calcite polarizer. Our polarizer pair in isolation has a finite extinction ratio of better than $10^{-6}$, but the presence of the furnace, vapor cell windows, and Faraday glass limit the effective extinction ratio of our polarimeter to about $2\times 10^{-5}$. The polarizers are each housed in a rotational lever mount actuated with a differential micrometer. Given the geometry of our mount and the \SI{1}{\micro\meter} resolution of the differential micrometer, we can reliably set and control the polarizer tilt angle at the \SI{10}{\micro\radian} level.
The light is then incident on a diffraction grating, which separates the two laser beam paths. With the aid of collimators and lenses, we focus each laser beam onto a high-gain, low-noise photodiode detector. This arrangement also allows us to reject nearly all of the substantial (but incoherent) blackbody radiation emanating from the furnace. This is important given that the coherent laser radiation reaching our detector after exiting the polarimeter is never more than about \SI{100}{\nano\watt}.
\subsection{Modulation, Lock-in Detection, and Calibration}\label{detection}
The detection scheme, similar to that described in \cite{Meekhof1995}, uses the modulator combined with a pair of lock-in amplifiers for each wavelength in order to extract the optical rotation signal. After passing through the atomic vapor, the laser intensity is $I(f)$, reflecting the absorption lineshape, and there is also a frequency-dependent rotation of $\Phi_{\text F}(f)$, due to the atomic Faraday effect. We also account for a small frequency-dependent optical birefringence, $\Phi_{\text{br}}(f)$, unrelated to the atoms. The Faraday modulator introduces an additional sinusoidal rotation of $\Phi_{\mathrm{rot}} \cos(\omega t)$. The resulting intensity through the second polarizer is thus (using the small angle approximation):
\begin{align}
I_{\text{out}} &= I(f) \sin^2 \left[ \Phi_{\text{Pb}}(f) + \Phi_{\text{br}}(f) + \Phi_{\text{rot}} \cos(\omega t) \right] \nonumber\\
&\approx I(f) \left[ \Phi_{\text{Pb}}^2(f) + \Phi_{\text{br}}^2(f) + 2\Phi_{\text{Pb}}(f)\Phi_{\text{br}}(f) \right. \\
&+ \left. 2 \Phi_{\text{rot}} \cos(\omega t)(\Phi_{\text{Pb}}(f) + \Phi_{\text{br}}(f)) + \Phi^2_{\text{rot}}\cos^2(\omega t) \right], \nonumber
\end{align}
where we have ignored the small constant transmission component from the finite polarimeter extinction. This expansion results in three important components: a constant term, one oscillating at $\omega$, and another oscillating at $2\omega$. Lock-in detection at $\omega$ and $2\omega$ removes the DC term; the $2\omega$ term is only dependent on the transmitted intensity, whereas the $1\omega$ term is proportional to the Faraday optical rotation times the transmission. Thus, the ratio of the two signals $S_{1\omega}/S_{2\omega}$ yields a signal proportional to the optical rotation only. Four lock-in amplifiers (Stanford Research Systems SRS 810) are set to the fundamental and second harmonic of the modulation frequency for the two lasers, and the extracted signals from the four are collected using a data acquisition board.
The size of the lock-in signal we detect is also proportional to the the amplitude of the modulation, $\Phi_{\mathrm{rot}}$. However, we know that the Verdet constant of our Faraday glass is substantially different at our two laser frequencies. To account for this in our calibration procedure, we first perform the following off-line exercise for each laser in turn. We fix the laser frequency at a value away from the atomic resonance. While still modulating the magnetic field, we add a stepwise series of increasing DC currents to the solenoid. At each step, we use the micrometer controlling the second polarizer to `re-cross' the polarimeter by noting when the $1\omega$ lock-in output reaches exactly zero. In this way, we can accurately find the ratio of the rotatory effects of the Faraday glass for our two laser frequencies. Repeated calibration exercises such as these were performed over the one-month period of data collection to study reproducibility upon laser beam and polarimeter realignment. With these measurements in hand, we can, as noted below, incorporate a second procedure into our data collection sequence in which we apply a large, discrete DC current step to the solenoid, and, while directing both lasers through the cell (at fixed frequencies), detect the corresponding step-size changes in the lock-in outputs. When we include the results of both calibration procedures, we can then convert the units of the experimental signal of interest (ratio of lock-in outputs) to absolute radians for each transition.
\subsection{Data Acquisition Procedure}\label{acquisition}
Data acquisition was performed at a range of temperatures (\SI{800}{\celsius} -- \SI{940}{\celsius}) and with a range of applied currents to the Helmholtz coils (\SI{1}{\ampere} -- \SI{4}{\ampere}). Acquisition was done in three steps: an initial calibration sequence, the main measurement sequence, and a final calibration sequence. The main measurement sequence has eight components and is typically looped five times. Table \ref{sequence} summarizes the data collection sequence. We refer to this as a `run.' The goal of the sequence is to examine possible sources of systematic error by measuring each transition's rotation with a background scan without an applied magnetic field either immediately before or immediately after the field is applied and the rotation is measured. We acquire field-on / field-off scans, and also $E2$ and $M1$ scans in an ``ABBA'' sequence configuration to allow us to study and minimize temporal drift-related systematic errors. Such a collection sequence typically required one hour to complete.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c||c|}
\hline
\textbf{Data} & Cal. & \multicolumn{8}{c||}{Frequency Scan $(\times 5)$} & Cal. \\
\hline
$\mathbf{\lambda}$ & $E2$/$M1$ & $E2$ & $E2$ & $M1$ & $M1$ & $M1$ & $E2$ & $E2$ & $M1$ & $E2$/$M1$ \\
\hline
$\mathbf{B_{\text ext}}$ & & & x & x & & x & x & & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Data acquisition sequence. Each individual up/down scan pair takes 15 seconds. The `x' in the $\mathbf{B_{\text ext}}$ row reflects application of the longitudinal magnetic field to the atoms.}
\label{sequence}
\end{table}
An individual scan is based upon a triangle wave applied to a laser's intracavity piezoelectric transducer (PZT), changing its frequency and scanning across the transition's linecenter, which typically requires \SI{20}{\second} to complete. The atomic spectral features of interest extend over roughly \SI{1}{\giga\hertz}, and a typical laser scan extended over \SI{4}{\giga\hertz}. We separately analyzed the frequency-increasing portion of the scan (``upscan'') as well as the portion with a downward slope (``downscan''). For each run with a particular laser, a data acquisition computer recorded the triangle voltage wave, the transmission of the Fabry-P\'{e}rot cavity the $1\omega$ lock-in amplifier signal, and the $2\omega$ lock-in amplifier signal.
At each temperature, we acquired between 4 and 6 runs, between which optical realignments, changes of laser beam powers, and changes in laser sweep characteristics were applied. In all, roughly \SI{40}{\hour} of data were collected, representing 800 distinct $E2$/$M1$ amplitude ratio measurements. The temperature range over which we worked corresponds to more than an order of magnitude change in lead vapor density. The corresponding $M1$ Faraday rotation amplitudes range from \SI{2}{\milli\radian} to \SI{50}{\milli\radian}, while the $E2$ amplitudes were in the \SI{200}{\micro\radian} to \SI{5}{\milli\radian} range.
\section{Data Analysis and Results}\label{results}
\subsection{Data Analysis Procedure}\label{analysis}
The first step in data analysis involves using the Fabry-P\'{e}rot transmission data to linearize and calibrate the frequency scans. Using the FP peak locations, we model the frequency as a fourth-order polynomial function of scan point number to account for small nonlinearity in the PZT voltage response. We found that higher-order polynomials did not improve the statistical quality of the FP peak fits. Using this frequency axis, we construct the unitless ratio of the $1\omega$ to $2\omega$ lock-in outputs, and then apply the calibration factors described above to convert this ratio to units of radians. In each case, we use the average step calibration values obtained by the pre- and post-calibration scans for that particular data run. This procedure is applied to both the $M1$ and $E2$ scans for both the field-on and field-off configurations. We next subtract the field-off scans proximate to the associated field-on scan, removing background features unrelated to the atoms that are typically a few percent of the field-on Faraday signals.
The subtracted lineshape is then fitted using a standard nonlinear least squares algorithm to the convolution function described in Eq.~(\ref{eqL}). With two thermocouple temperature monitors near the cell, we have a fairly accurate estimate of the temperature. We choose, then, to fix the Doppler width to a calculated value for the case of each laser scan. Below we discuss our exploration of lineshape changes and associated systematic amplitude errors resulting from our estimated temperature uncertainty. We note that, since ultimately we determine the ratio of the $E2$ to $M1$ amplitudes, overall temperature uncertainty largely cancels in this ratio, since the ratio of Doppler widths is temperature-independent. We therefore analyzed our Faraday lineshapes by fitting to two key parameters: the Lorentz width, $\Gamma$, due here to lead-lead collisional broadening, and the amplitude parameter $\mathcal{C}$ introduced in Sec. \ref{background}, connecting our convolution lineshape to the experimental peak height. We find this homogeneous linewidth component to be roughly ten times smaller than the Doppler width for the case of both transitions. In order to account for imperfect background subtraction, we also add constant and linear background parameters to the fit, which are always quite small, and, in the case of the linear term, often statistically unresolved. Examples of single background-subtracted scans of each transition at \SI{800}{\celsius} (near the low end of our temperature range) are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:M1_sample} and \ref{fig:E2_sample}, along with the residuals of the fits. Each scan shown represents about \SI{40}{\second} of data collection. As one can see, the residual RMS optical rotation noise is at the few \si{\micro\radian} level in both cases. Because of its much larger amplitude, the $M1$ scan exhibits a baseline signal-to-noise ratio of more than 1000:1. Interestingly, in this case there is a significant increase in the size of the residuals near linecenter. In fact, this can be easily modeled as an effective amplitude noise induced by short-term frequency jitter of the diode laser as it scans across the transition --- something that would manifest in the regions of the lineshape where the slope is steepest. The dashed envelope included in the lower box of Fig, \ref{fig:M1_sample} shows the expected amplitude noise from a frequency jitter of \SI{1}{\mega\hertz} --- something quite typical of ECDL systems such as ours.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.9\columnwidth]{M1_residual}
\caption{Sample data from \SI{800}{\celsius} $M1$ Faraday rotation signal (black dots, every fifth point shown) and fit result (red line). Residuals, expanded by a factor of 20, are shown below; solid blue shows the unweighted residual, while the dashed black line shows the envelope of the noise expected from a model that includes laser frequency jitter (see text).}
\label{fig:M1_sample}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.9\columnwidth]{E2_residual}
\caption{Sample data from \SI{800}{\celsius} $E2$ Faraday rotation signal (black dots, every fifth point shown) and fit result (red line). Expanded residuals are shown below.}
\label{fig:E2_sample}
\end{figure}
Fit results are organized by laser scan direction and order of field-on / field-off sequencing. We scale our amplitude fit parameters using the calibration factors discussed above. The difference between the pre- and post-calibration scans within a data run yields a measure of calibration uncertainty, which can be combined with the error bar generated by the fit procedure to arrive at a final uncertainty for the corrected fit amplitude. We then construct the ratio of the fit amplitudes for the two transitions, $\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{E2}}/\mathcal{C}_{\mathrm{M1}}$, for each set of consecutive $E2$ and $M1$ scans. Inserting the values for the ratios of the frequencies and $g$-factors of these transitions, we finally obtain experimental values for $\chi$ as defined in Eq.~(\ref{Eqfinal}). We accumulated statistics on all amplitude ratios taken at a given temperature. In some cases, the scatter between the weighted mean value for different data runs at a given temperature slightly exceeded their respective standard errors, due, for example, to small changes in experimental conditions, thermal drift, or relative beam path changes of the two lasers due to purposeful optical realignment. In each case, we expanded our error bars to account for this measured variance. We also took the approach of generating a histogram for all values at a given temperature and fitting this distribution to a Gaussian (see Fig. \ref{fig:histogram}). The mean values arrived at by these two methods agreed very well within statistical uncertainties. Fig. \ref{fig:ratio} shows the complete data set for our measured values of $\chi$ plotted as function of temperature, and corresponding $M1$ absorptive optical depth. Final weighted mean and $1\sigma$ statistical uncertainty are indicated in blue. This range of temperatures corresponds to a roughly a factor of 15 in vapor density, and as such is associated with changes in amplitude, and component spectral widths of the Faraday lineshape. Below \SI{800}{\celsius}, the $E2$ amplitudes were too small to achieve reliable fit results. At the upper end of our temperature range, where relatively large rotation amplitudes should have provided the best statistical precision, we observed a large scan-to-scan and run-to-run variation in ratios, likely due to much larger thermal drifts and optical birefringence effects at this temperature. Ultimately, while the mean value at \SI{940}{\celsius} agrees well with other data sets, the uncertainty is significantly higher due to this increased scatter, and we did not seek to increase the temperature further. Our final value and $1\sigma$ statistical uncertainty in the measured ratio is $\chi =0.1496(7)_{\text{stat}}$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.9\columnwidth]{histogram}
\caption{Distribution of $\chi$ measurements from all 95 individual scan ratios taken at \SI{800}{\celsius}. Main figure: $\chi$ and corresponding error bars, with mean and standard deviation (solid blue) shown. Inset: histogram of $\chi$ (red bar plot) and a fitted Gaussian (thick blue curve). Intrinsic precision of $\chi$ values varies for subsets of these data depending, for example, on magnetic field employed for a given run.}
\label{fig:histogram}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.9\columnwidth]{ratio}
\caption{The amplitude ratio $\chi$ as a function of optical depth (bottom axis) and temperature (top axis). The mean and standard error are shown in solid and dashed blue lines, respectively.}
\label{fig:ratio}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Exploration of Systematic Errors}\label{errors}
Potential systematic errors in our experimental value for $\chi$ were studied extensively, and the results are summarized in Table \ref{error_table}, where systematic error contributions to the unitless ratio are expressed in percentages. Potential error sources which did not show statistically resolved effects are listed with a dash. In many cases, the fact that we are taking the ratio of two amplitudes tends to reduce systematic error impact (such as for temperature uncertainties, or magnetic field inhomogeneities). In addition, since $\chi$ is proportional to the square root of the amplitude ratio, the size of potential errors in $\chi$ associated with extracting Faraday signal amplitude are immediately reduced by a factor of two. Further, $1/f$-type noise associated with thermal, mechanical, or magnetic field drifts occurring on time scales comparable to our scan sequence would tend to show up as increased scatter between measurements rather than systematic bias, especially given our choice of sequencing repeated measurements in an ``ABBA'' pattern.
As can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:ratio}, we importantly do not see a resolved systematic trend in our measured ratio as a function of temperature/density. In addition to comparing results at a number of different temperatures, we compared results for laser scan direction, different scan speeds and scan ranges, different temporal order of field-on/field-off scans, and different temporal order of $E2$ vs. $M1$ scans. Occasionally, we saw comparisons of subsets of data that differed by 1.5 to 2.0$\sigma$, where $\sigma$ is the combined error of the data subsets, and these contributions to the net systematic uncertainty are included in the table.
\begin{table}[htb]
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Source} & \textbf{Error in $\chi$ (\%)} \\
\hline
\textbf{Statistical error} & 0.48 \\
\hline
\textbf{Fitting} & \\
Frequency Linearization & 0.02 \\
Fixing vs. Floating Lorentz Widths & 0.37 \\
Linear Background & 0.27 \\
Lineshape Weighting & 0.32 \\
Incorrect Doppler Widths & 0.10 \\
Include / Discount Scan Wings & 0.13 \\
\hline
\textbf{Signal Modeling} & \\
Derivative vs. Difference & 0.19\\
Magnetic Field Dependence & -- \\
\hline
\textbf{Geometry} & \\
$E2$ $\Delta m = 2$ Transitions & 0.35 \\
\hline
\textbf{Laser Scanning Properties} & \\
Scan Direction & 0.22\\
Scan Speed / Width & -- \\
\hline
\textbf{Data Collection} & \\
Field-On / Field Off Order & --\\
$E2$ / $M1$ Order & 0.13 \\
\hline
\textbf{Angle Calibration} & \\
Off-Line Calibration & 0.28\\
Pre/Post Variance & 0.29 \\
\hline
\textbf{Other} & \\
Isotopic Purity & 0.02 \\
\hline
\textbf{TOTAL:} & \textbf{0.98\%} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of error contributions and sources, expressed as percentage errors in the experimental ratio $\chi$. Horizontal line entries reflect the lack of a resolved systematic error contribution.}
\label{error_table}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Calibration}
Errors in any aspect of our calibration procedure would directly impact our amplitude ratio measurement, and these were explored as follows. We completed several of the off-line calibration exercises over the course of our data-collection period, and compared the ratio of calibration factors obtained in these procedures. We assign a systematic error component based on the variation of these measurements (most likely due to small changes in the relative optical paths of the lasers, or possibly small thermal drifts over the time scale of the measurements). Also, for all of our data collection runs, we studied the differences between the pre- and post-calibration scans to estimate the potential errors associated with using their average to calibrate all scans in that run. An estimate of the systematic error associated with taking our approach of calibrating all runs based on the average of the two calibration values is also included in Table \ref{error_table}.
\subsubsection{Fitting Methods}
We explored a number of alternative approaches to fitting our Faraday rotation spectra to quantify systematic effects associated with lineshape analysis. First, as noted above, we explored different polynomial orders for parametrization of the ECDL scan nonlinearity, finding that beyond fourth order, no statistically significant changes to the fitted amplitude were seen. Our nominal method for fitting our spectra involved equal weighting of all points in the scan. We explored two alternatives. First, we explored a model that weighted data points according to a model that accounted for the frequency noise and associated fluctuations as noted in Fig. \ref{fig:M1_sample} and discussed in the previous section. Second, we explored truncating our fit ranges to exclude portions of the scan farther away from the resonant lineshape. We saw small changes in our fitted amplitude results, always well below the 1\% level, and include small error contributions for these in Table \ref{error_table}.
We studied the reliability of our Lorentzian and Gaussian (Doppler) width determinations in detail. Possible errors in these parameters impact the peak value of the lineshape convolution function defined in Eq.~(\ref{eqL}), and thus directly affect the fitted amplitude parameters, $\mathcal{C}$, from which we determine $\chi$. As noted, since the ratio of the Doppler widths for the two transitions is temperature-independent, a potential systematic error in $\chi$ due to temperature error could only come from the secondary effect of producing associated changes in other fit parameters that would affect the two transitions lineshapes in different ways. We explored this by systematically choosing a temperature (and hence Doppler widths) over a $\pm$20-degree range centered on the nominal temperature (which is taken to be the average of our two thermocouple readings). We then fit both experimental lineshapes, extracting the Lorentzian width, $\Gamma$, and peak amplitude factor, $\mathcal{C}$, in our usual fashion. Even using this relatively large temperature range, roughly equal to the difference in our thermocouple readings, we saw changes in the value of $\chi$ only at the $\pm 0.1\%$ level, and have included this in our error table.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.9\columnwidth]{lorentz}
\caption{Exploration of a potential systematic error from a fixed, miscalculated Lorentzian width. The amplitude ratio, $\chi$, is plotted with black dots and dashes on the left y-axis. The corresponding fit error for those values and Lorentz widths are plotting with red plusses, on the right y-axis. The orange star indicates the Lorentz width and $\chi$ of a floated Lorentz width. Further details are provided in the text.}
\label{fig:gamma_sys}
\end{figure}
Of more concern is the accuracy of our Lorentz width determinations. These widths are an order of magnitude smaller than the Doppler widths, and thus more challenging to extract. However, their value clearly affects the amplitude of our lineshape function (Eq.~(\ref{eqL})). Our standard analysis method starts with fixed Doppler widths and optimizes the Lorentz width parameter in the fit process. In order to explore the effect of potential errors in Lorentz width values on our ratio $\chi$, we proceeded as follows. Since the $E2$ Faraday amplitudes have substantially lower signal-to-noise ratio, we assumed, for the purpose of this exercise, that the standard $M1$ fit procedure is able to extract the `correct' Lorentz width, $\Gamma_{\mathrm{M1}}$. Then, we fit $E2$ lineshapes using a modified procedure where instead we fix the Lorentz width (in addition to the Doppler width) to a series of values above and below the apparent `best fit' value, and allow only the peak amplitude factor to be optimized (this optimized value is clearly correlated with the choice of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{E2}}$). We then recorded the summed chi-squared value of the overall lineshape fit for each fixed choice of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{E2}}$. Figure \ref{fig:gamma_sys} summarizes this exploration for the case of all the data runs taken at one temperature (here \SI{900}{\celsius}). The red curve indicates the changing `quality of fit' for the entire collection of fits at \SI{900}{\celsius} at each fixed choice of $\Gamma_{\mathrm{E2}}$. The black line simply maps out the correlation between $\chi$ and $\Gamma_{\mathrm{E2}}$ , assuming that $\Gamma_{\mathrm{M1}}$ remains constant. The orange `star' shows the average Lorentz width parameter generated by our standard fitting procedure, in which $\Gamma_{\mathrm{E2}}$ is `floated.' The excellent agreement between the two methods in terms of finding the optimal value $\Gamma_{\mathrm{E2}} \approx$ \SI{35}{\mega\hertz} is reassuring, and we can see even a very large fractional change in $\Gamma_{\mathrm{E2}}$ of $\pm$ \SI{10}{\mega\hertz} that yields a change in $\chi$ of only $\pm 1\%$. A more extensive analysis of data sets at all temperatures allows us to place a $\pm 0.4\%$ systematic error based on our estimated uncertainty in the the extracted Lorentz widths.
\subsubsection{Lineshape Model}
We also considered the systematic error associated with using the derivative approximation to the Faraday lineshape. First, for a series of Zeeman splittings in our experimental range, we generated theoretical lineshapes with typical values for component widths using the difference (rather than the derivative) of the dispersive real part of the refractive index lineshapes. We then proceeded to fit these lineshapes using our standard (derivative approximation) fitting function and studied the changes in fitted amplitude as a function of the Zeeman splitting. Since the $g$-factors and component widths of the two transitions are different, this would impact the two transitions differently, and hence would produce a systematic error in $\chi$. From this investigation, we put a limit of the potential systematic error of our derivative approximation at the 0.2\% level. As a second experimental check, we studied the correlation of $\chi$ with the current applied to the Helmholtz coils for the data we collected. This showed no statistically resolved trend over the $\approx$~3--\SI{15}{\gauss} range of magnetic fields that we explored.
\subsubsection{Geometrical Misalignment}
Finally, we note that our analysis assumes that the laser beam paths are exactly collinear with the magnetic field axis within the vapor cell interaction region. This effectively allows us to view the electric quadrupole interaction as an operator proportional to the $\ell = 2, m = 1$ spherical harmonic (see Sec. \ref{discussion} below). For small deviations from collinearity, $\delta\theta$, one can show that $\Delta m = \pm 2$ transitions are possible, and that the size of these components relative to the dominant $\Delta m=\pm 1$ transitions is proportional to $|\sin(\delta\theta)|$ \cite{Roos2000}. Given our apparatus geometry and laser beam collimation, we estimate that $|\sin(\delta\theta)| \le 2^{\circ}$. We were able to explore the implications of this by generating simulated Faraday rotation spectra with small $\Delta m = \pm2$ components, and then analyzing these modified lineshapes using our standard fitting routine. By studying the impact of this non-ideal geometry on the fitted lineshape amplitudes, we can place a limit on its potential systematic error contribution to $\chi$, which is included in Table \ref{error_table}. We note that, even with perfect collinearity, small stray magnetic fields, either from external sources or mu-metal remanence, would ultimately produce a small systematic geometric uncertainty. For the experimental fields employed here, we estimate this contribution to misalignment to be several times smaller than the current optical collinearity contribution.
We lastly mention that such geometrical misalignment also produces more complicated magneto-optical effects, including the so-called `Voigt' effect. As discussed in detail in \cite{Edwards1995}, the size of these additional components, given the estimated size of our misalignment, would produce changes to our Faraday lineshape that are well below our level of statistical sensitivity.
\subsubsection{Isotopic Purity}
Given the quoted isotopic purity of the vapor cell (99.9\%), we generated realistic simulated lineshapes and fit these using our standard analysis procedure to produce the systematic relevant error estimate in Table \ref{error_table}.
\subsubsection{Final Experimental Ratio}
Combining all of the systematic error contributions in quadrature gives an uncertainty roughly twice that of the statistical error. Combining these leads to a final experimental value for our unitless amplitude ratio: $\chi = 0.1496 \pm 0.0015$. In Sec. \ref{discussion}, we establish the connection between this ratio and the reduced electric quadrupole matrix element, the \emph{ab initio} theoretical derivation for which we present next.
\section{Theory}\label{theory}
We evaluated the reduced matrix elements (MEs) of the $6p^2\,\,^3\!P_0 -\, 6p^2\,\,^3\!P_2$ and $6p^2\,\,^3\!P_0 -\, 6p^2\,\,^1\!D_2$ $E2$ transitions as well as the static scalar and tensor polarizabilities of the $6p^2\,\,^3\!P_1$ and $6p7s\,\,^3\!P_0^o$ states of Pb using the high-precision relativistic CI+all-order method~\cite{Safronova2009}. This method was adopted by us for calculating the PNC amplitude for the $6p^2\,\,^3\!P_0 -\, 6p^2\,\,^3\!P_1$ transition~\cite{Porsev2016}.
We consider Pb as a four-valence atom. The basis set was constructed using a $V^{N-2}$ approximation in the framework of the Dirac-Fock-Sturm approach (see Ref.~\cite{Porsev2016} for more details). In this calculation, we use the wave functions obtained in~\cite{Porsev2016} in the CI+MBPT~\cite{Dzuba1996} and CI+all-order approximations. We carry out calculations in both approximations considering the CI+all-order results as the recommended ones. Atomic units ($\hbar=|e|=m=1$) are used throughout unless stated otherwise.
\subsection{$E2$ Transitions}
\label{theory_E2}
Using the expression for the electric quadrupole moment operator, given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:Qdef}), we obtain
for the $E2$ $6p^2\,\,^3\!P_0 -\, 6p^2\,\,^3\!P_2$ transition,
\begin{eqnarray}
|\langle ^3\!P_0 ||Q|| ^3\!P_2 \rangle| &\approx& 8.91\,\, {\rm a.u.}\,\, ({\rm CI+MBPT}), \nonumber \\
&\approx& 8.86\,\, {\rm a.u.}\,\, ({\rm CI+all-order}) .
\end{eqnarray}
Inclusion of the Breit interaction correction increases the absolute value of the matrix element (ME) by 0.02 a.u.. The quantum-electrodynamic (QED) correction is negligible at the current level of calculation accuracy. The difference of the values obtained at the CI+MBPT and CI+all-order stages gives us an estimate of the uncertainty. Thus, the final recommended value is:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Qfinal}
|\langle ^3\!P_2 ||Q|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle| = 8.88(5)~\text{a.u.}.
\end{equation}
We have also estimated the reduced ME of the electric quadrupole $6p^2\,\,^3\!P_0 -\, 6p^2\,\,^1\!D_2$ transition. This is an intercombination transition (the initial and final states have different total spin $S$). As a result, it is an order of magnitude smaller than $|\langle ^3\!P_2 ||Q|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle|$. We find
\begin{equation}
|\langle ^1\!D_2 ||Q|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle| \approx 0.63\,\, {\rm a.u.}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Polarizabilities}
\label{theory_polar}
\begin{table*}
\caption{\label{tab_scal} Polarizabilities obtained using the CI+all-order approximation.
Contributions to the $6s^2 6p^2\,\,^3\!P_1$ and $6s^2 6p7s\,\,^3\!P_0^o$ scalar static polarizabilities, $\alpha_0$, of Pb (in a.u). The dominant contributions to the valence polarizability from intermediate states $|n\rangle$ are listed separately with the corresponding absolute values of electric-dipole reduced matrix elements given (in a.u.) in the column labeled ``$D$''. The theoretical and experimental~\cite{NIST} transition energies $\Delta E \equiv E(n) - E(6p^2\,^3\!P_1)$ and $\Delta E \equiv E(n) - E(6p7s\,^3\!P_0^o)$ are given (in cm$^{-1}$) in columns $\Delta E_{\rm th}$ and $\Delta E_{\rm expt}$. The remaining contributions to the valence polarizability are given in the row labeled ``Other.'' The values listed in the row labeled ``Total val.'' are obtained as the sum of all listed contributions and ``Other.''
The dominant contributions to $\alpha_0$, listed in columns $\alpha_0[\text{A}]$ and $\alpha_0[\text{B}]$, are calculated with CI+all-order+RPA matrix elements and theoretical [A] and experimental [B] energies \cite{NIST}, respectively.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccrrcc}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{State} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$|n\rangle$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\Delta E_{\rm th}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\Delta E_{\rm expt}$}
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{$D$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\alpha_0[\text{A}]$} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\alpha_0[\text{B}]$} \\
\hline \\ [-0.3pc]
$6p^2\,\,^3\!P_1$ & $6p7s\,\,^3\!P_0^o$ & 27207 & 27141 & 1.92 & 6.6 & 6.6 \\
& $6p7s\,\,^3\!P_1^o$ & 27533 & 27468 & 1.41 & 3.5 & 3.5 \\
& $6p6d\,\,^3\!F_2^o$ & 38222 & 37624 & 0.08 & 0.01 & 0.01 \\
& $6p6d\,\,^3\!D_2^o$ & 39046 & 38242 & 3.45 & 14.9 & 15.2 \\
& $6p6d\,\,^3\!D_1^o$ & 39110 & 38249 & 0.63 & 0.5 & 0.5 \\
& $6p7s\,\,^3\!P_2^o$ & 40572 & 40370 & 0.78 & 0.7 & 0.7 \\
& $6p8s\,\,^3\!P_1^o$ & 41737 & 40868 & 1.13 & 1.5 & 1.5 \\
& $6p8s\,\,^3\!P_0^o$ & 42275 & 40907 & 0.65 & 0.5 & 0.5 \\
& $6p7s\,\,^1\!P_1^o$ & 42670 & 41621 & 0.20 & 0.04 & 0.05 \\
& Other & & & & 25.9 & 25.9 \\
& Total val. & & & & 54.2 & 54.6 \\
& Core + Vc & & & & 3.8 & 3.8 \\
& Total & & & & 58.0 & 58.4 \\
\hline \\ [-0.5pc]
$6p7s\,\,^3\!P_0^o$ & $6p^2\,\,^3\!P_1$ &-27207 & -27141 & 1.92 & -20 & -20 \\
& $6p7p\,\,^3\!P_1$ & 7837 & 7959 & 3.99 & 298 & 293 \\
& $6p7p\,\,^3\!D_1$ & 9605 & 9715 & 5.43 & 450 & 445 \\
& $6p8p\,\,^3\!P_1$ & 17800 & 16361 & 0.17 & 0.2 & 0.2 \\
& $6p8p\,\,^3\!D_1$ & 18336 & 16957 & 1.04 & 8.6 & 9.4 \\
& Other & & & & 19 & 19 \\
& Total val. & & & & 756 & 747 \\
& Core +Vc & & & & 4.1 & 4.1 \\
& Total & & & & 760 & 751
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}[htb]
\caption{\label{tab_polar} The static scalar ($\alpha_0$) and tensor ($\alpha_2$) polarizabilities
obtained in the CI+MBPT and CI+all-order approximations (in a.u.) are presented. The differences of the CI+all-order and CI+MBPT results are given (in \%) in the column labeled ``diff.'' The recommended values and their uncertainties are given in the last column.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
State & & CI+MBPT & CI+all-order & diff(\%) & Recom. \\
\hline \\ [-0.5pc]
$6p^2\,\,^3\!P_1$ & $\alpha_0$ & 58.7 & 58.0 & 1.2 & 58.0(7) \\[0.1pc]
& $\alpha_2$ & -5.8 & -5.7 & 1.5 & -5.7(1) \\[0.3pc]
$6p7s\,\,^3\!P_0^o$ & $\alpha_0$ & 752 & 760 & 1.1 & 760(8)
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
The scalar dynamic polarizability $\alpha(\omega)$ can be separated into three parts:
\begin{equation}
\alpha(\omega) = \alpha_v(\omega) + \alpha_c(\omega) + \alpha_{vc}(\omega),
\label{alpha}
\end{equation}
Where $alpha_v$ is the valence polarizability and $\alpha_c$ is the ionic core polarizability. A small term, $\alpha_{vc}$, is included due to the presence of the four valence electrons and possible excitation of a core electron to the occupied shell. Thus, $\alpha_{vc}$ serves to restore the Pauli principle and slightly modifies the core polarizability~\cite{Porsev2002}.
The valence part of the a.c. electric dipole polarizability of the $|\Phi_0 \rangle$ state can be written in
the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha_v (\omega) &=& 2\, \sum_k \frac { \left( E_k-E_0 \right)
|\langle \Phi_0 |D_0| \Phi_k \rangle|^2 }
{ \left( E_k-E_0 \right)^2 - \omega^2 } \nonumber \\
&=& \sum_k \left[ \frac {|\langle \Phi_0 |D_0| \Phi_k \rangle|^2 } {E_k - E_0 + \omega}
+\frac {|\langle \Phi_0 |D_0| \Phi_k \rangle|^2 } {E_k - E_0 - \omega} \right]\!,
\label{Eqn_alpha}
\end{eqnarray}
where $D_0$ is the $z$-component of the effective electric dipole operator ${\bf D}$, defined (in a.u.) as ${\bf D} = -{\bf r}$.
By the effective (or ``dressed'') electric dipole operator, we mean that the operator also includes the random-phase approximation (RPA) corrections~\cite{Dzuba1998}.
To account for intermediate high-lying discrete states and the continuum, we calculated $\alpha_v(\omega)$
by solving the inhomogeneous equation in valence space. We use the Sternheimer~\cite{Sternheimer1950} or Dalgarno-Lewis \cite{Dalgarno1955} method implemented in the CI+all-order approach~\cite{Kozlov1999}. Given the $\Phi_0$ wave function and energy $E_0$ of the $|\Phi_0 \rangle$ state, we find intermediate-state wave functions $\delta \psi_{\pm}$ from an inhomogeneous equation,
\begin{eqnarray}
|\delta \psi_{\pm} \rangle & = & \frac{1}{H_{\rm eff} - E_0 \pm \omega}\,
\sum_k | \Phi_k \rangle \langle \Phi_k | D_0 | \Phi_0 \rangle \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{H_{\rm eff}- E_0 \pm \omega} \, D_0 | \Phi_0 \rangle .
\label{delpsi}
\end{eqnarray}
Using Eq.~(\ref{Eqn_alpha}) and $\delta \psi_{\pm}$ introduced above, we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\alpha_v (\omega ) = \langle \Phi_0 |D_0| \delta \psi_+ \rangle
+ \langle \Phi_0 |D_0| \delta \psi_- \rangle \, ,
\label{alpha2}
\end{equation}
where the subscript $v$ emphasizes that only excitations of the valence electrons are included in the intermediate-state wave functions $\delta \psi_{\pm}$ due to the presence of $H_{\rm eff}$.
The $\alpha_{c}$ and $\alpha_{vc}$ terms were evaluated in the RPA. The small $\alpha_{vc}$ term was calculated by adding $\alpha_{vc}$ contributions from the individual electrons. For example, for the $6s^2 6p^2 \,\, ^3\!P_1$ state, we find $\alpha_{vc} = 2 \alpha_{vc}(6s)+ \alpha_{vc}(6p_{1/2}) + \alpha_{vc}(6p_{3/2})$.
For the case of static polarizabilities, where $\omega=0$, Eq.~(\ref{Eqn_alpha}) is written as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha_v (0) &=& 2\, \sum_k \frac {|\langle \Phi_0 |D_0| \Phi_k \rangle|^2} {E_k-E_0}.
\label{stat_alpha}
\end{eqnarray}
To establish the dominant contributions to the valence polarizabilities, we combine the electric-dipole matrix elements and energies according to the sum-over-states formula given by Eq.~(\ref{stat_alpha}). We have carried out two calculations of the dominant contributions of the intermediate states to the polarizabilities using our theoretical and experimental energies. In Table~\ref{tab_scal}, we present results obtained in the CI+all-order approximation. The absolute {\it ab initio} values of the corresponding reduced electric-dipole matrix elements are listed (in a.u.) in column labeled ``$D$.'' The theoretical and experimental \cite{NIST} transition energies are given in columns $\Delta E_{\rm th}$ and $\Delta E_{\rm expt}$. The remaining valence contributions are given in rows labeled ``Other.'' The contributions from the core and $\alpha_{vc}$ terms are listed together in the row labeled ``Core + Vc.'' The dominant contributions to $\alpha_0$, listed in columns $\alpha_0[\text{A}]$ and $\alpha_0[\text{B}]$, are calculated with CI+all-order+RPA matrix elements and theoretical [A] and experimental [B] energies \cite{NIST}, respectively. The results listed in the column $\alpha_0[\text{A}]$ are the recommended ones.
The results obtained in the CI+MBPT and CI+all-order approximations, their differences, and the recommended values are presented in Table~\ref{tab_polar}.
\section{Comparison of Experiment to Theory}
\label{discussion}
We turn now to the connection between our unitless $E2$/$M1$ amplitude ratio, $\chi$, and the theoretical expressions for the respective matrix elements. It is helpful to recall that both the $M1$ and $E2$ matrix element components emerge from the same term in the expansion of the interaction Hamiltonian. Following a standard textbook derivation of these higher-order terms \cite{Fitzpatrick}, we find that both the $M1$ and $E2$ transition amplitudes originate from a matrix element, $T_{fi}$, containing both the position and momentum operators,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqmultipole}
T _{fi \; (\rm{M1, E2})} \propto \langle f | (\hat{k}\cdot\ {\bf r})\;(\hat{\epsilon}\cdot\ {\bf p} ) | i \rangle,
\end{equation}
where $\hat{k}~(\hat{z}$ in our case) is the laser propagation direction, and $\hat{\epsilon}~(\hat{x}$ in our case) is the laser polarization axis. We can ignore overall multiplicative factors since they will cancel in the eventual $E2$/$M1$ amplitude ratio.
After some vector algebra and use of a commutator to re-express the momentum operator in terms of position \cite{Fitzpatrick}, we can separate the $M1$ (vector) and $E2$ (second-rank tensor) components of the matrix element in Eq.~(\ref{eqmultipole}). We note that this process introduces a factor of $\omega_{\mathrm{E2}}/c$ into the $E2$ component. In our case, the $M1$ final state of interest is $|^3\!P_1, m=1 \rangle$, where as for the $E2$ component it will be $|^3\!P_2, m=1\rangle$.
According to the Wigner-Eckart theorem, for the case of the $|J=0\rangle \rightarrow |J_f, m=1\rangle$ transitions, the multiplicative factor connecting the $|\Delta m| = 1$ matrix elements that we measure with the associated {\it reduced} matrix element is $1/\sqrt{2J_f+1}$. Given our geometry, the operator for the $E2$ term is proportional to $\langle xz \rangle$. This can then be rewritten in terms of the operator $\langle r^2 C_{21}\rangle$ as introduced in Sec.~\ref{background}.
Assembling a theoretical expression that is equivalent to the (unitless) experimental amplitude ratio $\chi$, given by Eq.~(\ref{Eqfinal}), we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\chi = \frac{1}{2\sqrt{5}} \frac{\omega_{E2}}{c} \, \frac{\langle ^3\!P_2 ||Q|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle}{\langle ^3\!P_1 ||\mu|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle}.
\label{chi_frac}
\end{equation}
Here the reduced ME $\langle ^3\!P_2 ||Q|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle$ is expressed in $|e| a_B^2$ (where $a_B$ is the Bohr radius; note that for this ME $1 \, {\rm a.u.} = 1\, |e| a_B^2$) and $\langle ^3\!P_1 ||\mu|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle$ is expressed in $\mu_B/c$.
Inserting our experimental value, $\chi = 0.1496(15)$, as well as the (highly accurate) theoretical value for the $M1$ reduced matrix element $\langle ^3\!P_1 ||\mu|| ^3\!P_0 \rangle = 1.293(1)\,\mu_B/c$~\cite{Porsev2016}, we can compute an experimentally-derived value for the reduced quadrupole matrix element: $\langle ^3\!P_2 ||Q|| ^3\!P_0\rangle_{\mathrm{exp}} = 8.91(9)$ a.u.. This is in excellent agreement with, and of comparable precision to, the recommended \emph{ab initio} theory value from Eq.~(\ref{eq:Qfinal}) in Sec.~\ref{theory}: $\langle ^3\!P_2 ||Q|| ^3\!P_0\rangle_{\mathrm{th}} = 8.88(5)$ a.u.. Together, we have demonstrated consistency between experiment and theory for this lead E2 transition amplitude at the 1.2\% level of accuracy.
\section{Concluding Remarks}
\label{conclusion}
We have completed a precise measurement of the electric quadrupole $^3\!P_0 \rightarrow \, ^3\!P_2$ transition amplitude within the $6s^2 6p^2$ configuration in atomic lead. This result is in excellent agreement with a precise \emph{ab initio} calculation of this amplitude, which has also been presented here. The calculation builds upon on recent theoretical work in the four-valence lead system aimed at improving PNC calculations in this element \cite{Porsev2016}. The experimental work relies critically on a high-precision polarimetry technique used previously to measure PNC optical rotation in Pb and Tl \cite{Meekhof1993, Vetter1994}, and has allowed direct measurement of this forbidden $E2$ transition for the first time. We have also presented \emph{ab initio} calculations of the static polarizability of several low-lying states in lead. This now provides additional opportunities to test the accuracy and further guide the refinement of theory through precise atomic-beam-based measurements of Stark shifts in this element, employing experimental techniques analogous to those used by our group in recent indium and thallium polarizability measurements \cite{Doret2002, Ranjit2013, Augenbraun2016, Vilas2018}.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors thank Gabriel Patenotte and Sameer Khanbhai for their assistance in the construction and testing of the experimental apparatus. We are grateful for valuable conversations with David DeMille, and thank Charles Doret for helpful comments on the manuscript. The experimental work described here was completed with the support of the National Science Foundation RUI program, through Grant No. PHY-1404206. The theoretical work was supported in part by NSF Grant No. PHY-1620687. S.~P.~acknowledges support by the Russian Science Foundation under Grant No. 19-12-00157.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{he} target of super-resolution (SR) is to generate a corresponding high-resolution (HR) image or video from its low-resolution (LR) version. As an extension of single image super-resolution (SISR), video super-resolution (VSR) provides a solution to restore the correct content from the degraded video, so that the reconstructed video frames will contain more details with higher clarity. Such kind of technology with important practical significance can be widely used in many fields such as video surveillance~\cite{seibel2017eyes}, ultra-high definition television~\cite{park2018high} and so on.
Different from SISR which only considers one single low-resolution image as input at a time, VSR devotes to effectively making use of intrinsic temporal information among multiple low-resolution video frames. Although vanilla SISR approaches can be directly applied to video frames by treating them as single images, abundant detail information available from neighboring frames will be wasted. Such practice is hard to reconstruct promising video frames, so they are not well adapted to VSR task.
To overcome the limitation of the SISR, existing VSR methods~\cite{park2003super,farsiu2004fast,liu2013bayesian,ma2015handling,wang2018video} usually take a LR reference frame and its multiple neighboring frames as inputs to reconstruct a corresponding HR reference frame. Due to the motion of the camera or objects, the neighboring frames should be spatially aligned first for utilizing the temporal information. To this end, most traditional VSR methods~\cite{liu2017robust,tao2017detail,sajjadi2018frame,caballero2017real} generally calculate the optical flow and estimate the sub-pixel motion between LR frames to achieve the alignment operation. However, fast and reliable flow estimation still remains a challenging problem. The brightness constancy assumption, which most motion estimation algorithms rely on, may be invalid due to the existence of motion blur and occlusion. Incorrect motion compensation will introduce artifacts in aligned neighboring frames and affect the quality of final reconstructed video frames. Hence, explicit flow estimation and motion compensation methods could be sub-optimal for VSR task.
In this paper, we propose a novel deformable non-local network (DNLN), which is non-optical-flow-based, to perform both implicit motion estimation and video super-resolution. Our network mainly consists of four modules: feature extraction module, alignment module, non-local attention module and SR reconstruction module. Inspired by TDAN~\cite{tian2018tdan}, we apply the deformable convolution~\cite{zhu2019deformable} in our alignment module and enhance its ability of adaptively warping frames. Specifically, we introduce a hierarchical feature fusion block (HFFB)~\cite{hui2019progressive} to effectively handle the videos with large and complex motions. Through the stacks of deformable convolutions, we align the neighboring frame to the reference frame at the feature level and gradually improve the alignment accuracy. Then in the non-local attention module, we exploit a non-local structure to capture the global correlation between the reference feature and each aligned neighboring feature, which assesses the importance of different regions in neighboring feature. Such operation is expected to highlight the features complementary to the reference frame and exclude regions with improper alignment. The features with attention guidance are fused and then fed into the final SR reconstruction module. Here, we use residual in residual dense blocks (RRDB)~\cite{wang2018esrgan} to generate the SR reference frame. RRDBs help to make full use of the information from different hierarchical levels and retain more details of the input LR frame.
In summary, the main contributions of this paper can be concluded as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose a novel deformable non-local network (DNLN) to accomplish high quality video super-resolution. Our method achieves the most advanced VSR performance on several benchmark datasets.
\item We design an alignment module based on deformable convolution, which can realize the feature level alignment in a coarse to fine manner without explicitly motion compensation.
\item We propose a non-local attention module to select significant features from neighboring frames which are conducive to the recovery of the reference frame.
\end{itemize}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the related work. Section 3 elaborates the structure of the proposed network. Section 4 shows our experimental results on benchmark datasets, including visual comparisons with other methods. The effectiveness of each components in our network is analyzed in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 draws conclusions.
\section{Related Work}
\subsection{Single Image Super-resolution}
Dong et al.~\cite{dong2014learning} first proposed SRCNN for single image super-resolution to learn the nonlinear mapping between LR and HR images in an end-to-end manner, which achieves better performance than previous work. Kim et al.~\cite{kim2016accurate} further improved SRCNN by stacking more convolution layers and using residual learning to increase network depth. Tai et al. introduced recursive blocks in DRRN~\cite{tai2017image}, which employs parameters sharing strategy to make the training stable. All of these methods first upscale the LR input to the desired size and the reconstruction process is based on the upscaled products. Such pre-processing step inevitably results in loss of details and additional computation cost. To avoid these problems, extracting features from the original LR input and upscaling spatial resolution at the end of the network become the main direction of SR network. Dong et al.~\cite{dong2016accelerating} directly took the original LR image as input and brought in the transpose convolution layer (also known as the deconvolution layer) for upsampling features to high resolution outcomes. Shi et al.~\cite{shi2016real} proposed an effective sub-pixel convolution layer for amplifying the final LR feature map to SR output and accelerating the network.
Afterwards, Timofte et al.~\cite{timofte2017ntire} provided a new large dataset (DIV2K) in the NTIRE 2017 challenge that consists of 1000 2K resolution images. This dataset enables researchers to train deeper and wider networks which leads to various development of SR methods. The most advanced SISR networks, such as EDSR~\cite{lim2017enhanced}, DBPN~\cite{haris2018deep}, RDN~\cite{zhang2018residual} and RCAN~\cite{zhang2018image}, have far better training performance on this dataset than previous networks.
\subsection{Video Super-resolution}
Liao et al.~\cite{liao2015video} proposed DECN and made use of two classical optical flow methods: TV-L1 and MDP flow to generate SR drafts with different parameters, and then produced the final result through a deep network. Kappeler et al.~\cite{kappeler2016video} proposed VSRnet, which uses a hand-designed optical flow algorithm to perform motion compensation on the input LR frame, and takes the warped frame as the CNN input to predict the HR video frame. Caballero et al.~\cite{caballero2017real} introduced the first end-to-end VSR network: ESPCN, which studies early fusion, slow fusion, and 3D convolution to learn temporal relationships. They applied a multi-scale spatial transformer to warp the LR frame and eventually generated a HR frame through another deep network. Tao et al.~\cite{tao2017detail} proposed a sub-pixel motion compensation layer for frame alignment and used a convolutional LSTM architecture in following SR reconstruction network. Recently, Haris et al.~\cite{haris2019recurrent} proposed RBPN which learns from the idea of back-projection to iteratively extract temporal features between frames. They treated frames independently rather than concatenated them together.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{network_images/figure1.pdf}
\caption{The architecture of the proposed DNLN framework. We only show one neighboring frame in the figure. Each neighboring frame will pass through feature extraction module, alignment module and non-local attention module. Then all the features are concatenated and fed into SR reconstruction module to generate HR reference frame.}
\label{figure:proposed_network}
\end{figure*}
Most previous VSR methods exploit optical flow to estimate motion between frames and perform motion compensation to integrate effective features. While various approaches~\cite{dosovitskiy2015flownet,ranjan2017optical,ilg2017flownet,hui2018liteflownet,zhai2019skflow} are proposed to calculate the optical flow, it is still intractable to obtain precise flow estimation in the case of occlusion and large movement. Xue et al.~\cite{xue2017video} proposed task-oriented TOFlow with learnable task-oriented motion prompts. It achieved better VSR results than fixed flow algorithm, which reveals that standard optical flow is not the best motion representation for video recovery. To circumvent this problem, DUF~\cite{jo2018deep} uses an adaptive upsampling with dynamic filters instead of the explicit estimation process. TDAN~\cite{tian2018tdan} uses deformable convolutions to adaptively align the video frame at the feature level without computing optical flow. These kind of methods transcend the flow-based approaches through implicit motion compensation.
\subsection{Deformable Convolution}
To enhance the CNNs’ capability of modeling geometric transformations, Dai et al.~\cite{dai2017deformable} proposed deformable convolutions. It adds additional offsets to the regular grid sampling locations in the standard convolution and enables arbitrary deformation of the sampling grid. To further enhance the modeling capability, they proposed modulated deformable convolutions~\cite{zhu2019deformable} which can further learn modulation scalar for sampling kernels. The modulation scalar lies in the range $[ 0,1 ]$, which can adjust the weight for each sampling location. The deformable convolution is effective for high-level vision tasks such as object detection and semantic segmentation. TDAN~\cite{tian2018tdan} is the first to utilize deformable convolutions in the VSR task. It is an end-to-end network which adaptively aligns the input frames at the feature level without explicit motion estimation. EDVR~\cite{wang2019edvr} further exploits the deformable convolutions with a pyramid and cascading structure. It shows superior performance to previous optical-flow-based VSR networks.
\subsection{Non-local Block}
Inspired by the classic non-local method in computer vision, Wang et al.~\cite{wang2018non} proposed a building block for video classification by virtue of non-local operations. For image data, long-range dependencies are commonly modeled via large receptive fields formed by deep stacks of convolutional layers. While the non-local operations capture long-range dependencies directly by computing interactions between any two positions, regardless of their positional distance. It computes the response at a position as a weighted sum of all positions in the input feature maps. The set of positions can be in space, time, or spacetime, so the non-local operations are applicable for image or video problems.
\section{Deformable Non-local Networks}
\subsection{Network Architecture}
Given a sequence of 2N+1 consecutive low-resolution frames$\left\{ I _ { t - N } ^ { LR } , \ldots , I _ { t - 1 } ^ { LR } , I _ { t } ^ { LR } , I _ { t + 1 } ^ { LR } , \ldots , I _ { t + N } ^ { LR } \right\}$, where $I _ { t } ^ { LR }$ is the reference frame and the others are the neighboring frames, our goal is to recover the corresponding high quality video frame through the reference frame and its 2N neighboring frames. Therefore, our network takes $I _ { [ t - N , t + N ] } ^ { LR }$ as inputs, and finally reconstructs $I _ { t } ^ { SR }$. The overall network structure is shown in Fig.\ref{figure:proposed_network}, which can be divided into four parts, including feature extraction module, alignment module, non-local attention module and the final SR reconstruction module.
For all the input LR frames, we first extract their features via a shared feature extraction module. It consists of one convolutional layer and several residual blocks. The feature extraction can be represented as:
\begin{equation}
F_{T}=H_{fea}\left(I_{T}^{L R}\right),
\end{equation}
where the output $F_{T}$ denotes the extracted LR feature maps. Then each LR neighboring feature $F_{i}$ will enter the alignment module along with the LR reference feature $F_{t}$. Our alignment module which consists of stacked deformable convolutions is responsible for performing adaptive feature level alignment:
\begin{equation}
F_{i}^{a}=H_{align}\left(F_{i}, F_{t}\right),
i \in[t-N, t+N] \text { and } i \neq t,
\end{equation}
where $F_{i}^{a}$ denotes the neighboring feature after alignment. Subsequently, each aligned neighboring feature and the reference feature are fed into a non-local attention module. By calculating the global correlation between them, connections of pixels are established and informative regions in $F_{i}^{a}$ will be further enhanced. The output $F_{i}^{a'}$ of the non-local attention module can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
F_{i}^{a'}=H_{nl}\left(F_{i}^{a}, F_{t}\right).
\end{equation}
The last part is the SR reconstruction module, here we use the residual in residual dense blocks (RRDB). We concatenate 2N+1 features and fuse them through a $3 \times 3$ convolution layer, then the fused feature maps are fed into RRDBs for further reconstruction. Besides, we use a skip connection to propagate LR reference feature to the end of the network and do an element-wise addition with the outcome of RRDBs. Finally, a high quality HR reference frame is recovered from the output feature. The reconstruction module is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
F_{\text {fusion}}=\operatorname{Conv}\left(\left[F_{t-N}^{a'}, \ldots, F_{t-1}^{a'}, F_{t}, F_{t+1}^{a'}, \ldots, F_{t+\mathrm{N}}^{a'}\right]\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
I_{t}^{S R}=H_{r e c}\left(H_{R R D B s}\left(F_{f u s i o n}\right)+F_{t}\right),
\end{equation}
where $[\cdot, \cdot, \cdot]$ denotes concatenation of the features. $H_{r e c}$ contains an upscaling layer and a reconstruction layer.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{network_images/figure2.pdf}
\caption{The proposed alignment module and the detailed illustration of deformable convolution operation.}
\label{figure:alignment module}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htpb]
\begin{center}
\subfigure[Hierarchical feature fusion block (HFFB)]
{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{network_images/figure3a.pdf}}
\hfil
\subfigure[Receptive field of multiple dilated convolutions addition]
{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{network_images/figure3b.pdf}}
\caption{(a) The structure of hierarchical feature fusion block (HFFB). It contains 8 $3 \times 3$ dilated convolutions with a dilation rate from 1 to 8. The feature maps obtained using kernels of different dilation rates are hierarchically added before being concatenated. (b) A diagrammatic sketch of multiple dilated convolutions addition.}
\label{figure:hffb}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Alignment Module}
In order to make use of temporal information from consecutive frames, traditional VSR methods are based on optical flow to perform frame alignment. However, explicit motion compensation method could be sub-optimal for video super-resolution task. We use modulated deformable convolutions~\cite{zhu2019deformable} in the alignment module to get rid of such limitation.
For each location $p$ on the output feature map $Y$, a normal convolution process can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
Y(p)=\sum_{k=1}^{K} \omega_{k} \cdot X\left(p+p_{k}\right),
\end{equation}
where $p_{k}$ represents the sampling grid with $K$ sampling locations and $\omega_{k}$ denotes the weights for each location. For example, $K=9$ and $p_{k} \in\{(-1,-1),(-1,0), \ldots,(1,1)\}$ defines a $3 \times 3$ convolutional kernel. In the modulated deformable convolution, predicted offsets and modulation scalar are added to the sampling grid making deformable kernels spatially-variant. Here, we utilize the deformable convolution for temporal alignment. Let $F_{i,b-1}$ and $F_{i,b}$ denote the input and output of the deformable convolution in our module, respectively. The operation of modulated deformable convolution is as follows:
\begin{equation}
F_{i,b}(p)=\sum_{k=1}^{K} \omega_{k} \cdot F_{i,b-1}\left(p+p_{k}+\Delta p_{i,k}\right) \cdot \Delta m_{i,k},
\label{eq:deform_conv}
\end{equation}
where $\Delta p_{i,k}$ and $\Delta m_{i,k}$ are the learnable offset and modulation scalar for the $k$-th location, respectively. The convolution will be operated on the irregular positions with dynamic weights to achieve adaptive sampling on input features. Since the offsets and modulation scalar are both learned, each input neighboring feature will be concatenated with the reference one to generate the corresponding deformable sampling parameters:
\begin{equation}
\Delta P_{i}, \Delta M_{i}=f\left(\left[F_{i}, F_{t}\right]\right),
\end{equation}
where $[ \cdot , \cdot ]$ denotes the concatenation operation. And $\Delta P=\{\Delta p_{k}\}$, $\Delta M=\{\Delta m_{k}\}$. As the $\Delta p_{k}$ may be fractional, we use the bilinear interpolation, which is the same as that proposed in \cite{dai2017deformable}.
The alignment module proposed in DNLN is composed of several deformable convolutions as shown in Fig.\ref{figure:alignment module}. In each deformable convolution, a reference feature $F_{t}$ and a neighboring feature $F_{i}$ are concatenated as an input. Then they pass through a $3 \times 3$ convolution layer to reduce channels and a hierarchical feature fusion block (HFFB)~\cite{hui2019progressive} to increase the size of receptive field. The following $3 \times 3$ convolution layer is used to obtain the offset $\Delta P_{i}$ and modulation scalar $\Delta M_{i}$ for the deformable kernel. The structure of HFFB is depicted in Fig.\ref{figure:hffb}. It introduces a spatial pyramid of dilated convolutions to effectively enlarge receptive field with relatively low computational cost, which contributes to deal with complicated and large motions between frames. In HFFB, the feature maps obtained using kernels of different dilation rates are hierarchically added before being concatenated. With the same size of receptive field, the multiple dilated convolutions addition is more dense than just one dilated convolution. The use of HFFB is beneficial to acquire an effective receptive field, so we can more efficiently exploit the temporal dependency of pixels to generate the sampling parameters.
According to Eq.(\ref{eq:deform_conv}), the deformable kernel can adaptively select sampling positions on neighboring features, learn implicit motion compensation between two frames, and complete the alignment of features. With a cascade of deformable convolutions, we can gradually align the neighboring features and improve the alignment accuracy of sub-pixels. It is noticed that when passing through a deformable convolution layer, the reference feature always keeps unchanged, only to provide a reference for the alignment of neighboring features. Through such a coarse to fine process, the neighboring frames can be well warped at the feature level.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{network_images/figure4.pdf}
\caption{The non-local attention module.}
\label{figure:non-local attention module}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Non-local Attention Module}
Due to the factors such as occlusion, blurring and parallax problems, even after the alignment module, the neighboring frames still have some areas that are not well aligned or don't contain the missing details needed for the reference frame. Therefore, it is essential to dynamically select valid inter-frame information before merging features. The proposed DNLN introduces a non-local attention module to achieve this goal. By capturing the global correlation between the aligned neighboring feature $F_{i}^{a}$ and the reference one $F_{t}$, the non-local module can effectively enhance desirable fine details in $F_{i}^{a}$ which can be complementary to the reference frame, and suppress the misaligned areas.
Let $\mathbf{x}$ and $\mathbf{y}$ denote the input feature $F_{i}^{a}$ and $F_{t}$ in Fig.\ref{figure:non-local attention module}, respectively. The non-local operation in our module can be defined as:
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{z}_{p}=\mathbf{x}_{p}+W_{z} \sum_{n=1}^{N} \frac{f\left(\mathbf{x}_{p}, \mathbf{y}_{n}\right)}{\mathcal{C}(\mathbf{y})} \left(W_{g} \cdot \mathbf{y}_{n}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{z}$ denotes the module output $F_{i}^{a'}$. Here $p$ is the index of an output position, and $n$ is the index that enumerates all positions on $\mathbf{y}$. $W_{g} \mathbf{y}_{n}$ computes the expression of input $\mathbf{y}$ at position $n$. The function $f\left(\mathbf{x}_{p}, \mathbf{y}_{n}\right)$ calculates the relationship between $\mathbf{x}_{p}$ and $\mathbf{y}_{n}$. We use embedded Gaussian function to represent this pairwise relationship and it is normalized by a factor $\mathcal{C}(\mathbf{y})$:
\begin{equation}
\frac{f\left(\mathbf{x}_{p}, \mathbf{y}_{n}\right)}{\mathcal{C}(\mathbf{y})}=\frac{\exp \left(\left\langle W_{u} \mathbf{x}_{p}, W_{v} \mathbf{y}_{n}\right\rangle\right)}{\sum_{n} \exp \left(\left\langle W_{u} \mathbf{x}_{p}, W_{v} \mathbf{y}_{n}\right\rangle\right)}.
\end{equation}
$W_{u} \mathbf{x}_{p}$, $W_{v} \mathbf{y}_{n}$ are used to linearly embed the input and pairwise relationship is obtained from such a softmax computation. Then we calculate a value of position $p$ by using these relationships and the corresponding expression of all positions on $\mathbf{y}$. The value is added to the input $\mathbf{x}_{p}$ to get the final output $\mathbf{z}_{p}$. Through non-local operation, the neighboring features can make full use of the correlation with the reference feature at the pixel level and enhance the desired missing details.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{network_images/figure5.pdf}
\caption{The residual in residual dense block (RRDB).}
\label{figure:rrdb}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\tiny
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=.33\textwidth]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/gt1.png}\vspace{0.5em}
\\
{\small ``Calendar'' \hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.5em}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\hspace{-0.4cm}
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\tiny
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/rcan.png}\hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/vespcn.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/toflow.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/frvsr.png}\vspace{0.42em}
\\
{\small (a) RCAN\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (b) VESPCN \hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (c) TOFlow\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (d) FRVSR\hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.42em}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/duf.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/rbpn.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/dnln.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/calendar/gt2.png}\vspace{0.5em}
\\
{\small (e) DUF\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (f) RBPN\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (g) Ours \hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (h) GT\hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.5em}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\vspace{0.5mm}
\\
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\tiny
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=.33\textwidth]{experiment_images/vid4/city/gt1.png}\vspace{0.5em}
\\
{\small ``City'' \hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.5em}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\hspace{-0.4cm}
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\tiny
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/rcan.png}\hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/vespcn.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/toflow.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/frvsr.png}\vspace{0.42em}
\\
{\small (a) RCAN\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (b) VESPCN \hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (c) TOFlow\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (d) FRVSR\hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.42em}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/duf.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/rbpn.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/dnln.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/city/gt2.png}\vspace{0.5em}
\\
{\small (e) DUF\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (f) RBPN\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (g) Ours \hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (h) GT\hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.5em}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\vspace{0.5mm}
\\
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\tiny
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[width=.33\textwidth]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/gt1.png}\vspace{0.5em}
\\
{\small ``Walk'' \hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.5em}
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\hspace{-0.4cm}
\begin{adjustbox}{valign=t}
\tiny
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/rcan.png}\hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/vespcn.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/toflow.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/frvsr.png}\vspace{0.42em}
\\
{\small (a) RCAN\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (b) VESPCN \hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (c) TOFlow\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (d) FRVSR\hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.42em}
\\
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/duf.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/rbpn.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/dnln.png} \hspace{-1em} &
\includegraphics[width=.145\textwidth,height=2.1cm]{experiment_images/vid4/walk/gt2.png}\vspace{0.5em}
\\
{\small (e) DUF\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (f) RBPN\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (g) Ours \hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (h) GT\hspace{-1em}}\vspace{0.5em}\\
\end{tabular}
\end{adjustbox}
\vspace{0.5mm}
\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Visual results on Vid4 for $4\times$ scaling factor. Zoom in to see better visualization.}
\label{fig:result_vid4}
\end{center}\vspace{-1em}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{SR Reconstruction Module}
The output of the non-local attention module $F_{i}^{a'}$ is aggregated with the reference feature $F_{t}$ through a feature fusion layer, and then fed into the following SR reconstruction module. The SR reconstruction module mainly consists of stacked residual in residual dense blocks (RRDB) and a global skip connection.
The structure of RRDB can be seen in Fig.\ref{figure:rrdb}. It combines multi-level residual network and dense connections. Benefiting from them, RRDBs can make full use of hierarchical features from input frames and obtain better restoration quality. More details about RRDB can be found in \cite{wang2018esrgan}. The global skip connection transfers the shallow features of the reference frame to the end of the network, making the reconstruction module focus on learning residual features from the neighboring frames. It can well keep spatial information of the input LR reference frame and ensure the input frame and the corresponding super-resolved one have more structural similarity. Finally, a high-resolution reference frame is produced by a sub-pixel upsampling layer and a reconstruction layer.
\section{Experiments}
\subsection{Training Datasets and Details}
\noindent \textbf{Datasets }
To train high-performance VSR networks, a large video dataset is required. Xue~\cite{xue2017video} et al. collected videos from Vimeo and released a VSR dataset vimeo-90k after processing. The dataset contains 64612 training samples with various and complex real-world motions. Each sample contains seven consecutive frames with a fixed resolution of $448 \times 256$. We use the vimeo-90k dataset as our training dataset. To generate LR images, we downscale the HR images $4 \times$ with MATLAB imresize function, which first blurs the input frames using cubic filters and then downsamples them using bicubic interpolation.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\scriptsize
\begin{center}
\caption{Quantitative comparison of state-of-the-art SR algorithms on Vid4 for $4 \times$. {\color{red}Red} indicates the best and {\color{blue}blue} indicates the second best performance (PSNR/SSIM). In the evaluation, the first and last two frames are not included and we do not crop any border pixels except DUF. Eight pixels near image boundary are cropped for DUF.}
\label{tab:Vid4}
\begin{tabular}{l|c||c|c||c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
&Flow &Bicubic & RCAN~\cite{zhang2018image}& VESPCN~\cite{caballero2017real}& TOFlow~\cite{xue2017video}&FRVSR~\cite{sajjadi2018frame}&DUF~\cite{jo2018deep} & RBPN~\cite{haris2019recurrent}&DNLN(Ours)\\
Clip Name &Magnitude&(1 Frame) & (1 Frame) & (3 Frames) & (7 Frames) & (recurrent)&(7 Frames) & (7 Frames) & (7 Frames) \\
\hline
Calendar &1.14&20.39 / 0.5720 &22.31 / 0.7248 & - &22.44 / 0.7290 & - &{\color{blue}24.07 / 0.8123} &23.95 / 0.8076 &{\color{red}24.12 / 0.8141} \\
City &1.63&25.17 / 0.6024 &26.07 / 0.6938 & - &26.75 / 0.7368 & - &{\color{red}28.32 / 0.8333} &27.74 / 0.8051 &{\color{blue}27.90 / 0.8111} \\
Foliage &1.48&23.47 / 0.5666 &24.69 / 0.6628 & - &25.24 / 0.7065 & - &{\color{red}26.41 / 0.7713} &26.21 / 0.7578 &{\color{blue}26.28 / 0.7607} \\
Walk &1.44&26.11 / 0.7977 &28.64 / 0.8718 & - &29.03 / 0.8777 & - &30.63 / {\color{red}0.9144} &{\color{blue}30.70} / 0.9111 &{\color{red}30.85} / {\color{blue}0.9129} \\
\hline
Average &1.42&23.79 / 0.6347 &25.43 / 0.7383 &25.35 / 0.7557 &25.86 / 0.7625 &26.69 / 0.822 &{\color{red}27.36 / 0.8328} &27.15 / 0.8204 &{\color{blue}27.29 / 0.8247} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t!]
\scriptsize
\begin{center}
\caption{Quantitative comparison of state-of-the-art SR algorithms on SPMCS-11 for $4 \times$.}
\label{tab:SPMCS-11}
\begin{tabular}{l|c||c|c||c|c|c|c}
\hline
&Flow &Bicubic & RCAN~\cite{zhang2018image}& TOFlow~\cite{xue2017video}&DUF~\cite{jo2018deep} & RBPN~\cite{haris2019recurrent}&DNLN(Ours)\\
Clip Name &Magnitude&(1 Frame) & (1 Frame) & (7 Frames) &(7 Frames) & (7 Frames) & (7 Frames) \\
\hline
car05$\_$001 &6.21&27.75 / 0.7825 &29.86 / 0.8484 &30.10 / 0.8626 &30.79 / 0.8707 &{\color{blue}31.95} / {\color{red}0.9021} &{\color{red}31.96} / {\color{blue}0.9011} \\
hdclub$\_$003$\_$001 &0.70&19.42 / 0.4863 &20.41 / 0.6096 &20.86 / 0.6523 &{\color{blue}22.05} / {\color{red}0.7438} &21.91 / 0.7257 &{\color{red}22.15} / {\color{blue}0.7366} \\
hitachi$\_$isee5$\_$001 &3.01&19.61 / 0.5938 &23.71 / 0.8369 &22.88 / 0.8044 &25.77 / 0.8929 &{\color{blue}26.30 / 0.9049} &{\color{red}26.60 / 0.9080} \\
hk004$\_$001 &0.49&28.54 / 0.8003 &31.68 / 0.8631 &30.89 / 0.8654 &32.98 / 0.8988 &{\color{blue}33.38 / 0.9016} &{\color{red}33.46 / 0.9041} \\
HKVTG$\_$004 &0.11&27.46 / 0.6831 &28.81 / 0.7649 &28.49 / 0.7487 &29.16 / 0.7860 &{\color{blue}29.51} / {\color{red}0.7979} &{\color{red}29.53} / {\color{blue}0.7976} \\
jvc$\_$009$\_$001 &1.24&25.40 / 0.7558 &28.31 / 0.8717 &27.85 / 0.8542 &29.18 / 0.8961 &{\color{blue}30.06 / 0.9105} &{\color{red}30.65 / 0.9205} \\
NYVTG$\_$006 &0.10&28.45 / 0.8014 &31.01 / 0.8859 &30.12 / 0.8603 &32.30 / 0.9090 &{\color{blue}33.22 / 0.9231} &{\color{red}33.35 / 0.9254} \\
PRVTG$\_$012 &0.12&25.63 / 0.7136 &26.56 / 0.7806 &26.62 / 0.7788 &27.39 / 0.8166 &{\color{blue}27.60 / 0.8242} &{\color{red}27.68 / 0.8260} \\
RMVTG$\_$011 &0.18&23.96 / 0.6573 &26.02 / 0.7569 &25.89 / 0.7500 &27.56 / 0.8113 &{\color{blue}27.63 / 0.8170} &{\color{red}27.75 / 0.8199} \\
veni3$\_$011 &0.36&29.47 / 0.8979 &34.58 / 0.9629 &32.85 / 0.9536 &34.63 / 0.9677 &{\color{red}36.61} / {\color{blue}0.9735} &{\color{blue}36.33} / {\color{red}0.9739} \\
veni5$\_$015 &0.36&27.41 / 0.8483 &31.04 / 0.9262 &30.03 / 0.9118 &31.88 / 0.9371 &{\color{blue}32.37 / 0.9409} &{\color{red}33.04 / 0.9466} \\
\hline
Average &1.17&25.73 / 0.7291 &28.36 / 0.8279 &27.87 / 0.8220 &29.43 / 0.8664 &{\color{blue}30.05 / 0.8747} &{\color{red}30.23 / 0.8782} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}[t!]
\scriptsize
\begin{center}
\caption{Quantitative comparison of state-of-the-art SR algorithms on Vimeo-90K-T for $4 \times$.}
\label{tab:Vimeo-90K-T}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1.4mm}{
\begin{tabular}{*1l||*1c|*1c|*1c|*1c}
\hline
Method & Slow & Medium & Fast & Average \\
\hline
Bicubic &29.34 / 0.8330 &31.29 / 0.8708 &34.07 / 0.9050 &31.32 / 0.8684\\
RCAN ~\cite{zhang2018image} &32.93 / 0.9032 &35.35 / 0.9268 &38.47 / 0.9456 &35.34 / 0.9249\\
\hline
TOFlow ~\cite{xue2017video} &32.15 / 0.8900 &35.01 / 0.9254 &37.70 / 0.9430 &34.84 / 0.9209\\
DUF ~\cite{jo2018deep} &33.41 / 0.9110 &36.71 / 0.9446 &38.87 / 0.9510 &36.37 / 0.9386\\
RBPN ~\cite{haris2019recurrent} &{\color{blue}34.26 / 0.9222} &{\color{blue}37.39 / 0.9494} &{\color{blue}40.16 / 0.9611} &{\color{blue}37.18 / 0.9456}\\
DNLN(ours) &{\color{red}34.47 / 0.9246} &{\color{red}37.59 / 0.9510} &{\color{red}40.35 / 0.9621} &{\color{red}37.38 / 0.9473}\\
\hline
\# of clips &1616 &4983 &1225 &7824\\
Flow Mag. &0.6 &2.5 &8.3 &3.0\\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\noindent \textbf{Training Details }
In our network, the convolutional layers have 64 filters and their kernel sizes are set to $3 \times 3$, if not specified otherwise. In the feature extraction module, we utilize 5 residual blocks to extract shallow features. Then the alignment module adopts 5 deformable convolutions to perform feature alignment. The dilated convolutions in HFFB have $3 \times 3$ kernels and 32 filters. In the non-local attention module, the first three $1 \times 1$ convolutions have 32 filters and the last $1 \times 1$ convolution has 64 filters. Finally, in the reconstruction module, we use 23 RRDBs and set the number of growth channels to 32.
In the training process, we perform data augmentation by doing horizontal or vertical flipping, $90 ^ { \circ }$ rotation and random cropping of the images. The batch size is set to 8. The network takes seven consecutive frames as inputs, and LR patches with the size of $50 \times 50$ are extracted for training. Our model is trained by Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma2014adam} with $\beta_{1}=0.9$, $\beta_{2}=0.999$, and $\epsilon=10^{-8}$. The initial learning rate is $10^{-4}$ before 70 epochs and later decreases to half every 20 epochs. All experiments were conducted on two NVIDIA RTX 2080 GPUs using PyTorch 1.0~\cite{paszke2017automatic}. We train the network end-to-end by minimizing L1 loss between the predicted frame and the ground truth HR frame. And later we employ the L2 loss to finetune the model, which could result in better performance.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cccccc}
\includegraphics[width=.198\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hdclub_003/gt1.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hdclub_003/toflow.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hdclub_003/duf.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hdclub_003/rbpn.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hdclub_003/dnln.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hdclub_003/gt2.png}\hspace{-1em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.198\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hkvtg_004/gt1.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hkvtg_004/toflow.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hkvtg_004/duf.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hkvtg_004/rbpn.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hkvtg_004/dnln.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/hkvtg_004/gt2.png}\hspace{-1em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.198\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/ldvtg_009/gt1.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/ldvtg_009/toflow.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/ldvtg_009/duf.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/ldvtg_009/rbpn.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/ldvtg_009/dnln.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/ldvtg_009/gt2.png}\hspace{-1em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.198\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/nyvtg_006/gt1.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/nyvtg_006/toflow.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/nyvtg_006/duf.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/nyvtg_006/rbpn.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/nyvtg_006/dnln.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/nyvtg_006/gt2.png}\hspace{-1em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.198\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/veni5_015/gt1.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/veni5_015/toflow.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/veni5_015/duf.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/veni5_015/rbpn.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/veni5_015/dnln.png}\hspace{-1em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/spmc/veni5_015/gt2.png}\hspace{-1em}\\
&{\small (a) TOFlow\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (b) DUF\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (c) RBPN\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (d) Ours\hspace{-1em}}
&{\small (e) GT \vspace{0.2em}}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Visual results on SPMCS for $4\times$ scaling factor. Zoom in to see better visualization.}
\label{fig:result_spmcs}
\end{center}\vspace{-1em}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{cccccc}
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00013_0581/bicubic.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00013_0581/toflow.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00013_0581/duf.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00013_0581/rbpn.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00013_0581/dnln.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00013_0581/gt.png}\hspace{-0.9em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00042_0539/bicubic.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00042_0539/toflow.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00042_0539/duf.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00042_0539/rbpn.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00042_0539/dnln.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00042_0539/gt.png}\hspace{-0.9em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00016_0341/bicubic.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00016_0341/toflow.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00016_0341/duf.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00016_0341/rbpn.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00016_0341/dnln.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00016_0341/gt.png}\hspace{-0.9em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00030_0496/bicubic.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00030_0496/toflow.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00030_0496/duf.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00030_0496/rbpn.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00030_0496/dnln.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00030_0496/gt.png}\hspace{-0.9em}\\
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00082_0473/bicubic.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00082_0473/toflow.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00082_0473/duf.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00082_0473/rbpn.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00082_0473/dnln.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.15\textwidth]{experiment_images/vimeo/00082_0473/gt.png}\hspace{-0.9em}\\
{\small (a) Bicubic\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (b) TOFlow\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (c) DUF\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (d) RBPN\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (e) Ours\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (f) GT \vspace{0.3em}}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Visual results on Vimeo-90K-T for $4\times$ scaling factor. Zoom in to see better visualization.}
\label{fig:result_vimeo}
\end{center}\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[c]{ccccccc}
\includegraphics[width=.13\textwidth]{experiment_images/ablation/1deform.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\textwidth]{experiment_images/ablation/2deform.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\textwidth]{experiment_images/ablation/3deform.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\textwidth]{experiment_images/ablation/4deform.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\textwidth]{experiment_images/ablation/5deform.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\textwidth]{experiment_images/ablation/x-HFFB.png}\hspace{-0.9em}
&
\includegraphics[width=.13\textwidth]{experiment_images/ablation/GT.png}\hspace{-0.9em}\\
{\small (a) 1dconv\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (b) 2dconv\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (c) 3dconv\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (d) 4dconv\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (e) 5dconv\hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (f) w/o HFFB \hspace{-0.9em}}
&{\small (g) GT \vspace{0.3em}}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Qualitative results of ablation on alignment module.}
\label{fig:result_ablation}
\end{center}\vspace{-1.5em}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Comparison with the State-of-the-art Methods}
We compare our DNLN with several state-of-the-art SISR and VSR methods: RCAN~\cite{zhang2018image}, VESPCN~\cite{caballero2017real}, TOFlow~\cite{xue2017video}, FRVSR~\cite{sajjadi2018frame}, DUF~\cite{jo2018deep} and RBPN~\cite{haris2019recurrent}. Note that most previous methods are trained with different datasets and we just compare with the results they provided. The SR results are evaluated with PSNR and SSIM~\cite{wang2004image} quantitatively on Y channel (i.e., luminance) of transformed YCbCr space. In the evaluation, the first and last two frames are not included and we do not crop any border pixels except DUF~\cite{jo2018deep}. Eight pixels near image boundary are cropped for DUF due to its severe boundary effects.
We evaluated our models on three datasets: Vid4~\cite{liu2013bayesian}, SPMCS~\cite{tao2017detail}, and Vimeo-90K-T~\cite{xue2017video} with average flow magnitude (pixel/frame) provided in \cite{haris2019recurrent}. Vid4 is a commonly used dataset which contains four video sequences: calendar, city, foliage and walk. However, we can observe that Vid4 has limited inter-frame motion and there exists artifacts on its ground-truth frames. SPMCS consists of higher quality video clips with various motions and diverse scenes. Vimeo-90K-T is a much larger dataset. It contains a wide range of flow magnitude between frames which can well judge the performance of the VSR methods.
Table~\ref{tab:Vid4} shows the quantitative results on Vid4. Our model outperforms the optical-flow-based methods which demonstrates the effectiveness of our optical flow free alignment module. Qualitative results are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:result_vid4}. We mark out the positions which display obvious distinctions among different methods. For the date in “Calendar” clip, most compared methods produce images with blurring artifacts, while our method achieves a better result and alleviates the artifacts. In the “Walk” clip, the existing methods blur the rope and clothing together, only DNLN can clearly distinguish these two parts and restore the pattern closest to the ground truth frame.
In comparison to Vid4, SPMCS contains more high frequency information with higher resolution, which requires the superb recovery abilities of algorithms. Results on SPMCS are shown in Table~\ref{tab:SPMCS-11}. DNLN achieves the best results and outperforms other methods by a large margin on PSNR, which proves the superiority of our model. Visual comparisons are depicted in Fig.\ref{fig:result_spmcs}. Due to the abundance of textures, most methods cannot fully recover the frames and obviously produce blurring artifacts. Although DUF and RBPN could reproduce part of the HR patterns, it is obvious that our DNLN is the unique approach to restore the abundant details and clean edges. Such visual comparisons demonstrate that our network can extract more sophisticated features from LR space with the proposed modules.
Table~\ref{tab:Vimeo-90K-T} presents the quantitative outcomes of Vimeo-90K-T. As suggested in~\cite{haris2019recurrent}, we classified the video clips into three groups (e.g. slow, medium and fast) according to the motion velocity. While the motion velocity increases, video frames with larger motion amplitude will contain more useful temporal information but also make the recovery more challenging. Our DNLN ensures optimal performance on all three groups, surpassing RBPN by 0.21 dB, 0.20 dB and 0.19 dB on PSNR, respectively. Since the flow magnitude of Vimeo-90K-T in fast group is higher than Vid4 and SPMCS, the content between video frames varies greatly, which reflects that DNLN could take full advantage of temporal information among multiple frames. The qualitative evaluations are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:result_vimeo}. For the railing texture in third row, only our method restores the correct and clear pattern while others suffer from varying degrees of blurring. In some cases, even the SR frames recovered by different methods have the same sharp edges, our DNLN is more accurate and faithful to the ground truth. Such as the images in fourth row, the results restored by RBPN and DNLN are equally clear, while the former produces the stripes with wrong directions.
\subsection{Model Size and Running Time Analyses}
Table~\ref{tab:model_size} shows comparisons about model size and and running time of the methods. The running time is test with input size $112\times64$. Our DNLN has the largest model size but also achieves the best performance. Here, we adopt a smaller model S-DNLN with only 3 deformable convolutions in alignment module and 14 RRDBs in reconstruction module. We can see that S-DNLN has a comparable number of parameters and running time with RBPN. Nevertheless, it can still get a better result which further validates the effectiveness of our proposed modules.
\begin{table}[htb]
\scriptsize
\begin{center}
\caption{Number of parameters and time cost on Vimeo-90K-T for $4\times$.}
\label{tab:model_size}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
Methods & RCAN & TOFlow & DUF & RBPN & S-DNLN & DNLN\\
\hline
Parameter (M) &15.59 &1.41 &5.82 &12.77 &12.39 &19.74\\
\hline
Time (s) &0.051 &0.126 &0.175 &0.086 &0.095 &0.119\\
\hline
PSNR &35.34 &34.84 &36.37 &37.18 &37.23 &37.38\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Ablation Study}
To further investigate the proposed method, we conducted ablation experiments by removing the main components of our network. The results are shown in Table~\ref{tab:ablation_dnln}. First, we remove the alignment module, thus the shallow features would be directly fed into the following network without warping. The PSNR of the results on Vimeo-90K-T is relatively low, which indicates that the alignment operation is crucial for utilizing the inter-frame information. Second, we remove the non-local attention module and the performance decreases a lot. Third, we replace the RRDBs by simply stacking common residual blocks and it also harms the performance. We visualize the convergence process of these combinations in Fig.\ref{figure:convergence analysis}. The results demonstrate the effectiveness and benefits of our proposed three modules.
\begin{table}[H]
\scriptsize
\begin{center}
\caption{Ablation study of proposed network on Vimeo-90K-T for $4 \times$.}
\label{tab:ablation_dnln}
\begin{tabular}{ccc|c|c}
\hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Alignment \\ module \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}Non-local \\ module \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}c@{}}SR \\ module \end{tabular} & PSNR & SSIM \\
\hline
& \Checkmark & \Checkmark & 36.82 & 0.9418 \\
\Checkmark & & \Checkmark & 37.34 & 0.9471 \\
\Checkmark & \Checkmark & & 37.25 & 0.9462 \\
\Checkmark & \Checkmark & \Checkmark & \color{red}37.38 & \color{red}0.9473 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{experiment_images/convergence.pdf}
\caption{Convergence analysis on the three modules of proposed network. The curves for each combination are based on the PSNR with scaling factor $4 \times$.}
\label{figure:convergence analysis}
\end{figure}
From the ablation experiments above, we can observe that the network performance would be significantly affected by the alignment preprocessing. So we further validated the impact of deformable convolutions on the reconstruction capability. As shown in Table~\ref{tab:ablation_alignment}, with only one deformable convolution, the PSNR value can improve greatly. It demonstrates the importance of alignment operations for making efficient use of the neighboring frames. As the number of deformable convolutions increases, the network gains a better performance. The visual comparisons are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:result_ablation}. From left to right, the network alleviates the blurring artifacts of the office building and recovers more accurate details. In addition, we replaced the HFFB used in deformable convolutions with a $3 \times 3$ convolution layer. The performance of network decreases by roughly 0.29 dB. It proves that by enlarging the receptive field, the deformable convolution can more effectively cope with complex and large motions.
\begin{table}[H]
\scriptsize
\begin{center}
\caption{Ablation study on alignment module.}
\label{tab:ablation_alignment}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\hline
Model & PSNR & SSIM \\
\hline
w/o deform &36.81 & 0.9417 \\
1dconv &37.09 & 0.9446 \\
2dconv &37.19 & 0.9455 \\
3dconv &37.33 & 0.9469 \\
4dconv &37.36 & 0.9471 \\
5dconv &\color{red}37.38 & \color{red}0.9473 \\
5dconv, w/o HFFB &37.09 & 0.9447 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In order to study the influence of inter-frame information on the recovery results, we leveraged different number of frames to train our network. From Table~\ref{tab:ablation_frames}, we can observe that there is a significant improvement in DNLN when switching from 3 frames to 5 frames, and the performance of DNLN/5 is even better than RBPN which uses 7 frames. When further switching to 7 frames, we can still get a better result but the improvement becomes minor.
\begin{table}[H]
\scriptsize
\begin{center}
\caption{Experimental results with a different number of input frames.}
\label{tab:ablation_frames}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c}
\hline
Input & 3 frames & 5 frames & 7 frames \\
\hline
PSNR / SSIM &37.06 / 0.9435 &37.29 / 0.9463 &{\color{red}37.38 / 0.9473}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we propose a novel deformable non-local network (DNLN), which is a non-flow-based method for effective video super-resolution. To deal with complicated and large motion compensation, we introduce the deformable convolution with HFFB in our alignment module, which can well align the frames at the feature level. In addition, we adopt a non-local attention module to further extract complementary features from neighboring frames. By making full use of the temporal information, we finally restore a high quality video frame through a reconstruction module. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets illustrate the effectiveness of our DNLN in video super-resolution.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
We have a random sample $(X_1, Y_1),\ldots ,(X_n, Y_n)$, which are i.i.d.\ copies of $(X, Y)$, and the regression of $Y$ on $X$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{model}
Y_i = g (X_i) + e_i, \quad i = 1, \ldots, n,
\end{equation}
where $g(\cdot)$ is unknown, and $e_i$ are independent copies of error random variable $e$ with $E(e \, |\, X)=0$ and $var(e \, |\, X=x) = \sigma^2 (x) < \infty$ for all $x$. Note that the condition $E(e \, |\, X)=0$ is essentially the identifiable condition for mean regression, and it varies over the different procedures of regression. For instance, in the case of the median regression, the identifiable condition will be the median functional $(e | X) = 0$ or for the trimmed mean regression, it will be the trimmed mean functional $(e | X) = 0$.
There have been several attempts to estimate the unknown non-parametric regression function $g (\cdot)$; for overall exposure on this topic, the readers are referred to \citeA{priestley1972non}, \citeA{clark1977non} and \citeA{gasser1979kernel}. Among well-known estimators of the regression function, the Nadaarya-Watson estimator (see \citeA{nadaraya1965non} and \citeA{watson1964smooth} ) is one of the most classical estimator, and it has been used in different Statistical methodologies. Some other classical estimators of the regression function, namely, Gasser-M\"uller \cite{gasser1979kernel} and Priestley-Chao \cite{priestley1972non} estimators are also well-known in the literature. In this context, we should mention that all three aforesaid estimators are based on kernel function; in other words, these estimators are examples of kernel smoothing of regression function. In fact more generally speaking, one may consider local polynomial fitting as a kernel regression smoother, and the fact is that Nadaraya-Watson estimator is nothing but a local constant kernel smoother.
Note that as it is mentioned in the previous paragraph, Nadaraya-Watson estimator can be obtained from a certain minimization problem related to the weighted least squares methodology, where the weights are the functional values of the kernel function evaluated at data points. This fact further indicates that it is likely to be less efficient in the presence of the outliers or influential observations in the data. To overcome this problem, we here propose the trimmed version of Nadaraya-Watson estimator, which can be obtained as the minimizer of a certain minimization problem. It is also of interest to see how this estimator performs compared to the classical Nadaraya-Watson estimator (i.e., based on the usual least squares methodology) when data follow various distributions. For instance, it should be mentioned that for the location parameter of Cauchy distribution, neither the sample mean nor the sample median, 0.38-trimmed mean is the most efficient estimator for the location parameter of Cauchy distribution as pointed out by \citeA{dhar2016trimmed}. In fact, such a nice combination of efficiency and robustness properties of the trimmed mean for various Statistical model (see, e.g., \citeA{dhar2009comparison,dhar2012derivatives}, \citeA{dhar2016trimmed}, \citeA{vcivzek2016generalized}, \citeA{park2015robust}, \citeA{wang2019robust} and references therein) motivated us to propose this estimator and study its behaviour. For the classical references of the trimmed mean, one may look at \citeA{bickel1965some}, \citeA{hogg1967some}, \citeA{jaeckel1971some}, \citeA{stigler1973asymptotic}, \citeA{welsh1987trimmed}, \citeA{jureckova1994regression} and \citeA{jurevckova1994adaptive}.
The contribution of this article is three fold. The first fold is to propose an entirely new estimator of the non-parametric regression function, which was never studied in the literature before. The next fold is the derivation of the asymptotic distribution of the proposed estimator. As the proposed estimator is based on the order statistic, one cannot use the classical central limit theorem directly; it requires advanced technicalities associated with order statistic to obtain the asymptotic distribution. The last fold is the formal study of the robustness property of the proposed estimator using the concept of breakdown point.
As said before, one of the main crux of the problem is to show the proposed estimator as a minimizer of a certain minimization problem, and that enables us to explain the geometric feature of the estimator. Besides, another difficulty involved in deriving the asymptotic distribution is dealing the order statistics in the non-parametric regression set up. For this reason, one cannot use the classical central limit theorem to establish the asymptotic normality of the estimator after appropriate normalization. Moreover, the presence of kernel function in the expression of the estimator also made challenging to establish the breakdown point of the estimator.
The rest of this article is arranged as follows. Section 2 proposes the estimator and shows how it obtains from the minimization problem. Section 3 provides the large sample properties of the proposed estimator, and the robustness property of the estimator is studied in Section 4. Section 5 presents the finite sample study, and the performance of the estimator for a few benchmark data set is shown in Section 6. Section 7 contains a few concluding remarks. The proof of Theorem \ref{T1} along with the related lemmas is provided in Appendix A, and Appendix B contains all results of numerical studies in tabular form.
\section{Proposed Estimator}
Let $(X_{1}, Y_{1}), \ldots, (X_n, Y_n)$ be an i.i.d.\ sequence of random variables having the same joint distribution of $(X, Y)$ and recall the model (\ref{model}). The well-known Nadaraya-Watson estimator is defined as $$\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0}) = \frac{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n} k_{n}\left(X_{i} - x_{0}\right) Y_{i}}{\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{n} k_{n}\left(X_{i} - x_{0}\right)},$$ where $\displaystyle k_n (\cdot) = \frac{1}{h_n} K\left(\frac{\cdot}{h_n}\right)$, and $K(\cdot)$ is a symmetric kernel function, i.e., $K$ is a non negative kernel with support $[-\tau ,\tau]$, $\displaystyle \int\limits_{-\tau}^{\tau} K(u) du = 1$ and $K(-u) = K(u)$ for all $u\in [-\tau, \tau]$. Besides, $\{h_{n}\}$ is a sequence of bandwidth, such that $h_n \rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow \infty$ and $nh_n \rightarrow \infty $ as $n\rightarrow \infty$. Note that $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ can be expressed as a solution of the following minimization problem :
\begin{equation}
\label{argmin}
\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0}) = \argmin\limits_\theta \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} \left(Y_i - \theta \right)^2 k_n \left( X_i - x_{0}\right).
\end{equation}
Note that the above formulation implies that Nadaraya-Watson estimator is a certain weighted average estimator, which can be obtained by weighted least squares methodology. It is a well-known fact that the (weighted) least squares methodology is not robust against the outliers or influential observations (see, e.g., \citeA{huber1981robust}), and to overcome this problem related to the robustness against the outliers, we here study the trimmed version of the weighted least squares methodology, which obtains the local constant trimmed estimator of the non-parametric regression function, i.e., the trimmed version of Nadaraya-Watson estimator. Let us now define the estimator formally, which is denoted by $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$ for $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$.
\begin{equation}
\label{trimargmin}
\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})=\argmin\limits_\theta \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha ]} \left( Y_{[i]} -\theta \right)^2 k_n \left( X_{(i)} -x_{0} \right),
\end{equation}
where $X_{(i)}$ is the $i$-th ordered observation on variable $X$, and $Y_{[i]}$ denotes the observation on variable $Y$ corresponding $X_{(i)}$. Solving \eqref{trimargmin}, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{trimnwe}
\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}) = \frac{\sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha] } k_n \left( X_{(i)} -x_{0}\right) Y_{[i]} }{ \sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha]} k_n \left(X_{(i)} -x_{0}\right)}.
\end{equation}
Here it should be mentioned that $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$ is the trimming proportion, and in particular, for $\alpha = 0$, $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$ will coincide with $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (\cdot)$. i.e., usual Nadaraya-Watson estimator. Further, note that here $Y_{[i]} = g(X_{(i)}) + e_{[i]}$ for $i = 1, \ldots, n$, where $e_{[i]}$ denotes the error corresponding to $(X_{(i)},Y_{[i]})$.
We now want to add one discussion on possible extension of this estimator. As it follows from (\ref{argmin}), Nadaraya-Watson estimator is a local constant estimator, and in this context, it should be added that there has been an extensive literature on local linear (strictly speaking, local polynomial) estimator of non-parametric regression function. One of the advantage of local linear or generally speaking local polynomial estimator is, it gives a consistent estimator of a certain order derivatives of the regression function as well (see, e.g., \citeA{fan1996local}) but on the other hand, it will enhance the overall standard error as well. Following the same spirit, one can consider local linear or polynomial trimmed mean of non-parametric regression function, and it will be an interest of future research.
This section ends with another discussion on the choice of the tuning parameter $\alpha$ involved in $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$. Apparently, our efficiency study (see in Section \ref{AE}) and simulation study (see in Section \ref{FSS}) indicate that for a wide range of $\alpha$, $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ has good efficiency property for various distributions. In contrast, in terms of the robustness against the outliers, $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ attains the highest breakdown point when $\alpha$ attains its largest value (see Section \ref{breakdownpoint}). However, since there is a trade-off between efficiency and robustness of an estimator, choosing the largest value of $\alpha$ in practice may originate an estimator having poor efficiency. In order to maintain the best efficiency and a reasonably good breakdown point, one may estimate the trimming proportion $\alpha$ (denote it as $\hat{\alpha}$), which minimizes the estimated asymptotic variance of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ after appropriate normalization. However, Statistical methodology based on $\hat{g}_{n,\hat{\alpha}} (x_{0})$ will be difficult to implement because of its intractable nature. Overall, the choice of $\alpha$ is an issue of concern to use $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ in practice.
\section{Asymptotic distribution of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$}
In order to implement any Statistical methodology based on $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$, one needs to know the distributional behaviour of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$. However, due to complicated form of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$, it is intractable to derive the exact distribution, which drives us to study the asymptotic distribution of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$. This section describes the pointwise asymptotic distribution of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$ after appropriate normalization. To prove the main result, one needs to assume the following conditions.
\vspace{0.15in}
\noindent {\bf Assumptions : }
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A1)] The regression function $g(\cdot)$ is a real valued continuously twice differentiable function on a compact set.
\item[(A2)] The probability density function of the covariate random variable $X$, which is denoted by $f_{X}$, is a bounded function.
\item[(A3)] The kernel $K(\cdot)$ is a bounded probability density function with support $(-\tau,\tau)$ such that, \\
(a) $\displaystyle \int_{-\tau}^{\tau} K (u) du = 1$, \\
(b) $\displaystyle \int_{-\tau}^{\tau} u K (u) du =0 $, and \\
(c) $\displaystyle h_{n}^{-1}K\left(h_{n}^{-1}\right) = O(1)$.
\item[(A4)] The sequence of bandwidth $\{ h_n \}$ is such that $h_n = O(n^{-1/3})$.
\item[(A5)] The probability density function of error random variable $e$ is symmetric about $0$ with the following properties:
\noindent (i) $e_{i}$s are i.i.d.\ random variables.
\noindent (ii) For the location functional $T(F)$, $T(F_{e|X}) = 0$, where $F_{e|X}$ is the conditional distribution of $e$ conditioning on $X$. For instance, in the case of $\alpha$-trimmed mean, $T(F) = \frac{1}{(1 - 2\alpha)}\int x dF(x)$, where $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$.
\noindent (iii) $E ({e}^2 |\, X = x) = \sigma^2 (x) < \infty$ for all $x$.
\item[(A6)] There exists a positive $\delta$ such that $E(|e_i|^{2+\delta}) < \infty$ for all $i=1,\ldots ,n$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{theorem}
\label{T1}
Under (A1)-(A6) and for any fixed point $x_{0}$,
$$\sqrt{nh_n} \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}) - g(x_{0}) - h_n^2 k_2 \left( \frac{g^{\prime \prime} (x_{0})}{2(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0}) + \frac{g^{\prime}(x_{0})}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0}) \right) \right)$$ converges weakly to a Gaussian distribution with mean $= 0$ and variance $= V$. Here
$\displaystyle V = \frac{\sigma^2 (x_{0}) \int \{K(u)\}^2 du}{(1 -2\alpha) t_{\alpha} (x_{0}) }$ , $\displaystyle k_2 = \int v^2 K(v) dv$,
$\displaystyle t_{\alpha} (x_{0})= \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{n-2[n\alpha]} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0})$, $f_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0})$ denotes the probability density function of $X_{(i)}$ ($i$-th order statistic of $X$) at the point $x_{0}$, and $g^{'}$ and $g^{''}$ denote the first and the second derivatives of $g$, respectively.
\end{theorem}
The assertion in Theorem \ref{T1} indicates that the rate of convergence of the estimator $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ after proper transformation is $\sqrt{n h_{n}}$, which is same as the rate of convergence of the usual Nadaraya-Watson estimator. In fact, as $\alpha = 0$, the asymptotic variance of $$\sqrt{nh_n} \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}) - g(x_{0}) - h_n^2 k_2 \left( \frac{g^{\prime \prime} (x_{0})}{2(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0}) + \frac{g^{\prime}(x_{0})}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0}) \right) \right),$$ i.e., $V$ coincides with the asymptotic variance of the Nadaraya-Watson estimator after proper transformation. In other words, from this study and the definition of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$, it follows that $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ coincides with the Nadaraya-Watson estimator (i.e., $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$) when $\alpha = 0$. Besides, the assertion in Theorem \ref{T1} further indicates that the performance or the efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ depends on the choice of $\alpha$ and $x_{0}$, and it motivates us to study the asymptotic efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ for various choices of $\alpha$ and $x_{0}$ in Section \ref{AE}.
\subsection{Asymptotic Efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$}
\label{AE}
As mentioned earlier, it is of interest to see the asymptotic efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ for various choices of $x_{0}$ and $\alpha$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$, i.e., usual Nadarya-Watson estimator. To explore this issue, this section studies the asymptotic efficiency of the proposed $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$. Note that when $\alpha = 0$, it follows from the assertion of Theorem \ref{T1} that the asymptotic variance of $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ is given by:
\begin{equation*}
AV(\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_0)) = \frac{\sigma^2 (x_0)}{f_X (x_0)} \int \{K(u)\}^2 du,
\end{equation*}
where $\sigma^2 (x) = E(e^2 |X = x)$, $K$ is the kernel function, and $f_X$ is the density function of $X$. Next, the statement of Theorem \ref{T1} provides us the expression of the asymptotic variance of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$, which is the following.
\begin{equation*}
AV(\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)) = \frac{\sigma^2 (x_{0})}{(1 -2\alpha) t_{\alpha} (x_{0})} \int \{K(u)\}^2 du,
\end{equation*}
where $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$ is the trimming proportion and $\displaystyle t_{\alpha} (x)= \lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{n-2[n\alpha]} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x)$. Using $AV (\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0}))$ and $AV (\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}))$, one can compute the asymptotic efficiency (denoted by AE) of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$, which is as follows:
\begin{equation}
AE(\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}), \hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})) = \frac{AV (\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0}))}{AV (\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0))} = \frac{(1 - 2\alpha) t_{\alpha} (x_{0})}{f_{X}(x_{0})}.
\end{equation}
It should be mentioned that $AE (\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}), \hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0}))$ does not depend on the form of kernel function and the nature of the error random variable unlike the location model although asymptotic variances of both $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ and $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ depend on the choice of the kernel functions. Besides, note that for $\alpha = 0$, $AE (\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}), \hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})) = 1$ as $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ coincides with $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ for any $x_{0}$, since the sum $\displaystyle \frac{1}{n} \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) = f_X (x_0)$ for any $n$ and $x_0$. This fact can be obtained by the formulation of the probability density function of the order statistic and the properties of the binomial coefficients (see {\bf Fact A} for details in Appendix A). In Figures \ref{ae_plot1} and \ref{ae_plot2}, we plot the AE of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $g_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ when $x_{0} = 0.5$, and the co-variate $X$ follows uniform distribution over $(0, 1)$ and beta distribution with the scale parameter $= 2$ and the shape parameter $= 2$, respectively. In both cases, it is observed that the AE of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (0.5)$ is close to one for a wide range of $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$. Here it should be mentioned that $AE (\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x), \hat{g}_{n, NW} (x))\leq 1$ for all $x$ and $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$, which follows from {\bf Fact B} (see in Appendix A). Overall, this study establishes that for even a large values of $\alpha$, $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$ can attain the almost the same efficiency as that of $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (\cdot)$ but with having much better breakdown point, which follows from the assertion in Theorem \ref{BP}.
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_AE_unif_s.eps}
\caption{The asymptotic efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ plotted for different values of $\alpha$ when $x_{0} = 0.50$, and $X$ follows uniform distribution over $(0, 1)$. }
\label{ae_plot1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_AE_beta_s.eps}
\caption{The asymptotic efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ plotted for different values of $\alpha$ when $x_{0} = 0.50$, and $X$ follows beta distribution with the scale parameter $= 2$ and the shape parameter $= 2$.}
\label{ae_plot2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Breakdown Point}
\label{breakdownpoint}
In the earlier section, we established the asymptotic distribution of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ and studied its asymptotic efficiency for various choices of $\alpha$ and $x_{0}$. Also, it was mentioned that there is a trade-off between the efficiency and the robustness of an estimator. To explore the issue of the robustness of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$, we here study the finite sample breakdown point (see, e.g., \citeA{rousseeuw2005robust}) of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$.
For sake of completeness, we here define the finite sample breakdown point of an estimator $T$. The maximum bias of $T$ with respect to a sample $\mathcal{X} = \{X_1, \ldots, X_n\}$ $(X_{i} \in \mathbb{R}^{d}, d\geqslant 1, i = 1, \ldots, n)$ is defined as $\displaystyle b \left(m, T ,\mathcal{X} \right) = \sup_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}} |T(\mathcal{X}^{\prime}) - T(\mathcal{X})|$, where $\mathcal{X}^{\prime}$ is the corrupted sample obtained by replacing $m$ sample points from $\mathcal{X}$. Finally, the breakdown point of $T$ is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\epsilon^{\star}_n \left( T , \mathcal{X} \right) = \inf_{m} \left\{ \frac{m}{n} \, \Big| \, b \left(m, T ,\mathcal{X} \right) \text{ is unbounded} \right\}.
\end{equation*}
\noindent To compute the breakdown point of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$, one needs to assume the following conditions.
\noindent (B1) The kernel $K(\cdot)$ is a bounded probability density function with support $(-\tau,\tau)$, where $\tau > 0$.
\noindent (B2) $\displaystyle \int_{-\tau}^{\tau} K (u) du = 1$.
\noindent (B3) $\displaystyle h_{n}^{-1}K\left(h_{n}^{-1}\right) = O(1)$.
\noindent The following theorem describes the breakdown point of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{BP}
Under the assumptions (B1), (B2) and (B3), for any $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$, the finite sample breakdown point of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$ is $\epsilon^{\star}_n \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) , \mathcal{X} \right)$ = $\displaystyle \frac{[n\alpha]}{n}$, and consequently, the asymptotic breakdown point is $\epsilon^{\star} \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) , \mathcal{X} \right) = \displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\epsilon^{\star}_n \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0), \mathcal{X} \right) = \alpha$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{X} = \{ (X_1,Y_1), \ldots ,(X_n,Y_n) \}$, then $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ based on $\mathcal{X}$ as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) = \frac{\sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha] } k_n \left( X_{(i)} -x_0\right) Y_{[i]} }{ \sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha]} k_n \left(X_{(i)} -x_0\right)} = \frac{(n-2[n\alpha])^{-1} \sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha] } k_n \left( X_{(i)} -x_0\right) Y_{[i]} }{ (n-2[n\alpha])^{-1} \sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha]} k_n \left(X_{(i)} -x_0\right)}.
\end{equation*}
The minimum bias of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ is then expressed as $\displaystyle b \left(m, \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) ,\mathcal{X} \right) = \sup_{\mathcal{X}^{\prime}} \left\lVert \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)(\mathcal{X}^{\prime}) - \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)(\mathcal{X}) \right\rVert $.
Let us first consider $m = [n\alpha]$, and after replacing $m$ pairs of $(X_i,Y_i)$ with arbitrarily large values $(X_i^{\prime},Y_i^{\prime})$, the estimator remains unchanged. The reason is as follows: for all contaminated pairs $(X_i^{\prime},Y_i^{\prime})$, we have $(X_i^{\prime},Y_i^{\prime}) = (X_{(j)},Y_{[j]})$ for some $j > n - [n\alpha]$. This fact implies that $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x)(\mathcal{X}^{\prime}) = \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)(\mathcal{X})$ when $[n\alpha]$ number of observations are contaminated. Hence, $\displaystyle b \left([n\alpha], \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) ,\mathcal{X} \right) = 0$, and consequently,
\begin{equation}\label{ub}
\epsilon^{\star}_n \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) , \mathcal{X} \right) \geqslant \frac{[n\alpha]}{n}.
\end{equation}
For the reverse inequality, suppose that $m = [n\alpha] +1$ many observations (denoted as $(X_i^{\prime},Y_i^{\prime})$) are corrupted. Note that under this circumstance, for at least one value of $i \in \{1,\ldots ,n\}$, $(X_i^{\prime}, Y_i^{\prime}) = (X_{(j)},Y_{[j]})$ for some $j \leqslant n - [n\alpha]$. Now, the denominator of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ is bounded, i.e., $\displaystyle (n-2[n\alpha])^{-1} \sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha]} k_n \left(X_{(i)} -x_0\right) < \infty$ for all $x_0$ (using (B3)), and the numerator of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)(\mathcal{X}^{\prime})$ is unbounded, since the sum $\displaystyle (n-2[n\alpha])^{-1} \sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha] +1}^{n -[n\alpha]} k_n \left(X_{(i)} -x_0\right) Y_{[i]} $ has at least one contaminated $Y_{[i]}$, which makes $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ unbounded. Therefore, $b \left([n\alpha] +1, \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) ,\mathcal{X} \right)$ becomes unbounded, and hence,
\begin{equation}\label{lb}
\epsilon^{\star}_n \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) , \mathcal{X} \right) < \frac{[n\alpha] +1}{n}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Combining (\ref{ub}) and (\ref{lb}), we have $\displaystyle\epsilon^{\star}_n \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) , \mathcal{X} \right) = \frac{[n\alpha]}{n}$. Consequently, the asymptotic breakdown point is $\epsilon^{\star} \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) , \mathcal{X} \right) = \displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\epsilon^{\star}_n \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0), \mathcal{X} \right) = \alpha$.
\end{proof}
The assertion in Theorem \ref{BP} indicates that the asymptotic breakdown point of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ is $\alpha$ for any $x_{0}$, which further implies that it attains the highest asymptotic breakdown point $\frac{1}{2}$ when the trimming proportion $\alpha\rightarrow \frac{1}{2}$. On the other hand, when $\alpha = 0$, the asymptotic breakdown point will be the lowest possible value zero, which is a formal reason why usual Nadarya-Watson estimator, i.e., $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (.)$ is a non-robust estimator. Overall, the fact is that the robustness of the estimator $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (\cdot)$ will increase as the trimming proportion increases unlike the case of efficiency study. In fact, as it is mentioned earlier, this is the reason why the choice of trimming proportion in $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ is an issue of concern as $\alpha$ controls the both the efficiency and the robustness properties of the estimator. Moreover, since the efficiency of the estimator depends on the sample size $n$ as well, we study the finite sample efficiency of the estimator in the next section.
\section{Finite Sample Study}
\label{FSS}
In Section \ref{AE}, we studied the efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ for various choices of $\alpha$ and $x_{0}$ when the sample size tends to infinity, and it showed various features in the performance of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ in terms of the asymptotic efficiency. We are now interested to see the performance of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ for different values of $\alpha$ when the sample size is finite. In the numerical study, we consider $\alpha = 0.05, 0.10, \ldots ,0.45$ and $n = 50$ and $500$. Here also, Epanechnikov Kernel (see, e.g., \citeA{silverman1986density}) is used with $h_{n} = \frac{n^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{2}$, and the co-variates are generated from uniform distribution over $(0,1)$, unless mentioned otherwise. We study both linear and non linear model coupled with standard normal and $t$-distribution with 5 degrees of freedom as the distribution of the error random variables. All results are summarized in Figures \ref{fss_plot1}, \ref{fss_plot2}, \ref{fss_plot3} and \ref{fss_plot4}, and in the tabular form in Appendix B.
We compute the finite sample efficiency as follows: Using the form of the model and the distribution of the error random variable, we generate $(x_{1, j}, y_{1, j}), \ldots, (x_{n, j}, y_{n, j})$, when $j = 1, \ldots, N$. Afterwards, for each $j = 1, \ldots, N$, we compute $\hat{g}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})$ for different values of $\alpha$ and $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ as well. Let the values of $\hat{g}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})$ and $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ be $(U_{1}, \ldots, U_{N})$ and $(V_{1}, \ldots, V_{N})$, respectively, and finally, the finite sample efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ is defined as $\frac{\frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N} \left(V_{i} - \frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N} V_{i} \right)^{2} }{\frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N} \left(U_{i} - \frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N}U_{i}\right)^{2}}$. In the numerical study, we consider $N = 1000$ and $x_{0} = 0.50$. In Figures \ref{fss_plot1}, \ref{fss_plot2}, \ref{fss_plot3} and \ref{fss_plot4}, we plot the finite sample efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW}$ for different values of $\alpha$, for four different underlying model.
\vspace{0.25in}
\noindent {\bf Example 1:} Model: $Y = 5X+e$, where $e$ follows standard normal distribution.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_lin_nor_50.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_lin_nor_500.eps}
\caption{For different values of $\alpha$, the finite sample efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}(0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW}(0.5)$ for Example 1. The left diagram is for $n = 50$, and the right diagram is for $n = 500$.}
\label{fss_plot1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The diagrams in Figures \ref{fss_plot1}, \ref{fss_plot2}, \ref{fss_plot3} and \ref{fss_plot4} indicate that $\hat{g}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})$ has good efficiency relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ for a wide range of $\alpha$ regardless of the choice of the model and/or the choice of the distribution of the error random variable.
\vspace{0.25in}
\noindent {\bf Example 2:} Model: $Y = 4X^3 +e$, where $e$ follows standard normal distribution.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_nlin_nor_50.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_nlin_nor_500.eps}
\caption{For different values of $\alpha$, the finite sample efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}(0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW}(0.5)$ for Example 2. The left diagram is for $n = 50$, and the right diagram is for $n = 500$.}
\label{fss_plot2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\noindent {\bf Example 3:} Model: $Y = 5X +e$, where $e$ follows $t$-distribution with $5$ degrees of freedom.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_lin_t_50.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_lin_t_500.eps}
\caption{For different values of $\alpha$, the finite sample efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}(0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW}(0.5)$ for Example 3. The left diagram is for $n = 50$, and the right diagram is for $n = 500$.}
\label{fss_plot3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\noindent {\bf Example 4:} Model: $Y = 4X^3 +e$, where $e$ follows $t$-distribution with $5$ degrees of freedom.
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_nlin_t_50.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.6]{Rplot_nlin_t_500.eps}
\caption{For different values of $\alpha$, the finite sample efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}(0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW}(0.5)$ for Example 4. The left diagram is for $n = 50$, and the right diagram is for $n = 500$.}
\label{fss_plot4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Real Data Analysis}
\label{rda}
In this section, we illustrate the functionality of our proposed estimator on some benchmark real data sets. All these data sets are available in UCI machine repository.
{\bf Combined Cycle Power Plant Data Set:} This data set contains 9568 data points collected from a Combined Cycle Power Plant over six years (2006-2011), when the plant was set to work with full load (see \citeA{kaya2012local} and \citeA{tufekci2014prediction} for details). The data set can be accessed with the following link: \url{https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Combined+Cycle+Power+Plant}. The data contains five attributes: Temperature (in $^{\circ}$C), Ambient Pressure (in milibar), Relative Humidity (in \%), Exhaust Vacuum (in cm Hg) and Electrical Energy Output (in MW). We consider Temperature as our co-variate or independent variable ($X$) and Electrical Energy output as response or dependent variable ($Y$). We provide a scatter plot of the Electrical Energy Output against Temperature in the first diagram of Figure \ref{realdata1}.
In the study, we first scaled the data associated with the co-variate to the interval $[0, 1]$ using the transformation $x^{*} = \frac{x - \min (x)}{\max(x) - \min(x)}$, where $x^{*}$ is the transformed variable, and we adopt Bootstrap methodology to compute the efficiency, which is called as Bootstrap efficiency. The procedure : We first generate $B$ many Bootstrap resamples with size $n$ from the data $(y_{1}, x_{1}^{*}), \ldots, (y_{n}, x_{n}^{*})$, and compute the values of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ and $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ for each resample. Let us denote those values of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ and $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ as $(S_{1}, \ldots, S_{B})$ and $(R_{1}, \ldots, R_{B})$, respectively. Then the Bootstrap efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ is defined as $\frac{\frac{1}{B}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{B} \left(R_{i} - \frac{1}{B}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{B}R_{i}\right)^{2}}{\frac{1}{B}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{B} \left(S_{i} - \frac{1}{B}\sum\limits_{i = 1}^{B}S_{i}\right)^{2}}.$ In the second diagram of Figure \ref{realdata1}, we plot the Bootstrap efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ for different values of $\alpha$ for this data (here $n = 9568$). In this study, we consider Epanechnikov kernel with bandwidth $h_{n} = \frac{n^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{2}$ and $B = 1000$. The second diagram of Figure \ref{realdata1} indicates that the efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW}$ is substantially high for a wide range of $\alpha$, and the most probable reason is that the data has a few influential observations.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{Rplot_scatter_ccpp1.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{Rplot_rd_ccpp1.eps}
\caption{Scatter plot (Up) of the Combined Cycle Power Plant Data and Efficiency (Down) of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW} (x_0)$ at $x_0 =0.50$ plotted for different values of $\alpha$.}
\label{realdata1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
{\bf Parkinson's Telemonitoring Data Set:} This data set consists of 5875 recordings of several medical voice measures from forty two people with early-stage Parkinson's disease recruited to a six month trial of a telemonitoring device, for remote symptom progression monitoring (see \citeA{tsanas2009accurate} for details). This data can be accessed with the following link: \url{https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Parkinsons+Telemonitoring}. The data has 22 attributes, out of which two attributes are of our interest for this study: NHR (measure of ratio of noise to tonal components in the voice) and RPDE (A nonlinear dynamical complexity measure). We consider the attribute NHR as our co-variate or independent variable ($X$) and RPDE as our response or dependent variable ($Y$). We provide a scatter plot of RPDE against NHR variable in the first diagram of Figure \ref{realdata2}. Unlike the earlier data analysis, the transformation of the co-variate has not been done here as the values of NHR variable belongs to $[0, 1]$.
Here also, we compute the Bootstrap efficiency $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ based on the data $(Y, X)$, and the procedure is same as it is described in the earlier real data analysis. In the second diagram of Figure \ref{realdata2}, we plot the Bootstrap efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ for different values of $\alpha$ for this data (here $n = 5875$). In this study also, we consider Epanechnikov kernel with bandwidth $h_{n} = \frac{n^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{2}$ and $B = 1000$. Here also, the second diagram of Figure \ref{realdata1} indicates the efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW}$ is substantially high for a wide range of $\alpha$, and as we indicated in the earlier study, the most probable reason is that the data has a few influential observations.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{Rplot_scatter_parkin.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{Rplot_rd_parkin.eps}
\caption{Scatter plot (Up) of the Parkinson's Telemonitoring Data and Efficiency (Down) of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW} (x_0)$ at $x_0 =0.50$ plotted for different values of $\alpha$.}
\label{realdata2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
{\bf Air Quality Data Set:} This data set contains 9358 instances of hourly averaged responses from an array of five metal oxide chemical sensors embedded in an Air Quality Chemical Multisensor Device (see \citeA{de2008field} for details). The device was set up in a polluted area of an Italian city, at road level. The data set can be accessed with the following link: \url{https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Air+quality}. There are thirteen attributes in this data apart from date and time: \\
1 True hourly averaged concentration $CO$ in $mg/m^3$ (reference analyzer). \\
2 PT08.S1 (tin oxide) hourly averaged sensor response (nominally CO targeted). \\
3 True hourly averaged overall Non Metanic Hydrocarbons concentration in $microg/m^3$ (reference analyzer). \\
4 True hourly averaged Benzene concentration in $microg/m^3$ (reference analyzer). \\
5 PT08.S2 (titania) hourly averaged sensor response (nominally NMHC targeted). \\
6 True hourly averaged NOx concentration in ppb (reference analyzer). \\
7 PT08.S3 (tungsten oxide) hourly averaged sensor response (nominally NOx targeted). \\
8 True hourly averaged NO2 concentration in $microg/m^3$ (reference analyzer). \\
9 PT08.S4 (tungsten oxide) hourly averaged sensor response (nominally NO2 targeted). \\
10 PT08.S5 (indium oxide) hourly averaged sensor response (nominally O3 targeted).\\
11 Temperature in $^{\circ}$C. \\
12 Relative Humidity (\%). \\
13 AH: Absolute Humidity. \\
We consider the quantity of Tungsten Oxide as the co-variate or the independent variable ($X$), and the Absolute Humidity is considered as the response or dependent variable ($Y$). We provide a scatter plot of Absolute Humidity against Tungsten Oxide in the first diagram of Figure \ref{realdata3}, and the scatter plot indicates that the data does not have as such any influential or outlier observations.
In the study, as we did for the first real data analysis, the co-variate is scaled to the interval $[0, 1]$ using the transformation $x^{*} = \frac{x - \min (x)}{\max(x) - \min(x)}$, where $x^{*}$ is the transformed variable, and we here also adopt Bootstrap methodology to compute the efficiency. The computational procedure of the Bootstrap efficiency is same as we described in the first real data analysis. In the second diagram of Figure \ref{realdata3}, we plot the Bootstrap efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ for different values of $\alpha$ for this data (here $n = 9358$). In this study also, we consider Epanechnikov kernel with bandwidth $h_{n} = \frac{n^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{2}$ and $B = 1000$. The second diagram of Figure \ref{realdata3} indicates the efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW}$ is high for small values $\alpha$, and decreases gradually as $\alpha$ increases. It is expected since the data does not have any substantial outliers, $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ performs well for small values of $\alpha$, i.e., when $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ is almost same as $\hat{g}_{n, NW}$. On the other hand, the efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ steadily goes down for larger values of $\alpha$ as $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}$ is different from $\hat{g}_{n, NW}$ by a great amount when $\alpha$ is large.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{Rplot_scatter_air.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=.7]{Rplot_rd_air.eps}
\caption{Scatter plot (Up) of the Air Quality Data and Efficiency (Down) of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW} (x_0)$ at $x_0 =0.50$ plotted for different values of $\alpha$.}
\label{realdata3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Concluding Remarks}
{\bf Local linear or local polynomial version:}
The estimator studied in this article is a local constant trimmed mean for the non-parametric regression function (see (\ref{trimargmin})). Following the same spirit of (\ref{trimargmin}), one can define a local linear or even local polynomial version of the trimmed mean for non-parametric regression function. However, at the same time, adding more variables may create various problems associated with the issue of variable selection. Choosing appropriate degree of polynomial version of the trimmed mean may be an interest of future research. Besides, one of the well-known problem of using the local constant estimator is the adverse effect of boundary (see e.g., \citeA{fan1996local}). However, since the trimming based estimator is based on the ordered observations and the procedure of trimming, the proposed estimator can avoid the negative effect of boundary.
\vspace{0.1in}
\noindent{\bf Uniform convergence and influence function:}
In Theorem \ref {T1}, we stated the pointwise weak convergence of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x)$, and it is indeed true that the result would be more appealing if one can establish the process convergence of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha}(x)$, which allows us to study the related testing of hypothesis problem based on $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x)$. However, to prove the process convergence of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x)$, one needs to establish the tightness property of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x)$, which is not easily doable. Regarding the robustness property of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x)$, along with the breakdown point, one may also consider the gross error sensitivity (see \citeA{huber1981robust}, p.14) as a measure of robustness. However, since the gross error sensitivity only measures the local robustness of an estimator whereas the breakdown point measures the global robustness of the estimator, we here investigate the breakdown point of the proposed estimator.
\vspace{0.1in}
\noindent{\bf The choice of kernel function and bandwidth:}
The choice of kernel function along with its bandwidth another issue of concern. In our numerical study, we consider Epanechnikov kernel since it is the most efficient kernel among the symmetric kernel (see \citeA{silverman1986density}, p.59). Regarding the choice of bandwidth, we consider $h_{n} = \frac{n^{-\frac{1}{2}}}{2}$ since it satisfies $h_{n}\rightarrow 0$ and $n h_{n}\rightarrow\infty$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$. However, since the aforesaid criterion is asymptotic in nature, one can adopt the methodology based on data driven approach but using such choice of bandwidth, deriving the asymptotic distribution of the proposed estimator will become more challenging.
\vspace{0.1in}
\noindent{\bf Main contribution of this article:}
In this article, we propose a new estimator for the non-parametric regression function, which coincides with the well-known Nadarya-Watson estimator as a special case. The characterization of the proposed estimator through an optimization problem is also discussed. In the study, we have observed that the proposed estimator can maintain a good efficiency with high break down point for a wide range of trimming proportion, which is a rare attribute of any estimator. The estimator performs well on real data as well.
\section{Appendix}
\subsection{Appendix A : Proofs}
We first present a fact, which is used to compute the asymptotic efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0})$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (x_{0})$ in Section 3.1.
\noindent {\bf Fact A:} {\it Let $X_{(i)}$ be the $i$-th order statistic of the i.i.d.\ random variables $\{X_1,\ldots ,X_n\}$ with common density $f_X$ and distribution function $F_X$. Suppose that $f_{X_{(i)}}$ is the probability density function of $X_{(i)}$ for $i=1,\ldots ,n$. Then for any $x_{0}$,
$$\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i = 1}^{n} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0}) = f_{X} (x_{0}).$$}
\noindent {\bf Proof of Fact A:} Note that for any arbitrary $x_0$, and $i=1,\ldots ,n$, we have
\begin{equation*}
f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) = \frac{n!}{(i-1)! (n-i)!} [F_X (x_0)]^{i-1} [1-F_X (x_0)]^{n-i} f_X (x_0).
\end{equation*}
Now, taking sum over $i$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\sum_{i=1}^{n} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) &= \sum_{i=1}^{n} \frac{n!}{(i-1)! (n-i)!} [F_X (x_0)]^{i-1} [1-F_X (x_0)]^{n-i} f_X (x_0) \\
&= n \sum_{i=1}^{n} \frac{(n-1)!}{(i-1)! (n-i)!} [F_X (x_0)]^{i-1} [1-F_X (x_0)]^{n-i} f_X (x_0) \\
&= n [F_X (x_0) +1 -F_X (x_0)]^{n-1} f_X (x_0) = n f_X (x_0).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Hence, $\frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) = f_X (x_0)$ for any arbitrary $x_0$, which completes the proof. \hfill$\Box$
\vspace{0.25in}
\noindent {\bf Fact B:} {\it
\begin{equation*}
AE(\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x), \hat{g}_{n, NW} (x)) = \frac{(1 - 2\alpha) t_{\alpha} (x)}{f_{X}(x)}\leq 1
\end{equation*} for any $x$ and $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$. Here the notations are same as defined in Section 3.1.}
\noindent {\bf Proof of Fact B:} Using the form of the probability density function of $X_{(i)}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{bin}
\begin{split}
t_{\alpha} (x) = \frac{1}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x) &= \frac{1}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} n C(n-1,i-1) [F_{X}(x)]^{i-1} [1-F_{X}(x)]^{n-i} f_X (x) \\
&= \frac{n f_X (x)}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} C(n-1,i-1) [F_{X}(x)]^{i-1} [1-F_{X}(x)]^{n-i},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $F_{X}$ is the distribution function of $X$ and $C(n-1,i-1) = \frac{(n - 1)!}{(i - 1)! (n - i)!}$. We also note that,
\begin{equation}
\label{bin2}
\sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} C(n-1,i-1) [F_{X}(x)]^{i-1} [1-F_{X}(x)]^{n-i} \leqslant \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n} C(n-1,i-1) [F_{X}(x)]^{i-1} [1-F_{X}(x)]^{n-i} =1,
\end{equation}
for all $n$ and any fixed $\alpha \in [0,\frac{1}{2})$. Hence, (\ref{bin}) and (\ref{bin2}) together give us
\begin{equation*}
t_{\alpha} (x) = \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x) \leqslant \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{n f_X (x)}{(n-2[n\alpha])} = \frac{f_X (x)}{(1-2\alpha)}.
\end{equation*}
It completes the proof.\hfill$\Box$
\vspace{8mm}
In order to prove Theorem \ref{T1}, one needs the following lemmas.
\vspace{5mm}
\begin{lemma}
\label{L1}
Let $\displaystyle \hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_0) = \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n -[n \alpha]} K\left( \frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right)$, where $K$ is the kernel function. Then, under (A1)-(A5), for any arbitrary $x_{0}$, $\displaystyle \hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_0) \xrightarrow{\makebox[5mm]{p}} \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0)$ as $n\to \infty$, where $f_{X_{(i)}}(\cdot)$ is the density function of $i$-th order statistic $X_{(i)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove this lemma, it is enough to show that for any arbitrary $x_{0}$, $E[\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})]\rightarrow\displaystyle\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{1}{(n - 2[n\alpha])}\sum\limits_{i = [n\alpha]+1}^{n - [n\alpha]} f_{X_{i}}(x_{0})$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$ and variance$[\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})]\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$.
\vspace{0.5in}
We now consider
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
E\left(\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_0)\right) &= \frac{1}{h_n (n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} E\left[ K\left( \frac{X_{(i)}-x_0}{h_n} \right) \right] \\
&= \frac{1}{h_n (n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int K\left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right) f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Using $\displaystyle \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} =z$ yields
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
E\left(\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_0)\right) &= \frac{1}{h_n (n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} h_n \int K(z) f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0 +h_n z) dz \\
&= \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int K(z) f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0 +h_n z) dz \\
& \to \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0)
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
as $n\to \infty$, for each $x_0$. The last implication follows from the application of dominated convergence theorem using the facts that $f_{X_{(i)}}$ is a bounded function (follows from (A2)), $h_{n}\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$ and $\int\limits_{-\tau}^{\tau} k(z) dz = 1$.
Next, consider ($var$ denotes the variance and $cov$ denotes the co-variance)
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{L1e1}
var \left(\hat{f}_{n,\alpha} (x_0)\right) &= \frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} var\left[ K\left( \frac{X_{(i)}-x_0}{h_n} \right) \right] \\
& + \frac{1}{h_{n}^{2} (n - 2[n\alpha])^{2}}\sum\limits_{i\neq j = [n\alpha] +1}^{n - [n\alpha]} cov\left[K\left(\frac{X_{(i)}- x_{0}}{h_{n}}\right), K\left(\frac{X_{(j)} - x_{0}}{h_{n}}\right)\right]\\
&= \frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} E\left[ K\left( \frac{X_{(i)}-x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 \right] - E\left[\left\{K\left( \frac{X_{(i)}-x_0}{h_n} \right)\right\} \right]^2 \\
& + \frac{1}{h_{n}^{2}(n - 2[n\alpha])^{2}} \sum\limits_{i\neq j = [n\alpha] + 1}^{n - [n\alpha]} cov\left[K\left(\frac{X_{(i)} - x_{0}}{h_{n}}\right), K\left(\frac{X_{(j)} - x_{0}}{h_{n}}\right)\right]\\
&= \frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int \left[K\left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right)\right]^2 f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du \\
&- \frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \left( \int K\left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right) f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du \right)^2\\
& + \frac{1}{h_{n}^{2}(n - 2[n\alpha])^{2}} \sum\limits_{i\neq j = [n\alpha] + 1}^{n - [n\alpha]} cov\left[K\left(\frac{X_{(i)} - x_{0}}{h_{n}}\right), K\left(\frac{X_{(j)} - x_{0}}{h_{n}}\right)\right].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Note that since for any random variable Y, $var(Y) \leq E[Y^{2}]$ and $var(Y)\geq 0$ along with the fact that for any two random variables $X$ and $Y$, $|cov (X, Y)|\leq\sqrt{var(X) var(Y)}$, it is now enough to show that $\frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int \left[K\left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right)\right]^2 f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$. Using the transformation $\displaystyle z=\frac{u-x_0}{h_n}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} & \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int \left[K\left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right)\right]^2 f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du \\
&= \frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} h_n \int \{K(z)\}^2 f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0 +h_n z) dz \\
&= \frac{1}{h_n (n - 2[n \alpha])} \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int\{K(z)\}^2 f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0 +h_n z) dz.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Here since $nh_{n}\rightarrow\infty$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$, $\displaystyle \lim_{n\to \infty} h_n^{-1} (n - 2[n \alpha])^{-1} =0$ for a fixed $\alpha\in [0, \frac{1}{2})$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int \{K(z)\}^2 f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0 +h_n z) dz \to \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{i}} (x_0)
\end{equation*}
as $n\to \infty$ for each $x_0$ using the same argument provided for $E [\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})]$. Thus $$\displaystyle \frac{1}{h_n^2 (n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int K\left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 f_{X_{i}} (u) du\to 0$$ as $n\to \infty$, and hence,
$var \left(\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})\right)\rightarrow 0$ as $n\rightarrow\infty$. It completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{L2}
Let
\begin{equation}
\hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) = \frac{1}{ (n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left( \frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right)\left( g(X_{(i)}) - g(x_0) \right),
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the kernel function, $g$ is the regression function and $X_{(i)}$ is the $i$-th order statistic. Then under (A1)-(A5), we have
\begin{equation*}
E ( \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) ) = \frac{h_n^2 g^{\prime \prime} (x_0)\, k_2}{2 \left( n - 2[n \alpha]\right)} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + \frac{h_n^2 g^{\prime} (x_0)\, k_2}{\left( n - 2[n \alpha]\right)} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) +o(h_n^2)
\end{equation*}
for each $x_0$, where $g^{\prime}$ and $g^{\prime \prime}$ are the notations for first and second derivatives of $g$, respectively, $f_{X_{(i)}} (\cdot)$ is the probability density function of $i$-th order statistic $X_{(i)}$ with its derivative $f_{X_{(i)}}^{'}$ and $\displaystyle k_2 = \int v^2K(v) dv$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
E ( \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) ) & = E \left( \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n } \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} - x_0}{h_n} \right) \left( g(X_{(i)}) - g(x_0) \right) \right) \\
& = \frac{1}{( n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} \int K \left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right) \left( g(u)-g(x_0)\right) f_{X_{(i)}}(u) du .
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Using transformation $\displaystyle v = \frac{u-x_0}{h_n}$ and (A3) $\left(i.e., \displaystyle \int v K(v) dv =0\right)$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
& \int K \left( \frac{u-x_0}{h_n} \right) h_n \left( g(u)-g(x_0) \right) f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du \\
& = h_n \int K(v) \left( g(x_0 + v h_n) - g(x_0) \right) f_{X_{(i)}}(x_0 + v h_n) dv \\
& = h_n \int K(v) \left( h_n v g^{\prime}(x_0) + \frac{h_n^2 v^2}{2} g^{\prime \prime}(x_0) + o(h_n^2) \right) \left( f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + h_n v f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + o(h_n) \right) dv \\
& = h_n \int K(v) \left( h_n v g^{\prime}(x_0) f_{X_{(i)}}(x_0) + \frac{h_n^2 v^2}{2} g^{\prime \prime} f_{X_{(i)}}(x_0) + h_n^2 v^2 g^{\prime} f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}}(x_0) + o(h_n^2) \right) dv \\
& = \frac{1}{2} h_n^3 g^{\prime \prime}(x_0) f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) \int v^2K(v) dv + h_n^2 g^{\prime}(x_0) f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) \int v^2K(v) dv + o(h_n^3) \\
& = h_n^3 k_2 \left(\frac{1}{2} g^{\prime \prime}(x_0) f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + g^{\prime}(x_0) f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) \right) + o(h_n^3)
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
for any arbitrary $x_0$, where $\displaystyle k_2 = \int v^2K(v) dv$. Hence, we have
\begin{equation*}
E (\hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0)) = \frac{h_n^2 g^{\prime \prime} (x_0)\, k_2}{2 \left( n - 2[n \alpha]\right)} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + \frac{h_n^2 g^{\prime} (x_0)\, k_2}{\left( n - 2[n \alpha]\right)} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) +o(h_n^2).
\end{equation*}
It completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{L3}
Under (A1)-(A5),
\begin{equation*}
var \left( \sqrt{n h_n } \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) \right) \longrightarrow 0 \text{ as } n \to \infty,
\end{equation*} where $\hat{m}_{1, n} (x_{0})$ is same as defined in the statement of Lemma \ref{L2}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove the assertion of this lemma, we find an upper bound of $\sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0)$ as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\left| \sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) \right| & = \left| \frac{\sqrt{n h_n} }{ (n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left( \frac{X_{(i)} - x_0}{h_n} \right) \left( g(X_{(i)}) - g(x_0) \right) \right| \\
& \leqslant \frac{\sqrt{n}}{(n - 2[n \alpha]) \sqrt{h_n}} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} \left| K \left( \frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) \right| \left| \left( g (X_{(i)}) - g(x_0) \right) \right| \\
& = \frac{\sqrt{n}}{ (n - 2[n \alpha]) \sqrt{h_n}} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} M h_n \left| X_{(i)} - x_0 \right| \left| g^{\prime} (\xi) \right| ,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
using first order Tailor series expansion of $g(\cdot)$, where $\xi$ lies between $X_{(i)}$ and $x_0$, and $M$ is an arbitrary constant such that $h_{n}^{-1} k(./h_{n})\leq M$ (see assumption (A3)). Thus we have,
\begin{equation*}
\left| \sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) \right| \leqslant \frac{\sqrt{n}}{(n - 2[n \alpha]) \sqrt{h_n}} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} M h_n M_1 \frac{\log n}{n} \leqslant \sqrt{h_{n}} M M_1 \frac{\log n}{\sqrt{n}} ,
\end{equation*}
using spacing property of order statistics (see \cite{devroye1981laws}), where $M_1$ is an upper bound for $g^{\prime}$ as $g^{'}$ is bounded, which follows from (A1). It leads to $\displaystyle \sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) \xrightarrow{\makebox[.5cm]{a.s}} 0$ as $n \to \infty $, which implies that $\displaystyle \left( \sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0)\right)^2 \xrightarrow{\makebox[.5cm]{a.s}} 0$ as $n \to \infty $. Using similar arguments, one can establish that $\displaystyle \left( \sqrt{n h_{n}} \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0)\right)^2 $ is uniformly bounded in probability. Hence by Dominated Convergence Theorem, $\displaystyle E \left[ \left(\sqrt{n h_{n}} \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0)\right)^2 \right] \to 0$ as $n \to \infty $, which implies that $var \left( \sqrt{n h_n } \hat{m}_{1, n} (x_0) \right) \to 0 \text{ as } n \to \infty$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{L4}
Let
\begin{equation}
\hat{m}_{2, n} (x_0) = \frac{1}{ (n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]},
\end{equation}
where $K$ is the kernel function, $X_{(i)}$ is the $i$-th order statistic and $e_{[i]}$ denotes the error corresponding to $X_{(i)}$. Then under (A1)-(A5),
\begin{equation*}
E \left( \sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{2, n} (x_0) \right) = 0 \text{ for any arbitrary $x_0$ and for all $n$}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assumption (A5) implies that $E(e_{[i]} | X_{(i)}) = 0$, which further infers that
\begin{equation*}
E\left( K\left( \frac{X_{(i)} - x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} \right) = E\left( K\left( \frac{X_{(i)} - x_0}{h_n} \right) E\left( e_{[i]} \big| X_{(i)} \right) \right) = 0,
\end{equation*}
for each $x_0$ and $i=1,\ldots ,n$. Using this fact, we now have
\begin{equation}
E \left( \sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{2, n} (x_0) \right) = \frac{\sqrt{n h_n}}{ (n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} E \left( K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]}\right) = 0.
\end{equation}
It completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{L5}
Under (A1)-(A5),
\begin{equation*}
var \left( \sqrt{n h_n}\, \, \hat{m}_{2, n} (x_0) \right) \longrightarrow \frac{\sigma^2 (x_0) t_{\alpha} (x_0) \int \{K(z)\}^2 dz}{(1-2\alpha)} \quad \text{as } n\to \infty
\end{equation*}
for any arbitrary $x_0$, where $\hat{m}_{2, n} (x_{0})$ is same as defined in the statement of Lemma \ref{L4}. Here
$\displaystyle \sigma^2 (x_0) = E\left(e^{2} | X = x_0 \right)$ and $\displaystyle t_{\alpha} (x_0) = \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First note that $\displaystyle var \left( \sqrt{n h_n}\, \, \hat{m}_{2,n} (x_0) \right) = E \left[ \left( \sqrt{n h_n}\, \, \hat{m}_{2,n} (x_0) \right)^2 \right]$, which follows from the assertion of Lemma \ref{L4}. We now have
\vspace{0.25in}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
& var \left( \sqrt{n h_n} \hat{m}_{2,n} (x_0) \right) = \frac{n h_n}{ (n - 2[n \alpha])^2 h_n^2} E\left[ \left( \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} \right)^2 \right] \\
&= \frac{n h_n}{ (n - 2[n \alpha])^2 h_n^2} E \Bigg[ \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 e_{[i]}^2
+ \sum\limits_{\substack{i,j = [n \alpha] +1 \\ i\neq j}}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} K \left(\frac{X_{(j)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[j]} \Bigg].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.25in}
We now consider
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
E \left( K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 (e_{[i]})^2 \right) &= E\left( K\left( \frac{X_{(i)} - x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 E\left( e_{[i]}^2 \, \big|\, X_{(i)} \right) \right) \\
&= E\left( K\left( \frac{X_{(i)} - x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 \sigma^2 (X_{(i)}) \right) \\
&= \int K\left( \frac{u - x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 \sigma^2 (u) f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du .
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Substituting $\displaystyle \frac{u - x_0}{h_n} = z$, and applying Taylor expansion in the neighbourhood of $x_0$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{L5e2}
\int & K\left( \frac{u - x_0}{h_n} \right)^2 \sigma^2 (u) f_{X_{(i)}} (u) du = h_n \int \{K\left( z \right)\}^2 \sigma^2 (x_0 + h_n z) f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0 + h_n z) dz \\
&= h_n \int \{K\left( z \right)\}^2 \left(\sigma^2(x_0)+ h_n z(\sigma^2)^{\prime} (x_0) + o(h_n)\right) \left( f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + h_n z f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + o(h_n) \right) dz \\
&= h_n \sigma^2 (x_0) f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) \int \{K(z)\}^2 dz + o(h_n).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Next for the product term, without loss of generality, one can consider the summand based on the sample $(X_1,\ldots ,X_{n-2[n\alpha]})$ and the corresponding errors $(e_1,\ldots ,e_{n-2[n\alpha]})$. Then the expectation $E \left[ K \left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right) e_i K \left(\frac{X_j -x_0}{h_n}\right) e_j \right] =0$, for each pair $\{(i,j)| i,j=1,\ldots ,n-2[n\alpha] ; i\neq j \}$, using the fact that $E(e_i|X_i) =0$ for all $i =1,2\ldots ,n-2[n\alpha]$. Hence, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{L5e3}
E\left[\sum\limits_{\substack{i,j = [n \alpha] +1 \\ i\neq j}}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} K \left(\frac{X_{(j)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[j]}\right] =0
\end{equation}
Finally, combining (\ref{L5e2}) and (\ref{L5e3}), we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
var \left( \sqrt{n h_n}\, \, \hat{m}_{2, n} (x_0) \right) &= \frac{n h_n}{ (n - 2[n \alpha])^2 h_n^2} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} h_n \sigma^2 (x_0) f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) \int\{K(z)\}^2 dz + o(h_n) \\
&= \int\{K(z)\}^2 dz \frac{n \sigma^2 (x_0)}{(n - 2[n \alpha])^2} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0) + o(1).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Note that since $\displaystyle \frac{n}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \to \frac{1}{(1-2\alpha)}$ as $n\to \infty$, we have
\begin{equation}
var \left( \sqrt{n h_n}\, \, \hat{m}_{2, n} (x_0) \right) \longrightarrow \frac{\sigma^2 (x_0) t_{\alpha} (x_0) \int \{K(z)\}^2 dz}{(1-2\alpha)} \quad \text{as } n\to \infty
\end{equation}
for any arbitrary $x_0$, where $\displaystyle t_{\alpha} (x_0) = \lim_{n\to \infty} \frac{1}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_0)$. It completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{L6}
Under (A2)-(A6), $\displaystyle \sqrt{nh_n} \left[\hat{m}_{2,n}(x_0) -E(\hat{m}_{2,n}(x_0)) \right] \xrightarrow{\makebox[5mm]{d}} \mathcal{N} (0,V)$, where $\hat{m}_{2, n} (x_{0})$ is same as defined in the statement of Lemma \ref{L4} and $\displaystyle V = \frac{\sigma^2 (x_0) }{(1-2\alpha) t_{\alpha} (x_0)} \int \{K(z)\}^2 dz$. Especially, since $E(\hat{m}_{2,n}(x_0)) = 0$ (see Lemma \ref{L4}), we have $\sqrt{nh_n} \hat{m}_{2,n}(x_0) \xrightarrow{\makebox[5mm]{d}} \mathcal{N} (0,V)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{L6e1}
\hat{m}_{2, n} (x_0) &= \frac{1}{ (n - 2[n \alpha]) h_n} \sum\limits_{i = [n \alpha] +1}^{ n - [n \alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} \\
&= \frac{n}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} \Bigg[ \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} \\
&- \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{[n\alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} \\
&- \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=n-[n\alpha]+1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} \Bigg]\\
&:= \frac{n}{(n - 2[n \alpha])} [T_{n, 1} - T_{n, 2} - T_{n, 3}]
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We now investigate the distributional properties of $T_{n, 1}$, $T_{n, 2}$ and $T_{n, 3}$ in (\ref{L6e1}) separately.
We now consider $T_{n, 1}$, which is the following.
\begin{equation*}
T_{n, 1} = \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} = \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_i .
\end{equation*}
The last equality follows from the definitions of $X_{(i)}$ and $e_{[i]}$.
Note that for $i = 1,\ldots, n$, $K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_i$ is a sequence of independent random variables, with zero mean and variances given by
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
var \left( K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)e_i \right) &= E\left[ \left\{K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)\right\}^2 e_i^2 \right] - E\left[ K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right) e_i \right]^2 \\
&= E\left[ K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)^2 e_i^2 \right] = E\left[ K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)^2 E[e_i^2 | X_i] \right] \\
&= E\left[ K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)^2 \sigma^2 (X_i) \right] = \int K\left(\frac{u -x_0}{h_n}\right)^2 \sigma^2 (u) f_X (u) du.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Now, changing the variable to $z = \frac{u-x_0}{h_n}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
var \left( K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)e_i \right) &= h_n \int\{K(z)\}^2 \sigma^2 (x_0 +h_n z) f_X (x_0 +h_n z) dz = h_n c(x_0)+o(h_n),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $c(x_0) = \sigma^2(x_0) f_X (x_0) \int \{K(z)\}^2 dz <\infty$. The sum of variances is then given by
\begin{equation*}
s_n = \sum_{i=1}^{n} var \left( K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)e_i \right) = \sum_{i=1}^{n} h_n c(x_0) = nh_n c(x_0) +o(h_n).
\end{equation*}
Now, using condition (A6) in the Lyapunov condition for the sequence of random variables $K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_i$ and for some $\delta >0$ we have,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{s_n^{2+\delta}} \sum_{i=1}^{n} E\left[\left|K\left(\frac{X_i -x_0}{h_n}\right)e_i \right|^{2+\delta} \right] = \frac{1}{s_n^{2+\delta}} \sum_{i=1}^{n} c_1 E[|e_i^{2+\delta}|X_i] = \frac{n}{s_n^{2+\delta}} c_2,
\end{equation*}
using boundedness of $K$ where $c_1$ and $c_2$ are constants. Note that, $\frac{n}{(nh_n)^{2+\delta}} \to 0$ as $n\to \infty$, using $nh_n^2 \to 0$ as $n\to \infty$ (see (A4)). Hence, this sequence of random variables are satisfying the condition of Lyapunov CLT (see, e.g., \citeA{billingsley1995probability}, p.362) in view of (A3), (A4) and (A6). Hence, by Lyapunove CLT, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{ft}
\sqrt{nh_n}\left(\frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_{i} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{i}\right) = \sqrt{nh_{n}}\left(\frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]}\right)
\end{equation} converges weakly to a Gaussian distribution.
\noindent Now, $T_{n, 2}$ in (\ref{L6e1}), we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{[n\alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} = \frac{[n\alpha]}{n} \left( \frac{1}{[n\alpha]h_n} \sum_{i=1}^{[n\alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} \right).
\end{equation}
Since $\frac{[n\alpha]}{n} \to \alpha$ as $n\to \infty$ and $[n\alpha] \to \infty$ as $n\to \infty$, using a similar argument as for the first term we conclude that for $m_n =[n\alpha]$
\begin{equation}
\label{st}
T_{n, 2} = \sqrt{nh_n}\left(\frac{1}{m_{n}h_n} \sum_{i=1}^{m_n} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]}\right)
\end{equation} converges weakly to another Gaussian distribution.
\noindent Finally, for $T_{n, 3}$ in (\ref{L6e1}), we have
\begin{equation}
\label{tt}
T_{n, 3} = \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=n-[n\alpha]+1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} = \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]} - \frac{1}{nh_n} \sum_{i=1}^{n-[n\alpha]} K \left(\frac{X_{(i)} -x_0}{h_n} \right) e_{[i]}.
\end{equation}
Using a similar arguments as the first and the second terms, it also converges weakly to a another Gaussian distribution. Therefore, combining the asymptotic distributions of the expressions of (\ref{ft}), (\ref{st}) and (\ref{tt}) leads to the asymptotic normality of $\hat{m}_{2, n} (x_{0})$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\vspace{8mm}
\noindent {\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{T1}:}
\begin{proof}
The regression model defined in (\ref{model}) can be rewritten as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
Y_i = g (X_i) + e_i = g(x_0) + (g(X_i) - g(x_0)) + e_i, \text{ for } i = 1,2,\ldots ,n \\
\text{OR} \quad Y_{[i]} = g(x_0) + (g(X_{(i)}) - g(x_0)) + e_{[i]}, \text{ for } i = 1,2,\ldots ,n ,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
with the ordered version of random variables. Here $X_{(i)}$ denotes the $i$-th order statistic of $\{X_1,\ldots ,X_n\}$, and $Y_{[i]}$ and $e_{[i]}$ are the corresponding response and error random variables (as defined in Section 2). Note that
\begin{equation}
\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_0) = g(x_0) + \frac{\hat{m}_{1, n} (x_{0})}{\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})} + \frac{\hat{m}_{2, n} (x_{0})}{\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})},
\end{equation} where $\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})$, $\hat{m}_{1, n} (x_{0})$ and $\hat{m}_{2, n} (x_{0})$ are same as defined in Lemmas \ref{L1}, \ref{L2} and \ref{L4}, respectively.
Note that the assertions in Lemmas \ref{L1}, \ref{L4}, \ref{L5} and \ref{L6} imply that
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{n h_n} \frac{\hat{m}_{2,n} (x_0)}{\hat{f}_{n, \alpha} (x_{0})} \overset{d}{\longrightarrow} \mathcal{N} \left( 0, \frac{\sigma^2 (x_0)}{(1-2\alpha)t_{\alpha} (x_{0})} \int \{K(z)\}^2 dz \right).
\end{equation}
The above two facts along with an application of Slutsky's theorem (see, e.g., \citeA{serfling2009approximation}), one can conclude that $$\sqrt{nh_n} \left( \hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (x_{0}) - g(x_{0}) - h_n^2 k_2 \left( \frac{g^{\prime \prime} (x_{0})}{2(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0}) + \frac{g^{\prime}(x_{0})}{(n-2[n\alpha])} \sum\limits_{i=[n \alpha] +1}^{n - [n \alpha]} f^{\prime}_{X_{(i)}} (x_{0}) \right) \right)$$ converges weakly to a Gaussian distribution with mean $= 0$ and variance $= V$, where $V$ is same as defined in the statement of Theorem \ref{T1}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{APPENDIX B}
\noindent {\bf Asymptotic Efficiency Table:} Corresponding to Section \ref{AE}.
\begin{table}[H]
\begin{center}
\caption{Table showing Asymptotic Efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (0.5)$ for different values of $\alpha$.}
\label{table_ae}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c}
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{c}{$X$ follows $Unif(0,1)$} \\
\hline
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
0.9782609 & 0.9836066 & 0.9999998 & 0.9673888 & 0.9153650 & 0.5826260 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{$X$ follows $Beta(2,2)$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
0.9782609 & 1.0000000 & 0.9999752 & 0.9950485 & 0.8399297 & 0.5005812 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\noindent {\bf Finite Sample Study Table:} Corresponding to Section \ref{FSS}.
\begin{table}[H]
\begin{center}
\caption{Table showing the finite sample Efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n,NW} (0.5)$ for Examples 1, 2, 3 and 4 in Section \ref{FSS}. Here $n = 50$ and $500$.}
\label{table_fss}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c}
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 1 with $n=50$} \\
\hline
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
1.0274176 & 0.9659629 & 1.0141424 & 0.6229415 & 0.2438898 & 0.1900028 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 1 with $n=500$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
1.0822063 & 1.0020056 & 1.0444929 & 1.0289262 & 0.4826861 & 0.2658498 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 2 with $n=50$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
1.0484987 & 0.9574283 & 0.9581104 & 0.7012951 & 0.3207287 & 0.2309493 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 2 with $n=500$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
0.9379374 & 0.9479973 & 1.0495048 & 1.0015816 & 0.5939786 & 0.3355768 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 3 with $n=50$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
1.0300403 & 1.0345411 & 0.8658538 & 0.6145255 & 0.2826788 & 0.2157184 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 3 with $n=500$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
1.0728524 & 0.9986963 & 1.1596102 & 1.0221897 & 0.4859994 & 0.2524595 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 4 with $n=50$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
0.9551044 & 0.9540824 & 0.9748282 & 0.7162221 & 0.3683285 & 0.2436081 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Example 4 with $n=500$} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
1.0058514 & 1.0806839 & 1.0892772 & 1.0036713 & 0.5958239 & 0.3385112 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\noindent {\bf Real Data Analysis Table:} Corresponding to Section \ref{rda}.
\begin{table}[H]
\begin{center}
\caption{Table showing Bootstrap Efficiency of $\hat{g}_{n,\alpha} (0.5)$ relative to $\hat{g}_{n, NW} (0.5)$ for three benchmark Real Data studied in Section \ref{rda}.}
\label{table_rda}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c}
\hline
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Data: Combined Cycle Power Plant Data Set} \\
\hline
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
0.6501292 & 0.6595586 & 0.7475265 & 1.0328150 & 0.2786650 & 0.1804794 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Data: Parkinson's Telemonitoring Data Set} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
0.9309987 & 1.0066488 & 0.9618025 & 0.6231914 & 0.2356732 & 0.1749779 \\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{Data: Air Quality Data Set} \\
$\alpha$ = 0.05 & $\alpha$ = 0.10 & $\alpha$ = 0.20 & $\alpha$ = 0.30 & $\alpha$ = 0.40 & $\alpha$ = 0.45 \\
1.0120231 & 0.9598871 & 0.6772431 & 0.4064943 & 0.0923924 & 0.0 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\bibliographystyle{apacite}
|
\section{Introduction}
The study of generic quantum field theories (QFTs) is one of the main topics of interest in present-day theoretical Physics. Perturbative and non-perturbative investigations in the recent decades have shown that remarkable progress can be achieved when the system under study is symmetric enough.
One major line of research that came as a by-product of the Maldacena conjecture \cite{Maldacena:1997re}, is the study of supersymmetric and conformal field theories in diverse dimensions.
Superconformal Field Theories (SCFTs) exist in space-time dimensions $d<7$ \cite{Nahm:1977tg}.
The last two decades witnessed a large effort in the classification of Type II or M-theory backgrounds with AdS$_{d+1}$ factors, see for example \cite{Gauntlett:2004zh},\cite{Gutowski:2014ova}. The solutions are conjectured to be dual to SCFTs in $d$ dimensions with different amounts of SUSY. In the case in which we have eight Poincar\'e supercharges major progress has been achieved (the number of real supercharges doubles by the presence of the conformal partner supercharges).
For the case of ${\cal N}=2$ SCFTs in four dimensions, the field theories studied in \cite{Gaiotto:2009we} have holographic duals first discussed in \cite{Gaiotto:2009gz}, and further elaborated (among other works) in \cite{ReidEdwards:2010qs}-\cite{Bah:2019jts}. The case of five dimensional SCFTs was analysed from the field theoretical and holographic viewpoints in \cite{DHoker:2016ujz}-\cite{Bergman:2018hin}, among many other interesting works. An infinite family of six-dimensional ${\cal N}=(1,0)$ SCFTs was discussed from both the field theoretical and holographic points of view in \cite{Apruzzi:2015wna}-\cite{Hanany:1997gh}. For three-dimensional ${\cal N}=4$ SCFTs, the field theories presented in \cite{Gaiotto:2008ak} were discussed holographically in \cite{DHoker:2007hhe}-\cite{Lozano:2016wrs}, among other works.
The case of two-dimensional SCFTs and their AdS duals is particularly attractive. The interest that CFTs in two dimensions and AdS$_3$ solutions present in other areas of theoretical Physics (condensed matter systems, black holes, etc), and the power of the 2-d super conformal algebra present us with a perfect {\it theoretical lab} to test various ideas explicitly. This motivated various
attempts at finding classifications of AdS$_3$ backgrounds and studying their dual CFTs --for a sample of papers see
\cite{Witten:1997yu}-\cite{Lozano:2019emq}.
In this work we add a new entry to the dictionary between SCFTs and string backgrounds with an AdS-factor described above. We deal with ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ (small algebra) SCFTs. We define our SCFTs as the IR fixed points of ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ UV finite QFTs. These QFTs
are
described by quivers, consisting of two long rows of gauge groups connected by hypermultiplets and Fermi multiplets. There are also global (flavour) symmetry groups, joined with the gauge groups by Fermi multiplets. Quantum theories of this kind (with some differences regarding the field content and R-symmetry charges) have been proposed in the study of solitonic strings in six-dimensional ${\cal N}=(1,0)$ SCFTs, see for example \cite{Gadde:2015tra}\footnote{See also \cite{Hanany:2018hlz} for realisations in terms of D3-brane boxes.}.
We show that the new background solutions to massive IIA supergravity constructed recently in \cite{Lozano:2019emq} contain the needed isometries to be dual to our SCFTs. These backgrounds may be trusted when the number of nodes of the quiver is large and so are the ranks of each gauge group\footnote{See the recent paper \cite{Uhlemann:2019ypp} for long 5d quivers.}. We show that they reproduce the central charge of our SCFTs in the holographic limit.
The contents of this paper are distributed as follows. In section \ref{geometria} we summarise the general massive Type IIA backgrounds that we constructed recently in \cite{Lozano:2019emq}, and find new solutions, also presented in \cite{Lozano:2019jza}. These backgrounds have the structure
\begin{equation}
\text{AdS}_3\times \text{CY}_2\times\text{S}^2\times \text{I}_\rho.
\end{equation}
By I$_\rho$ we denote an interval parametrised by a coordinate that we label $\rho$. There are warp factors in front of each metric component (also for each of the RR and NS fluxes compatible with the isometries of the background).
We discuss various observable quantities of these backgrounds, like the Page charges, the explicit presence of branes (we map these data into Hanany-Witten brane set-ups) and the holographic central charges. All these quantities are described in terms of the functions that define the warp factors.
\\
In section \ref{CFTsect} we define the QFTs of our interest. In order to do this we take a small detour through 2-d ${\cal N}=(0,2)$
multiplets. In terms of them we write the field content of our ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ QFTs. We pay special attention to the cancellation of gauge anomalies. We propose that these QFTs flow in the IR to strongly coupled ${\cal N}=(0,4) $ SCFTs with small superconformal algebra. We use this to link the R-symmetry anomaly (the level of the Kac-Moody algebra) with the central charge (the leading coefficient in the OPE of energy-momentum tensors). We finally propose a generic duality between our SCFTs
and the backgrounds discussed in section \ref{geometria}.
\\
In section \ref{ejempl} (of pedagogical character), we present a detailed set of examples that serve as tests of our proposed duality. In those examples we show how the supergravity backgrounds (with the predicted number of {\it colour} and {\it flavour} branes) have the precise {\it combinatorics} to be dual to long quivers with non-anomalous gauge symmetries and flavour symmetries. We calculate the central charge in the SCFT and the holographic central charge in the gravity background
showing a clean matching between both descriptions.
We close the paper with a brief summary and some ideas for further research in section \ref{conclusion}. The presentation is complemented by appendixes of technical nature.
\section{The holographic backgrounds}\label{geometria}
In this section we start by discussing the solutions to massive IIA supergravity (with localised sources) obtained in the recent work \cite{Lozano:2019emq}. We propose that these backgrounds are
holographic duals to two dimensional CFTs preserving ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ SUSY. The particular CFTs will be discussed in section \ref{CFTsect}. The Neveu-Schwarz (NS) sector of these bosonic solutions reads,
\begin{align}
ds^2&= \frac{u}{\sqrt{\hat{h}_4 h_8}}\bigg(ds^2(\text{AdS}_3)+\frac{h_8\hat{h}_4 }{4 h_8\hat{h}_4+(u')^2}ds^2(\text{S}^2)\bigg)+ \sqrt{\frac{\hat{h}_4}{h_8}}ds^2(\text{CY}_2)+ \frac{\sqrt{\hat{h}_4 h_8}}{u} d\rho^2,\\
e^{-\Phi}&= \frac{h_8^{\frac{3}{4}} }{2\hat{h}_4^{\frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{u}}\sqrt{4h_8 \hat{h}_4+(u')^2},~~~~ H= \frac{1}{2}d(-\rho+\frac{ u u'}{4 \hat{h}_4 h_8+ (u')^2})\wedge\text{vol}(\text{S}^2)+ \frac{1}{h_8}d\rho\wedge H_2,\nonumber
\end{align}
here $\Phi$ is the dilaton, $H=dB_2$ is the NS 3-form and $ds^2$ is written in string frame. The warping function $\hat{h}_4$ has support on $(\rho,\text{CY}_2)$. On the other hand, $u$ and $h_8$ only depend of $\rho$. We denote $u'= \partial_{\rho}u$ and similarly for $h_8'$.
The RR fluxes are
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
F_0&=h_8',\;\;\;F_2=-H_2-\frac{1}{2}\bigg(h_8- \frac{ h'_8 u'u}{4 h_8 \hat{h}_4+ (u')^2} \bigg)\text{vol}(\text{S}^2),\label{eq:classIflux2}\\[2mm]
F_4&= \bigg(d\left(\frac{u u'}{2\hat{ h}_4}\right)+2 h_8 d\rho\bigg) \wedge\text{vol}(\text{AdS}_3)\nonumber\\[2mm]
& -\frac{h_8}{u} (\hat \star_4 d_4 \hat{h}_4)\wedge d\rho- \partial_{\rho}\hat{h}_4\text{vol}(\text{CY}_2)-\frac{u u'}{2 ( 4h_8 \hat{h}_4+ (u')^2)} H_2\wedge \text{vol}(\text{S}^2),\label{eq:classIflux3}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
with the higher fluxes related to them as $F_6=-\star_{10} F_4,~F_8=\star_{10} F_2,~F_{10}=-\star_{10} F_0$.
It was shown in \cite{Lozano:2019emq} that supersymmetry holds whenever
\begin{equation}
u''=0,~~~~ H_2+ \hat{\star}_4 H_2=0,\label{messi}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\star}_4$ is the Hodge dual on CY$_2$. In what follows we will concentrate on the set of solutions for which $H_2=0$.
The Bianchi identities of the fluxes then impose (away from localised sources)
\begin{align}\label{eq:BI1}
&h''_8= 0,\;\;\;\;\frac{h_8}{u}\nabla^2_{\text{CY}_2}\hat{h}_4+ \partial_{\rho}^2 \hat{h}_4 =0.\nonumber
\end{align}
A further restriction consists in assuming that $\hat{h}_4=\hat{h}_4(\rho)$.
After this, the string frame background reads,
\begin{eqnarray}
ds_{st}^2&=& \frac{u}{\sqrt{\hat{h}_4 h_8}}\bigg(ds^2(\text{AdS}_3)+\frac{h_8\hat{h}_4 }{4 h_8 \hat{h}_4+(u')^2}ds^2(\text{S}^2)\bigg)+ \sqrt{\frac{\hat{h}_4}{h_8}}ds^2(\text{CY}_2)+ \frac{\sqrt{\hat{h}_4 h_8}}{u} d\rho^2,\nonumber \\
e^{-\Phi}&=& \frac{h_8^{\frac{3}{4}} }{2\hat{h}_4^{\frac{1}{4}}\sqrt{u}}\sqrt{4h_8 \hat{h}_4+(u')^2},~~~~~~ B_2= \frac{1}{2}\left(-\rho+ 2\pi k+\frac{ u u'}{4 \hat{h}_4 h_8+ (u')^2} \right) \text{vol}(\text{S}^2),\nonumber\\
\hat{F}_0&=&h_8',\;\;\;\;
\hat{F}_2=-\frac{1}{2}\bigg(h_8- h_8'(\rho-2\pi k)\bigg)\text{vol}(\text{S}^2),\nonumber\\
\hat{F}_4&=& \bigg(\partial_\rho\left(\frac{u u'}{2 \hat{h}_4}\right)+2 h_8\bigg) d\rho \wedge\text{vol}(\text{AdS}_3)
- \partial_{\rho}\hat{h}_4\text{vol}(\text{CY}_2).\label{eq:background}
\end{eqnarray}
We have written the Page fluxes $\hat{F}=e^{-B_2}\wedge F$ that are more useful for our purposes. Notice that we have also allowed for large gauge transformations $B_2\to B_2 + { \pi k} \text{vol}(\text{S}^2)$, for $k=0,1,...., P$. The transformations are performed every time we cross an interval $[2\pi k, 2\pi(k+1)]$. To motivate this consider the following: in the limit where $\hat{h}_4(\rho)$ and/or $h_8(\rho)$ become large compared with $u(\rho)$ the NS 2-form in the presence of $k$ large gauge transformations is approximately
\begin{equation}
B_2\sim \frac{1}{2}(-\rho+ 2\pi k)\text{vol}(\text{S}^2) \implies \hat{b}_0 = -\frac{1}{(2\pi)^2}\int_{\text{S}^2}B_2\sim \frac{1}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k).
\end{equation}
This can be archived by tuning certain integration constants in the solutions presented below, and in fact coincides with the limit of weak curvature where the supergravity approximation can be trusted. Demanding that $\hat{b}_0$ lies in the fundamental region $\hat{b}_0\in[0,1)$ partitions the real line spanned by $\rho$ into segments of length $2\pi$. A large gauge transformation ( $B_2\to B_2+ \pi \text{vol}(\text{S}^2)$) is required as one crosses between these segments, such that the NS 2-form quoted in \eqref{eq:background} is valid in the segment $2k\pi\leq \rho <2\pi(k+1)$ with $k=0,1,2...$.
The background in \eqref{eq:background} is a SUSY solution of the massive IIA equations of motion if the functions $\hat{h}_4,h_8,u$ satisfy (away from localised sources),
\begin{equation}
\hat{h}_4''(\rho)=0,\;\;\;\; h_8''(\rho)=0,\;\;\;\; u''(\rho)=0.\label{eqsmotion}
\end{equation}
The three functions are thus linear. Various particular solutions were analysed in \cite{Lozano:2019emq}. Here we will present an infinite family of solutions for which the functions are piecewise continuous.
\subsection{The local solutions}\label{soluciones}
We shall be interested in solutions that in the interval $2\pi k\leq \rho\leq 2\pi (k+1)$ (for $k=0,1,....,P$) are of the form,
\begin{equation}
\hat{h}_4^{(k)}=\Upsilon \left( \alpha_k +\frac{\beta_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k)\right),\;\;\;\; h_8^{(k)}= \mu_k +\frac{\nu_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k),\;\;\;u^{(k)}= a_k +\frac{b_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k).\nonumber
\end{equation}
Here ($\Upsilon, \alpha_k,\beta_k, \mu_k,\nu_k, a_k,b_k$) are arbitrary constants whose physical meaning we shall discuss below.
In particular, we impose that these three functions vanish at $\rho=0$ (where the space begins) and that the space ends at $\rho=2\pi(P+1)$, by considering the situation for which $\hat{h}_4$ and/or $h_8$ vanish at this point. These conditions leave us with functions of the form,
\begin{equation} \label{profileh4final}
\hat{h}_4(\rho)=\Upsilon h_4(\rho)
=\Upsilon \left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\beta_0 }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi \\
\alpha_k + \frac{\beta_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k ) &~~ 2\pi k\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(k+1),\;\;\;\; k:=1,....,P-1\\
\alpha_P+ \frac{\beta_P}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{profileh8final}
h_8(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\nu_0 }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi \\
\mu_k + \frac{\nu_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k) &~~ 2\pi k\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(k+1),\;\;\;\; k:=1,....,P-1\\
\mu_P+ \frac{\nu_P}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{profileufinal}
u(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{b_0 }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi \\
a_k + \frac{b_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k) &~~ 2\pi k\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(k+1),\;\;\;\; k:=1,....,P-1\\
a_P+ \frac{b_P}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
If the function $\hat{h}_4(\rho)$ vanishes at $\rho=2\pi(P+1)$, ending the space there, we need that $\alpha_P=-\beta_P$. Similarly if $h_8\big(2\pi(P+1)\big)=0$, we must impose that $\nu_P=-\mu_P$.
\\
Demanding that the metric, dilaton and $B_2$ field are continuous across the different intervals imposes additional conditions on the various constants\footnote{We do not impose the continuity of $H= dB_2$ since $H=F(\rho) d\rho \wedge \text{vol}(\text{S}^2)$. This implies that $dH=0$ and the continuity of $H$ is not needed to avoid the presence of NS brane sources. }. The details are discussed in appendix \ref{continuityconditions}. Here we quote one simple solution to these continuity equations,
\begin{equation}
\mu_k=\sum_{j=0}^{k-1} \nu_j,\;\;\; \alpha_k=\sum_{j=0}^{k-1}\beta_j,\;\;\;\; b_k=b_0,\;\;\;\; a_k= k b_0.\label{conticond}
\end{equation}
These conditions imply the continuity of the functions $\hat{h}_4, h_8$. Their derivatives can, however, present jumps. This will imply discontinuities in the RR sector, that we will interpret as generated by the presence of branes in the background, that modify the Bianchi identities. In turn, notice that \eqref{conticond} implies that $u(\rho)=\frac{ b_0}{2\pi} \rho$ in all intervals,
which is consistent with the supersymmetry requirement \eqref{messi} that $u''=0$ globally.
\\
These supergravity backgrounds can be trusted (with localised singularities) if the numbers $P, \alpha_k,\mu_k$ are large. Indeed, the Ricci scalar only diverges at the points where the sources are localised. Choosing the numbers $\nu_k, \beta_k$ to be large controls this divergence. On the other hand $P$ is taken to be large to have these
singularities separated enough that we can trust the geometric description given here.
\subsection{The $\rho$-interval}
Let us analyse more closely these solutions. The background functions defined in the first interval $[0, 2\pi]$ show that the space begins at $\rho=0$ in a smooth fashion.
On the other hand, the $\rho$-interval
ends at a generic point $\rho= 2\pi(P+1)$ if any of the functions $\hat{h}_4$ and/or $h_8$ vanish at that point. Let us analyse the behaviour of the metric and dilaton close to the end of the space for the three possible cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item The space ends by virtue of the function $\hat{h}_4$ whilst $h_8$ is generically non-vanishing at $\rho=2\pi(P+1)$. In the last interval the functions defining the background are then
\begin{equation}
\hat{h}_4=\Upsilon\left( \alpha_P-\frac{\alpha_P}{2\pi} (\rho-2\pi P)\right),\;\;\;h_8= \mu_P+\frac{\nu_P}{2\pi} (\rho-2\pi P),\;\;\;u=\frac{b_0}{2\pi} \rho.\nonumber
\end{equation}
In this case, expanding the metric and the dilaton close to $\rho=2\pi(P+1)$ we find, for small values of $x=2\pi(P+1) -\rho$,
\begin{equation}
ds^2\sim \frac{m_1}{\sqrt{x}} ds^2(\text{AdS}_3) +\frac{\sqrt{x}}{m_1}\Big[dx^2+ m_1 m_2 ds^2(\text{S}^2) + m_3 m_1 ds^2(\text{CY}_2) \Big],\;\;\; e^{-4\Phi}=\frac{m_4}{x}.\label{cani}
\end{equation}
The numbers $(m_1,....,m_4)$ are written in terms of $\mu_P,\alpha_P,\nu_P, b_0,\Upsilon$. This asymptotic behaviour indicates that close to the end of the space we have a D2 brane that extends on AdS$_3$ and is delocalised (or smeared) on CY$_2 \times $S$^2$---see \cite{Lozano:2019emq} for a generic analysis of singularities. Note that one could also view this as an O2 plane smeared on CY$_2 \times $S$^2$ or a superposition of both D2s and O2s. \\
\item The space ends by virtue of the function $h_8$ while $\hat{h}_4$ is generically non-vanishing at $\rho=2\pi(P+1)$. In the last interval the functions are then
\begin{equation}
h_8=\mu_P-\frac{\mu_P}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P),\;\;\;\; \hat{h}_4=\Upsilon\left(\alpha_P+\frac{\beta_P }{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P)\right),\;\;\;\; u=\frac{b_0}{2\pi} \rho.\nonumber
\end{equation}
For small $x=2\pi(P+1)-\rho$, the metric and dilaton scale as,
\begin{equation}
ds^2\sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{x}}\Big[n_1 ds^2(\text{AdS}_3)+ n_3 ds^2({\text{CY}_2}) \Big] +\frac{\sqrt{x}}{n_1}\Big[dx^2+ n_1 n_2 ds^2(\text{S}^2) \Big],\;\;\;e^{-4\Phi}=n_4 x^3.\label{diego}
\end{equation}
The numbers $(n_1,....,n_4)$ are written in terms of $\mu_P,\alpha_P,\beta_P, b_0,\Upsilon$. This asymptotic behaviour indicates that at $\rho=2\pi(P+1)$ we have an O6 plane that extends on AdS$_3\times$CY$_2$.\\
\item Finally, consider the more symmetric case for which the space is closed by the simultaneous vanishing of $\hat{h}_4$ and $ h_8$ at $\rho=2\pi(P+1)$. In this case the functions in the last interval read,
\begin{equation}
h_8=\mu_P-\frac{\mu_P}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P),\;\;\;\; \hat{h}_4=\Upsilon\left(\alpha_P-\frac{\alpha_P}{2\pi} (\rho-2\pi P)\right),\;\;\; u=\frac{b_0}{2\pi} \rho.\label{bati}
\end{equation}
For small values of $x=2\pi(P+1)-\rho$, the metric and dilaton scale as,
\begin{equation}
ds^2\sim \frac{s_1}{{x}} ds^2(\text{AdS}_3)+ s_3 ds^2(\text{CY}_2) +\frac{ {x}}{s_1}\Big[dx^2+ s_1 s_2 ds^2(\text{S}^2)
\Big],\;\;
e^{-4\Phi}=s_4 x^2.
\end{equation}
The numbers $(s_1,....,s_4)$ are written in terms of $\mu_P,\alpha_P, b_0,\Upsilon$. Notice that each quantity above is the product of those in \eqref{cani}-\eqref{diego}. This indicates the superposition of O2-O6 planes.\\
~\\
This more symmetric way of ending the space is the one
on which we will concentrate our forthcoming analysis. An important observation is that, from the gravity perspective, the behaviour we are finding close to the end of the interval is the least healthy of the three analysed, as the O2s need to be smeared. We believe that the presence of smeared O-planes is an artifact of the supergravity approximation.\\
~\\
To be used below, let us quote the explicit expressions for the different numerical values of $(s_1,s_2,s_3,s_4)$,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & s_1= \frac{4\pi^2 b_0 (P+1)}{\sqrt{\alpha_P\mu_P \Upsilon}},\;\;\;\; s_2=2\pi(P+1)\frac{\sqrt{\alpha_P\mu_P \Upsilon}}{b_0},\nonumber\\
& & s_3= \sqrt{\frac{\Upsilon \alpha_P}{\mu_P}},\;\;\;\; s_4=\frac{b_0^2 \mu_P^3}{2^{10}\pi^6 \alpha_P (P+1)^2 \Upsilon}.\label{lio}
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that in order for the CY$_2$ space to be large compared with the string size, we need that $\Upsilon \alpha_P\sim \mu_P$. Otherwise the gravity background is not trustable.\\
\end{itemize}
In the following section we study the Page charges and discuss the presence of branes in our solutions. These are of the form given by eq.\eqref{eq:background}, with the functions $({\hat h}_4, h_8, u)$ satisfying eq.\eqref{eqsmotion},
away from localised sources, and piecewise continuous, as in \eqref{profileh4final}-\eqref{profileufinal}. The condition for continuity
of the defining functions $\hat{h}_4, h_8$ is given by \eqref{conticond}. This implies the continuity of the NS-sector of the solution. From all the possibilities to end the space we focus on solutions whose last interval's functions are given by \eqref{bati}. The non-compact solution with $\hat{h}_4\sim h_8\sim u\sim \rho$ all over the space will be discussed in detail in \cite{LMNR3}.
\subsection{Page charges}
The Page charges are important observable quantities characterising a supergravity solution. Since they are quantised they imply the quantisation of some of the constants defining the solution in \eqref{profileh4final}-\eqref{profileufinal}. The Page charge of Dp-branes is given by the integral of the magnetic part of the Page $\hat{F}_{8-p}$ form. This is,
\begin{equation}
{(2\pi)^{7-p} g_s \alpha'^{(7-p)/2}}Q_{Dp}= \int_{\Sigma_{8-p}} \hat{F}_{8-p}.\label{pagedef}
\end{equation}
In what follows, we choose units consistent with $\alpha'=g_s=1$.
Also, we will use that $\hat{h}_4=\Upsilon h_4$, as seen in \eqref{profileh4final}.
\\
We find the following Page charges for our solutions in the interval $[2\pi k, 2\pi(k+1)]$,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & Q_{D8}=2\pi F_0 =2\pi h_8'= \nu_k.\label{cargasxx}\\
& & Q_{D6}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\text{S}^2} \hat{F}_2= {h_8- {h_8'}(\rho-2\pi k)}=\mu_k.\nonumber\\
& & Q_{D4}=\frac{1}{8\pi^3}\int_{\text{CY}_2} \hat{F}_4=\Upsilon \frac{\text{Vol(CY}_2)}{16\pi^4} \beta_k,\nonumber\\
& & Q_{D2}=\frac{1}{32\pi^5}\int_{\text{CY}_2\times \text{S}^2} \hat{F}_6=\Upsilon \frac{\text{Vol(CY}_2)}{16\pi^4} (h_4- h_4'(\rho-2\pi k))= \Upsilon \frac{\text{Vol(CY}_2)}{16\pi^4} \alpha_k .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
We have used that the magnetic part of $\hat{F}_6$ is
\begin{equation}
\hat{F}_{6,mag}=\hat{f}_6=\frac{\Upsilon }{2}\left(h_4- h_4'(\rho-2\pi k)\right) \text{vol}(\text{S}^2)\wedge \text{vol}(\text{CY}_2) .\label{estax}
\end{equation}
We also have one NS-five brane every time we cross the value $\rho=2\pi k$ (for $k=1,....,P$). The total number of NS-five branes is $Q_{NS}=\frac{1}{4\pi^2}\int_{\rho\times S^2}H_3=(P+1)$.\\
In what follows, we choose the constant $\Upsilon$ to satisfy $\Upsilon \text{Vol(CY}_2) =16\pi^4$.
This implies that the constants $\alpha_k,\beta_k$ are integer numbers (like $\nu_k,\mu_k$ are). They are directly related with the number of branes in the associated Hanany-Witten brane set-up.\\
~\\
To understand which branes are present in our backgrounds, let us study the Bianchi identities for the Page fluxes.
\subsubsection{Hanany-Witten brane set-up}
We now calculate the Bianchi identities for the Page fluxes. The goal is to determine which branes are actually present in our background solutions, either as sources or dissolved into
fluxes.
Let us start with the flux $F_0=h_8'(\rho)$. We calculate
$dF_0= h_8''(\rho) d\rho$. Now, at a generic point of the $\rho$-coordinate we will have $h_8''=0$, according to \eqref{eqsmotion}. However, due to our definition of the functions $\hat{h}_4$ and $h_8$---see \eqref{profileh4final}-\eqref{profileh8final}, something special occurs at the points where the functions change slope. In fact, for both $\hat{h}_4$ and $h_8$ we find,
\begin{equation}
h_8''=\sum_{k=1}^{P} \left(\frac{\nu_{k-1}-\nu_{k}}{2\pi}\right)\delta(\rho-2\pi k),\;\;\; \hat{h}_4''=\Upsilon \sum_{k=1}^{P} \left(\frac{\beta_{k-1}-\beta_{k}}{2\pi}\right)\delta(\rho-2\pi k).\label{carlitos}
\end{equation}
As a consequence of this we have,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & dF_0=\sum_{k=1}^{P} \left(\frac{\nu_{k-1}-\nu_{k}}{2\pi}\right)\delta(\rho-2\pi k) d\rho,\label{secondd}\\
& & d\hat{F}_4= \Upsilon \sum_{k=1}^{P} \left(\frac{\beta_{k-1}-\beta_{k}}{2\pi}\right)\delta(\rho-2\pi k) d\rho\wedge \text{vol}(\text{CY}_2),\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
indicating that at the points $\rho=2 \pi k$ there may be localised D8 and semi-localised D4 branes.
In fact, explicit D8 and D4 branes are present at $\rho=2\pi k$ when the slopes of $h_8,\hat{ h}_4$ are different at both sides.\\
Let us investigate the same about D2 and D6 branes. For the magnetic part of the Page fluxes, we compute in the interval $[2\pi k, 2\pi (k+1)]$
\begin{eqnarray}
& & d\hat{F}_2=\frac{1}{2} h_8''\times (\rho-2\pi k) d\rho\wedge \text{vol}(\text{S}^2),\label{zada}\\
& & d\hat{F}_6= d\hat{f}_6= \frac{1}{2} {\hat{h}}_4'' \times(\rho-2\pi k) d\rho\wedge \text{vol}(\text{S}^2)\wedge \text{vol}(\text{CY}_2).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Using \eqref{carlitos} and that $x\delta(x)=0$, we then find that there are no
sources for D2 or D6 branes present.
This is precisely because a large gauge
transformation of the NS two-form is performed at the loci of the D8 and D4s, were this not
the case a source term for D6 and D2 would be induced as in section 5.1 of \cite{Lozano:2019emq} \footnote{The D8 and D4 can also be
shown to be supersymmetric by a small modification of
the argument in \cite{Lozano:2019emq}. There, it was assumed that no gauge transformations are performed
on the brane, which lead to D8 and D4 world volume gauge fields being required by
supersymmetry and the source corrected Bianchi identities. Here these gauge fields have
been absorbed by the large gauge transformation of the NS two-form.
The branes now restricted to lie at $\rho= 2\pi (k+1)$, $k=0,1,2...$. We give some details in Appendix \ref{apendice2}.}.
\\
This study suggests that the D2 and D6 branes will play the role of {\it colour} branes, while the D4 and D8 branes that of {\it flavour} branes. The global symmetry in the dual CFT is gravitationally realised by the gauge fields that fluctuate on the D4 or D8 branes.
\\
Studying the associated Hanany-Witten \cite{Hanany:1996ie} set-up, we find that in flat space the branes are distributed as
indicated in table \ref{D6-NS5-D8-D2-D4-first}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{| l | c | c | c | c| c | c| c | c| c | c |}
\hline
& 0 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 \\ \hline
D2 & x & x & & & & & x & & & \\ \hline
D4 & x & x & & & & & & x & x & x \\ \hline
D6 & x & x & x & x & x & x & x & & & \\ \hline
D8 & x & x &x & x & x & x & & x & x & x \\ \hline
NS5 & x & x &x & x & x & x & & & & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{$\frac18$-BPS brane intersection underlying our geometry. The directions $(x^0,x^1)$ are the directions where the 2d CFT lives (dual to our AdS$_3$). The directions $(x^2, \dots, x^5)$ span the CY$_2$, on which the D6 and the D8-branes are wrapped. The coordinate $x^6$ is the direction associated with $\rho$. Finally $(x^7,x^8,x^9)$ are the transverse directions realising an SO(3)-symmetry associated with the isometries of S$^2$.}
\label{D6-NS5-D8-D2-D4-first}
\end{table}
Our proposal is that the geometries described by \eqref{eq:background}, capture the near horizon, or decoupling limit, of the brane configuration, once a suitable large number of NS and D-branes is considered.
\\
Using our result for the Page charges in \eqref{cargasxx} and the modified Bianchi identities in \eqref{secondd}, we find
that the number of D-branes in the interval $[2\pi (k-1) , 2\pi k]$ (in between two NS-five branes) is,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & N_{D8}^{[k-1,k]}= \nu_{k-1}-\nu_k,\;\;\;\;\; N_{D4}^{[k-1,k]}= \beta_{k-1}-\beta_k,\label{numberofbranes}\\
& &
N_{D6}^{[k-1,k]}= \mu_k=\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}\nu_i,\;\;\;\; N_{D2}^{[k-1,k]}= \alpha_k=\sum_{i=0}^{k-1}\beta_i.\label{numberofcolour}
\end{eqnarray}
We then have a Hanany-Witten brane set-up, that in the interval $[2\pi(k-1),2\pi k]$ (bounded by NS-five branes), has $N_{D6}^{[k-1,k]}, N_{D2}^{[k-1,k]}$ colour branes and $N_{D8}^{[k-1,k]}, N_{D4}^{[k-1,k]}$ flavour branes. See figure \ref{xxy}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=10cm]{BraneSetupPart2-II.pdf} }}%
\caption{The generic Hanany-Witten set-up associated with our backgrounds. The vertical lines are NS-five branes. The horizontal lines represent D2 and D6 branes. The crosses indicate D4 and D8 branes.}
\label{xxy}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Holographic central charge}
To close our study of the background in \eqref{eq:background} we will calculate the holographic central charge associated with these solutions. The idea is to compare with the central charge of the proposed dual conformal field theory, that we study in the coming sections.
\\
The central charge is one of the important observables for conformal field theories. It appears when calculating the trace of the energy-momentum tensor, for a theory defined on a curved space. In the case of two dimensional conformal field theories, there is only one relevant quantity -- denoted by $"c"$--that appears when computing $<T_\mu^\mu>=-\frac{c}{24\pi} R$. Here $R$ is the Ricci scalar of the manifold on which the CFT is defined and $c$ is the central charge. \\
The holographic calculation of this quantity has a very interesting history. It was first obtained in
\cite{Brown:1986nw} (before the Maldacena conjecture was formulated),
then calculated in \cite{Henningson:1998gx}. In the context of AdS-supergravity, it was holographically computed in \cite{Freedman:1999gp} and \cite{Kraus:2005zm}. In \cite{Klebanov:2007ws} generic supergravity solutions were considered that were later generalised in \cite{Macpherson:2014eza}. This is the formalism we will use. It basically boils down to computing the volume of the
internal space (excluding AdS$_3$).
\\
In a putative compactification to an effective 3-d supergravity this volume is the inverse of the 3-d Newton constant. However, in general, it needs to be weighted by factors of the dilaton and other warp factors. In fact, for a generic dilaton and background of the form,
\begin{equation}
ds^2= a(r,\vec{\theta})(dx_{1,d}^2 + b(r)dr^2) + g_{ij}(r,\vec{\theta}) d\theta^id\theta^j,\;\;\;\; \Phi(r,\vec{\theta}),
\end{equation}
one should calculate the auxiliary quantity \cite{Macpherson:2014eza}
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}= \left(\int d\vec{\theta} \sqrt{e^{-4\Phi} \det[g_{ij}] a(r,\vec{\theta})^d } \right)^2.\nonumber
\end{equation}
With this, one computes the holographic central charge (see \cite{Macpherson:2014eza,Bea:2015fja} for the derivation) to be,
\begin{equation}
c_{hol}= 3\times \frac{ d^d}{ G_N} \frac{b(r)^{d/2} (\hat{H})^\frac{2d+1}{2} }{(\hat{H}')^d} .\label{centralx}
\end{equation}
The factor of $"3"$ in \eqref{centralx} is introduced as a normalisation, to coincide with the standard result of \cite{Brown:1986nw}.
\\
For the case at hand, comparing with the solutions in \eqref{eq:background} and using Poincar\'e coordinates for AdS$_3$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
& & a(r,\vec{\theta})=\frac{u}{\sqrt{\hat{h}_4 h_8}} r^2,\;\;\; b(r)=\frac{1}{r^4},\;\;\; d=1,\nonumber\\
& & \det[g_{ij}]= u\sqrt{\frac{\hat{h}_4^{7}}{h_8}} \frac{\sin^2\chi}{\left(4\hat{ h}_4 h_8) + (u')^2\right)^2},\;\;\; \sqrt{e^{-4\Phi} \det[g_{ij} ] a}= \frac{r}{4}\hat{h}_4 h_8\sin\chi,\nonumber\\
& & \hat{H}= {\cal N}^2 r^2,\;\;\;\; {\cal N}=\pi \text{Vol}(\text{CY}_2) \int_0^{2\pi(P+1)} \hat{h}_4 h_8 d\rho.
\end{eqnarray}
We then obtain,
\begin{equation}
c_{hol}=\frac{3}{2G_N} {\cal N}= \frac{3\pi}{2G_N}\text{Vol}(\text{CY}_2) \int_0^{2\pi(P+1)} \hat{h}_4 h_8 d\rho= \frac{3}{\pi} \int_0^{2\pi(P+1)} h_4 h_8 d\rho, \label{centralhol}
\end{equation}
where in the last equality we have used--see below \eqref{estax},
\begin{equation}
\Upsilon \text{Vol}(\text{CY}_2)= 16 \pi^4,\;\;\;\;\; \hat{h}_4=\Upsilon h_4,\;\;\; G_N=8\pi^6.\nonumber
\end{equation}
It is useful to express the holographic central charge in terms of the constants $\alpha_k,\beta_k,\mu_k,\nu_k$ defining the solution,
\begin{equation}
c_{hol}= \sum_{j=0}^P \Bigl(6 \alpha_j \mu_j +3 \alpha_j \nu_j +3\beta_j \mu_j +2\beta_j \nu_j\Bigr).\label{centralholfinal}
\end{equation}
We shall come back to these expressions in section \ref{ejempl} when we discuss the matching between the holographic quantities studied in this section and the field theory observables discussed below.
\section{The ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ SCFTs }\label{CFTsect}
As we advanced in the Introduction,
the idea of this work is to propose a duality between the new background solutions in massive IIA found in \cite{Lozano:2019emq} (summarised in section \ref{geometria}) and
a set of CFTs. These CFTs are thought to be arising as low energy fixed points in the RG flows of well defined ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ two dimensional quantum field theories.
\\
In this
section we discuss the weakly coupled UV description of such quantum field theories. \subsection{The UV description}\label{sectionuv}
Let us start with a brief discussion of the fields involved in the weakly coupled description.
It is usual to describe ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ SUSY in terms of ${\cal N}=(0,2)$
superfields. In this paper we will not use the detailed structure of each $(0,2)$ multiplet. We shall content ourselves with listing the degrees of freedom together with the
R-charges for the fermions involved. As we explain below, these are the details we need to discuss cancellation of gauge anomalies, the R-charge anomaly and the central charge of the IR CFT.
\\
The superfields of ${\cal N}=(0,2)$ two-dimensional SUSY are well described in various references. We found particularly clear and enlightening the papers
\cite{Witten:1993yc}-\cite{Franco:2015tna}.
They contain some of the results we summarise in this section.
As we advanced, instead of going into the details of the $(0,2)$ supermultiplets we describe the degrees of freedom involved in each of them:
\begin{itemize}
\item{\underline{Vector multiplet, $U$}: It contains a gauge field $A_\mu$ and one left moving fermion $\lambda_-$.}
\item{\underline{Chiral multiplet, $\Phi$ }: It consists of a complex scalar $\varphi$ and a right moving fermion $\psi_+$. By the context, we hope the reader will be able to distinguish between the chiral multiplet and the dilaton in massive IIA, that we denote with the same character $\Phi$.}
\item{\underline{Fermi multiplet, $\Theta$}: This is a constrained superfield for which only a left handed fermion $\psi_-$ propagates. The constraint defining the Fermi superfield generates interactions between the Fermi and the chiral multiplets. The field strength multiplet is an example of a Fermi multiplet. It being constrained agrees with the fact that in two dimensions, a gauge field has no propagating degrees of freedom.}
\end{itemize}
We are interested in theories for which the amount of SUSY is ${\cal N}=(0,4)$. In this case the quantum field theories are formulated in terms
of combinations of $(0,2)$ superfields. For $(0,4)$ SUSY we have:
\begin{itemize}
\item{\underline{$(0,4)$ vector multiplet}: It is expressed as a combination of a $(0,2)$ vector multiplet and a $(0,2)$ Fermi multiplet. There are
two left handed fermions $\lambda_-^{a}$ with $a=1,2$ and a gauge field $A_\mu$. }
\item{\underline{$(0,4)$ hypermultiplet}: Defined as the combination of two chiral multiplets. The degrees of freedom are two complex scalars and two right handed fermions $\psi_+^{a}$.}
\item{\underline{$(0,4)$ twisted hypermultiplet}: Also written as a superposition of two chiral multiplets. The degrees of freedom are two right handed fermions $\tilde{\psi}_+^{a}$ and two complex scalars. The difference with the (non-twisted) hypermultiplet discussed above is in the R-charge assignment. This is reflected in the interactions with other multiplets.}
\item{\underline{$(0,4)$ Fermi multiplet}: It is the superposition of two $(0,2)$ Fermi multiplets. As such, it contains two left handed fermionic degrees of freedom, $\psi_-^{a}$.}
\item{\underline{$(0,2)$ Fermi multiplet}: As explained in \cite{Witten:1994tz}, it is compatible with $(0,4)$ SUSY to have the single left handed fermion of the $ (0,2)$ Fermi multiplet. }
\end{itemize}
The couplings between these multiplets and the constraints on some of them determine the interactions. These can be derived from a superpotential.
See \cite{Witten:1993yc}- \cite{Tong:2014yna} for the details.
\\
In a similar vein one can write the ${\cal N}=(4,4)$ SUSY field content in terms of ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ fields. Notice that in both $(0,4)$ hypers, we have right handed fermions and in the $(0,4)$ vector multiplet left handed ones . In fact, a $(4,4)$ vector multiplet contains a $(0,4)$ vector multiplet and a $(0,4)$ twisted-hypermultiplet (this is: a vector, a Fermi and two chirals of (0,2) SUSY). A ${\cal N}=(4,4)$ hypermultiplet contains a $(0,4)$ hypermultiplet and a $(0,4) $ Fermi multiplet, hence containing two Fermi and two chiral multiplets of $(0,2)$ SUSY.
The R-symmetry of ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ field theories is SU(2)$_L\times$SU(2)$_R$. We single out a U(1$)_R$ inside SU(2)$_R$ and quote the U(1)$_R$ charge of each fermion in the above multiplets. This will be used below to calculate the anomaly of the global R-symmetry. See equation (3.13) in the paper \cite{Putrov:2015jpa} for the same charge assignment.\\
For the $(0,4)$ vector multiplet we have that the left handed fermion inside the vector has $R[\lambda_-^v]=0$ while the left handed fermion inside the Fermi multiplet has $R[\lambda_-^f]=1$. Similarly, for the $(0,4)$ twisted hypermultiplet we have that for both right handed fermions $R[\tilde{\psi}_+^a]=0$. For both right handed fermions inside the $(0,4)$ hypermultiplet we have $R[{\psi}_+^{a}]=-1$. Finally, the fermion inside the $(0,2)$ Fermi multiplet (allowed in theories with $(0,4)$ SUSY) is such that $R[\lambda_-^f]=0$.
\\
Now, we explore the condition for cancellation of gauge anomalies.
\subsection{Anomaly cancellation}
We are dealing with chiral theories. Their consistency requires one to be careful with the field content, so that gauge anomalies are vanishing.
In this work we only need to use that the anomaly of a (gauged or global) non-Abelian symmetry is given by the correlator of the symmetry currents, $<J_\mu^A(x) J_\nu^B(x)>\sim k \delta^{A,B} \delta_{\mu\nu}$. Notice that there is no mixing between non-Abelian currents. On the other hand, Abelian currents can mix. The coefficient $k$ is calculated by computing $\mbox{Tr} [\gamma_3 J_{\text{SU}(N)} J_{\text{SU}(N)} ]$. This should be read as the difference between the right handed fermions times their charge squared and the left handed fermions times their charge squared. Let us study in detail the contribution to the SU($N$) anomaly coming from the various ${\cal N}=(0,2)$ multiplets mentioned above:
\begin{itemize}
\item{Chiral multiplets: If they are in the adjoint representation of the symmetry group SU($N$), they contribute with a factor $N$. If they transform in the (anti) fundamental, they contribute with a factor $\frac{1}{2}$.}
\item{Fermi multiplets: If they are in the adjoint representation of the symmetry group SU($N$), they contribute with a factor $-N$. If they transform in the (anti) fundamental, they contribute with a factor $-\frac{1}{2}$.}
\item{Vector multiplets: They are in the adjoint representation of the symmetry group SU($N$). They contribute with a factor $-N$. }
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Building block of our theories}
Let us discuss now what will be the 'building block' of our quantum field theories. See figure \ref{explanation}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=5cm]{explanation.pdf} }}%
\caption{The building block of our theories. The solid black line represents a $(4,4)$ hypermultiplet. The grey line represents a $(0,4)$ hypermultiplet. The dashed line represents a $(0,2)$ Fermi multiplet. Inside the gauge group SU($N$) run $(4,4)$ SUSY vector multiplets. The groups SU($\hat{P}$), SU($Q$) and SU($R$) can be gauge or global.}
\label{explanation}
\end{figure}
We have an SU($N$) gauge group. In the gauge group the matter content is that of a $(4,4)$ vector multiplet, namely---in $(0,2)$ notation, a vector, two twisted chirals and a Fermi multiplet in the adjoint representation of SU($N$). This gauge group is joined with other (gauged of global) symmetry groups SU($\hat{P}$), SU($R$) and SU($Q$). The connection with the SU($\hat{P}$) symmetry group is mediated by $(4,4)$ hypers. In $(0,2)$ notation, $2\times N\times \hat{P}$ Fermi multiplets and $2\times N\times \hat{P}$ chiral multiplets run over the black solid line. The connection with the SU($R$) symmetry group is via $(0,4)$ hypermultiplets. In $(0,2)$ notation
$2\times N\times R$ chiral multiplets propagate over the grey lines. Finally, over the dashed line run $N \times Q$ Fermi multiplets in $(0,2)$ notation. Notice that a similar (but not the same!) field content to this was proposed in \cite{Gadde:2015tra}, in the study of the field theories associated with tensionless strings in ${\cal N}=(0,1)$ six-dimensional SCFTs.
\\
Let us now calculate the anomaly of the gauged SU($N$) symmetry group and impose that it vanish. We focus only on the gauged SU($N$) group, but a similar job should be done for all other gauged symmetry groups. Let us spell the various contributions:
\begin{itemize}
\item{The contribution of the adjoint fields is $2N-N-N=0$. This is expected, as the field content is that of a $(4,4)$ vector multiplet.}
\item{The contribution of the bifundamentals connecting with $\text{SU}(\hat{P})$ is $(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2})2 \hat{P} N=0$. Again, this vanishing contribution is expected as we are dealing with $(4,4)$ hypers.}
\item{The link with the symmetry $\text{SU}(R)$ contributes a factor $2\times N\times R\times \frac{1}{2}= N R$.}
\item{Finally the bifundamentals running on the link with the $\text{SU}(Q)$ symmetry group contribute $-\frac{1}{2} N Q$.}
\end{itemize}
Thus, in order to have a non anomalous gauged symmetry we need to impose that the four contributions above add to zero, that is
\begin{equation}
2R=Q \, .\label{noanomaly}
\end{equation}
This mechanism should apply to all other gauged symmetry groups. When we construct our gauge theories, they will be represented by quivers obtained by 'assembling' the building blocks of figure \ref{explanation}.
\subsection{U(1) R-symmetry anomaly}
It is instructive to compute the R-symmetry anomaly for our 'building block'. Once again, we focus the attention on the $\text{SU}(N)$ gauge group. We use the values for the U(1)$_R$ charges quoted near the end of section \ref{sectionuv}. We find that the U(1)$_R$ anomaly, following from $\mbox{Tr}[\gamma_3 Q_i^2]$ is given by the sum of various contributions. In detail, we have,
\begin{itemize}
\item{For the fields in the adjoint of the $\text{SU}(N)$ gauge group, the only contribution is from the fermions inside the Fermi multiplet (all the other fermions have zero $U(1)_R$ charge). The contribution of these particular left handed fermions is $- (N^2-1)$. This coincides with (minus) the number of $(0,4)$ vector multiples in $\text{SU}(N)$. }
\item{The contribution from the bifundamentals joining $\text{SU}(N)$ with $\text{SU}(\hat{P})$ is $N\times \hat{P}$. This is the number of $(0,4)$ hypermultiplets in that link.}
\item{The contribution coming from the fields running over the grey line, joining $\text{SU}(N)$ with $\text{SU}(R)$, is $N\times R$, once again, counting the number of $(0,4)$ hypers running on the link.}
\item{Finally, the fields running over the dashed line do not contribute as the R-charge of the left handed fermion is zero, as we discussed above.}
\end{itemize}
In summary, we find that
\begin{equation}
\mbox{Tr}[\gamma_3 Q_i^2]\sim (n_{hyp}- n_{vec}).\label{r-anomaly}
\end{equation}
Thus, the R-symmetry anomaly is proportional to the number of $(0,4)$ hypers minus the number of $(0,4)$ vectors.
\subsection{Central charge, R-anomaly and the superconformal algebra}
Up to this point, we have found the condition for our building block to be non-anomalous, see \eqref{noanomaly}, and the contribution of the matter charged under $\text{SU}(N) $ to the U(1)$_R$ anomaly, see \eqref{r-anomaly}. If the theory becomes conformal and strongly coupled -- as we shall propose our quivers do when flowing to low energies -- the coefficients for the anomalies cannot be computed by summing over fermions at the conformal point (as we do not have a particle-like description of the CFT). But since these coefficients are 't Hooft anomalies, they are invariants under RG-flow. Hence UV-QFT calculations are good for the same IR-CFT quantity (we are assuming that the proposed R-symmetry does not mix in the IR with other Abelian symmetries). We propose that our quivers become conformal in the IR and then the central charge of the quiver and the R-symmetry anomaly get related by the superconformal algebra.
In our case the relevant superconformal algebra is the small ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ algebra. This consists of eight operators: the energy momentum tensor $T(z)$, four fermionic superpartners $G^a(z)$ and three Kac-Moody currents $J^{i} (z)$. The dimensions of these operators are $(2, \frac{3}{2},1)$ respectively. The modes of these operators satisfy an algebra that can be derived from the OPE's of the small ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ algebra. In particular among the various relations we have,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & T(z)T(0)\sim \frac{c}{z^4}+ 2\frac{T(0)}{z^2} +\frac{\partial T}{z}+\text{regular},\;\;\; J^i(z)J^l(0)\sim \frac{k^{il}}{z^2}+\text{regular}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
A relation between $c$ and $k^{il}=k \delta^{il}$ appears by virtue of the algebra of (anti) commutators. The relation is that $c= 6\times k$. In other words, for our building block
\begin{equation}
c= 6 (n_{hyp}- n_{vec}).\label{important}
\end{equation}
This relation---also derived in \cite{Putrov:2015jpa}, is of importance to us. Let us briefly discuss it, as well as the proposed duality and its implications.
\subsection{The proposed duality}
In what follows we shall define ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ SUSY quiver field theories. These quivers will consist of colour and flavour groups joined by hypermultiplets or ${\cal N}=(0,2)$ Fermi multiplets as indicated in our building block. We must be careful to have all anomalies of gauged groups vanishing. We will also calculate the R-symmetry anomaly and the 'central charge' via the relation in \eqref{important}\footnote{Strictly speaking, we should not call this quantity central charge as (in the UV) we are not at a fixed point of the RG flow. The relation in \eqref{important} is only valid at the fixed point. }. The calculation will be performed in the weakly coupled description of the field theory, in the UV before the conformal point is attained. But as we mentioned, these are 't Hooft coefficients, hence invariants of the RG flow. Importantly, we assume that there is no mixing between the R-symmetry and other global symmetries. If such mixing were to exist, an extremisation procedure like the one devised in \cite{Benini:2012cz},\cite{Benini:2013cda} would be needed. It would be nice to prove that for our quivers there is no mixing between the R-symmetry and other global symmetries. As a plausible argument for the non-mixing, notice that the non-Abelian R-symmetry $SU(2)$ cannot mix with $U(1)$ global symmetries in two dimensions. There is no other non-Abelian global R-symmetry to mix with. Let us then focus on the end of the RG flow to low energies.
\\
As advanced, we propose that our quivers flow to a strongly coupled CFT with ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ SUSY and central charge given by \eqref{important}, as enforced by the superconformal algebra. The second part of our proposal is that the holographic backgrounds are dual to these CFTs. The holographic central charge calculated in \eqref{centralhol} should coincide with the result of \eqref{important}, in the case of long quivers with large ranks (as this is the regime in which we can trust the supergravity solutions).
\\
Another check of our proposal will be the matching of global symmetries on both sides of the duality. In fact the SCFTs have $SO(2,2)$ space-time and SU(2) R-symmetries. The backgrounds in \eqref{eq:background} match these with the isometries of AdS$_3$ and S$^2$ respectively. Also eight supercharges are preserved both by the CFT and the background. Indeed, there are four space-time (Q's) and four conformal (S's) supercharges. More interestingly, the flavour symmetries of the SCFT are matched by the presence of 'flavour branes' in the background (giving place to Bianchi identities modified by the presence of sources). The counting of Page charges also coincides with the ranks of the colour and flavour groups, or, analogously, with the numbers of (D2,D6) colour branes and (D4,D8) flavour branes in the associated Hanany-Witten brane set-ups.
\\
Let us be more concrete. A generic background of the form in \eqref{eq:background} is defined by the functions $\hat{h}_4,h_8, u$. In the type of solutions we consider in this paper (those where the space ends at $\rho_*=2\pi(P+1)$, where we have $\hat{h}_4(\rho_*)=h_8(\rho_*)=0$), we generically have---see \eqref{profileh4final}-\eqref{profileh8final} and \eqref{bati},
\begin{equation} \label{profileh4sp}
\hat{h}_4(\rho)\!=\!\Upsilon\! h_4(\rho)\!=\!\!
\Upsilon\!\!\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\beta_0 }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi \\
\beta_0+\frac{\beta_1}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi) &2\pi \leq \rho \leq 4\pi \\
(\beta_0+\beta_1 )+\frac{\beta_2}{2\pi} (\rho-4\pi) & 4\pi\leq\rho\leq 6\pi\\
(\beta_0+\!\beta_1\!+\!....+\!\beta_{k-1})\! +\! \frac{\beta_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k) &~~ 2\pi k\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(k+1),\;\;\;\; k:=3,....,P-1\\
\alpha_P- \frac{\alpha_P}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{profileh8sp}
h_8(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\nu_0 }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi \\
\nu_0+\frac{\nu_1}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi) &2\pi \leq \rho \leq 4\pi \\
(\nu_0+\nu_1 )+\frac{\nu_2}{2\pi} (\rho-4\pi) & 4\pi\leq\rho\leq 6\pi\\
(\nu_0+\nu_1+....+\nu_{k-1}) + \frac{\nu_k}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi k) &~~ 2\pi k\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(k+1),\;\;\;\; k:=3,....,P-1\\
\mu_P- \frac{\mu_P}{2\pi}(\rho-2\pi P) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
and \begin{equation}
u=\frac{b_0}{2\pi}\rho.\nonumber
\end{equation}
The background in \eqref{eq:background} for the functions $\hat{h}_4,h_8, u$ above is dual to the CFT describing the low energy dynamics of a two dimensional quantum field theory encoded by the quiver in figure \ref{figurageneral} and the Hanany-Witten set-up of figure \ref{vvvbb}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=10cm]{II.pdf} }}%
\caption{ A generic quiver field theory whose IR is dual to the holographic background defined by the functions in \eqref{profileh4sp}-\eqref{profileh8sp}. As before, the solid black line represents a $(4,4)$ hypermultiplet. The grey line represents a $(0,4)$ hypermultiplet and the dashed line represents a $(0,2)$ Fermi multiplet. ${\cal N}=(4,4)$ vector multiplets are the degrees of freedom in each gauged node.}
\label{figurageneral}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=11cm]{BraneSetupPart2-I.pdf} }}%
\caption{Hanany-Witten set-up associated with our generic quiver in figure \ref{figurageneral}. The vertical lines denote NS five branes, horizontal lines D2 and D6 colour branes. The crosses, D4 and D8 flavour branes. }
\label{vvvbb}
\end{figure}
Let us see how the correspondence works. For the first two gauge groups $\text{SU}(\nu_0)$ and $\text{SU}(\beta_0)$, the cancellation of gauge anomalies in \eqref{noanomaly} implies that,
\begin{equation}
F_0+\nu_0+\nu_1=2\nu_0\to F_0=\nu_0-\nu_1,\;\;\; \tilde{F}_0+\beta_0+\beta_1=2\beta_0\to \tilde{F}_0=\beta_0-\beta_1.
\end{equation}
This is precisely the number of flavour D8 and D4 branes predicted by the Bianchi identities in the interval $[0,2\pi]$---see
\eqref{numberofbranes} for $k=1$. Similarly, the ranks of the first two gauge groups, namely $\beta_0$ and $\nu_0$, are precisely the numbers of D2 and D6 colour branes predicted by eq.\eqref{numberofcolour} in the first interval (for $k=1$).
\\
This works similarly for all other entries in the quiver. For example, for the $\text{SU}(\alpha_k)$ colour group, we obtain that in the interval $[2\pi(k-1), 2\pi k]$ of the associated Hanany-Witten set up in figure \ref{vvvbb}, there are $\alpha_k$ D2 branes, with
\begin{equation}
\alpha_k= \sum_{j=0}^{k-1} \beta_j.\nonumber
\end{equation}
The cancellation of gauge anomalies for the $\text{SU}(\alpha_k)$ gauge group imposes that,
\begin{equation}
F_{k-1}+\mu_{k+1}+\mu_{k-1}=2\mu_k\to F_{k-1}=\nu_{k-1}-\nu_k,
\end{equation}
which, according to \eqref{numberofbranes}, is precisely the number of flavour D8 branes in the $[2\pi(k-1), 2\pi k]$ interval of the brane set-up. Things work analogously if we replace D2 for D6 (or $ \alpha_k\to\mu_k$) and D8 for D4 ($\nu_k\to \beta_k$) and deal with the lower-row gauge group $\text{SU}(\mu_k)$.
\\
We can calculate the field theory central charge by counting the number of $(0,4)$ hypermultiplets, the number of $(0,4)$ vector multiplets and using \eqref{important}. We find,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & n_{vec}= \sum_{j=1}^P \Bigl(\alpha_j^2+\mu_j^2-2\Bigr),\;\;\;\; n_{hyp}= \sum_{j=1}^P \alpha_j\mu_j +\sum_{j=1}^{P-1} \Bigl(\alpha_j \alpha_{j+1}+\mu_j\mu_{j+1}\Bigr),\nonumber\\
& & c= 6\times \left( \sum_{j=1}^P \Bigl(\alpha_j\mu_j -\alpha_j^2-\mu_j^2+2\Bigr) +\sum_{j=1}^{P-1} \Bigl(\alpha_j \alpha_{j+1}+\mu_j\mu_{j+1}\Bigr) \right).\label{batigol}
\end{eqnarray}
When the number of nodes is large $P>>1$, and the ranks of each gauge group $\alpha_i,\mu_i$ are large numbers, the supergravity backgrounds are trustable and the holographic central charge calculated according to \eqref{centralhol} should coincide at leading order in these large parameters with \eqref{batigol}.
\\
For pedagogical purposes, in the next section we present some explicit examples (in increasing level of complexity) of quiver-supergravity dual pairs. We shall check the cancellation of gauge anomalies and the leading order matching of \eqref{centralhol} and \eqref{batigol}.
\section{Various checks of our proposed duality}\label{ejempl}
In this section we discuss various examples of
dual holographic pairs. We check anomaly cancellation and the leading order matching of the CFT and holographic central charges. We start from
the simplest possible example of a quiver field theory flowing to a superconformal ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ SCFT that admits a viable supergravity dual, and move on to examples of increasing complexity. These will provide stringent checks of our proposal\footnote{In the examples that follow we write the function $h_4(\rho)$. As discussed above, the function that appears in the background is $\hat{h}_4=\Upsilon h_4$. The value $\Upsilon \text{Vol(CY}_2)=16\pi^4$ is used to have well quantised charges in terms of the integer numbers ($\alpha_k,\beta_k,\mu_k,\nu_k$).}.
\subsection{Example I}\label{ejemplos1}
Consider the quiver of figure \ref{example1}, where we depict $P$ gauge groups $\text{SU}(\nu)$ and $P$ gauge groups $\text{SU}(\beta)$. They are joined by bifundamentals, all complemented by flavour groups (rectangular boxes). This quiver encodes the kinematical content of our first field theory. We propose that this QFT flows in the IR to a CFT.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=11cm]{ExampleICarlos.pdf} }}%
\caption{ The quiver encoding our first example of quantum field theory. The conventions for the fields running along the different lines are the same as those in section \ref{CFTsect}.}
\label{example1}
\end{figure}
Let us focus on the first gauge group of the top row, $\text{SU}(\nu)$. We compare with our building block in figure \ref{explanation} to find that,
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{P}=\nu,\;\;\; Q=2\beta,\;\;\; R=\beta.
\end{eqnarray}
This is precisely what our formula (\ref{noanomaly}) requires for the cancellation of the $\text{SU}(\nu)$ gauge anomaly.
For the first $\text{SU}(\beta)$ gauge group in the lower row, we have $\hat{P}=\beta, Q=2\nu, R=\nu$ and \eqref{noanomaly} is also satisfied.
\\
Similarly, one can calculate for the top and bottom gauge groups at the right end of the figure and check that all of them satisfy \eqref{noanomaly}. Finally, for any intermediate $\text{SU}(\nu)$-node, we have $\hat{P}=\nu$, $Q=2\beta$, $R=\beta$. Analogous statements hold true for the lower row groups. Hence all of the gauge symmetries are non-anomalous.
\\
We can now calculate the number of $(0,4)$ hypermultiplets and vector multiplets with a view on computing the central charge of the IR CFT. We find,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & n_{vec}=P(\nu^2+\beta^2-2),\;\;\;\; n_{hyp}= (P-1)(\nu^2+\beta^2) + P\nu\beta.\nonumber\\
& & c=6(n_{hyp}-n_{vec})= 6\nu\beta P(1 +\frac{2}{\beta\nu} -\frac{\beta}{\nu P}-\frac{\nu}{\beta P})\sim 6\nu\beta P.\label{centralQFTI}
\end{eqnarray}
In the last approximation we used that the ranks are large numbers $(\nu,\beta)\to \infty$ and that the quiver is long enough, hence $P>>1$, to meaningfully compare with the dual massive IIA solution.
\\
The holographic background dual to this CFT is given in terms of the functions $u=\frac{b_0}{2\pi}\rho$ and
\begin{equation} \label{profileh8exampleII}
h_8(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\nu }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2 \pi \\
\nu &2\pi \leq \rho \leq 2\pi P \\
\frac{\nu }{2\pi}(2\pi( P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{profileh4exampleII}
h_4(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\beta }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2 \pi \\
\beta &2\pi \leq \rho \leq 2\pi P\\
\frac{\beta }{2\pi}(2\pi( P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
The holographic central charge is found by the simple calculation in \eqref{centralhol},
\begin{eqnarray}
& & c_{hol}= \frac{3}{\pi} \left(\int_0^{2\pi} \frac{\beta\nu}{4\pi^2}\rho^2 d\rho +\int_{2\pi}^{2\pi P}\beta\nu d\rho +\int_{2\pi P}^{2\pi (P+1)} \frac{\beta\nu}{4\pi^2} (2\pi( P+1) -\rho)^2d\rho \right)\nonumber\\
& & c_{hol}=6\beta \nu P (1-\frac{1}{3P})\sim 6 P \beta\nu.
\end{eqnarray}
This coincides with the field theoretical result in \eqref{centralQFTI}.
Finally, notice that the number of D4 and D8 flavour branes, dictated by \eqref{numberofbranes}, precisely provide the flavour symmetries at the beginning and end of the quiver. One finds the same by inspecting \eqref{numberofcolour} for the number of colour branes, coinciding with the ranks of the gauge groups of our quiver.
\subsection{Example II}\label{ejemplos2}
Let us slightly complicate our previous example. We consider now a quiver with two rows of linearly increasing colour groups. These two rows are finished after $P$ nodes by the addition of a flavour group for each row. See figure \ref{segundo}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=10cm]{ExampleIICarlos.pdf} }}%
\caption{ The quiver encoding our second example. There are $P$ gauged nodes with increasing rank in each row. The conventions for the fields running along the different lines are the same as those in section \ref{CFTsect}.}
\label{segundo}
\end{figure}
This type of quivers can be used as a completion of the background obtained via the application of non-Abelian T-duality on AdS$_3\times $S$^3\times$CY$_2$, inspired by the treatments in \cite{Lozano:2016kum}-\cite{Lozano:2018pcp}. See \cite{LMNR3} for a careful discussion of this.
The anomalies of each of the gauge groups can be easily seen to vanish. In fact, for any of the intermediate gauge nodes, say SU($k \nu$) and referring to our building block in figure \ref{explanation}, we have $ Q= 2 k\beta , R=k\beta$. This implies that \eqref{noanomaly} is satisfied and a generic intermediate gauge group is not anomalous. If we refer to the last gauge group in the upper-row SU($P\nu$) we have that $Q=(P+1)\beta+(P-1)\beta=2P\beta$ and $R=P\beta$. As a consequence \eqref{noanomaly} is satisfied and the gauged group SU($P\nu$) is not anomalous. The same occurs for the lower-row gauge groups.
\\
We can easily count the number of $(0,4)$ hypers and the number of $(0,4)$ vector multiplets,
\begin{eqnarray}
n_{vec}=\sum_{j=1}^P \Bigl(j^2(\nu^2+\beta^2)-2\Bigr),\;\;\;
n_{hyp}=\sum_{j=1}^{P-1} j(j+1)(\nu^2+\beta^2)+ \sum_{j=1}^{P} j^2\nu\beta.
\end{eqnarray}
The central charge of the IR CFT is,
\begin{eqnarray}
c&=&6(n_{hyp}-n_{vec})\nonumber\\
&=&6\nu\beta (\frac{P^3}{3} +\frac{P^2}{2} +\frac{P}{6}) - 3(\nu^2+\beta^2)(P^2+P)+12 P\sim 2\nu\beta P^3.\label{centralchargeexampleII}
\end{eqnarray}
The holographic description of this system is in terms of the functions,
\begin{equation} \label{profileh8exampleII}
h_8(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\nu }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi P \\
\frac{\nu P}{2\pi}(2\pi( P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{profileh4exampleII}
h_4(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\beta }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi P\\
\frac{\beta P}{2\pi}(2\pi (P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{centralhol}, we calculate the holographic central charge,
\begin{equation}
c_{hol}=\frac{3}{\pi} \left(\frac{\beta\nu}{4\pi^2}\right) \left(\int_0^{2\pi P}\rho^2 d\rho+ \int_{2\pi P}^{2\pi(P+1)}P^2 (2\pi (P+1) -\rho)^2 d\rho \right)=2\nu\beta P^3(1+\frac{1}{P})\sim 2 \nu\beta P^3.\label{ccholii}
\end{equation}
Again, we observe that in the limit of a long quiver, there is matching for the central charge in the CFT --see \eqref{centralchargeexampleII}, with that of the dual description--see \eqref{ccholii}.
\\
Let us now discuss a more involved example, providing us with a much stringent check of our proposed duality.
\subsection{Example III}
In this case we consider the more involved field theory encoded by the quiver in figure \ref{tercera}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=14cm]{ExampleIVCarlos.pdf} }}%
\caption{ The quiver encoding our third example. There are $K$ gauged nodes with linearly increasing ranks in each row. These are followed by $q- \text{SU}(K\nu)$ (top row) and $q-\text{SU}(K\beta)$ nodes (lower row). The ranks of the next $\text{SU}(G_i)$ and $\text{SU}(\tilde{G}_i$) nodes is given in the text. The conventions for the fields running along the different lines are the same as those in section \ref{CFTsect}.}
\label{tercera}
\end{figure}
In this quiver we have a line of linearly increasing nodes $\text{SU}(\nu)\times \text{SU}(2\nu)\times ....\times \text{SU}(K\nu)$ followed by $q\times \text{SU}(K\nu)$ nodes. The gauge groups $\text{SU}(G_l)$ have ranks
\begin{equation}
G_l=K\nu(1-\frac{l}{P+1-K-q}),\;\;\;\;\; l=1,...., P-K-q. \label{gls}
\end{equation}
For the lower row we have analogous kinematics: Linearly increasing ranks $\text{SU}(\beta)\times \text{SU}(2\beta)\times ....\times \text{SU}(K\beta)$, followed by $q\times \text{SU}(K\beta)$ nodes. The gauge groups $\text{SU}(\tilde{G}_l)$ have ranks,
\begin{equation}
\tilde{G}_l=K\beta(1-\frac{l}{P+1-K-q}),\;\;\;\;\; l=1,...., P-K-q.\label{tgls}
\end{equation}
Let us analyse anomalies for the upper row groups (the lower row ones work analogously). The linearly increasing chain is non-anomalous like our previous example in section \ref{ejemplos2} was. Namely, for a generic $\text{SU}(j \nu)$ node, we have $Q=2 j \beta$ and $R=j\beta$. \\
The chain of $q$ $\text{SU}(K\nu)$ groups works exactly as any intermediate group in section \ref{ejemplos1}, namely for any generic (intermediate) node we have $Q=2 K\beta$ and $R=K\beta$, satisfying \eqref{noanomaly}. \\
More interesting are the first and last of these $q$-nodes. For the first node we have $Q= F_1+(K-1)\beta +K \beta$ and $R= K\beta$. Observe that \eqref{noanomaly} forces
\begin{equation}
F_1= \beta.\nonumber
\end{equation}
For the last of these $q$-nodes we have $Q=K\beta + \tilde{G}_1 + F_2$ and $R=K\beta$. Then the vanishing of the gauge anomaly forces
\begin{equation}
F_2= \frac{K\beta}{P+1-K-q}.\nonumber
\end{equation}
For any generic group $\text{SU}(G_i)$ we have $Q= \tilde{G}_{i-1} +\tilde{G}_{i+1}$ and $R=\tilde{G}_i$. Using \eqref{tgls} we find that $Q=2R$ as imposed in \eqref{noanomaly} for the vanishing of the gauge anomalies.
\\
Analogously, for the lower row groups, we find that the vanishing of the gauge anomalies imposes
\begin{equation}
\tilde{F}_1=\nu,\;\;\;\;\; \tilde{F}_2=\frac{K\nu}{P+1-K-q}.\label{baba}
\end{equation}
To calculate the CFT central charge we need to compute the number of $(0,4)$ hypers and vectors. We find
\begin{eqnarray}
n_{vec}&=&\sum_{j=1}^K\left(j^2(\nu^2+\beta^2)-2\right) + q(K^2 (\nu^2+\beta^2)-2)\nonumber\\
& &+\sum_{j=1}^{P-K-q} \left(K^2(\nu^2+\beta^2)(1-\frac{j}{P+1-K-q})^2-2 \right) ,\nonumber\\
n_{hyp}&=& \sum_{j=1}^{K-1} j(j+1)(\nu^2+\beta^2) +\sum_{j=1}^{K}j^2 \beta \nu + K^2 q(\nu^2+\beta^2+\beta\nu)\nonumber\\
& &+\sum_{j=0}^{P-K-q-1} K^2(\beta^2+\nu^2)(1-\frac{j}{P+1-K-q})(1-\frac{j+1}{P+1-K-q})\nonumber\\
& &+\sum_{j=1}^{P-K-q} K^2\beta \nu (1-\frac{j}{P+1-K-q})^2.
\end{eqnarray}
The field theory central charge is after a lengthy calculation,
\begin{eqnarray} \label{centralchargeexampleIV}
c&=&6(n_{hyp}-n_{vec})\nonumber\\
&\sim&\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
2\beta\nu K^2P + 12 P + O(1, 1/P),\;\; &\text{if} ~P>>1,\\
4\beta \nu K^2 q + O(1, 1/q),\;\;&\text{if} ~ q>>1,\\
2\beta\nu K^2(1+2q+P)+ O(1, 1/K),\;\; &\text{if} ~K>>1.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{eqnarray}
We have expanded the exact result for the three possible ways in which the quiver may be considered to be 'long'. We also need to take $(\nu,\beta)$ to be large numbers. \\
Now, let us compare with the holographic description. The functions $h_4$ and $h_8$ for this case read,
\begin{equation} \label{profileh8exampleIV}
h_8(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\nu }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi K \\
\nu K &2\pi K \leq \rho \leq 2\pi (K+q)\\
\frac{\nu K}{2\pi (P+1-K-q)}(2\pi (P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi (K+q)\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{profileh4exampleIV}
h_4(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\beta }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi k\\
\beta K &2\pi K \leq \rho \leq 2\pi (K+q) \\
\frac{\beta K}{2\pi (P+1-K-q)}(2\pi (P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi (K+q)\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
The holographic central charge is given by \eqref{centralhol}, that after some algebra yields
\begin{equation}
c_{hol}= 2\beta\nu K^2 (P+2q+1)=
\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
2\beta\nu K^2 P & \text{if} ~ P>>1 \\
4\nu \beta K^2 q & \text{if}~ q>>1\\
2\beta \nu K^2(P+2q+1)& \text{if} ~ K>>1.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
The comparison with \eqref{centralchargeexampleIV} shows that this is a very stringent check of our proposal.
\\
Finally, the reader can check, using \eqref{numberofbranes}, that the numbers of flavour D8 and D4 branes coincide with the numbers $F_1, F_2$ and $\tilde{F}_1, \tilde{F}_2$ quoted above -- see \eqref{baba}. The same happens with the gauge groups and the numbers of D2 and D6 branes in the associated brane set-up calculated using \eqref{numberofcolour}, and comparing with \eqref{gls}),\eqref{tgls}.\\
Let us now study a qualitatively different example. It will raise a puzzle with an instructive resolution.
\subsection{Example IV: a puzzle and its resolution}
Qualitatively, the QFTs discussed above share the fact that the lower row gauge groups 'mirror' the behaviour of the upper row ones. The groups both grow, stabilise and decrease at the same points. It is interesting to consider an example for which this is not the case. Let us consider the quiver in figure \ref{figuraxx}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
{{\includegraphics[width=14cm]{ExamplevvCarlos.pdf} }}%
\caption{ The quiver encoding our fourth example. The conventions for the fields running along the different lines are the same as those in section \ref{CFTsect}.}
\label{figuraxx}
\end{figure}
We can easily calculate the number of $(0,4)$ hypermultiplets, vector multiplets and the central charge,
\begin{eqnarray}
& & n_{vec}=P(\beta^2-1) +\sum_{j=1}^{P}\Bigl(j^2 \nu^2-1\Bigr),\;\;\; n_{hyp}= \sum_{j=1}^P j \beta\nu + \sum_{j=1}^{P-1}j(j+1)\nu^2 +\beta^2(P-1),\nonumber\\
& & c= 3 P^2 (\beta\nu -\nu^2) +(12 +3\beta \nu -3\nu^2) P- 6\beta^2.\label{feita}
\end{eqnarray}
We can anticipate troubles with the holographic description. Indeed, if we were to take $\nu>\beta$ and large $P$, we could get a negative central charge.
\\
Let us write the functions $h_4, h_8$ describing holographically the IR dynamics of this quiver (as usual $u=\frac{b_0}{2\pi}\rho$),
\begin{equation} \label{profileh8example5}
h_8(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\nu }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi P \\
\frac{\nu P}{2\pi }(2\pi (P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{profileh4example5}
h_4(\rho)
=\left\{ \begin{array}{ccrcl}
\frac{\beta }{2\pi}
\rho & 0\leq \rho\leq 2\pi \\
\beta &2 \pi \leq \rho \leq 2\pi P \\
\frac{\beta}{2\pi }(2\pi (P+1) -\rho) & 2\pi P\leq \rho \leq 2\pi(P+1).
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation}
The holographic central charge is calculated using \eqref{centralhol}. After some algebra this results in,
\begin{equation}
c_{hol}= 3 P^2 \beta\nu(1+\frac{2}{3P}-\frac{1}{3P^2})\sim 3 P^2 \beta\nu.\label{feita2}
\end{equation}
Comparing the expressions for the field theoretical and holographic central charges in \eqref{feita},\eqref{feita2}, we see a mismatch if we keep the leading order in $P,\nu,\beta$ . This raises a puzzle. The resolution to this puzzle is given by \eqref{lio}. The last interval of the functions $h_4, h_8$ in this example is written as
\begin{eqnarray}
& & h_4^{P,P+1}= \frac{\alpha_P}{2\pi}(2\pi(P+1)-\rho),\;\;\;\; \alpha_P=\beta,\nonumber\\
& & h_8^{P,P+1}= \frac{\mu_P}{2\pi}(2\pi(P+1)-\rho),\;\;\;\; \mu_P=P \nu .\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Using \eqref{lio}, this implies that the CY$_2$ space is of sub-stringy size, for large $P$. This invalidates the supergravity solution which does not include the dynamics of massless states due to strings or branes wrapping the CY$_2$--see the comment below \eqref{lio}.
The way out of this puzzle is to decouple these light states (by making them heavy and hence the supergravity solution valid). To do this, one must scale $\beta\sim \hat{\beta}\times P$. Then, both the field theoretical and the holographic central charges in \eqref{feita},\eqref{feita2} coincide to $c\sim 3\hat{\beta}\nu P^3$.
We close this section here. A more involved example is discussed in appendix \ref{ejemplodificil}.
\section{Conclusions}\label{conclusion}
This paper presents a new entry in the mapping between SCFTs and AdS-supergravity backgrounds, for the particular case of two-dimensional small ${\cal N}=(0,4)$ SCFTs and backgrounds with AdS$_3\times$S$^2$ factors. The most general solutions of this type that support an SU(2)-structure on the internal space were recently classified in \cite{Lozano:2019emq}. \\
We have constructed new solutions of the type AdS$_3\times$S$^2\times$CY$_2$, belonging to class I in the classification in \cite{Lozano:2019emq}, with compact CY$_2$, whose defining functions are piecewise continuous. We elaborated on their regime of validity and on various general aspects of their mapping with SCFTs.
In particular, we matched the background isometries and the global symmetries (both space-time and flavour) of the SCFTs. We computed Page charges and put them in correspondence with the putative colour and flavour branes in the Hanany-Witten set-ups associated to our SCFTs. The CFTs are defined as the IR limit of UV well-behaved long quivers with $(0,4)$ SUSY, that generalise 2-d (0,4) quivers previously discussed in the literature --see \cite{Gadde:2015tra,Hanany:2018hlz}.
Our $(0,4)$ quivers consist of two families of $(4,4)$ quivers coupled by $(0,4)$ and $(0,2)$ matter fields. The $(4,4)$ quivers are associated to D2-NS5-D4 and D6-NS5-D8 brane systems, the latter wrapped on the CY$_2$, which by themselves do not give rise to 2d CFTs in the IR. Our work shows that the coupling between the two families of quivers through matter fields that reduce the supersymmetry to $(0,4)$ renders a 2d CFT in the IR, which admits an AdS$_3$ dual.
After presenting our proposed duality we discussed a
number of examples of increasing complexity that together constitute a stringent test of our proposal. These examples exhibit perfect agreement between the holographic and field theoretical central charges (in the regime where both descriptions are valid), gauge-anomaly cancellation and matching between isometries and 'flavour' symmetries on both sides of the duality.
\\
It is clear that this paper just scratches the surface of a rich line of work. In the forthcoming paper \cite{LMNR3} we will apply the developments in this paper to (among other things) construct a symmetric solution that can be thought of as a completion of the background obtained via non-Abelian T-duality on AdS$_3\times$S$^3\times$CY$_2$.
Indeed, non-Abelian T-duality has been one of the inspirations of the exhaustive classification presented in \cite{Lozano:2019emq}, and further discussed in this work. This classification provides one more example that shows the huge impact of non-Abelian T-duality as a solution generating technique in supergravity
--see for example \cite{Lozano:2012au}-\cite{Lozano:2015cra}. One can speculate that an approach similar to the one in \cite{Lozano:2019emq} can be used to classify generic backgrounds in different dimensions and with different amounts of SUSY from particular solutions generated through this technique.
More related to the present paper a number of interesting problems can be tackled. For example, operators of spin two have been studied in correspondence with certain fluctuations of the background metric
\cite{Chen:2019ydk}, \cite{Passias:2016fkm}. It would be interesting to study the analog operators in our CFTs. Similarly, long operators like those in
\cite{Bergman:2018hin} should exist in our CFTs and their associated backgrounds. An obvious open problem is to discuss the CFTs dual to the solutions terminated by the two types of boundary conditions discussed in section \ref{geometria}, not tackled in this paper.
In the same vein, it would be interesting to explore the CFT duals of the solutions referred as class II in \cite{Lozano:2019emq}, where the CY$_2$ is replaced by a 4-d Kahler manifold.
\
It would be nice to explore other tests and (more interestingly) find predictions of our proposed duality. The richness of the 2-d SCFTs suggests that stringy tests and mappings along the lines of \cite{Eberhardt:2017pty}-\cite{Dei:2019osr}
should be possible. We hope to report on these projects soon.
\section*{Acknowledgements} We would like to thank Giuseppe Dibitetto, Gaston Giribet, S. Prem Kumar, Daniel Thompson, Alessandro Tomasiello and Stefan Vandoren for very useful discussions.
\\YL and AR are partially supported by the Spanish government grant PGC2018-096894-B-100 and by the Principado de Asturias through the grant FC-GRUPIN-IDI/2018/000174. NTM is funded by the Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research under the Prin project ``Non Perturbative Aspects of Gauge Theories and Strings'' (2015MP2CX4) and INFN. CN is Wolfson Fellow of the Royal Society. AR is supported by CONACyT-Mexico. We would like to acknowledge the Mainz Institute for Theoretical Physics (MITP) of the DFG Cluster of Excellence PRISMA$^{+}$ (Project ID 39083149) for its hospitality and partial support during the development of this work. YL and AR would also like to thank the Theory Unit at CERN for its hospitality and partial support during the completion of this work.
|
\section{Datasets}
\begin{table*}[t]
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c c | c c | c }
& Training & Dev & Test & Input & Output & Abstraction \\
& Examples & Examples & Examples & Length & Length & Rate\% \\
\hline
Gigaword & 4,194,451 & 10,000 & 1,951 & 37.4 & 9.8 & 53.8\% \\
CNN/DailyMail & 287,108 & 13,368 & 11,489 & 572.7 & 66.0 & 13.8\%
\end{tabular}
\caption{Statistics for the Gigaword and CNN/DailyMail datasets.
The fourth and fifth column show the input/output sequence length over the dev set (number of word-pieces).
The final column shows Abstraction Rate, the percentage of tokens in the reference summary not present in the input.
}
\label{table:datasets}
\end{table*}
\begin{table}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c | c c }
& Input & Output & Input & Output \\
& Limit & Limit & Trunc.\% & Trunc.\% \\
\hline
Gigaword & 128 & 64 & .07\% & 0\% \\
CNN/DailyMail & 640 & 96 & 64.95\% & 19.6\% \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{The left two columns show the sequence length limits we use (number of word-pieces).
The right two columns show the percentage of examples in the dev set that were truncated as a result of these limits (in the Gigaword case, the data are pre-truncated; the truncation rates given here are in addition to that).}
\label{table:truncation}
\end{table}
We use two News summarization datasets in our experiments: the Gigaword~\cite{rush2015neural} and the CNN/DailyMail~\cite{nallapati2016abstractive} datasets.
The Gigaword dataset contains examples of $\langle$document, headline$\rangle$ as input/output pairs, while the CNN/DailyMail dataset contains examples of $\langle$document, bullet-summary$\rangle$ as input/output pairs.
Gigaword represents a short-form summarization task, in which the output is confined to a single sentence (i.e., headline).
CNN/DailyMail, on the other hand, represents a long-form summarization task, in which the output is relatively long and contains multiple sentences (i.e., bullet-based summary sentences).
Given that these datasets share the same domain (i.e., News reported in English), it is reasonable to expect that general concepts learned on one dataset transfer to the other.
Nevertheless, there are also significant differences between them: CNN/DailyMail has far fewer training examples than Gigaword (about 20x fewer), and much longer inputs (15x longer on average) and outputs (7x longer on average), see Table~\ref{table:datasets}.
However, it is intuitively appealing to train a long-form summarization model (on CNN/DM) by first pretraining it on for short-form summarization (on Gigaword).
Moreover, one should not run before learning to walk; i.e., short-form summarization should not start from scratch, but from a model that is already equipped for natural language understanding.,
To that end, we start from a BERT model pretrained on the BooksCorpus~\cite{zhu2015aligning} and English Wikipedia, as described in~\cite{devlin2018bert}.
As we see in Sec.~\ref{sec:experiments}, we achieve significant improvements using this style of multi-stage pretraining.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\section{Discussion}
In this paper, we show that full-network parameter initializations for a Transformer-based model, obtained as a result of multi-stage pretraining that includes BERT initialization as a first step, allows us to train abstractive summarization models that improve upon randomly-initialized baselines.
These results are achieved using a simple maximum-likelihood loss (MLE) setup, do not heavily rely on inference-time heuristics, and complement recent modeling advances such as copy-attention.
In addition to having better performance, our two-stage--pretrained models reach their peak score (against a development set) in far fewer epochs, compared to zero- or one-stage pretrained models.
Given that MLE-based training is already superior in both speed and stablity to RL-based methods, these results encourage us to use this efficient and convenient recipe for training high-quality abstractive summarization systems.
\section{Introduction}
The field of abstractive summarization has exploded since the introduction of neural models for text generation, as such models have been successful at pushing the state-of-the-art ever higher~\cite{rush2015neural,luong2015multi,nallapati2016abstractive,see2017get,paulus2017deep,amplayo2018entity,gehrmann2018bottom}.
One of the main attractions for some of these neural models is that they are capable of generating summaries from scratch, based on abstract representations of the input document, and therefore promise to allow for the abstraction that is intuitively needed when compressing longer pieces of text into shorter ones.
However, there are two main trends that we have observed in multiple modeling approaches.
First, models that are successful at improving the state-of-the-art are usually ones that take a generic deep neural-network architecture as a base model and add various specialized, summarization-specific learning mechanisms and inference heuristics.
Among such mechanisms are the ability to copy from the input~\cite{gu2016incorporating,see2017get} (i.e., switch between extractive and abstractive styles of summarization) and the ability to model coverage~\cite{suzuki2016rnn,see2017get,gehrmann2018bottom} (mechanisms that specifically target the ability to learn what to cover and what to ignore from the input).
Inference-time heuristics include length penalties, coverage penalties, and n-gram--based repeat restrictions enforced by the decoder~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom}.
Recent works such as~\cite{holtzman2019curious,welleck2019neural} propose alternative training objectives which lead to better quality neural text generation systems by reducing repetitions and blandness.
Second, the push towards improved quantitative results, as measured by various ROUGE-based metrics~\cite{lin2004rouge}, tends to diminish the extent to which these models generate summaries that are truly abstractive.
Instead, the models learn to generate fluent outputs based on extracting/copying the right words and phrases from the input, in effect a small-granularity extractive process.
To quantify this better, we mention here that for the CNN-DailyMail dataset~\cite{hermann2015teaching}, the abstraction rate (percent of words in the summary that are not present in the input) is around 14\%, while a current state-of-the-art model produces outputs with an abstraction rate of 0.5\%~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom}.
We present in this paper an approach to abstractive summarization that diverges from the two trends mentioned above, by addressing the problem in a data-driven way.
Through pretraining, we improve the model's fundamental language capabilities, in a way that is complementary to the modeling advancements described above.
Pretraining has become a topic of great interest since the introduction of the BERT~\cite{devlin2018bert} model for language understanding and GPT-2~\cite{radford2019language} for neural text generation.
Works such as~\cite{edunov2019pre,zhang2019pretraining} show that pre-trained networks can be used to improve performance on summarization benchmarks.
In~\cite{rothe2019leveraging}, they demonstrate that pre-trained networks can be used to improve performance on a variety of tasks, beyond just summarization.
In this work, we explore different initialization schemes for a Transformer~\cite{vaswani2017attention} model and show how they affect performance on summarization tasks, after fine-tuning.
Compared to a randomly-initialized baseline, this improves upon the widely-used Gigaword~\cite{ldc-english-gigaword} benchmark by 1.05 ROUGE-L points.
Furthermore, we introduce multi-stage pretraining as a novel way to leverage multiple pretraining sources when solving a particularly hard problem, such as the non-anonymized CNN/DailyMail task~\cite{hermann2015teaching,nallapati2016abstractive}.
By taking the parameters of the state-of-the-art Gigaword model described above, and using them to initialize a model for the CNN/DailyMail task, we improve upon a randomly-initialized baseline by 1.78 ROUGE-L points.
The resulting model combines summarization-specific modeling advances with the benefits of multi-stage pretraining to achieve a model with a substantially higher abstraction rate than a comparable model without pretraining: in contrast with the 0.5\% rate of~\citet{gehrmann2018bottom}, our model outputs have an abstraction rate of around 4\%.
This difference indicates that there are substantive differences between the levels of abstractization achieved.
\section{Models and Initialization Schemes}
In this section, we describe key aspects of our summarization models and the initialization strategies we use.
\subsection{Base Model}
Our base model is a Transformer Network~\cite{vaswani2017attention} in a BERT configuration~\cite{devlin2018bert}.
We chose the BERT model configuration for studying multi-stage pretraining because
i) BERT models trained on unsupervised language tasks are readily available, and
ii) models based on BERT parameters have been shown to perform very well on a large number of language understanding tasks.
The Transformer model consists of two components, an Encoder and a Decoder.
The role of the Encoder is to map input tokens to embeddings to token-in-context representations, in this case using the self-attention mechanism.
The role of the Decoder is to predict a current output token given the previous outputs and the encoded input representations, using both self-attention and encoder-decoder attention mechanisms.
Purely abstractive approaches model predictions as a distribution across the token vocabulary at each timestep $t$:
\begin{align}
P(t) = P_{vocab}(t) &= softmax(\hat{y}_t) \label{eq:predict} \\
&= softmax(Vd_t + b_v) \nonumber
\end{align}
\noindent
where $V$ is a learnable embedding matrix.
Note that we use the same embedding matrix for also embedding the input tokens.
We use MLE as our training objective (negative log likelihood of the target token).
We extend Eq.\ref{eq:predict} to models with copy-attention below.
\begin{comment}
We use the negative log likelihood of the target token $w^{*}_t$ as our training objective:
\begin{align}
loss_t &= -log(P_{w^{*}_t}(t))
\end{align}
To compute the batch loss, we average across both batch and sequence dimensions (non-pad positions only):
\begin{align}
loss &= \frac{1}{T}\sum_{t=0}^{T}loss_t
\end{align}
\end{comment}
\subsection{Copy-attention}
Mechanisms for copying words from the input such as the pointer-generator network~\cite{see2017get} have helped push forward the state-of-the-art in abstractive summarization.
We explore an approach here similar to the CopyTransformer~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom}, where a single attention head in the encoder-decoder attention is used as the copy distribution.
Our approach diverges slightly from previous approaches by modeling copying and generation as a single event.
The pointer-generator network~\cite{see2017get}, for example, augments the purely abstractive predictions of Eq.\ref{eq:predict} with an extractive component using a learned weighted sum of generation and copy probabilities:
\begin{align*}
P(t) = p_{gen}(t)P_{vocab}(t) + (1-p_{gen}(t))a_tX
\end{align*}
\noindent
In this formulation, copy probabilities are computed by projecting the encoder-decoder attention probabilities $a_t$ into the vocabulary space using a one-hot encoding of the input ids, $X$.
Our approach is similar to the formulation above but uses a learned weighted sum of logits, normalizing afterwards:
\begin{align}
\hat{z}_t &= p_{gen}(t)\hat{y}_t + (1-p_{gen}(t))\hat{a}_tX
\label{eq:pgen}
\end{align}
\begin{align*}
P(t) &= softmax(\hat{z}_t)
\end{align*}
\noindent
This change preserves the model's ability to copy but does not use distinct probabilities for copying and generation.
Furthermore, it allows the objective function to be simplified by distributing the logarithm into the softmax.
In our approach, the learned weight function, $p_{gen}(t)$, is implemented as a fully connected layer on top of decoder output $d_t$:
\begin{align}
p_{gen}(t) &= \sigma(x_g^Td_t + b_g)
\end{align}
where $x_g$ and $b_g$ are learnable parameters of the model.
\subsection{Content selection}
Bottom-up attention uses a content selection model to restrict the copy attention to input tokens predicted to appear in the output.
This technique has been shown to improve summarization performance~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom}.
We take a similar approach but instead use a content selection model that is based on BERT fine-tuning~\cite{devlin2018bert}.
To train the content selection model, we construct labels by aligning the input document and groundtruth summary, according to the procedure described in ~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom}.
We model the probability of selecting token $i$, $P_{sel}(i)$, using a fully connected layer on top of the BERT model's outputs $c_i$:
\begin{align*}
P_{sel}(i) &= \sigma(x_s^Tc_i + b_s)
\end{align*}
We use logistic regression to train the content selection model (on non-pad positions only).
Finally, we integrate the trained content selection model into the summarization model by masking the encoder-decoder attention logits (copy head only) in Eq.\ref{eq:pgen}:
\begin{align}
\hat{a}'_t =
\begin{cases}
\hat{a}_t,& \text{if }P_{sel}(i) > \epsilon \\
\hat{a}_t - 10000,& \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
\noindent
The threshold $\epsilon$ is chosen by sorting the model's predictions over the dev set, and choosing the midpoint that maximizes F1 score.
In our experiments, we also use an oracle version, which uses the constructed labels $y_i \in \{0,1\}$ instead of the predicted probabilities $P_{sel}(i)$.
\subsection{Initialization Schemes}
We present here the initialization schemes we use in this paper, namely zero-step, one-step, and two-step initializations.
We use the notation $\langle params_{enc}, params_{dec}\rangle$ to represent the parameter initialization for the encoder and decoder, respectively.
\textbf{Zero-step} initialization means that the model parameters are not pretrained, i.e., they are initialized from random distributions.
In our experiments, we use the default distributions provided with the BERT model.
Under our notation, we denote this initialization as $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$.
\textbf{One-step} means that some of the parameters of the model have been pretrained.
We use the following one-step initialization schemes:
\begin{description}
\item[$\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$]: encoder parameters are initialized from the BERT checkpoint; decoder parameters are initialized randomly.
\item[$\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$]: encoder and decoder initialized symmetrically from the BERT checkpoint (cross-attention initialized from self-attention).
\item[$\langle \mathrm{Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Gword_{dec}}\rangle$]: encoder and decoder initialized from parameters resulted from training end-to-end on the Gigaword corpus (initialized using $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$).
\item[$\langle \mathrm{CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$]: encoder and decoder initialized from parameters resulted from training end-to-end on the CNN/DM corpus (initialized using $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$).
\end{description}
\textbf{Two-step} means that the model parameters have been pretrained in a two-step fashion:
first on one task, followed by another task (as a fine-tune procedure).
\begin{description}
\item[$\langle \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$]: encoder and decoder initialized from the result of: i) starting from $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ initialization, and ii) fine-tuning on the CNN/DM corpus.
\item[$\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$]: encoder and decoder initialized from the result of: i) starting from $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ initialization, and ii) fine-tuning on the Gigaword corpus.
\end{description}
\noindent
In turn, a two-step initialization such as $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$ can be used as a starting point for some subsequent fine-tuning training procedure, for instance on the CNN/DM corpus.
It is important to note that the initialization on the encoder side is different from the one on the decoder side, as the parameters of the two networks specialize in their different roles:
one for encoding representations and the other one for decoding representations.
The experimental results in the following section indicate that chaining fine-tuning procedures in this manner makes learning more effective.
\section{Related Work}
Early summarization work~\cite{dorr2003hedge,jing1999decomposition, filippova2015sentence} mostly focused on purely extractive approaches.
With the development of neural sequence-to-sequence models~\cite{sutskever2014sequence,bahdanau2015neural}, there has been substantial work in abstractive approaches~\cite{rush2015neural,luong2015multi,nallapati2016abstractive,chopra-etal:2016,see2017get,paulus2017deep,chen2018fast}.
However, due to the large search space and the relative lack of training data, purely abstractive approaches still suffer from performance issues compared to extractive approachs, especially from issues like missing critical details and hallucinations~\cite{hsu2018unified}.
A natural step is to combine the abstractive and extractive apporaches together.
Copy mechanisms~\cite{vinyals2015pointer, gu2016incorporating, see2017get} and coverage modeling~\cite{suzuki2016rnn,chen2016distraction,see2017get,gehrmann2018bottom} are examples of these approaches.
Our work represents a more fundamental way of solving the data-hungry problem and under-constrained modeling problem.
Instead of constraining the learning space, we incrementally pretrain the model on relatively similar, data-rich tasks.
Pretraining has been popular for image classification~\cite{he2018rethinking}, language understanding, see most recently~\cite{devlin2018bert}, and language generation~\cite{ramachandran2017unsupervised,edunov2019pre,rothe2019leveraging} tasks.
Although recent works in image classification~\cite{he2018rethinking} show that pretraining may not be necessary when are allowed to train for a longer time,
our results indicate that meaningful multi-stage pretraining allows our models to achieve significantly higher accuracy levels.
\section{Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
In this section, we describe our experimental setup (hardware, model hyperparameters) and our experimental results.
\subsection{Implementation details}
All models are trained on Google Cloud TPUs with 16GB high-bandwidth memory (HBM) each.
The models are evaluated on Tesla GPUs, as the TPUs do not support some of the string operations used for evaluation.
We use TensorFlow~\cite{tensorflow2015-whitepaper} and a patched version of the BERT model~\cite{devlin2018bert}.
All BERT checkpoints used are provided by~\citet{devlin2018bert}.
We limit ourselves to the \textit{uncased\_L-12\_H-768\_A-12} monolingual version.
Larger versions are available, but they become too memory intensive when used in a dual Transformer encoder-decoder setup like ours.
For the experiments presented here, we preprocess both datasets by tokenizing into word-pieces, as described in~\cite{devlin2018bert}.
Due to hardware and architecture limitations, we truncate (or pad) inputs and outputs to a fixed number of word-pieces, as shown in Table~\ref{table:truncation} (these limits are also reflected in Table~\ref{table:datasets}).
\subsection{Hyperparameters}
All of our models use the Adam optimizer and learning rate of $2e^{-5}$.
We experimented with three learning rate values: $1e^{-5}$, $2e^{-5}$, and $5e^{-5}$.
We found that $1e^{-5}$ does not improve the results compared to $2e^{-5}$, while $5e^{-5}$ resulted in poor performance for the $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ initialization scheme.
We use .3 dropout on all Transformer layer outputs.
Dropout is done at a token level, in keeping with the recommendations from~\cite{devlin2018bert} and~\cite{vaswani2017attention}.
We tested four values for the dropout rate: .1, .2, .3, and .4.
We found that a dropout rate of .3 worked best for both tasks.
Our vocabulary size is 30,522 word pieces, matching the vocabulary provided with the BERT checkpoint.
In addition, the version of BERT we use has 12-layers, each with a size of 768.
For experiments on the Gigaword dataset, our model has 128 encoder positions and 64 decoder positions (see Table~\ref{table:truncation}).
For experiments on the CNN/DM dataset, our model has 640 encoder positions and 96 decoder positions.
On Gigaword, we use beam search decoding with beam width 4 and length penalty parameter $\alpha=.6$~\cite{wu2016gnmt}.
Greedy decoding performed slightly worse across all setups by about $.2$ ROUGE-L F1 points.
On CNN/DM, we use greedy decoding only, as we found beam search yields similar performance.
\begin{table}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ l | c c }
& AUC-PR & AUC-RoC \\
\hline
CNN/DM dev & 82.43 & 87.86 \\
CNN/DM test & 81.90 & 87.84 \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{AUC of our BERT-based content selection model.
Note that these figures are not directly comparable to \cite{gehrmann2018bottom} due to differences in tokenization.}
\label{table:cauc}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ l | l | c c c }
& & Precision & Recall & F1 \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{CNN/DM dev} & Oracle & 100.00 & 80.77 & 89.01 \\
& Model & 56.11 & 46.47 & 49.95 \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{CNN/DM test} & Oracle & 100.00 & 80.49 & 88.85 \\
& Model & 55.11 & 46.58 & 49.58 \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Label coverage of our BERT-based content selection model. We also show
the performance of a content selection oracle which always does perfect
content selection. True positives here are groundtruth word pieces that are selected
by the content selector. The oracle achieves perfect precision because the labels
are used to select inputs in the first place. The oracle does not achieve perfect recall
because not all input word pieces are present in the groundtruth.}
\label{table:coracle}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}[t]
\rowcolors{2}{gray!10}{white}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ r | c c c | c }
Method & \multicolumn{3}{ |c| } { ROUGE F1 } & Best (on dev) \\
& 1 & 2 & L & at epoch \\
\hline
ABS+~\cite{rush2015neural} & 29.78 & 11.89 & 26.97 & - \\
Luong-NMT~\cite{luong2015multi} & 33.10 & 14.45 & 30.71 & - \\
Feat2s~\cite{nallapati2016abstractive} & 32.67 & 15.59 & 30.64 & - \\
RAS-Elman~\cite{chopra2016abstractive} & 33.78 & 15.97 & 31.15 & - \\
SEASS~\cite{zhou2017selective} & 36.15 & 17.54 & 33.63 & - \\
Re\textsuperscript{3}Sum~\cite{cao2018retrieve} & 37.04 & 19.03 & 34.46 & - \\
Base+E2Tcnn+sd~\cite{amplayo2018entity} & 37.04 & 16.66 & 34.93 & - \\
\hline
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 38.05 & 18.95 & 35.26 & 68 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 38.84 & 19.86 & 36.24 & 47 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 38.96 & 19.55 & 36.22 & 88 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$ & 38.79 & 19.88 & 36.14 & 47 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$ & \textbf{39.14} & \textbf{19.92} & \textbf{36.57} & 41 \\
\hline
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 37.98 & 18.93 & 35.23 & 47 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 38.94 & 19.91 & 36.24 & 34 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 38.97 & 19.84 & 36.31 & 59 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$ & 38.55 & 19.44 & 35.88 & 51 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$ & 38.52 & 19.28 & 35.91 & 38 \\
\hline
+Bottom-Up CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 38.90 & 19.70 & 36.28 & 34 \\
+Bottom-Up CopyTransformer Oracle $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 53.98* & 32.97* & 49.37* & 91 \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results of summarization methods on the Gigaword benchmark.
The first section shows the performance reported by prior work.
The second section shows our baseline model performance under various initialization schemes.
The third section shows the performance of our model with the addition of the copy-attention mechanism, while the final section shows the performance when using the content selection model in a two-step setup.}
Scores marked with an asterisk represent results when using an oracle for content selection.
\label{table:gigaword}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Experimental Results}
To set up the end-to-end experimental conditions, we first present the results obtained by our content selection model.
We follow with end-to-end results on the Gigaword and CNN/DM benchmarks.
Finally, we present an ablation study on partial initialization.
\subsubsection{Content selection}
Table~\ref{table:cauc} shows that our BERT-based content selection model achieves an 80+ AUC score on the validation set, with similar performance on the test set.
Though our model's AUC seems on par with that of~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom}, we note that the comparison is imperfect due to differences in tokenization.
Table~\ref{table:coracle} quantifies the performance from another perspective, i.e. label coverage, using Recall/Precision/F1 metrics.
Label coverage is an important metric for understanding the performance of content selectors in the context of copy mechanisms.
If the content selector has a false negative on a label word, then that word cannot be copied, thus hurting performance.
Similarly, if the content selector has a false positive on a label word, the usefulness of the content selector model degrades.
Our content selection model seems sub-par compared to the oracle, with slightly less than half of the labels present in the content selector's outputs, and slightly more than half of the content selector's outputs present in the groundtruth labels.
Based on the results above, our content selection model should improve summarization performance when used in a two-step setup, as~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom} demonstrate with their Bottom-Up Summarization (CopyTransformer) method.
Our results on summarization benchmarks below, however, show that the actual improvement to performance on top of pretraining is minimal.
\subsubsection{The Gigaword Benchmark}
\begin{table*}[t]
\rowcolors{2}{gray!10}{white}
\small
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ r | c c c | c }
Method & \multicolumn{3}{ |c| } { ROUGE F1 } & Best (on dev) \\
& 1 & 2 & L & at epoch \\
\hline
Pointer-Generator~\cite{see2017get} & 36.44 & 15.66 & 33.42 & - \\
Pointer-Generator + Coverage~\cite{see2017get} & 39.53 & 17.28 & 36.38 & - \\
ML + Intra-Attention~\cite{paulus2017deep} & 38.30 & 14.81 & 35.49 & - \\
Bottom-Up Summarization~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom} & 41.22 & 18.68 & 38.34 & - \\
\hline
ML + RL~\cite{paulus2017deep} & 39.87 & 15.82 & 36.90 & - \\
Saliency + Entailment reward~\cite{pasunuru2018multi} & 40.43 & 18.00 & 37.10 & - \\
Key information guide network~\cite{li2018actor} & 38.95 & 17.12 & 35.68 & - \\
Inconsistency loss~\cite{hsu2018unified} & 40.68 & 17.97 & 37.13 & - \\
Sentence Rewriting~\cite{chen2018fast} & 40.88 & 17.80 & 38.54 & - \\
SRC-ELMO+SHDEMB & \textbf{41.56} & \textbf{18.94} & 38.47 & - \\
\hline
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 39.20 & 16.39 & 36.49 & 177 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 40.00 & 17.11 & 37.35 & 143 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 40.67 & 17.50 & 37.90 & 232 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Gword_{dec}}\rangle$ & 40.05 & 17.11 & 37.36 & 89 \\
Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$ & 40.80 & 17.90 & 38.14 & 72 \\
\hline
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 39.43 & 16.58 & 36.82 & 135 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ & 39.69 & 16.99 & 37.11 & 146 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 40.78 & 17.73 & 38.18 & 186 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Gword_{dec}}\rangle$ & 40.84 & 17.74 & 38.11 & 84 \\
+CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$ & 41.20 & 18.13 & 38.57 & 83 \\
\hline
+Bottom-Up CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 41.26 & 18.05 & \textbf{38.60} & 98 \\
+Bottom-Up CopyTransformer Oracle $\langle \mathrm{Bert}, \mathrm{Bert}\rangle$ & 62.59* & 32.61* & 57.34* & 51 \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Results of summarization methods on the CNN/DM benchmark.
The first section shows the performance of models trained with MLE loss (directly comparable to ours).
The second section shows the performance of Reinforcement-Learning--based approaches.
The third section shows the performance of our base model under various initialization schemes.
The fourth section shows the performance of our model with the addition of the copy-attention mechanism, while the final section shows the performance when using the content selection model in a two-step configuration.
Scores marked with an asterisk represent results when using an oracle for content selection.
}
\label{table:cnndm}
\end{table*}
The results on the Gigaword benchmark summarization task are presented in Table~\ref{table:gigaword}.
Our best model reaches 36.57 ROUGE-L F1 on the test set, without using content selection or summarization-specific coverage penalties.
Overall, the results in Table~\ref{table:gigaword} indicate that the key components leading to improved performance on this task are:
(a) the large Transformer model,
(b) the full-network initialization of the model parameters and,
(c) the multi-stage pretraining scheme,
as discussed in detail below.
The ROUGE-L F1 score of 35.26 for the Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ model indicates that the learning capacity of the base Transformer model is higher compared to the previous models.
On top of it, full-network (deep) initialization with the original BERT weights yields a +1 ROUGE-L increase, at 36.24 (for encoder-only) and 36.22 (encoder and decoder).
In contrast, deep initialization with weights originating from CNN/DM pretraining yield slightly lower results (36.14 ROUGE-L F1).
The best result is obtained with the $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$ initialization scheme (36.57 ROUGE-L F1), indicating that this multi-stage pretraining scheme helps the most with learning for this task, by first pretraining on generic language understanding tasks (the BERT stage), second pretraining on a related summarization task (CNN/DM), and finally fine-tuning on the target task (Gigaword).
We also report that, for these models, the abstraction rate (percent of words in the summary that are not present in the input) is in the range of 27-29\%.
While this is substantially less compared to the reference (at 53.8\%, see Table~\ref{table:datasets}), it still demonstrates non-trivial levels of abstractiveness.
We also note here that neither the copy-attention mechanism, nor its augmentation with content-selection prediction, improve on the results of the base model.
One possible explanation is that copy-attention is not well suited for a highly-abstractive task such as the one for the Gigaword benchmark.
This is supported by the result for +CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&CnnDm_{dec}}\rangle$ model, which, at 35.91 ROUGE-L F1, indicates a significant quality degradation, possibly because of the pre-training on a highly-extractive task such as CNN/DM.
\subsubsection{The CNN/DailyMail Benchmark}
The results on the CNN/DM benchmark summarization task are presented in Table~\ref{table:cnndm}.
The first notable result is that the base model Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ achieves, at 36.49 ROUGE-L F1, a score that is on-par with the Pointer-Generator + Coverage of~\citet{see2017get} (but without any summarization-specific modeling).
Similar to the result on the Gigaword benchmark, deep (full-network) initialization with the original BERT weights for the encoder yields a +1 ROUGE-L increase, at 37.35 ROUGE-L F1, while deep initialization with BERT weights on both the encoder and decoder achieves an additional +0.5 increase, at 37.90 ROUGE-L F1.
Again, the multi-stage pretraining scheme Transformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$, in which we first pretrain on generic language understanding (the BERT stage), then pretrain on a related summarization task (Gigaword), and finally fine-tuning on the target task (CNN/DM), yields the best result for base model, at 38.14 ROUGE-L F1.
We observe the same trends for the copy-attention model, but with significant performance increases relative to the baseline.
This is remarkable especially as this model is trained only with MLE loss, and does not suffer from the train-time inefficiencies present in RL-based approaches.
Also notably, the addition of the content-selection prediction yields almost no increase (from 38.57 to 38.60), in stark contrast with the large impact achieved by~\citet{gehrmann2018bottom} for their setup.
In addition, our models score in the range of 4-5\% on the Abstraction-Rate metric.
While less than the reference (at 13.8\%, Table~\ref{table:datasets}), it is still much more novel than the best MLE model to date~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom}, measured at .5\% on this metric.
This suggests that our model is capable of better learning to maintain the balance between extractiveness and abstractiveness present in the data.
We emphasize here that our results do not make use of any of the inference heuristics (length penalty, coverage penalty, n-gram--based repeat restrictions) previously reported~\cite{gehrmann2018bottom} to be crucial for achieving high performance levels.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\resizebox{.9\width}{!}{%
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
xlabel=Number of pretrained layers,
ylabel=ROUGE-L F1]
\addplot[color=red,mark=x, error bars/.cd, y dir=both, y explicit,][domain=0:24] coordinates {
(1,0.36245) += (0, .00212) -= (0, .00202)
(3,0.35483) += (0, .00211) -= (0, .00202)
(5,0.36064) += (0, .00210) -= (0, .00199)
(7,0.36857) += (0, .00205) -= (0, .00203)
(9,0.36776) += (0, .00214) -= (0, .00208)
(11,0.372) += (0, .00207) -= (0, .00213)
(13,0.36919) += (0, .00214) -= (0, .00211)
(15,0.37873) += (0, .00204) -= (0, .00200)
(17,0.38387) += (0, .00222) -= (0, .00209)
(19,0.38152) += (0, .00212) -= (0, .00224)
(21,0.38264) += (0, .00217) -= (0, .00212)
(23,0.38329) += (0, .00209) -= (0, .00226)
};
\addplot[color=blue,dashed][domain=0:24]{.3716};
\node at (axis cs:0,.3716) [anchor=south west] {$\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$};
\addplot[color=blue,dashed][domain=0:24]{.3849};
\node at (axis cs:0,.3849) [anchor=south west] {$\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}%
}
\caption{Performance of the +CopyTransformer $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$ model on the CNN/DailyMail task with increasing numbers of pretrained layers.
$x=1$ represents loading the embedding layer only, $x=3$ represents that plus the first two encoder layers, and $x=23$ represents all layers except for one decoder layer.
Performance of $x=0$ (i.e. $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$) and $x=24$ (i.e. $\langle \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{enc}}, \mathrm{Bert\&Gword_{dec}}\rangle$) are shown with dashed lines.
Error bars represent 95\% confidence intervals as reported by the ROUGE script.}
\label{figure:layerwise}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Partial pretraining}
In this section, we present the results of an ablation experiment in which we examine the effect of partially pretraining our model.
Results are shown in Fig.~\ref{figure:layerwise}.
The common practice with respect to pretraining summarization models is to start from pretrained word-embeddings.
As the results in Fig.~\ref{figure:layerwise} indicate, this type of ``shallow pretraining'' is harmful in the case of BERT word embeddings.
Notably, the $\langle \mathrm{Random}, \mathrm{Random}\rangle$ condition outperforms all initialization schemes that initialize fewer than 50\% of the model layers.
Consequently, these results indicate that using pretrained word-embeddings from a deep model such as BERT are not suitable for stand-alone use;
instead, deep initialization (i.e., multiple layers of the encoder and decoder are set to pretrained weights) is required.
Finally, we report a strong positive correlation between the \%-initialization of the model layers and the ROUGE-L F1 score.
The Pearson's \textit{r} correlation between them is .8698 (based on the numbers used to create Fig.~\ref{figure:layerwise}).
|
\section{Introduction}
\indent
\par Individuals get informed by consuming different formats of Mass Media (newspapers, radio, television, internet, etc).
The Mass Media play an important role in the formation of public opinion \cite{newman1990popular, ogden1913journalism, stivers2012media, yanich2004crime}. With its increased availability, this role constitutes a global phenomenon and has transformed the way individuals receive information on a daily basis.
\par The access to the news and information can be understood within the agenda setting framework \cite{mccombs1972agenda}.
Already one century ago, Lippmann observed that Mass Media dominates over the creation of pictures in our head, and that the public react not to the actual events but to the pictures created in their heads \cite{lippmann1922}.
The agenda setting process is in charge of remodelling the events that take place in our environment, and put them into an accessible model we interact with afterwards.
\par Agenda setting means the capability of Mass Media to bring issues concerned to the public and, concomitantly, to politicians. The basic claim is that as media devote more attention to an issue, the public perceives such issue as important. If the media bring up a specific topic, as for instance global warming, then they make the consumers think about it. This theory has been introduced by McCombs and Shaw in their seminal study of the role of the media in the 1968 Presidential campaign in the US \cite{mccombs1972agenda}.
\par Different approaches have been proposed to examine the role and influence of Mass Media on a society. On one side, social experiments have been designed, where group of subjects read news, and it was possible to directly measure how the opinions get modified afterwords.
In \cite{gerber2009does}, the authors shows that individuals who read the Mass Media constantly over time modify their political ideology and eventually vote explicitly in a different way. In \cite{king2017news}, it is demonstrated that exposure to news media causes U.S. citizens to take public stands on specific issues, join national policy conversations, and express themselves publicly more often than they would otherwise do.
\par On another stream of research, computational models have been implemented in order to describe collective behaviour arising from interactions between Mass Media and the citizens \cite{pinto2016setting,gonzalez2006local, shibanai2001effects}, providing theoretical tools to understand micro to macro effects in this situations. Other approaches are based on the analysis of large amount of data coming from surveys, as in \cite{wanta2004agenda,oberholzer2009media}, from big data \cite{xie2018big} or from online traffic \cite{yasseri2016wikipedia}, where the authors have shown that the relative change in the number of page views of a general Wikipedia page on the election day can offer a reasonable estimation of the relative change in turnout for that election at the country level.
\par In order to understand the changes produced by Mass Media in society, it is important to have a good representation of the ideology of the citizens. In \cite{brady2011art}, the author stress the importance of spatial diagrams of politics, because many fundamental problems of political science can be connected with them, and many different concepts (such as ideological constraint, cross-pressures, framing, agenda-setting, political competition, voting systems, and party systems, to name just a few) can be understood through spatial diagrams. In \cite{krasa2014policy}, for instance, Krasa and Polborn use a two-dimensional portrait with social and economics axes to represent a sample of the population in order to analyse political polarisation during elections in U.S.
\par If citizens can be placed in a two-dimensional diagram representing their ideology through answering a questionnaire as in \cite{PoliticalQuiz} or \cite{compass2012political}, can Mass Media outlets be placed in same space? Elejalde et al. \cite{elejalde2018nature} analyse tweets to automatically compute the political and socio-economic orientation of news articles in order to represent the real and perceived bias of several Chilean media outlets.
\par In the present paper we go a step beyond, and combine some of the mentioned approaches to understand the role and influence that Mass Media may have on the opinions of citizens during political elections. We build a data-driven agent based model in which citizens are placed in a two-dimensional space according to their ideological positions as was done in \cite{krasa2014policy}. This framework allows to study different mechanisms in agent based models: social peer influence, mass media influence, etc.
In particular, we focus on the hypothetical effects that a single isolated mechanism may have on a given population: the influence that Mass Media would have had on the intention to vote a given candidate. In this context, we assume that the citizens only interact with news related to candidates in media outlets. Given the media outlets are not able to fill the ideological questionnaire to be used afterwards to place them in the two-dimensional space like Nolan Charts for political spectrum diagram \cite{eysenck1954, Bryson1968} or Political Compass \cite{compass2012political}, we develop a novel method based on sentiment analysis in order to represent the way different media reflect the ideological positions of the candidates.
\par In order to test our approach, we compare the output of the model with the results of $263$ national surveys conducted by different agencies obtained from Real Clear Politics \cite{RCP} obtaining a very good matching for a set of optimal parameters.
\par The paper is organised in the following way. In section \ref{sec:MaterialMethods} we present the data used and the data used in the study and the text mining tools applied to the article news. In section \ref{sec:scenario} we present the data-driven model used to represent the interactions between citizen and candidates as presented by mass media and finally, in section \ref{sec:results} we compare the output of the model with empirical data from polls during the political campaign. Finally in section \ref{sec:discussion} we discuss the utility of this modelling approach as well as future research lines.
\section{Data and Methods}
\label{sec:MaterialMethods}
\par In this section we describe the data sources employed in our analysis as well as the text mining techniques which were used to extract useful and relevant information from the news articles. We retrieve data from three different mass media outlets, The New York Times, Fox News and Breitbart. We also use data from opinion polls in order to compare the output of the model.
\subsection{Mass Media Data}
\par We have selected three newspapers for the present analysis: New York Times (NYT), Breitbart and Fox News. The New York Times is the most searched online newspaper in all the states during the 2016 election campaign \cite{googleTrendsDiarios}, and has been classified as a democratic media \cite{berkeley2013MediaMap}. The Fox News portal is considered a Media Outlet with a republican bias, and the Breitbart portal was constantly quoted by Donald Trump and the media has made explicit his support since the beginning of the election campaign \cite{BrPorTrump}.
\par Thus, all the articles from the NYT, Fox News and Breitbart, corresponding to the electoral period from 07/28/2016 to 11/8/2016, were analysed (from the day of the last party convention of 2016, where formally candidates are defined, until the day of the election) containing at least the name of one of the two candidates: Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
\subsection{Polls}
\par In order to compare with the output of our model, time series from Real Clear Politics website \cite{RCP} were used. The data came from a total of 263 national surveys conducted by different agencies (an average of 2.7 surveys per day), in which the forecaster of vote of each candidate was measured in a gap of a few days (around 3-5 days). All national surveys that are presented in this work used a demographic balanced sample.
The datasets supporting this article have been uploaded as part of the supplementary material.
\subsection{Sentiment Analysis}
\label{subsec:sentimentanalysis}
\par The sentiment analysis was performed utilising deep recursive models for the semantic composition applied to sentiment trees \cite{socher2013recursive}, in particular by the Stanford CoreNLP implementation of natural language processing \cite{manning2014stanford}. The algorithm consists of assembling a tree from the grammatical structure and a syntactic analysis of each phrase. Then, each word (node) is assigned a sentiment value, taken from a database: very positive, positive, neutral, negative or very negative.
In addition, this algorithm takes into account if the words are intensifiers, appeasers, deniers, etc. Using deep machine learning techniques, the algorithm assigns a sentiment value to each node starting from the inner nodes. After several iterations, it ends up assigning the corresponding sentiment value to the root node which also corresponds to the total phrase.
\par Even though there exists other alternative algorithms to perform sentiment analysis, such as those based on the extraction of characteristics of the sentences \cite{doddi2014sentiment} or lexicon-based approaches to opinion mining \cite{taboada2011lexicon, muhammad2016contextual}, the Stanford CoreNLP is suitable for analysing our corpus of news given that each sentence is well-formulated with correct grammar and spelling and it uses this exact information to determine the sentiment of a phrase.
\section{The model}
\label{sec:scenario}
\par A computational model is a simplified mathematical description of a real system which, by means of extensive computer simulations, describes natural and/or social phenomena \cite{melnik2015mathematical}. Different models have been built to help to understand the dynamics that governs the opinion formation process of a population \cite{Castellanoetal2009}, and to what extent a Mass Media has a direct affect on it. When the discussion is about a specific topic, this process can be modelled using one-dimensional approach based on classical models, as for instance the Deffuant’s model with continuous opinions \cite{pineda2015mass}, various extensions of the voter model \cite{ligget1995, masuda2015opinion}, and the Sznadj’s model \cite{Zhao2015,Crokidakis2012}.
On the other hand, when the intention is to model the whole agenda of a media outlet, typically a multidimensional approach is used based on Axelrod's model \cite{pinto2016setting, gonzalez2006local, axelrod1997dissemination, gonzalez2005nonequilibrium, rodriguez2009induced, rodriguez2010effects,mazzitello2007effects}. If it is intended to model opinion changes related to political positions, a bi-dimensional representation based in Nolan Charts political spectrum diagram \cite{eysenck1954, Bryson1968} or Political Compass \cite{compass2012political} could be used. This modelling approach, while sound, has not been performed until now. This step is a first contribution of our paper.
\par We developed a new framework to model the role and influence that Mass Media can have and the dynamics of public opinion formation during elections as a single and isolated mechanism following a data-driven approach.
\par We consider a population of $N$ citizens and $M$ Mass Media agents. Each citizen is represented by a coordinate in a bounded two-dimensional space which represents agents' characteristics and ideological preferences. In contrast with the work of Elejalde et al. \cite{elejalde2018nature}, here each Mass Media agent is described by two points, one for each candidate $c$, which represents the perception that the corresponding media outlet adopts about the candidate position.
Different Mass Media outlet may depict differently the same candidates, and attribute them different positions depending on the news it decides to prevail, the emphasis to give to the topics and the sentiment of the article, as was shown in \cite{Albanese2019}. The idea is that a citizen, when he gets the news and information provided by Mass Media, does not interact with the a real candidate, but with the image reflected by each media outlet. That's why we implement a sentiment analysis of news related with candidates, as we explain below.
\subsection{Position of the voters}
\par In order to place the citizens in the two-dimensional space we used the results obtained by Krasa and Polborn \cite{krasa2014policy}, where the authors take seven social and three economic questions from the National Election Survey of the year 2004 \cite{ANES} applied to $N=1066$ US citizens selected in a representative way. The social questions\footnote{The question number in the ANES survey corresponding to each one of the questions are: VCF0837, VCF0838, VCF0834, VCF0206, VCF0830, VCF0213 and VCF0130.} cover different topics: abortion, the role of women, discrimination against people of colour, the role of the state in helping ethnic minorities, the army and religion. The economic ones embrace the role of the state in the economy (state interventionism), unions, large companies and the average family income\footnote{The question number in the ANES survey corresponding to each one is: VCF0809, VCF0210 and VCF0209.}. They assign a numerical range between 0 and 100 to the answers for each of the items, where the minimum stands for being disagreed with the subject and the maximum to be totally agreed.
The obtained values are normalised between 0 and 1 and centred, as shown by the green points in Figure \ref{Figura1}.
\par As far as we know, this representation, commonly used in sociology and human science \cite{brady2011art, mitchell2007eight, bell2012constitution, listhaug1990comparative}, has never been used before in agent based modelling.
\subsection{Position of the media}
\par Given that we assume the citizens only interact with news related to candidates in media outlets and they are not able to fill the ideological questionnaire to be used afterwards to place them in the two-dimensional space like Nolan Charts political spectrum diagram \cite{eysenck1954, Bryson1968}, or Political Compass \cite{compass2012political}, we develop a novel method based on sentiment analysis in order to represent the way different media reflects the ideological positions of the candidates.
This is a key ingredient of this model. Although media outlets can have a given ideological orientation \cite{elejalde2018nature}, our working hypothesis is that citizens get informed about the candidates through Mass Media. That is why we assume the relevant ingredient to capture the essence of the interaction between the media and citizens in a context of elections is the image of the candidates that media project. The way we find to do this is through a sentiment analysis of the media outlets related to the key concepts that allow choosing the coordinates in a two-dimensional diagram with social and economic axes.
\par We use a dictionary of keywords based on social and economic questions and recursive deep models for semantic composition over sentiment treebank in order to detect the sentiment of a given sentence \cite{socher2013recursive, manning2014stanford}, and quantify positively or negatively the context where these keywords appear.
\par The following steps have been done for locating the Mass Media agents in the two-dimensional space:
\begin{description}
\item [Create dictionary.] We define four dictionaries\footnote{The list of words of the four dictionaries can be found in the Supplementary material.} containing words for the libertarian, authoritarian, left and right topics (each of the semi-axes of the plane), using the words extracted from questions in the ANES polls, Political Compass \cite{compass2012political} and IsideWith \cite{isidewith}. These last two surveys were added in order to complete dictionaries with a larger number of words, and get a better statistics in the semantic analysis.
\item [Learning.] In order to know if a phrase contributes to a given semi-axis of the bi-dimensional representation, we identify keywords of one of the four semi-axes and try to know if they are mentioned positively or negatively. We do that using recursive deep models for semantic composition over sentiment treebank applied to this phrase
\item [Sentiment Analysis.] Each sentence $i$ gets an assigned value $l_j (i)\in[-2,2]$, for each Media and for each candidate, where $j$ corresponds to one of the four topics or semi-axes: $j=r,l,aut,lib$ (right, left, authoritarian and libertarian respectively). Neutral phrases will have $l_j=0$ since there are not in favour nor against the statement represented by the list of words of a given semi-axis. Very negative and very positive ones will have $l_j=-2$ and $l_j=+2$ respectively, and will be twice of the weight of negative (-1) or positive (+1) sentences. Given this notation, for instance, $l_{left}(i)$ is the sentiment value for the sentence $i$ of the economic left list.
\item [Calculate coordinates.] The information collected in these lists is used to calculate the coordinates in the two-dimensional space representing the candidate $c$ ($c=C$ for Clinton and $c=T$ for Trump) from the perspective of a given Media Outlet $m$ (the $x_{m,c}$ coordinates for economic and $y_{m,c}$ for the personal axis):
\begin{equation}
x_{m,c} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n_r} l_{r}(i) - \sum_{i=1}^{n_l} l_{l}(i)}{\sum_{i=1}^{n_r} \mid l_{r}(i) \mid + \sum_{i=1}^{n_l} \mid l_{l}(i) \mid }
\label{eqMODELO1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
y_{m,c} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n_{aut}} l_{aut}(i) - \sum_{i=1}^{n_{lib}} l_{lib}(i)}{\sum_{i=1}^{n_{aut}} \mid l_{aut}(i) \mid + \sum_{i=1}^{n_{lib}} \mid l_{lib}(i) \mid}
\label{eqMODELO2}
\end{equation}
\par where $n_{r}$, $n_{l}$, $n_{aut}$ and $n_{lib}$ are the number of phrases in right, left, authoritarian and libertarian categories. The values $x_{m,c}$ and $y_{m,c}$ are normalised and centred using the same method that was used before for the position of the voters.
\item [Distance. ] Both, the citizen and the Mass Media are placed in the same two-dimensional space. However, they have different scales due to the fact that their positions were obtained with different methods. This is the reason why a parameter of scale $k$ was introduced to our model in order to take into account this issue. Therefore, the coordinates $x_{m,c}$ and $y_{m,c}$ are multiplied by a constant $k$ and $A_m=k \sqrt{(x_C-x_T)^2+(y_C-y_T)^2}$ is defined as the distance between the centre of mass of the location of one candidate and another. The final result for different values of $A=<A_m>$ is plotted in Figure \ref{Figura1}.
\end{description}
\par Figure \ref{Figura1} also shows the representations of the two candidates for each of the three Mass Media outlets. It is interesting to emphasise that in this representation the candidates are perfectly grouped by media and by candidate. It is observed that Trump’s representations for each of the Media are in the lower right corner, whereas all of Clinton’s points are in the upper left side. This representation of the Democratic candidate as authoritarian and more of economically to the “left” than Donald Trump is consistent with the article's highlight of her tax reform, where the wealthiest should contribute to a greater extent. On the contrary, Donald Trump opposed such reform and also the national health plans for all citizens, which is informally named ``Obamacare''.
\par On the other hand, Figure \ref{Figura1} also shows how the candidates are aligned according to each media. In both cases Breitbart provides the most authoritative representation, followed then by Fox News and the New York Times. The fact that the points are grouped both by candidates and the media indicates that proposed method was able to distinguish effectively the differences between the candidates using the information available in the news only.
\par Curiously, it could be seen in Figure \ref{Figura1} that the Mass Media agents align themselves in a perpendicular axis with respect to the rest of the individuals. In order to understand this phenomenon, a game theoretic approach could be invoked. For a two-dimensional space where two entities compete for a good distributed uniformly inside a square in the plane and where agent keeps the goods which are closer to himself than to the other agent, the Nash Equilibrium is found when entities have the same position at the centre of the square \cite{easley2010networks}. However, the two candidates can not be located in exactly the same place due to the characteristics of the scenario, where the candidates tend to polarise \cite{stonecash2003diverging, layman2001great}. Here, the polarisation is represented in a two-dimensional opinion space as two agents in different, antagonistic positions. Therefore, they theoretically must polarise in a perpendicular direction to the axis where the population is mostly distributed in order to maximise their votes but also keep a distance with the other candidate. Exactly this phenomenon emerges naturally from the text analysis proposed, and it is observed in Figure \ref{Figura1}, validating the methodology.
\par Finally, we validate both methodologies in order to be sure we obtain consistent results. The details of these procedures will be clarified in the next section.
\subsection{Sentiment Analysis and ANES: validation}
\par As previously mentioned, locating Mass Media and citizens in the same two-dimensional space has an intrinsic difficulty: the same methodology can not be used for both. The reason behind this statement is that the position of the citizens can be defined using the analysis of a survey, whereas it cannot be used for Mass Media. In order to validate the methodology used, we compared the positions in the two-dimensional space assigned on all possible answers of the chosen survey ANES questions (used for citizens) with the positions based on the sentiment analysis methodology (used for Mass Media) for the same answers.
\par Texts were prepared with multiple choice answers to each of the ANES questions. Then, we applied the same procedure to the texts that are used to position the media based on the sentiment analysis of news articles. If both methodologies were equivalent, the value assigned by each of the methods would have resulted the same. In Figure \ref{Figura2} we plot the combination of all possible answers to social and economic questions. It can be seen that the linear relation validates the correspondence between the methods.
\subsection{Dynamical Rules}
\par Given that one of the goals of this work is to study the effects that the most important mass media would have on a measurable social behaviour (as the polls in the electoral period previous to elections), we assume that citizen agents in our models only interact with the news related to the candidates, represented with the media agents as explained above. The rationale of this approach is to study the effects of a single isolate mechanism.
\par We make the following set of assumptions in order to establish rules to model the process of Mass Media social influence:
\begin{itemize}
\item Each citizen interact only with one Mass Media outlet in a period. Thus, one interaction is the representation of an individual consuming a media outlet's content one single day.
\item A citizen interacts with the Mass Media which results to be closer to his/her preferences (it corresponds to the closest distance to the line that connects both media points).
\item A citizen reads news related to both candidates in each period. It means that the agent interacts with both points corresponding to a given Mass Media outlet.
\item A citizen reacts differently depending on whether he/she interacts with his/her preferred candidate or the opposite one:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If the agent interacts with the preferred candidate (the closest one), with probability $(1-p)$ he will be attracted to the candidate by a distance $d$, and with probability $p$ repelled (blue arrows in top panels of Figure \ref{Figura3}).
\item If the agent interacts with the opposite candidate (the furthest one), with probability $(1-p)$ he will be
repelled by a distance $d$, and with probability $p$ attracted (red arrows in top panels of Figure \ref{Figura3}).
\end{enumerate}
\item The distance $d$ is given by the following equation:
\begin{equation}
d = d_0 m_c(t) x,
\end{equation}
where $d_0$ is a model parameter and quantifies the degree of influence exerted by the Mass Media outlet on the reader, $x$ is a random variable which takes values $x=-1$ with probability $p$ and $x=+1$ with probability $(1-p)$, and $m_c(t)$ is a data-driven parameter which counts the number of phrases that contain the candidate $c$ in the news in the given Mass Media outlet in the period $t$. Consequently, $m_c(t)$ is a measure of how much each candidate is mentioned. The larger $m_c(t)$ the more intense the interaction will be.
\item After interacting with both candidates, the citizen gets closer (positive influence) to his/her preferred candidate with probability $(1-p)$, and moves away from him (negative influence) with probability $p$. Note that ``positive influence" in this model is composed by attraction to his/her preferred candidate and repulsion from the opposite candidate.
\end{itemize}
In order to get insights about the behaviour produced by the sketched dynamical rules, lets focus on some specific cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $p=0$, individuals get attracted to their preferred politician and repel from the opposite one, emulating an attractive dynamics towards the candidates, as sketched for a single agent in top left panel of Figure \ref{Figura3}. This dynamics polarises the population, as shown in left lower panel of Figure \ref{Figura3}. Once an agent has approached a candidate, it makes it difficult to get away when positive interactions predominate.
\item If $p=1$, a repulsive dynamic is present and the citizens move away from the preferred candidates and approach the one that are distant. Logically, majority will end up in the middle between the two candidates, as shown for a single candidate in top right panel of Figure \ref{Figura3} and at population level at low right panel of the same figure.
\end{itemize}
\section{Output of the model}
\label {sec:results}
\par In this section we run the model in order in order to analyse the dynamics of the model.
\par The dynamics of the model depends on the parameters $A$, $d_{0}$, $p$ and $\tau$.
The parameter $A$ gives the scale relation between metrics used to locate the citizen and the one corresponding to the Mass Media agents in the plane (see Figure \ref{Figura1}).
The parameter $d_0$ is a measure of influence of a Mass Media on a citizen (if $d_0$ is high, the citizen performs a larger change in its ideological position after reading the Mass Media), and $p$ is the probability that an agent moves away from his voter's preference (negative influence). The parameter $\tau$ takes into account the possibility that the degree of influence between Mass Media and citizens could not be instantaneous but mediated by a lag $\tau$.
\par In order to infer the percentage of citizens electing each candidate from our model, we
assume that citizens vote (or explicitly manifest their support) to the closer one in the ideological space. However, it should be taken into account the fact that the US adult citizens are not enforced to vote, so there is a region of undecided voters corresponding to $ 44 \% $ of the population (the participation rate in the 2016 presidential election \cite{porcentajePArticipacion}. Then we simply take the $ 56 \% $ of the closest citizens to each candidate and construct the time series of agents supporting for Clinton or Trump.
\par We proceed to determine the best performance of the model by comparing the time series generated by the model and the results of the polls. The comparison consists in minimizing the absolute average distance between the curves (difference Clinton-Trump) and maximizing the correlation in the four-dimensional parameter space given by $p$, $ d_{0} $, $A$ and $\tau$.
The range of variations of each parameter is the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item $d_0$ varies between $0.001$ and $0.1$. For values greater than $0.1$ the agents move at larger distances in a single interaction producing large oscillations that are not observed in data. On the other hand, values lower than $0.001$ produce negligible displacements which are not interesting for our analysis.
\item The probability parameter $p \in [0,1]$.
\item $A$ is varied between $0.6$ and $1.5$. The smaller values set the media agents too close to each others and are not interesting to be considered, while bigger values set them outside the boundary box.
\item The lag $\tau$ takes values between 0 and 20 days.
\end{itemize}
After a complete grid search is performed, we look for a combination of parameters that maximise the correlation and also minimise the distances between the mentioned series. The optimal performance corresponds to the set: $ d_{0} = 0.04$; $p = 0.2$; $\tau = 10$; $A = 1.5$.
\par The optimal set of parameters found is worthy to be interpreted as we consider they highlight the importance of the model. The small value of $p$ ($p=0.2$) indicates that the interactions between the Mass Media and the readers are mainly positive (either by supporting the preferred candidate or repelling from the opposite). This result is consistent with previously published research \cite{gerber2009does,yasseri2016wikipedia}. On the other hand, the computational model gives its best estimations $10$ days in advance since a maximum performance could be achieved with $\tau = 10$ days, in line with delayed correlations between news influence and polls found in \cite{Albanese2019}. As for the parameters $A$ and $d_{0}$, it is interesting that the best model corresponds to the largest possible value of $A$ ($A=1.5$) and a relative small $d_{0}$ ($d_{0} = 0.04$). In reality, candidates tend to separate themselves from the opponents because polarisation is a common strategy in a two-party system \cite{layman2006party, stonecash2003diverging,layman2001great}.
\par In top left panel of Figure \ref{Figura4}, the superposition of the time series of the polls and the model ($ d_{0} = 0.04$; $p = 0.2$; $\tau = 10$; $A = 1.5$) is observed. Since the model has a random variable, multiple iterations where performed and the error bars were assigned. This computational predictions based on the text of news articles are consistent with the polls for the first half of the electoral period. The top right panel of Figure \ref{Figura4} shows the difference in the percentage of voters (Clinton - Trump) produced by the model vs those produced by the polls. The points grouped in the horizontal line correspond to the region in which the model does not fit the data.
\par However, this implementation does not replicate correctly the shape of the poll's curves in the period of four weeks before the election day. This result could be related to the increasing of ``negative advertisement'' given that it could be used as a last resource in order to shorten the distance between the candidates \cite{peterson2005primary}. Also, individuals who are interested in politics might have already made his/her election (and therefore are not willing to change it), and those who are not politicised may be influenced less by news due to a lack of care. Consequently, owing to this change in the behaviour, different parameters could be needed in order to fit the last month. If we increase the value of the parameter $p$ (representing more negative interactions) and decrease the value of $d_{0}$ (representing weaker social influence) we get a new optimal fitting for the last month with $p=0.4$ and $d_{0}=0.01$. We show the full curves (with $ d_{0} = 0.04$; $p = 0.2$; $\tau = 10$; $A = 1.5$ for the first part and $p=0.4$ and $d_{0}=0.01$ for the last month) in low left panel of Figure \ref{Figura4}.
\par Also, it is easier to observe in top-right panel of Figure \ref{Figura4} that the model is producing an accurate fit of polls in the first $10$ weeks but fails in the last $4$ weeks. The improvement of allowing a change in behaviour in the last weeks could also be seen in right panels of Figures \ref{Figura4} (top and down), where slope is closer to 1 and the fit is statistically better in the second case.
\section{Discussion}
\label {sec:discussion}
\par In this paper, we proposed a novel framework to bound the influence Mass Media can have on individuals' opinion formation process. We build a data-driven model to study the hypothetical effects that a single isolated mechanism would have on a given population (in this case, Mass Media influence).
This model is based on a representative sample of a population (citizens agents) placed in a bounded socio-economical two dimensional space \cite{krasa2014policy} and a representation of the candidates as portrayed by Mass Media in the same space.
The novelty of our approach lies in the following hypothesis: the citizens get informed about the candidates through Mass Media and react accordingly. That is why we assume the relevant ingredient to capture the essence of the interactions between the media and citizens in a context of elections is the image of the candidates as projected by media. The way we find to do this is through sentiment analysis of media outlets related to the key concepts that allow choosing the coordinates in the mentioned two-dimensional diagram with social and economic axes.
\par The dynamical rules are chosen in a simple way, assuming that the citizen reads news related to both candidates and gets attracted to his/her preferred candidate or repelled from the opposite one with probability $(1-p)$, which can be considered as a positive influence towards its own candidate.
\par The proposed model and its optimal parameters are consistent with the literature for negative propaganda \cite{peterson2005primary}, polarisation strategies \cite{layman2006party, stonecash2003diverging, layman2001great} and the influence of the Mass Media \cite{gerber2009does, oberholzer2009media}, replicating those behaviours.
\par It should be noted that the model assumes citizens approach or move away from the image that the Mass Media reflects about the candidates when expressing their public opinion, but such changes should not necessarily be permanent or may reflect a difference between the manifestation of their vote and the true ideological position. That is, the observed changes in the model related to the positions of the citizens should not be seen as permanent changes in their ideological position, but as transitory commitments with the two majority voting options.
\par Finally, we would like to remark that this kind of framework could be taken as a starting point for data-driven modelling of other mechanism of social influence in socio-economical environments.
\section{Competing interests}
The authors declare no competing interests.
\section{Authors' contributions}
F.A. collect the data, made the calculations and participate in the writing of the manuscript. C.T, V.S. and P.B. design the study, discussed and interpreted the results and participate in the writing of the manuscript.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge Sebastian Pinto for carefully reading and interesting discussions.
\section{Figures and table captions}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Figure1.png}
\caption{{\bf Citizen and media representation in the two-dimensional social-economic space}: The initial positions of the citizens and Mass Media outlets for different numerical values of scaling factor $A$. Plots : citizens (green), 3 Mass Media outlets (Trump in red and Clinton blue). The big circles, the stars and squares correspond to the position for the New York Times, Fox News and Breitbart perception of the candidate respectively. Lib and Aut represent libertarian and authoritarian in the vertical social axis; and L and R represent left and right in the horizontal economic axis.}
\label{Figura1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Figure2.png}
\caption{{\bf Validation of representation methods}: Comparison of all possible combinations of answers to the social (left) and the economic (right) questions of ANES between both methodologies: scores and sentiment analysis. In blue there are lineal fits with slopes equal to $0.022$ and $0.015$ respectively and p-values lower than $0.001$.}
\label{Figura2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Figure3.png}
\caption{{\bf Dynamical rules}: Representation of two candidates (squares Blue and Red) and a citizen. The arrows indicate the possible movements of the agent when interacts with the media representation of a candidate. Lib and Aut represent libertarian and authoritarian in the vertical social axis; and L and R represent left and right in the horizontal economic axis. On the top the possible movements of an agent with an attractive dynamic ($P=0$) and on the bottom, a repulsive dynamic ($P=1$). The shades of green represent how an agent would move through time in the two-dimensional space.}
\label{Figura3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Figure4.png}
\caption{{\bf The time series produced by the model and the polls}: The time series with the differences in percentage of voters (Clinton - Trump) produced by the model and of the polls through time (left) and the pair scatter plot (right). The top panels correspond to the model with $ d_{0} = 0.04$; $p = 0.2$; $\tau = 10$; $A = 1.5$. The bottom panels correspond to $ d_{0} = 0.04$; $p = 0.2$; $\tau = 10$; $A = 1.5$ for the first part and $p=0.4$ and $d_{0}=0.01$ for the last month.}
\label{Figura4}
\end{figure}
\newpage
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.